Tech bindings

[Lindahl]

Kingpins are 730g right? That's a sidecountry binding imo, but then again 1400g is about the limit on skis for me. People are all different, maybe slapping some number ranges on different "types" of touring makes sense.

Once you start talking about 500g+ lineup, 2x to 4x heavier than the truly light options, 1.5+ lbs per binding... sure, it's gonna ski better. I think it's a bit disingenuous to just say "nothing else skis as good as kingpins" without mentioning "if you don't mind hauling an extra 1.25lbs per foot uphill"

Agreed. If I am really concerned with weight, I'm looking at the Superlight series, which is sub 200g. Otherwise I want to buy something substantial and tangible with that extra weight - more skiability (Kingpins) or safety (Vipecs) or high risers (Plum Guide).

We plan on doing a review of the lighter weight options at a later point in time, as well as mentioning this in our conclusion review for the current AT binding shootout.

[Lindahl]

I've skied a couple laps on hard/ manky snow with Ions. I own Kingpins. I think the Ion feel is closer to OG tech bindings than it is to Kingpins. I also had an issue with the heel piece catching on my boot in flat touring mode when I over flexed the ski. It only happened under unusual circumstances but was annoying nonetheless. Good product for sure but not convinced they're much of an improvement over the old school versions.

Beast 16's feel more like Kingpins but they are an inferior touring binding. Not only is there no flat mode, snow can build up in the heel lifter making it even less flat.

My exposure to Vipecs has involved multiple touring partners dealing with icing and problems switching modes. Too many gaps and plastic moving parts. If the complaints go away with the Black version I'd give them a try.

My choice would be

Long tour: Plum Guide (haven't tried any ATKs)- simplicity and weight win out. Would try something lighter if I were a bit lighter.

Short tour: Kingpin. They've been flawless for me.

Side country/ resort double duty: Beast 16. Release is smoother than Kingpins. But if I didn't already have them mounted on skis, I'd probably choose Kingpins which feel just as connected, if not more so, and tour much better. I have a hunch the Beasts have a bit more elasticity as well but I don't have any personal evidence to support this.

Interesting. We found that the Beast 14 had none of the power and connectedness of the Kingpin. We got the Beast 14 too late to do a lot of inbounds testing, but in the backcountry back-to-backs it didn't really feel much different than the Radical 2.0 (we were only able to A-B it against the Kingpin and Radical 2.0). I would like more time on all of them to be sure about difference to the others, but the Kingpin felt noticeably more connected and powerful than the Beast 14 - as noticeable as it was to the others. I think the Beasts main improvement is in release characteristics, but we don't have any real way of determining that.

I agree, the ATKs are pretty damn sweet for a long tour binding. We're working on getting a review pair, along with Guides, Speed Radicals and Superlights.

[GeezerSteve]

Agreed. If I am really concerned with weight, I'm looking at the Superlight series, which is sub 200g.

Lack of flat mode is fine for rando racing but touring bindings without a flat mode would suck on at least half of the hundreds of tours I've done in the past 30 years.

One of the problem with some of the so-called "expert" reviews of AT gear is that most of reviewers are lift skiers 90% of the time and their touring seems to be limited to yoyo skiing (which represents a fraction of tours that get done on AT gear). One yoyo-myopic review I recall was Marshall's comment in an AT boot review that TLT5/6-type ROM wasn't really important in touring boots because AFAICT he didn't do anything other than yoyo with the boots he was testing. Being an expert lift-served skier does not make one an expert re touring gear. [/rant]

[Cocximus]

I really like the vipecs for their release. I had them out for about 50 days. Mostly BC. I took a few particularly nasty falls, and the release definitely saved my season. Never had a pre-release. They iced on me twice in spring conditions. The tempt difference was big, otherwise they were fine on other spring days. My biggest gripe with them is that the brakes stick out and can get bent while touring. They don't always deploy all the way. By the end of the season I was skiing them in the resort. No complaints and definitely no tech binding chatter. I am 150lbs.

The only binding I would consider upgrading to would be a tech compatible trab TR2.

[mall walker]

Lack of flat mode is fine for rando racing but touring bindings without a flat mode would suck on at least half of the hundreds of tours I've done in the past 30 years.

One of the problem with some of the so-called "expert" reviews of AT gear is that the reviewers are usually lift skiers 90% of the time and their touring seems to be limited to yoyo skiing (which represents a fraction of tours that get done on AT gear). One yoyo-myopic review I recall was Marshall's comment in an AT boot review that TLT5/6-type ROM wasn't really important in touring boots because AFAICT he didn't do anything other than yoyo with the boots he was testing. Being an expert lift-served skier does not make one an expert tourist. [/rant]

I actually thought the SSL 2.0 had a flat mode... anyway the OG red ones had only slight more ramp to their lowest touring setting than my Radical STs with the brakes on there. It was worth the trade off for me, but I ski mostly in the basically-frontcountry Wasatch and don't do a lot of long flat approaches as a matter of course.

The Hagan ZR mounted at 5.5mm space (for heel rotation) at 116g or something seems like the holy grail though...

[PNWbrit]

actually spent 5 days in the backcountry with these bindings. Including hauling 3 pairs of skis on my back for several of those days for back to back comparisons.

WTF????

[Lindahl]

Lack of flat mode is fine for rando racing but touring bindings without a flat mode would suck on at least half of the hundreds of tours I've done in the past 30 years.

True, I did forget to mention that as well. Again, I hope to answer the question 'how big of a deal is this and when' in a review next year of the lighter bindings.

[PNWbrit]

Lack of flat mode is fine for rando racing but touring bindings without a flat mode would suck on at least half of the hundreds of tours I've done in the past 30 years.

