Gear Heavy vs. Light AT Setups

[Snowflake2420]

I have experience with some backcountry skiing on both frame and tech bindings. I'm a petite woman, 31, 5' 2". I have a trip to Argentina later this year and am thinking about getting a setup I'd feel confident with some in-bounds skiing, but primarily for backcountry and touring as that's a big part of the trip.

I currently ski the Nordica La Nina very often in-bounds and have been impressed with how well it handles non-powder conditions and therefore am considering them as a candidate with some Marker Kingpins as my one touring set up.

However, I found a pair of DPS Yvette Pure3 with Dynafit Radical ST Demos (basically never used). The Yvettes have a very similar shape to the La Nina from what I can tell, but lighter and stiffer. I'm going to try and demo them if I can.

My question is where is the dividing line between what makes a "heavy" AT set up? In comparing my two choices, it comes out to about a 2 pound difference with the skis, will I really notice? Am I crazy to even ask. Perhaps I don't want to accept my La Ninas are so much heavier haha.

La Nina set up comes out to 18.95 LBs vs. Yvette set up of 16.5. This includes my Scarpa Freedom Boots.

 

[Doug Briggs]

I favor downhill over uphill performance.

I used to tour in alpine race boots, Fritchis (then Barons) with big powder skis. For the tours I was doing, usually just one lap, the weight was a bit of a nuisance but the skiing was always great. I've migrated to XT FreeTours, heavy DPSs (Lotus 138) and Marker Kingpins. I never liked the performance of the Dynafit style binding; I've watched people fall out of them simply walking along a ridge top and they are not known for their rigidity. The Kingpin is solid and tested well with the Vermont Calibrator, a system to check binding release settings. I skied them hard in-bounds where they didn't flinch and have toured them as well. The walk mode and heel lifts are as good as I've ever experienced. I'm sold. I do have some skis with Barons for spring time tours when the skiing may be dicey and on the skis they are on they are heavy, but I again prefer performance on the descent over lightweight for ascent.

As to weight it really comes down to a trade off with performance. If I were going to tour more than just one lap, I'd be more concerned about weight, but the weight I trimmed off this year has added greatly to my uphill performance. The FreeTours and the Kingpins work well together to provide a very high level of performance for descent. If you can demo the Yvettes with the Dynafits and feel they perform well for skiing, then I'd say there would be no question but to choose them over the LaNinas.

 

[Monique]

@Doug Briggs - How does Kingpin step-in pressure compare to the Royal line?

 

[Doug Briggs]

It is a fair bit easier. I didn't try them side by each, though, so I'm going by memory. The heel piece is totally different.

 

[Rod9301]

I would save weight on the binding.

I use the g3 ion, great binding.

The vipec and the radical 2 are also good.

I wouldn't get the kingpin.

I don't like the DPS, in firm or crappy snow.

 

[Doug Briggs]

I would save weight on the binding.

I use the g3 ion, great binding.

The vipec and the radical 2 are also good.

I wouldn't get the kingpin.

I don't like the DPS, in firm or crappy snow.

Why not?

 

[pais alto]

I too am curious about why not on the Kingpin.

I favor tech bindings - I'm currently stoked on the G3 Ion. But I'm coming from mainly tele bindings so I'm a centered finesse skier and don't feel the need for super-stiff boots and DIN 16 bindings (also I'm light and over 60 but I ski steep and rough snow). I don't have a problem with using my tech bindings in bounds on occasion.

So it depends a lot on how one skis. If you bang it hard, then I'd recommend something like the Kingpin, Marker Duke, or Dynafit Beast (the Kingpin and Beast would tour best by a long shot). If you're a finesse skier that doesn't typically go huge, then I think you'll totally appreciate tech bindings, especially on the way up. Remember that you spend 90% or so of your touring time in tour mode where lighter stuff is so much better. Another important thing to factor in is how much you like carrying heavy shit uphill.

It probably doesn't matter but my current go-to AT setup, which I adore, especially in steeps and going uphill: Salomon MTN Explore boots, G3 Ion bindings, Blizzard Zero G 108s - all somewhat on the light side. I'll ski them inbounds every now and then.

