Binding Advice

[Slim]

And as far as the ramp angle, you can always shim the toe to reduce that.

I think part of the confusion comes from tech misnomers and false claims made by manufacturers and bad reviews.
The other part is simply from the fact that there is no ‘best’ or ‘perfect’ binding out there, and we each have to weigh our own pros and cons, which @laine is doing.

And indeed, as @jmeb said, go Black Diamond Helio instead of ATK branded version, BD is good with customer service.

Since you are in California, with acces to some great spring skiing, I would make sure to consider the price/weight of ski crampons for your intend binding model.
In other words, when you are comparing price and weight for different bindings, make sure to include the price, and possibly weight, of ski crampons(even if you don’t buy them right away).

Personaly, I find I need to write this stuff down in a spreadsheet, to list pros and cons, since my mind can’t remember and compare all that.

 

[Slim]

Lightweight Touring Binding Shootout | Blister

BLISTER | AT Bindings, Reviews | December 7, 2018 | The most honest & in-depth reviews of outdoor gear

blisterreview.com

The 5 Best Backcountry Ski Bindings of 2024

We've tested 40 of the best backcountry ski bindings over the past 8 seasons, and recently purchased 22 of today's top models to test side-by-side. We rely...

www.outdoorgearlab.com

(both older articles, but still cover many current models)

Dynafit Hoji Pro Ski Tour Boot - Fritschi Evo Tecton Toe Jam - The Backcountry Ski Touring Blog

Using Dynafit Hoji ski touring boot with Fritschi Tecton or Vipec Evo bindings, not recommended, we show why.

www.wildsnow.com

Edit: oops, I see @Analisa (as usual) had already put this useful link up.

 

[laine]

Hagen is a good brand, have fam who still tours on their 10+ year old skis (but with Fritschi frames).

Would be hesitant to advise someone on their first setup to go as boutique or rare as ATK is in USA for first pin tour (edit) bindings. Hagen skis, sure but maybe stick with something more mainstream available for bindings.

As for skis, what ski were you planning on using?

Skimo.com staff are certainly experts in their specialty but sometimes they might go too much for a intro setup. Do you plan to tour daily or 60% of the time on these skis?

Not sure what skis I'm going to be using yet. I am demoing a few that are actually available for me to try (size 154-160-ish), but to the point that the Skimo guy made on the phone, they all seem to be resort skis that are light enough to be touring options vs. a true touring ski.

The skis I'm demoing: Elan Ripstick 102 (but would buy the 94), Armada Trace 98 (though could buy an 88), Icelantic Mystic 97, DPS Yvette 100. But now I'm looking online at some of the true touring-specific skis like the ones the Skimo guy mentioned - the Blizzard Zero G, the Salomon MTN Explore 88, and the Movement Session 89 (construction on this one looks quite interesting) - and Voile skis, which I see a lot of people have (but I'm confused by the myriad models - the website doesn't make it easy to tell the difference). I just can't demo them, but I think maybe I know enough about skis to make a guesstimate if I would like something? So despite the fact that I'm demoing, I might just end up with something totally random that I've never seen in person. As I said, this is just another indecision.

I will primarily remain a resort skier, but I will tour on occasion. But that's what has made me think more about the weight of the setup. I exercise pretty regularly (about 4x per week) at home...at sea level. Cardio has always been my biggest fitness challenge, so my logic here (and feel free to call this crazy) is that I should try to go a bit lighter, since my touring will be intermittent and I won't really be building much cardio endurance at altitude. I kinda feel like if I were to tour 60% of the time, I would be developing better cardio and could better handle something slightly heavier. Flawed logic?

I agree with the Speed rad, and to a lesser extent the MTN.

But depending on which ATK they choose I'd disagree. I got ski both the Crest and ATK freeraider last year and both ski just as well as the Rotation.

@jmeb - So you had a positive experience on the Crest? It seemed to ski ok on the downhill, similar to the Rotation?

