# AT Binding Discussion



## Abubob (Jul 17, 2015)

I'm considering putting a AT (alpine touring) binding on my Dynastar Legends.

Having just gotten a pair of Dalbello Panterras a tech binding is out of the question.

The Marker Duke seem to be the most popular for resort use and light touring. But the weight and switch over (under the boot) worry me.

The Diamir Fritschis I'm familiar with are all plastic and of course the ones I have are much older and I don't think they'd stand up to a resort pounding for more than a run or two. But I wonder how would the newer models hold up.

Atomic, Tyrolia and even Black Diamond are making these "post" type binding but I know nothing about them.

Anyone have experience with any of these bindings?


----------



## skiNEwhere (Jul 17, 2015)

The duke is a hardy, durable binding that I've never had any problems with pre-release on. 

That comes at a price though, literally and figuratively. I think they are $400 new, and they are very heavy. So yea they are good for in bounds, but if you're doing long tours, they will wear you down. 

I've also felt that they are hard to carve with. I think this due to the design native to AT bindings overall. The binding is not as rigid laterally as a dedicated alpine binding. I have them mounted on soul 7's though, which is definitely not a carving ski.

You could also consider the marker baron, which is the little brother to the duke. Max DIN of 13 (vs Dukes 16) and a little lighter, and cheaper.

I wish the release for the Dukes were behind the heel instead of under the boot. You have to take your skis off anyways to put skins on, but there have been times when I'm stuck on a flat traverse at a resort where I wish I could temporarily free my heel with a ski pole. 

I'm not sure if all AT binding are like this, but Dukes are an absolute BITCH to click the heel back in when you've been skinning through pow. There was one time I had to take my car keys out of my pocket to free snow out of the track. Literally took 10 minutes to lock my heel back in.


----------



## Abubob (Jul 17, 2015)

skiNEwhere said:


> The duke is a hardy, durable binding that I've never had any problems with pre-release on.
> 
> That comes at a price though, literally and figuratively. I think they are $400 new, and they are very heavy. So yea they are good for in bounds, but if you're doing long tours, they will wear you down.
> 
> ...


These are the exact problems I've heard about. Icing and weight. Hadn't thought about the carving issue.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jul 17, 2015)

Agreed on the click back in part skiNEwhere.  I've had really bad experiences with that too


----------



## Abubob (Jul 17, 2015)

I've heard enough. Marker is out. Any experience with the others?


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Jul 17, 2015)

I have Dukes mounted n Soul 7's for my AT/Powder setup.  The pair I have are the first year release of the Duke so I think 8 years of use?  They have been transfered along to several pairs of skis over the years, I believe they are now on their 4th pair.






Pros-
Strong and beefy, allow me to ski them hard without worry(I am a big guy)
Wider binding helps turn a ski easier
I personally love the Marker Royal family for its release characteristics

Negs-
They are heavy....
After many years of use they have started to have some play in them
I guess the switch for changing from skim to ski, but I have never had a problem with this.  I cant take skins off with skis on, and have never experienced freeze up.
You are quite high above the ski.  But this seems to be a norm of AT's except for possibly tech style

I wish I had gotten Barons when I got the Dukes as they are lighter and cheaper.  However they were sold out, and I was just able to get a pair of Dukes when I did.  If I were to buy now, I would e getting the F12 Tour from Marker.  They are much lighter, and I have several friends who are happy with them.


----------



## Not Sure (Jul 17, 2015)

deadheadskier said:


> Agreed on the click back in part skiNEwhere.  I've had really bad experiences with that too



After the first ice up I started carrying a small screwdriver to cleanout those small channels .


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Jul 17, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> After the first ice up I started carrying a small screwdriver to cleanout those small channels .



Ski pole tip?


----------



## skiNEwhere (Jul 17, 2015)

Hawkshot99 said:


> Ski pole tip?



That really worked for you? There's only maybe 2-3 mm of clearance underneath the track where the heel part slides back in. I know my pole tip wouldn't fit.


----------



## skiNEwhere (Jul 17, 2015)

I found this post on TGR. Granted it's from 2011 but the general consensus is that the F12 is more geared towards touring than hard skiing. 