So, IMO the Yvette Pure 3/Dynafit setup might be really nice for touring and occasional inbounds.

 

[babanff]

When the kingpin first came out I was disinterested because of the heft of the heelpiece... I prefer the simplicity of a brakeless tech binding... but I love the idea of not being suspended with heel pins. The suspended heel of tech bindings is what for me creates a less confident feel inbounds. It creates a harsh feel in firm, bumped, or corral reefy conditions. I would love a tech binding that has a smaller, simpler (like no bigger than the dynafit vert) clamp-style heelpiece that doesn't require brakes.

 

[Monique]

So it depends a lot on how one skis. If you bang it hard, then I'd recommend something like the Kingpin, Marker Duke, or Dynafit Beast (the Kingpin and Beast would tour best by a long shot). If you're a finesse skier that doesn't typically go huge, then I think you'll totally appreciate tech bindings, especially on the way up. Remember that you spend 90% or so of your touring time in tour mode where lighter stuff is so much better. Another important thing to factor in is how much you like carrying heavy shit uphill.

FWIW, I would say Doug has plenty of finesse. He also seems to have plenty of lungs to deal with the extra ski weight, though.

 

[neonorchid]

When the kingpin first came out I was disinterested because of the heft of the heelpiece... I prefer the simplicity of a brakeless tech binding... but I love the idea of not being suspended with heel pins. The suspended heel of tech bindings is what for me creates a less confident feel inbounds. It creates a harsh feel in firm, bumped, or corral reefy conditions. I would love a tech binding that has a smaller, simpler (like no bigger than the dynafit vert) clamp-style heelpiece that doesn't require brakes.

...close, Lou D also hopes for a brakless option -
https://www.wildsnow.com/22228/fritschi-tecton-test-review/

 

[markojp]

I have a setup on a slightly older Dynafit FT w/Dynafit Vulcan boots. I'm probably 'medium large' in the skier size category. I normally ski DIN 10 in alpine gear. No issues at all. If I were trying to rip bumps in the AT setup, I'd ski the slow line slower, but this isn't about me.... hard to tell, huh? Anyhow, If you're primarily touring, IMHO, the newest generation of tech bindings (Dynafit, G3, Viper) are all really nice. I wouldn't consider a frame touring binding under almost any circumstance given the weight savings and general reliability of the lighter option. Unless you're a gear killer type skier, go light.

 

[Rod9301]

When the kingpin first came out I was disinterested because of the heft of the heelpiece... I prefer the simplicity of a brakeless tech binding... but I love the idea of not being suspended with heel pins. The suspended heel of tech bindings is what for me creates a less confident feel inbounds. It creates a harsh feel in firm, bumped, or corral reefy conditions. I would love a tech binding that has a smaller, simpler (like no bigger than the dynafit vert) clamp-style heelpiece that doesn't require brakes.

I don't get the suspended from pins.

On my wife radicals and my g3 ions, the boot heal is firmly suspended by the brakes.

Anyway, I just think that the kingpin is unnecessarily heavy, and more fiddly.

And I'm not a gram counter.
My boots now are Lange 130 freetours.

But if I can save half a pound on bindings with the same performance, why not?

 

[babanff]

I don't get the suspended from pins.

If you prefer brakeless options like me...



The gap of the heal can be filled with a brake, however the nature of the binding is still that you're held in place by pins vs a spring clamping you down so even with brakes you're still sort of 'floating'.

 

[Snowflake2420]

Appreciate all the comments! Going to do some testing this weekend and will make my decision.

 

[Doug Briggs]

I too am curious about why not on the Kingpin.

I favor tech bindings - I'm currently stoked on the G3 Ion. But I'm coming from mainly tele bindings so I'm a centered finesse skier and don't feel the need for super-stiff boots and DIN 16 bindings (also I'm light and over 60 but I ski steep and rough snow). I don't have a problem with using my tech bindings in bounds on occasion.

So it depends a lot on how one skis. If you bang it hard, then I'd recommend something like the Kingpin, Marker Duke, or Dynafit Beast (the Kingpin and Beast would tour best by a long shot). If you're a finesse skier that doesn't typically go huge, then I think you'll totally appreciate tech bindings, especially on the way up. Remember that you spend 90% or so of your touring time in tour mode where lighter stuff is so much better. Another important thing to factor in is how much you like carrying heavy shit uphill.

It probably doesn't matter but my current go-to AT setup, which I adore, especially in steeps and going uphill: Salomon MTN Explore boots, G3 Ion bindings, Blizzard Zero G 108s - all somewhat on the light side. I'll ski them inbounds every now and then.

So, IMO the Yvette Pure 3/Dynafit setup might be really nice for touring and occasional inbounds.

I am always carrying excess weight, but it tastes really good and boosts my enjoyment.

When I telemarked, my setup was pretty light compared to alpine. I found that the savings of energy going up by being light was exceeded by the amount of energy I had to use to descend relative to if I were descending on alpine gear. The same applies for light AT gear, especially boots; lighter on the way up didn't improve my descent. I don't find my enjoyment diminished by my current gear choices.

My reason for choosing Kingpins was partly for reduced weight from frame bindings, but also the quality of the system. I have not had a problem with transitions or skiing performance. They tour well, the convert easily and they hold me in with superb performance.

 

[Monique]

I've often heard, and it makes sense to me - the longer the tour, the more you want light weight. So if you're doing a 3 day tour in to do a few slopes and come back out, you might prioritize the lighter gear.

I personally wonder if there's a stamina component and tradeoff - I am like a shaky baby deer when I get to the top of even modest skins. If I had to deal with sub-optimal equipment on the way down, when the snow is often sub-optimal as well ... I'm not sure it would be worth it.

 

[markojp]

You'd be amazed how well some of the AT boots ski. I'm very happy with my boots, but the stance is certainly more upright. Nothing is as precise as race boots, but you adjust and move onward!

 

[Doug Briggs]

I've often heard, and it makes sense to me - the longer the tour, the more you want light weight. So if you're doing a 3 day tour in to do a few slopes and come back out, you might prioritize the lighter gear.

I personally wonder if there's a stamina component and tradeoff - I am like a shaky baby deer when I get to the top of even modest skins. If I had to deal with sub-optimal equipment on the way down, when the snow is often sub-optimal as well ... I'm not sure it would be worth it.

As with so many things, there is a trade off between weight and function. Today's pin bindings have made leaps and bounds since dynafit's patent expired but there are still limitations to the retention/release characteristics that make choosing a particular system a challenge; there is no one solution that fits all situations or optimizes all aspects of touring. That's why I have more than one setup I can go into the backcountry with.

 

[pais alto]

You'd be amazed how well some of the AT boots ski. I'm very happy with my boots, but the stance is certainly more upright. Nothing is as precise as race boots, but you adjust and move onward!

As with so many things, there is a trade off between weight and function. Today's pin bindings have made leaps and bounds since dynafit's patent expired but there are still limitations to the retention/release characteristics that make choosing a particular system a challenge; there is no one solution that fits all situations or optimizes all aspects of touring. That's why I have more than one setup I can go into the backcountry with.

^Both are quoted because of their good information.

My Salomon Explore boots amaze me for their control/weight ratio. And I prefer the touring capability of tech bindings over the benefits of frame bindings because i usually dial my skiing back some in the bc, because of consequences. Probably depends some on where you go backcountry.

 

[Doug Briggs]

You'd be amazed how well some of the AT boots ski. I'm very happy with my boots, but the stance is certainly more upright. Nothing is as precise as race boots, but you adjust and move onward!

I agree. AT boots have come a long way, too.

I'm not a big fan of comprising my skiing. When I tour the quality of the descent is paramount. That's why until this year, I've used alpine boots. Lange's XT FreeTour comes very close to responding like a full alpine boot. Next year Atomic will be introducing a Hawx variant about which the boot fitters in the shop I work in said: You'll want to sell your Langes next year and get the Atomic.

I might not sell the Langes but I'm certainly looking forward to trying the Atomic.