The 300g Touring Binding Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reckless toboggan

In the fall I picked up the UltraVector BC 177 with Atomic Backland Carbon and Dynafit Speed Turn.

It's insane how light the whole setup is compared to my 186 EHPs with Vertical FT12 (with brakes and toe shim) and Lange FT 130s, or compared to my 186 Renegades with Shifts and Lange FT 130s.

---

I did get the BC version... it's amazing what it will go up with no skins. I climbed Keystone without skins (sticking to the greens). It has more drag in packed dry snow than I was anticipating, but the ability to give it a kick definitely means it is at worst equal to the non BC base... and you get the bonus mobility to go up. Crest performs without adding any weight while the Alien makes you think you have no boots on during the ascent... little upright though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

I did get the BC version... it's amazing what it will go up with no skins. I climbed Keystone without skins (sticking to the greens). It has more drag in packed dry snow than I was anticipating, but the ability to give it a kick definitely means it is at worst equal to the non BC base... and you get the bonus mobility to go up. Crest performs without adding any weight while the Alien makes you think you have no boots on during the ascent... little upright though.

---

It IS amazing what you can go up on the Voile BC base. Not carrying skins drops significant weight too. Definitely some buzz and ski wandering on hardpack, but that's not really what I bought that setup for... spring corn might be a bit funky on them, I'll have to wait and see this spring.

The Backland Carbon boot is pretty light, take the tongue out and it feels like a stiff backpacking/mountaineering boot, you could practically walk around town in them. Definitely stiff enough to drive the UV BCs, and they're undergunned but certainly manageable when driving my EHPs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

So what is the real difference between the two toes? I can tell from the website that the SL Evo WC toe is lighter and more expensive, but not much more than that since the description for both is the same and they both use "monolink 1.0 technology"

---

Real difference is one is lighter than the other through removal of material. No difference in function, the heavier may be more robust, and it is definitely cheaper. I ski both toes, don't feel any concern skiing the light toes, other than they cost significantly more

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timmaio

Real difference is one is lighter than the other through removal of material. No difference in function, the heavier may be more robust, and it is definitely cheaper. I ski both toes, don't feel any concern skiing the light toes, other than they cost significantly more

---

Big shoutout for the photos of the ATK RT heelpiece disassembly you linked to in the thread: "Ultralight bindings: Independent heel Pins vs U Springs (Alpinist vs Haute Route)" - https://photos.google.com/share/AF1Q...BZSVhPN0NUSTZn

Thanks! What beautiful machining!

@Summit/@timmaio - I saw in that thread that you (@Summit) were going back and forth between the Crest 280 and the Haute Route 2.0 (along with the Alpinist). Was it a coin toss in the end that tilted you from the Haute Route toward the Crest? The 4mm of spring travel on the Crest heel? The integrated brakes?

I've been having some private conversations about the ATK line and one thing that came up is the release catch (button) on the Crest's brakes. I realize you've only had them out for a few days, but do you have any thoughts on how the brakes stay locked, behave in conditions when some binders are prone to icing, etc?

Lastly, can the bindings be skied with the brakes removed? I'm starting to lean toward the Haute Route 2.0s since the application is a Spring ski and leashes are OK for me in this application.

Thanks!
Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

@Summit/@timmaio - I saw in that thread that you (@Summit) were going back and forth between the Crest 280 and the Haute Route 2.0 (along with the Alpinist). Was it a coin toss in the end that tilted you from the Haute Route toward the Crest? The 4mm of spring travel on the Crest heel? The integrated brakes?

I've been having some private conversations about the ATK line and one thing that came up is the release catch (button) on the Crest's brakes. I realize you've only had them out for a few days, but do you have any thoughts on how the brakes stay locked, behave in conditions when some binders are prone to icing, etc?

Lastly, can the bindings be skied with the brakes removed? I'm starting to lean toward the Haute Route 2.0s since the application is a Spring ski and leashes are OK for me in this application.