I'd see if the reliability issues have been fixed 

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php/213234-Marker-Binding-question-(Duke-Baron-F12)


----------



## Not Sure (Jul 17, 2015)

skiNEwhere said:


> That really worked for you? There's only maybe 2-3 mm of clearance underneath the track where the heel part slides back in. I know my pole tip wouldn't fit.





Maybe for parts of the binding yes but there no way to clear the rail area .
When your skinning the whole upper part of the binding slides back a good 1.5 ""
I ran into problems sliding it back , I thought about some silicone spray to keep things from sticking but haven't tried it yet.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jul 17, 2015)

I've found the best solution is to just be too lazy to skin much at all.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Jul 17, 2015)

skiNEwhere said:


> That really worked for you? There's only maybe 2-3 mm of clearance underneath the track where the heel part slides back in. I know my pole tip wouldn't fit.



I have done some light cleaning with my pole tip, but honestly have never had a pronlem with any build up. I have had the misfortune of stepping in running water of creeks and then had either the skins, or bottoms of my skis freeze up with ice and snow to be scraped off.


----------



## skiNEwhere (Jul 18, 2015)

bigbog said:


> I think any carving issues are with the skier.



My friend has the soul 7's as well with jesters, and the same BSL as me. I tried his skis and they were easier to carve with. I do think the type of binding (AT/Alpine) does make a difference. There is no way you can make a tight fit on an AT binding between the track that's screwed into the ski and the portion that slides into it, at least not as tight the equivalent of an alpine binding. There will be a little give.

Messed around with the AFD (binding height)as well to no avail.


----------



## bigbog (Jul 19, 2015)

Latest Marker Tour F12/F10, (0º ramp),  love em....
Salomon Guardian(2nd edition) love it but a little much in +ramp(~6º)..would need more of a toe shim.  
Atomic's Tracker 16 = exact same binding as the Guardian.
Yes, agree with your AT/Alpine comparison skiNEwhere...


----------



## Not Sure (Jul 19, 2015)

bigbog said:


> Latest Marker Tour F12/F10, (0º ramp),  love em....
> Salomon Guardian(2nd edition) love it but a little much in +ramp(~6º)..would need more of a toe shim.
> Atomic's Tracker 16 = exact same binding as the Guardian.
> Yes, agree with your AT/Alpine comparison skiNEwhere...



They look like solid choices but the weights are up there with Dukes
http://www.evo.com/ski-binding-weight-chart-for-alpine-backcountry-bindings.aspx


----------



## marcski (Jul 20, 2015)

skiNEwhere said:


> My friend has the soul 7's as well with jesters, and the same BSL as me. I tried his skis and they were easier to carve with. I do think the type of binding (AT/Alpine) does make a difference. There is no way you can make a tight fit on an AT binding between the track that's screwed into the ski and the portion that slides into it, at least not as tight the equivalent of an alpine binding. There will be a little give.
> 
> Messed around with the AFD (binding height)as well to no avail.


This where tech bindings come in to the rescue, no?  No moving parts that can give you play.


----------



## Not Sure (Jul 20, 2015)

marcski said:


> This where tech bindings come in to the rescue, no?  No moving parts that can give you play.



Can't speak for other bindings but I use my Dukes as a daily driver in bounds.
When I mounted them they were on a bench and on a ski that has camber.
The tolerances were really tight and maybe that's why I have ice issues occasionally.
I have no "slop" at all . Tech bindings are Ok for groomers but present heel issues in bumps.
http://www.timefortuckerman.com/forums/showthread.php?p=169787#post169787
Read last paragraph of Cat's comment.


----------



## skiNEwhere (Jul 21, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> Maybe for parts of the binding yes but there no way to clear the rail area .
> When your skinning the whole upper part of the binding slides back a good 1.5 ""
> I ran into problems sliding it back ,* I thought about some silicone spray to keep things from sticking but haven't tried it yet.*



Why am I not surprised?


----------



## Not Sure (Jul 21, 2015)

skiNEwhere said:


> Why am I not surprised?



Haha ...was wondering if that would get a response , Silicone has thousands of uses.


----------



## skiNEwhere (Jul 21, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> Haha ...was wondering if that would get a response , Silicone has thousands of uses.



Like fake boobs?


----------



## Not Sure (Jul 21, 2015)

skiNEwhere said:


> Like fake boobs?



Yes ! But hire a professional ....not a DIY project.
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...-caulk-into-ones-breasts-and-buttocks/260423/


----------



## bigbog (Jul 21, 2015)

Agree....I'd like to check out choices/options out there for both DIN and Tech...


----------



## Abubob (Jul 26, 2015)

Been away. I've missed a lot of discussion here. The Markers seem to be pretty popular and do really well front side so maybe I won't discount them so quickly. I excluded tech bindings from the discussion primarily because my new boots don't have tech fittings.

I also recently found my copy of Backcountry magazine from last September. I'd completely forgotten. Top picks besides Dynafit techs? Salomon Guardian WTR 13, Fischer Adrenalin 16, Marker Tour F12.

Also reviewed: Marker Dukes, Frtschi Freeride Pro and Scout.

The favorite seems to be the Fischers. At 5 lbs. a little lighter than the Dukes heavier than the Freerides. The summation? "A solid argument for the obsolescence of alpine bindings."


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Jul 26, 2015)

Abubob said:


> The favorite seems to be the Fischers. At 5 lbs. a little lighter than the Dukes heavier than the Freerides. The summation? "A solid argument for the obsolescence of alpine bindings."



Absolutely not.  Yes I can ski my Dukes as a regular Alpine binding every day, but would much prefer my Griffons.  Lighter, shorter stack height, and more rigid.


----------



## bigbog (Sep 21, 2015)

Yeah, have been thinking between something on the burlier side(rougher terrain/bumps/crud) of the true techs = Beast 14/16 or Kingpin?(haven't read up on Kingpin much) ....or going with a Tour F12. 
Anyone with time on both or just the Beasts...?


----------



## Abubob (Sep 21, 2015)

bigbog said:


> Yeah, have been thinking between something on the burlier side(rougher terrain/bumps/crud) of the true techs = Beast 14/16 or Kingpin?(haven't read up on Kingpin much) ....or going with a Tour F12.
> Anyone with time on both or just the Beasts...?



The Beast 14/16 run about $750 and the Kingpins go for about $650

There's always this for $99:


----------



## marcski (Sep 21, 2015)

Abubob said:


> The Beast 14/16 run about $750 and the Kingpins go for about $650
> 
> There's always this for $99:


Don't mock them. I have them on my backcountry XC setup.  .


----------



## bigbog (Sep 22, 2015)

Abubob said:


> The Beast 14/16 run about $750 and the Kingpins go for about $650
> 
> There's always this for $99:



I know.....well, from not skiing much these last years...I've got a little spending $$$ saved up..but marcski's got me thinking about BC XC too = lots of terrain that's great for BC XC.  
Both BC XC can work, like AT(lockedheel) and Tele in the BC....


----------



## Abubob (Sep 22, 2015)

marcski said:


> Don't mock them. I have them on my backcountry XC setup.  .


No mocking intended. Merely posted to show how inexpensive a bc set up can be, especially if you're willing to tele. Another plus is that in the back country this is infinitely easier to repair.


----------



## Not Sure (Sep 29, 2015)

Abubob said:


> No mocking intended. Merely posted to show how inexpensive a bc set up can be, especially if you're willing to tele. Another plus is that in the back country this is infinitely easier to repair.



Are Tele bindings restricted to "flat" on the ski or do they have elevation settings? The above picture looks to be just flat.


----------



## 〽❄❅ (Sep 30, 2015)

Abubob said:


> The Beast 14/16 run about $750 and the Kingpins go for about $650
> 
> There's always this for $99:


...or this for $1,149.95 - http://www.backcountry.com/tyrolia-...mJjc0NhdDUxMTAwMDQw&skid=HEA001I-ONECOL-S95MM


----------



## Not Sure (Sep 30, 2015)

〽❄❅;915647 said:
			
		

> ...or this for $1,149.95 - http://www.backcountry.com/tyrolia-...mJjc0NhdDUxMTAwMDQw&skid=HEA001I-ONECOL-S95MM



Nuts! And I thought the Beast's were overpriced. With breaks almost 2lbs a piece weights not bad.
Anything between? How are tele boots weight wise?


----------



## Abubob (Sep 30, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> Are Tele bindings restricted to "flat" on the ski or do they have elevation settings? The above picture looks to be just flat.


Here. $160.00 Also these are spring loaded so a little more complicated to repair mid tour.


----------



## 〽❄❅ (Sep 30, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> Nuts! And I thought the Beast's were overpriced. With breaks almost 2lbs a piece weights not bad.
> Anything between? How are tele boots weight wise?


yes, the AAAmbition 12 AL version -  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cCu1X3HOBM

Tele gear, boots and bindings tend to be heavy, more like Alpine gear.


----------



## 〽❄❅ (Sep 30, 2015)

Abubob said:


> Here. $160.00 Also these are spring loaded so a little more complicated to repair mid tour.


...from what i gather, not as complicated as a repair of potential damage to the user, which those things do little to nothing to prevent. I'd say it's one thing in floopy BC-NNN or three pin soft boots, quite another with full on high cuff hard plastic shell tele boots!


----------



## bigbog (Sep 30, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> Are Tele bindings restricted to "flat" on the ski or do they have elevation settings? The above picture looks to be just flat.



Another fwiw...SBSP, I'll be using some cant/shim strips here & there, under AT bindings..for alignment.  Asked a few on TGR..and they do it...rather than screw up their soles that are to be hiked on...


----------



## Not Sure (Sep 30, 2015)

So many ways to ski !.....Wish I would have learned about BC when I had less weight to lug up the mountain. Was curious about tele as a BC option but don't think I'll be trying it. . I'll se how the Dynafits work out, the suspense is killing me .Can't wait for snow, October snow is a bit of a bad omen in Pa.


----------



## bigbog (Oct 2, 2015)

Hey I'll be interested in hearing how the Beasts work out SBSP...  Shot downstate to try on Scarpa Freedoms(both SL and RS) today(Fri).  Both very narrow...thought I read of their lasts being ~100:???: = NO Way!, at least not in the 25.  25.5(= 26?)..it seemed a little larger in the forefoot.. ...but still very snug, so much so that I couldn't get my foot(high instep) in with the liner in...LOL..so that was certainly a showstopper!  So I guess I'll be thinking another AT boot along the way this winter...OR maybe some sort of touring setup(possibly), however my Hawx 110s showed up today.  At least a great fit(+ super warmth) for inbounds + maybe a possible DIN-style AT binding(Guardian/Adrenaline)..?


----------



## Not Sure (Oct 2, 2015)

bigbog said:


> Hey I'll be interested in hearing how the Beasts work out SBSP...  Shot downstate to try on Scarpa Freedoms(both SL and RS) today(Fri).  Both very narrow...thought I read of their lasts being ~100:???: = NO Way!, at least not in the 25.  25.5(= 26?)..it seemed a little larger in the forefoot.. ...but still very snug, so much so that I couldn't get my foot(high instep) in with the liner in...LOL..so that was certainly a showstopper!  So I guess I'll be thinking another AT binding along the way this winter...OR maybe some sort of touring setup(possibly), however my Hawx 110s showed up today.  At least a great fit(+ super warmth) for inbounds + maybe a possible DIN-style AT binding(Guardian/Adrenaline)..?


Didn't buy beasts....got tilt radical ST's , Scarpa's were spirit 3 an older model , although I heard they could be soft forward flex . When I got them I found that to be true . Before I bought them I saw some posts that said scarpa had a black tongue that would stiffen them up . I contacted them (excellent service)and they sent picture of 3 tongues and I was able to get a good match . 
Mounted them on the Steadfast's 
Just got lucky with boot fit . The liners are wrap arounds vs my older tongues. I'll see how that works out. My downhill wrap around experience was the twist my socks and rip out leg hair .


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Oct 2, 2015)

bigbog said:


> Hey I'll be interested in hearing how the Beasts work out SBSP...  Shot downstate to try on Scarpa Freedoms(both SL and RS) today(Fri).  Both very narrow...thought I read of their lasts being ~100:???: = NO Way!, at least not in the 25.  25.5(= 26?)..it seemed a little larger in the forefoot.. ...but still very snug, so much so that I couldn't get my foot(high instep) in with the liner in...LOL..so that was certainly a showstopper!  So I guess I'll be thinking another AT boot along the way this winter...OR maybe some sort of touring setup(possibly), however my Hawx 110s showed up today.  At least a great fit(+ super warmth) for inbounds + maybe a possible DIN-style AT binding(Guardian/Adrenaline)..?


I have the Dalbello Virus AT boot.  They have since been replaced by the Sherpa series, but look VERY similar.  They are advertised as 100mm, and I would say that is accurate based on how tight vs. my everyday boots(Panterra 120).  I really like them for BC skin trips.


----------



## bigbog (Oct 7, 2015)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> Didn't buy beasts....got tilt radical ST's , Scarpa's were spirit 3 an older model , although I heard they could be soft forward flex . When I got them I found that to be true . Before I bought them I saw some posts that said scarpa had a black tongue that would stiffen them up . I contacted them (excellent service)and they sent picture of 3 tongues and I was able to get a good match .
> Mounted them on the Steadfast's
> Just got lucky with boot fit . The liners are wrap arounds vs my older tongues. I'll see how that works out. My downhill wrap around experience was the twist my socks and rip out leg hair .


Cool...as is Hawkshot's Virus and Sherpa.  
Well I kind of lost it....and bought three boots...will return two.  Just can't find these, in the flesh, to try on...gave up looking for Solly's Mtn Lab.    Salomon Quest Max BC 120, Atomic Tracker and Hawx 110(downhill...fits so well)...but think the Quest Max will win out by a landslide.  Versatile and I've worked with Pebax = not the bootfitter's favorite but it's stiff and very light.
Anxious to put an AT binding(probably Beast 16 or one of G3s or other Dynafit) on a wider ski(thinking K2 Pinnacle 95 or 105...and then a hardpack ski = thinking what binding?).


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Oct 7, 2015)

bigbog said:


> Cool...as is Hawkshot's Virus and Sherpa.
> Well I kind of lost it....and bought three boots...will return two.  Just can't find these, in the flesh, to try on...gave up looking for Solly's Mtn Lab.    Salomon Quest Max BC 120, Atomic Tracker and Hawx 110(downhill...fits so well)...but think the Quest Max will win out by a landslide.  Versatile and I've worked with Pebax = not the bootfitter's favorite but it's stiff and very light.
> Anxious to put an AT binding(probably Beast 16 or one of G3s or other Dynafit) on a wider ski(thinking K2 Pinnacle 95 or 105...and then a hardpack ski = thinking what binding?).



Hiking in DH boots SUCKS!! Idid this for many years before getting my AT boots. Yes it is doable, but they weigh so much more, have very little or no articulation front to back while striding.  I didn't realize how they really were till I got the Virus.
I have skinned in my Panterra's twice I belive. Both times were at the resort and I just skinned out the ridge that the mtn was on. Way better than a locked in DH boot, but nowhere near the AT boot.

I have owned and really liked the Atomic Hawx. Do not choose them if you plan on doing skin trips. I would choose the quest out of what you are looking at, but I believe they are a tad wider than Hawx (maybe 102?).


----------



## Not Sure (Oct 7, 2015)

Hawkshot99 said:


> Hiking in DH boots SUCKS!! Idid this for many years before getting my AT boots. Yes it is doable, but they weigh so much more, have very little or no articulation front to back while striding.  I didn't realize how they really were till I got the Virus.
> I have skinned in my Panterra's twice I belive. Both times were at the resort and I just skinned out the ridge that the mtn was on. Way better than a locked in DH boot, but nowhere near the AT boot.
> 
> I have owned and really liked the Atomic Hawx. Do not choose them if you plan on doing skin trips. I would choose the quest out of what you are looking at, but I believe they are a tad wider than Hawx (maybe 102?).



How is walk mode with touring vs Dh ? . I don't have any other experience besides Dh. wondering if you have chafing issues . I had very little of that with the Dh


----------



## bigbog (Oct 22, 2015)

Eyeing tech bindings....still to get downhill setup and AT boot punching/stretching.


----------