One of the problem with some of the so-called "expert" reviews of AT gear is that most of reviewers are lift skiers 90% of the time and their touring seems to be limited to yoyo skiing (which represents a fraction of tours that get done on AT gear). One yoyo-myopic review I recall was Marshall's comment in an AT boot review that TLT5/6-type ROM wasn't really important in touring boots because AFAICT he didn't do anything other than yoyo with the boots he was testing. Being an expert lift-served skier does not make one an expert re touring gear. [/rant]

^ This... plus there's so much more to it than which tech bring to bring.

actually spent 5 days in the backcountry with these bindings. Including hauling 3 pairs of skis on my back for several of those days for back to back comparisons.

WTF????

[Lindahl]

WTF????

Yeah, it was a pain in the ass, but it was a good way to answer some questions that I still had. At least it was a short 30-60min approach and then dropped the skis at the base of the chute. May have been able to do this at a resort but they all closed, that and it wouldn't have been backcountry snow - which was one of my questions.

[PNWbrit]

it was a good way to answer some questions that I still had.

Clearly I'm just not overthinking this enough.

[North]

Lack of flat mode is fine for rando racing but touring bindings without a flat mode would suck on at least half of the hundreds of tours I've done in the past 30 years.

The Hagan ZR mounted at 5.5mm space (for heel rotation) at 116g or something seems like the holy grail though...

Ski Trab Gara Titan clocks in at 114g for Steel and 105g for Titanium (Flat mode + 1 riser mode on both). Friend of mine was testing a pair this spring. Elegant, simple design IMO - that's the pair I'm most interested for the superlight category.

[Lindahl]

I've found I definitely need a second riser - more than I need a flat mode. The racer flap riser has never been enough for me in certain situations.

[Game Over]

^^price?

[mall walker]

I've found I definitely need a second riser - more than I need a flat mode. The racer flap riser has never been enough for me in certain situations.

Riser preference is super personal I've found. I hate the high riser on my speed radicals because it feels so unbalanced. The low riser / flat positions are awesome. But some people who tour harder than me love the full riser. Maybe it varies by binding + person combination (on my SSL 1.0 I liked the higher riser but it was less high and somewhat more stable feeling)

[Lindahl]

Riser preference is super personal I've found. I hate the high riser on my speed radicals because it feels so unbalanced. The low riser / flat positions are awesome. But some people who tour harder than me love the full riser. Maybe it varies by binding + person combination (on my SSL 1.0 I liked the higher riser but it was less high and somewhat more stable feeling)

Yeah, I had meant the high riser on the Superlight series, and the optional one for the Plum Race and ATK Race Tour. Those are about the same height as the low riser on the Speed Radical. I do like the high riser on thr Speed Radical in rare circumstances like deep powder and around a terrain feature, but its usually just for a minute or two and the low riser can work too. The ROM of the boot matters here as well.

[Cocximus]

I have many days on Vipec Black and like them for skiing.
regarding the brakes, i filed down the plastic that caught the ski edge and they now deploy real smooth.

It catches in the binding not the ski edge.

[Lindahl]

It catches in the binding not the ski edge.

You can file that down too - carefully. You should see rub marks where the plastic is catching.

[XXX-er]

Duno about the rest but I toe the plastic paddle area inwards on verts & rads so they don't catch on boots or trees they will still deploy without catching on the ski cuz the brake comes up and then tucks the brakes in. I have 130 brake arms radically bent to work on a lotus 120

[GeezerSteve]

Re flat mode, IMO it's essential for safe contouring and low angle traversing above exposure while skinning on firm, which is pretty common on ski mountaineering routes and high routes. Flat mode is absolutely essential for fat fishscale, which for us often involves negotiating rolling terrain boots in ski mode and bindings in flat tour mode (and long waits for the exhausted members of group members who don't have fat fishscales).

[neck beard]

I often use flat mode. Almost never need the highest riser.

[m-ruta]

Put me in the camp who could live without a high riser, but definitely not flat mode. It always feels so good to put it in flat mode and use a different rom for a while when terrain warrants on long days.

My beefy setup has Ion lt's and I love them. They feel a little more connected than my speed turns, I think. Some nice little features that I really appreciate, like the pole tip clearance under the toe wings and the little wedge under the heel to prevent ice build up in flat mode. They definitely seem more like a really refined bridge between radical 2.0 and 1.0 than a real next gen slackcountry type binding like a kingpin though.

[Lindahl]

Its important to clarify that I was talking about flat and high risers on race bindings. On Speed Radicals, I'd take the flat mode over the high riser for sure. On race bindings, the flap is really close to being flat. The high riser is like a Speed Radical low riser. Hence, I'd take the high riser over a flat mode. Riser heights are quite different between race bindings and the heavier bindings (300g+).

Re flat mode, IMO it's essential for safe contouring and low angle traversing above exposure while skinning on firm, which is pretty common on ski mountaineering routes and high routes. Flat mode is absolutely essential for fat fishscale, which for us often involves negotiating rolling terrain boots in ski mode and bindings in flat tour mode (and long waits for the exhausted members of group members who don't have fat fishscales).

Have you tried a race binding or Speed Superlight yet? The riser heights aren't like the ones you're probably used to.

[auvgeek]

Anybody know how well the Superlight 2.0 stays in flat mode if mounted with a 5.5 mm gap (similar to the Hagan ZR)? Or updates on the supposed B&D fix?

[sfotex]

Anybody know how well the Superlight 2.0 stays in flat mode if mounted with a 5.5 mm gap (similar to the Hagan ZR)? Or updates on the supposed B&D fix?

It doesn't have the detent to keep the heel in flat mode.

[auvgeek]

It doesn't have the detent to keep the heel in flat mode.

Yes, I understand that. I was looking for real-world usability from those who have tried it. Impossibly frustrating, minor annoyance, or somewhere in between?