Thanks!
Thom

---

Vs the HR2.0 it seemed like the Crest would have better transfer/durability with the brake underfoot (and had the brake), and it had the 4mm of spring travel. It also had more length adjustment.

The Crest can be skied with brakes removed (I haven't). I haven't been in icing conditions.

Thanks. So the brake assy. on the Crest serves the stomp pad function that's available on the Freeraider? That's a potential plus. I got thes hawt lookin' Praxis EXPs from @grinch, and they're looking longingly at me ... wanting to be mounted ;-)

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

Thanks. So the brake assy. on the Crest serves the stomp pad function that's available on the Freeraider? That's a potential plus. I got thes hawt lookin' Praxis EXPs from @grinch, and they're looking longingly at me ... wanting to be mounted ;-)

... Thom

---

Yes but unlike the add-it-on-stomp-pad which is height adjustable to boot contact, the brake pads do not quite sit in contact with my Alien RS heel tread when the ski is decambered to flat... but I think it does with more decambering found in normal pow skiing or carving which should improve energy transfer (and prevents boot heel explosion and pin shearing that some of us remember from the old Dynafit Comforts). It is also worth noting that I went with the very soft ultralight skis with patterned bases skis (Voile Hyper V6 BC 178) so I have above average toe-heel distance change with decambering for which I wanted the 4+4mm over just a 4mm gap on a HR2.0 in order to prevent release.

Thanks! I'm now back to leaning toward the Crest, although it seems like a "no lose" proposition either way.

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by reckless toboggan

It IS amazing what you can go up on the Voile BC base. Not carrying skins drops significant weight too. Definitely some buzz and ski wandering on hardpack, but that's not really what I bought that setup for... spring corn might be a bit funky on them, I'll have to wait and see this spring.

The Backland Carbon boot is pretty light, take the tongue out and it feels like a stiff backpacking/mountaineering boot, you could practically walk around town in them. Definitely stiff enough to drive the UV BCs, and they're undergunned but certainly manageable when driving my EHPs.

---

When I had some Charger BCs I thought they were the best in spring corn. Noticed them about as much there as I did in deep pow. It was variable stuff and styrofoam that I felt like I noticed the most. YMMV of course.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

Thanks! I'm now back to leaning toward the Crest, although it seems like a "no lose" proposition either way.

---

No lose fer sure, but without the bsl adjustment, the HR 2.0 saves you 115g per binding = 0.5 lbs per pair. Not a ton, but certainly not negligible either if you're going light with skis and boots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

No lose fer sure, but without the bsl adjustment, the HR 2.0 saves you 115g per binding = 0.5 lbs per pair. Not a ton, but certainly not negligible either if you're going light with skis and boots.

---

I'm looking forward to a brake plate without adjustment track at about 50gm per in the future, then I think it will be holy grail for light touring with tough but not 'don't fall' skiing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timmaio

I'm looking forward to a brake plate without adjustment track at about 50gm per in the future, then I think it will be holy grail for light touring with tough but not 'don't fall' skiing.

---

Why wouldn't you want to ski YFYD terrain on the HR 2.0 or Crest?

BTW, do you work with/for the US-based Hagan Ski Mountaineering in Breck?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

Yes but unlike the add-it-on-stomp-pad which is height adjustable to boot contact, the brake pads do not quite sit in contact with my Alien RS heel tread when the ski is decambered to flat... but I think it does with more decambering found in normal pow skiing or carving which should improve energy transfer (and prevents boot heel explosion and pin shearing that some of us remember from the old Dynafit Comforts). It is also worth noting that I went with the very soft ultralight skis with patterned bases skis (Voile Hyper V6 BC 178) so I have above average toe-heel distance change with decambering for which I wanted the 4+4mm over just a 4mm gap on a HR2.0 in order to prevent release.

