Thread: MFD Alltime AT binding plate unboxing, new/detailed photos.

I just got a new pair of these in the mail - while there are reviews on how they ski, there was a dearth of photos of the actual unit and how it fit together. In particular, the rear locking mechanism operates totally differently than I thought it did.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7065001...57628133370121

Mounting them tomorrow.

Nice pics. Thanks for the underside view.

In mounting them, I'm finding that with the FKS they can actually go down to 307mm despite a stated minimum BSL of 310mm.

Finished mounting. Result pics added to Flickr set.

Nice setup. What's the weight with MFD+FKS?

Saw these in person yesterday. Surprised at how long they were! Seems like they would dramatically change the flex of the ski.

Originally Posted by skimaxpower

Nice setup. What's the weight with MFD+FKS?

It's heavy. 713g for the large plate (600g for the small), 1075g for the FKS = 1675g. A Duke is 1334g but for those 341g the Alltime looks and feels way burlier.

Saw these in person yesterday. Surprised at how long they were! Seems like they would dramatically change the flex of the ski.

We'll see. The toe is in virtually the same spot, the heel is farther back but is floated. It would probably stiffen up the tail.

Just as an FYI.

I compared the binding templates from the template thread and found that the Salomon template holes all appear on the MFD.

On the Rossi/Look version of the MFD and comparing that to the Rossi/Look FKS template, anything with the Look toe will fit, the Geze toe will not. The 5th center bottom hole in the toe for the P18/180(?) is not on the MFD. The older "dildo" Pivot series which looks like this does not fit as the heel holes are different.

When you look at the Rossi version of the MFD, there is a 3rd set of rear holes on the one on the website that looks like it would fit the PX/Axial, but this has been removed on the version I have. (ed: I spoke with the designer and these holes were actually for the Rossi Freeride2 series, not the PX. They removed them because leaving them in weakened the tubular feet on the bottom, and none of their testers used the Freeride2 anyway.)

Just got mine the other day too:



Only skied a couple runs on them before unrelated issues sent me home, and no skinning yet. I was a little shocked at the weight the first time I picked the skis up with the whole setup together, but I think a lot of it is in my choice of binding rather than the plates. Also wish there was a little more clearance for the toe piece - if I pivot the binding forward to about 70 degrees or so, the front of the binding hits the ski. It's got enough leverage you could probably do some damage if you took a header while the heel was unlocked.

Originally Posted by superstator

Just got mine the other day too:


l wish there was a little more clearance for the toe piece - if I pivot the binding forward to about 70 degrees or so, the front of the binding hits the ski. It's got enough leverage you could probably do some damage if you took a header while the heel was unlocked.

To be fair, nearly all AT binders (Duke, F12, F10, Freeride, Baron, Naxo) will hit when approaching 90 deg at the toe. With my FKS it doesn't, and with the wife's older Sallys it doesn't either. I think that the Alltime is the rare exception in that with a lot of bindings it doesn't hit at the toe - and if it does, you're talking all that force going into a burly aluminum frame and pivot bushing instead of a chintzy plastic frame and tiny rod like on the Duke and all the rest.

On a recent tour, I had problems with the flat touring position - when the ski is flexed the rear will catch annoyingly, resulting in possible blisters on your heel if touring flat for awhile.

Therefore, after a consideration of the heel block and how overbuilt it is, I removed 75 thousandths of an inch (0.075") from the area described in this photo with a Dremel and it now operates perfectly in flat mode even if the ski is flexed. (I may or may not have been directly told by the designer to do this. YMMV.)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7065001...57628133370121

With this small change, the Alltime is perfect.

Originally Posted by coreshot-tourettes

To be fair, nearly all AT binders (Duke, F12, F10, Freeride, Baron, Naxo) will hit when approaching 90 deg at the toe. With my FKS it doesn't, and with the wife's older Sallys it doesn't either. I think that the Alltime is the rare exception in that with a lot of bindings it doesn't hit at the toe - and if it does, you're talking all that force going into a burly aluminum frame and pivot bushing instead of a chintzy plastic frame and tiny rod like on the Duke and all the rest.

Fritschi toe slides back on the rail when it makes contact. I noticed this playing with a pair at the shop.

just opened mine up. They certainly look long. Gonna mount them up with 916's tomorrow. Reports to come.

I believe they addressed that issue in the Blister Gear review. Look it up, it's pretty detailed.

It also covers concern over the length and ski flex.

Originally Posted by coreshot-tourettes

On a recent tour, I had problems with the flat touring position - when the ski is flexed the rear will catch annoyingly, resulting in possible blisters on your heel if touring flat for awhile.

Therefore, after a consideration of the heel block and how overbuilt it is, I removed 75 thousandths of an inch (0.075") from the area described in this photo with a Dremel and it now operates perfectly in flat mode even if the ski is flexed. (I may or may not have been directly told by the designer to do this. YMMV.)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7065001...57628133370121

With this small change, the Alltime is perfect.

Originally Posted by TahoeJ

I believe they addressed that issue in the Blister Gear review.

No, they did not. The Blister review basically said "don't walk like that and it isn't an issue", which is BS:

The more I walk, the more obvious it seems that this really isn’t an issue when you are aware of it

They also got confused and convinced themselves that it was due to sidehilling, which is a sufficient but not necessary cause of the problem. They also used the wrong terms for flexural direction. The problem is beam flex (deflection normal to the top of the ski) tilting the rear block up and down about its lateral axis, not torsional flex of the ski about its long axis.

You can modify your stride to unweight the ski, get your heel out of the heel block, and then weight it again to kick. This means that you are picking up the ski in a funny hitching way with each step that you're in soft snow in 0deg mode, which is a big touring no-no as it kills your efficiency.

Again, I may or may not have been directly told by the designer to take a file to the upper rear locking lug as this would solve the problem, and he may or may not have told me that he had done this himself. Read between the lines.

Good to hear a field report on these things, well any AT binding in general.

It may have been said and I might have missed it, but what skis did you end up attaching these to?

Originally Posted by Ivan Oder

Good to hear a field report on these things, well any AT binding in general.

It may have been said and I might have missed it, but what skis did you end up attaching these to?

They're on both my new pair of Coreupt Adrien Coirier in 191cm (basically reskinned Dynastar Pro Riders), and my wife's old Pocket Rockets in 165cm.

Just mounted my alltimes with some salomon sth 16s. Surprised how well they allow the ski to flex when locked. They feel solid when skiing them. Have not toured with them yet. i am a little worried about how they will do on flats after reading some reviews. Has anyone noticed a difference in the pivot point being farther forward than dukes (my normal BC setup) or freerides

Originally Posted by coreshot-tourettes

my wife's old Pocket Rockets in 165cm.

Really? Has she skied them yet? I'd love to know how they affect the flex on something that short and soft.

Have you skied the Adriens with a regular alpine binding? Did you find the MFD made them noticeably stiffer? Where?

Thanks. Still not sure what I'm going to do with mine but will probably end up putting them on whatever rockered 100mm daily driver I end up with...

once again nice coreupts man. those skis are solid. are these "all times" an AT conversion for alpine binders?

Originally Posted by cbarrett

Just mounted my alltimes with some salomon sth 16s. Surprised how well they allow the ski to flex when locked. They feel solid when skiing them. Have not toured with them yet. i am a little worried about how they will do on flats after reading some reviews. Has anyone noticed a difference in the pivot point being farther forward than dukes (my normal BC setup) or freerides

It's kind of a "hup-and-over!" stride in that you're going a bit more up instead of forward due to the forward pivot, but I got used to it.

I'd love to know how they affect the flex on something that short and soft.

I actually just tested this; I hand-flexed the Pockets with a roughly equal amount of force with the heel block locked versus the heel block unlocked and lifted off the ski, and could not tell a difference in flex. I would guess that on a stiffer ski you wouldn't be able to tell either. I think I'm going to make sure the rear block sliding track is silicone sprayed occasionally anyway.

Working the math, it takes 20lb force to deflect the rear block fully by hand, and it's 2" high appx. 12" in back of boot center. Therefore, the Alltime would seem to increase the force to needed deflect the ski fully by 3.3lb. So virtually nothing.

So now that you've had these out, would you see any benefit in having the option to use the MFD or a traditional mount depending on the day's mission? For example, Binding Freedom inserts in the ski for FKS and the MFD.

If I got these I'd have to decide whether I want to plug old FKS holes or install inserts for everything.

Originally Posted by Ivan Oder

So now that you've had these out, would you see any benefit in having the option to use the MFD or a traditional mount depending on the day's mission? For example, Binding Freedom inserts in the ski for FKS and the MFD.

If I got these I'd have to decide whether I want to plug old FKS holes or install inserts for everything.

Given that the holes in the MFD are ski screw thread and not machine screw, mounting and unmounting bindings to the MFD plate in order to use inserts on the ski is not a good thing (the MFD threads are meant to deform when you mount the bindings - a few remounts are OK but you are going to start stressing the thread and starting to strip it.)

Going inserts to have your regular alpine bindings directly attached to the ski doesn't really make sense either if you have an MFD - it doesn't affect the flex, it's just as bomber of a connection as an alpine binding, it's just a bit heavier and for resort skiing that matters little.

^^^^^ Time for a Dyna-MFD plate.. plate?

^^^^ I think I'm going to let the MFD plates prove themselves a tiny bit more first. I have a feeling that anyone who actually uses a pair of dynafit/plum bindings isn't going to like the MFDs. Lots of people who haven't actually used a tech binding like to talk about how the touring motion feels great.

<edited to add> that is not to say MFD don't have its place! I'm just not sure that there is a big enough market for people who want to swap between dynas and MFD </edit>