And as far as the ramp angle, you can always shim the toe to reduce that.

I think part of the confusion comes from tech misnomers and false claims made by manufacturers and bad reviews.
The other part is simply from the fact that there is no ‘best’ or ‘perfect’ binding out there, and we each have to weigh our own pros and cons, which @laine is doing.

And indeed, as @jmeb said, go Black Diamond Helio instead of ATK branded version, BD is good with customer service.

Since you are in California, with acces to some great spring skiing, I would make sure to consider the price/weight of ski crampons for your intend binding model.
In other words, when you are comparing price and weight for different bindings, make sure to include the price, and possibly weight, of ski crampons(even if you don’t buy them right away).

Personaly, I find I need to write this stuff down in a spreadsheet, to list pros and cons, since my mind can’t remember and compare all that.

@Slim - Crampons haven't even entered my consciousness yet! But I am doing a spreadsheet! I've listed out some skis in detail (length, measurements, radius, weight, price), but need to do more of the binding comparison in the spreadsheet, so it's easier to compare apples-to-apples. I get stuck going down these research rabbit holes and second-guess myself, so spreadsheets do help. You do raise a good point - I will add a column for crampon price/weight for the bindings I'm considering.

 

[Slim]

Is it ok if we do some thread drift to talk about skis?

Reading your posts above, @laine , a few things stand out to me.

One is, that the Skimo store, well, their name says it all. They are biased to the ‘skimo-racing’ (aka rando racing) side of things.
There exists a large (sweet?) spot between the light resort ski’s you mentioned, and the (mostly) skinny touring skis they came up.

Skis in the 90-100 waist, 1200-1600g(in ~170cm), are a large and useful category.
Skis like the Fischer Hannibal 96, (which my 12 y.o., 120lbs daughter has been skiing this year in a 162). She says they feel pretty similar to her Elan Ripstick 94.
K2 Talkback 96, Icelantic Mystic 97 etc.

Some of the unisex models only come down to ~162, but I think, if the next narrower model comes shorter, there must be a reason, in other words, they expect the same skier to ski a longer length in the wider model.

I think most of the <90 mm skis are more of a ’frontside shape’: less rocker, more directional. So, even though, at your weight, you don’t need a ton of width for float, the shape might not agree with you. Do you get along well with that style?

As has been written here before, demoing can be hard, especially if, like you and me, you fall on the outer edges of size ranges. Also, as @Philpug ’s article mentions, it can be easy to get the wrong impression on a demo day.

I would start with looking at your skiing style and technique, and narrowing it down.

For example, I have realized that I often revert back to poor technique, pushing one foot, getting backseat etc, so I know, I need a wide ski, with a ‘loose’ feel, that’s forgiving in those cases.

Conversely, if you know you can ski powder and trees decently on a narrow frontside ski, then that type will save you some effort on the uphill, and add comfort on the traverses.

Here is a decent overview article:

Choosing Your Ski Touring Setup

Finding your first, or next ski touring setup. Cripple Creek Backcountry started in 2011 as a touring specific shop located in a tiny plaza on the outskirts of Carbondale, Colorado. Since then we have grown to include locations in Aspen and Vail in addition to a online business. While we have...

www.cripplecreekbc.com

Also, I wouldn’t sweat the skis to much. They can be found for less than the bindings, and wear faster, so you can always switch to different skis in the future.

 

[jmeb]

@jmeb - So you had a positive experience on the Crest? It seemed to ski ok on the downhill, similar to the Rotation?

Yes -- but just to clarify -- it was a partial day demo of various tech bindings when I was abroad. I only skied a handful of runs on them.

From best skiing to less good skiing tech bindings I've been on (and to be clear, I still tour on the bottom of this list 50/60% of the time):
- Tecton (basically alpine feeling)
- Kingpin (90% of the Tecton, -10% because less damp feeling in toe)
- Vipec ( a very minor nudge over next category down because toe feels a bit smoother while skiing)
- Crest, Ion, Rotation, Mtn
- Speed radical & Speed turn.

If I was only going to buy one tech binding, and it was going to be taken on long tours (4k+ ft per day, several days in a row) -- it'd be the Mtn or an ATK.

 

[laine]

Is it ok if we do some thread drift to talk about skis?

Reading your posts above, @laine , a few things stand out to me.

One is, that the Skimo store, well, their name says it all. They are biased to the ‘skimo-racing’ (aka rando racing) side of things.
There exists a large (sweet?) spot between the light resort ski’s you mentioned, and the (mostly) skinny touring skis they came up.

Skis in the 90-100 waist, 1200-1600g(in ~170cm), are a large and useful category.
Skis like the Fischer Hannibal 96, (which my 12 y.o., 120lbs daughter has been skiing this year in a 162). She says they feel pretty similar to her Elan Ripstick 94.
K2 Talkback 96, Icelantic Mystic 97 etc.

Some of the unisex models only come down to ~162, but I think, if the next narrower model comes shorter, there must be a reason, in other words, they expect the same skier to ski a longer length in the wider model.

I think most of the <90 mm skis are more of a ’frontside shape’: less rocker, more directional. So, even though, at your weight, you don’t need a ton of width for float, the shape might not agree with you. Do you get along well with that style?

As has been written here before, demoing can be hard, especially if, like you and me, you fall on the outer edges of size ranges. Also, as @Philpug ’s article mentions, it can be easy to get the wrong impression on a demo day.

I would start with looking at your skiing style and technique, and narrowing it down.

For example, I have realized that I often revert back to poor technique, pushing one foot, getting backseat etc, so I know, I need a wide ski, with a ‘loose’ feel, that’s forgiving in those cases.

Conversely, if you know you can ski powder and trees decently on a narrow frontside ski, then that type will save you some effort on the uphill, and add comfort on the traverses.

Here is a decent overview article:

Choosing Your Ski Touring Setup

Finding your first, or next ski touring setup. Cripple Creek Backcountry started in 2011 as a touring specific shop located in a tiny plaza on the outskirts of Carbondale, Colorado. Since then we have grown to include locations in Aspen and Vail in addition to a online business. While we have...

www.cripplecreekbc.com

Also, I wouldn’t sweat the skis to much. They can be found for less than the bindings, and wear faster, so you can always switch to different skis in the future.

@Slim - I hadn't read that demoing article before and after reading it, it definitely makes sense - though I can usually tell from a demo a ski I don't like. I read the Cripple Creak post as well, and I know I want an All-Mountain, so I think it probably makes sense for me to stay in the 88-100 range. But what you said about skiing style and technique is something for me to consider. And about skis being cheaper - boots I always buy in person and I'll pay what they cost, but for skis, I will shop around for previous year's models and look for the lowest price.

So the Ripstick 94, Trace 98, and Mystic 97 are good ones to keep on the consideration list. I also took a look at the Voile skis and chatted with someone there and they recommended the UltraVector if I want a 90 and the SuperCharger if I want a 99 waist. I'll have to take a closer look at the shape and construction of the ones I can't ski to see what might work best for my weaknesses.

 

[François Pugh]

The one concern I have with the Fritschi Evo ones is that the DIN range is kinda high for me - 5-12. Right now, I measure at a 6.5 DIN, but (cards on the table here), I turn 50 in 2 years, and my DIN will go down to 5.5 - and is that bad to be that close to the bottom of the range?

If 5.5 were a problem for that binding, its range would be from 6-12.

Near the high end of a range you will have less travel and ability to recentre, but near the bottom you will have more room for things to move and move back before it lets go.

I don't know how it works with touring bindings, but with downhill bindings the higher DIN bindings coincidentally have better housings, less slop and better release/retention properties (and cost more money).

 

[Slim]

If 5.5 were a problem for that binding, its range would be from 6-12.

Near the high end of a range you will have less travel and ability to recentre, but near the bottom you will have more room for things to move and move back before it lets go.

But if you are truly at the very lowest setting, and it turns out the calibration of the binding is little bit off, and you need to lower the release a bit more, you have a problem.
So, at the low end, the question is not: will the ski/release well, but simply: can you set them to the actual torque value you want.
Especailly with the super short BSL of @laine ’s small foot in a toe-lug-less boot, any small variation will have larger effects on release torque. Add to that the inherent variations of tech pin interfaces, and it seems like a justified concern.

That said, there still is a ‘cushion’ of 0.5 DIN release, so personaly I would be fine with the Vipec on that count, but there is still the high weight and potential toe issues to deal with.

I don't know how it works with touring bindings, but with downhill bindings the higher DIN bindings coincidentally have better housings, less slop and better release/retention properties (and cost more money).

I know what you mean. But, almost no tech bindings come in different versions the way alpine bindings do, so I don’t think that applies to tech bindings.
The only one that comes to mind is the ST Rotation, and that appears to be identical, both versions are aluminum, same weight and price, just different springs.

 

[Primoz]

Just one more thing to consider when talking about DIN and touring bindings... I'm not 100% sure now (yeah my memory for certain unimportant things for me, is not greatest), but I have in my memory that actually only Dynafit has real DIN certified bindings. Everyone else don't have DIN standard, but "like DIN", which means with DIN certified bindings DIN 6 is DIN 6, while with non DIN certified, DIN 6 can be anything from 0 to 20. Ok probably range is not that big, but it can easily be 5 or 7.
Correct me if I'm wrong, and my memory for this failed me

 

[Slim]

Just one more thing to consider when talking about DIN and teach bindings... I'm not 100% sure now, but I have in my memory that actually only Dynafit has real DIN certified bindings.
Correct me if I'm wrong, and my memory for this failed me

We can correct you
All the Fritschi bindings are certified (Xenic 10, Vipec and Tecton). I bet several other brands/models are as well.
But of course, you are correct that most super light bindings have limited release adjustabilty and are not certified.

 

[jmeb]

We can correct you
All the Fritschi bindings are certified (Xenic 10, Vipec and Tecton). I bet several other brands/models are as well.
But of course, you are correct that most super light bindings have limited release adjustabilty and are not certified.

And to just add further confusion: keep in mind that DIN certification of a touring binding doesn't mean it matches what people call "DIN" on alpine bindings. DIN is just a certifying institute. And the release value testing applied by DIN to touring and alpine bindings are completely different than one another.

When someone rates a touring binding from 5-10 -- it means it should mimic that. Not that it tests to that necessarily.

The exception is the Shift which is an alpine norm binding which can tour (like frame bindings.)

 

[laine]

Oh yeah, I'm aware that the Touring bindings are not actually DIN-certified (except for a couple). I know it's "release value". But I want to make sure I'm in the right range for the release value. In my reading, I found that the MTN only has three release options - women, men, expert - so that's off my list.

I think I'm good on bindings and am close to a decision. Now on to skis!

 

[oobuin2B]

I've been advising my sister, who is a similar size as you, on her new setup as she's a beginner. I've suggested the ATK Crest 8 (a.k.a. Hagan Pure 8) with the G3 Seekr ski. ATK seem to have a solid reputation, and I've seen some positive feedback on the long tetongravity 300g binding thread.

There are trade-offs with this setup, but I think it's a good compromise for her, a beginner in the backcountry. I think the question for many is: Will you ski better with fresher legs or burlier gear? My guess is that lots of skiers who go a little "burlier" eventually downsize because they eventually realize how much the climb changes the downhill equation. Good luck!

 

[laine]

I've been advising my sister, who is a similar size as you, on her new setup as she's a beginner. I've suggested the ATK Crest 8 (a.k.a. Hagan Pure 8) with the G3 Seekr ski. ATK seem to have a solid reputation, and I've seen some positive feedback on the long tetongravity 300g binding thread.

There are trade-offs with this setup, but I think it's a good compromise for her, a beginner in the backcountry. I think the question for many is: Will you ski better with fresher legs or burlier gear? My guess is that lots of skiers who go a little "burlier" eventually downsize because they eventually realize how much the climb changes the downhill equation. Good luck!

@oobuin2B - That's actually the binding I ordered. Skis (Elan Ripstick 94) arrive today and will get them mounted over the weekend.

 

[Slim]

Funny! I just bought my first backcountry skis, and went with the Wayback 106 and the ATK Crest 10.
Mostly after reading this test:

Produkttest 2020: PIN-Skitourenbindungen

✅ Skitourenbindungen-Test 2020: 10 verschiedene Skitourenbindungen für die Wintersaison 2019/20 im Vergleich. ⭐ Mit Allroundtipp und Testsieger.

www.alpin.de

I was originally considering the Salomon/Atomic tech bindings, but from that test, it appears it was designed without brakes in mind, and adding the brakes creates serious issues in release.
Adding to that, I do like the idea of less wear, easier step in and better release adjustment offered by a camming heel (vs U-spring like the Salomon/Atomic), and even a (small) weight savings, and it seemed like a good choice.

I ended up getting it from Telemark Pyrenees, since I don’t have any skitouring shops nearby, so wanted to buy skis and bindings from the same shop, so they could mount them, and one that’s experienced in mounting tech bindings.
They were very helpful and knowledgeable to deal with, and prices are great to.

 

[Slim]

I think the question for many is: Will you ski better with fresher legs or burlier gear? My guess is that lots of skiers who go a little "burlier" eventually downsize because they eventually realize how much the climb changes the downhill equation. Good luck!

It’s not always about just about ‘skiing better’. I hemmed and hawed about bindings. Seriously considered the Vipec Evo. Although it is a lot heavier than many tech bindings, I was wondering whether it might be worth it from a safety standpoint.

I also chose a binding with brakes, and non-U-spring heel, so a heavier option. Not because I think it will ski better than lighter options, but because I think it offers safety and convenience benefits.

 

[Slim]

Well, hearing some noise outside, I went to have a look, and low and behold, Brown Santa had visited!
Moden bindings are truly amazing, it has:
good ski brakes, crampon slot, separate lateral and vertical adjustment, active length compensaton, sliding add in the heel, 3 riser heights. All that for less than 350g/binding.

 

[Slim]

That was supposed to read: sliding AFD in the rear(on the brake).

I tried it out for a bit in the backyard. The weight savings compared to my inbounds skis with frame bindings was wonderful of course: easier going and much more agile in tight terrain. It’s been over a year since I rented true AT skis with tech bindings, so I had kind of forgotten. 1150g/ foot is pretty noticeable .
Step in was very easy, although I get my left foot at about 95% succes rate, and the right foot at about 40%
Brakes were pretty easy to use, although you have to bend down to do lock or unlock them, and also to switch modes if you want a flat walk mode, since you can not rotate the heel with a pole. Heel rotates very easily though (RV 7).

 

[laine]

Brakes were pretty easy to use, although you have to bend down to do lock or unlock them, and also to switch modes if you want a flat walk mode, since you can not rotate the heel with a pole. Heel rotates very easily though (RV 7).

How easy was it to access the button for the brakes? That was my one potential hesitation- but the weight, release settings, and features tipped it for me. They’re getting mounted now.

 

[Slim]

How easy was it to access the button for the brakes? That was my one potential hesitation- but the weight, release settings, and features tipped it for me. They’re getting mounted now.

So so. The button is on the right, on both feet, soon the left it’s on the inside, easy to reach, on the right foot, it’s on the outside, so a bit harder to see and reach. The seeing part isn’t a big deal, as it has a nice bump on it, easy to grab, even blind.
It also sits below the brake, so very far from the bottom of your boot, so no issue grabbing it.

I had no problem on the one binding, a little bit on the other, not sure if it was less smooth, or if I just need a bit of practice.