---

I'm about to pull the trigger on some Crests for all the positive qualities discussed in this thread (wish they went to 12 RV, but 10 will be fine), but I was wondering about the brake pad/heel contact. Do you think you could add a little material if your boot doesn't contact? I feel like stomp pads/brake pads with good contact make a huge difference in the skiing feel on pin binders

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

When skiing YFYD terrain I am happy to ski on a race binding or currently Helio 180 with a locked toe and no leashes. For non YFYD I want brakes rather than leashes and I don't want to pay the weight penalty for the Crest. I have been skiing the RT on my 'resort'/powder ski with leashes, but when they have released(when I wanted them to) it was not so pleasant with the ski swinging around and hitting me.

I know Mike moderately well and my wife is currently sponsored by them, other than that I have no connection. Why do you ask?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

No lose fer sure, but without the bsl adjustment, the HR 2.0 saves you 115g per binding = 0.5 lbs per pair. Not a ton, but certainly not negligible either if you're going light with skis and boots.

---

Yeah, I'd keep the BSL adjustment (for 40g/pr.) if I go with HRs, 'coz these skis already have two sets of SSL 2.0 holes in them, and I don't know what boots I'll end up with next year.

So now, we're down to 75g/binding difference. If one wanted to further make an apples to apples comparison, I'm guessing that the net tradeoff of replacing brakes for a light (27g) Kevalar leash would net another 30g, so a net difference of maybe 40 g/binding?

I guess I'll toss a coin ;-)

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

No lose fer sure, but without the bsl adjustment, the HR 2.0 saves you 115g per binding = 0.5 lbs per pair. Not a ton, but certainly not negligible either if you're going light with skis and boots.

---

what are you gona do if you need to change boots or something?

I remember an or something where buddy had the super light race binding with them scarpa boots which used the funny (funny shitty) walk lever attached to the top buckle or SFT

when scarpa recalled all the boots

he was fucked eh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXX-er

what are you gona do if you need to change boots or something?

---

remount the heel with plates :wink:

won't the extra elevation give you a nose bleed ?

I go through skis quicker than boots. But yeah, I'd be concerned if I was buying a new pair of boots that I wasn't positive would work out. Or like mall walker says, remount with an adjustment plate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXX-er

won't the extra elevation give you a nose bleed ?

---

I’d hit the gym to shave the extra weight so as to compensate for the additional weight... :fm:

Skied my alpinist today inbounds with my regular resort boots (switched soles) on some helio 105’s. Very impressed. Hoping the heel lifters wonts annoy the fuck out of me and I’ll be all good until they explode and I die.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mall walker

I’d hit the gym to shave the extra weight so as to compensate for the additional weight... :fm:

---

you could just shave your legs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

I go through skis quicker than boots. But yeah, I'd be concerned if I was buying a new pair of boots that I wasn't positive would work out. Or like mall walker says, remount with an adjustment plate.

---

Or just mount with the adjustment plate and don't have to remount? It's 40 grams.

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaliBrit

Skied my alpinist today inbounds with my regular resort boots (switched soles) on some helio 105’s. Very impressed. Hoping the heel lifters wonts annoy the fuck out of me and I’ll be all good until they explode and I die.

---

yah as much as it pains me to say I've been skiing the Alpinist 12 inbounds doing some groomer laps while waiting for alpine lifts to open so I can tour out and they're solid af. I mean it's just groomers but they feel connected and not old-skool Dynafiddle vague

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeeLau

yah as much as it pains me to say I've been skiing the Alpinist 12 inbounds doing some groomer laps while waiting for alpine lifts to open so I can tour out and they're solid af. I mean it's just groomers but they feel connected and not old-skool Dynafiddle vague

---

Lee, can you compare the feeling of the Alpinists to something like the Crests, Raiders or RT 2.0s? The Alpinists look great in so many ways but they are Markers, they haven't been out very long and they do have a u-spring, which are all factors that make me a little nervous. I have read the Blister review and some of the Wildsnow posts, but curious to get a little more info. Seen a few Alpinists in the parking lot but haven't talked to anyone who's skiing them (yet.)

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk