Duke's vs. Look, is AT set-up too much for 118 underfoot?

[Slurr P]

Hey all,

So I decided on the 4FRNT CRJ's in 188 (from my last thread here: [ame="http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=198487"]2011 - EP Pro vs. CRJ vs. Obsethed vs. JJ - Teton Gravity Research Forums[/ame])

I am wondering about bindings now. I want to get more into BC/sidecountry stuff this season, so I have been thinking about getting a pair of Duke's. I'm wondering, is the 118mm underfoot too much for everyday use with an AT binding? I found a pair of the Look PX14's for $200 that I know would be better for the downhill (which would be the more everyday use).

Not really interested in a huge debate on Fritschi vs. Dynafit vs. Marker war, just interested in thoughts of an AT binding vs. alpine.

Thanks!!

[nick > jesus]

are you going to be skinning?

[dynodonkeyaltabird]

Look PX14's for $200

that is a fucking rip-off.

[Slurr P]

If I got the AT's I'd definitely pick up a set of skins. As of now I don't have any since I just got the skis of Friday.

Touring is definitely not the priority of the set-up, it would mainly be an afterthought. I just don't want to sacrifice my everyday use of the skis for a binding I might only use for touring a few times this season.

[Ottime]

Again. Will you be skinning?

The performance difference between my Duke and P14 is minimal, but then agian, I'm no pro. If you want to get out and tour, you need a touring binding. The Duke works fine for an everyday in bounds binding.

But, if you are not going to actually skin, then there is no need.

Alpine bindings have fewer moving parts to break. Weight difference = meh.

As for width. Not really an issue other than weight.

[Jarle]

There is trekkers if you don't want a pair of AT-bindings

[hop]

You're going to get a beacon/shovel/probe/training with your touring bindings, right?

[arewolfe]

FWIW I "tour" [in bounds powder days when lifts are on windhold] on ARGs with Dukes 133mm underfoot.

[time2clmb]

There's nothing wrong with touring on a fat ski if you are hunting for powder. The set up with Dukes will be heavy but if you're not a pansy or a whiner it will be just fine. I tour with EP's and Dukes on good days and choose that set up over my light dynafiddle setup when the snow is awesome.

[Mathematics]

I tour on dukes with lhasa's without issues. Not super lightweight but it works.

The question is how much are you planning on touring, and do you really need 16 DIN.

[wcf3]

All of my 'soft snow/wider' skis are now mounted with Dukes. Some of them don't get much touring action, but I travel a lot to ski, and I don't want to bring a dedicated touring rig on a trip, just in case I might want to do some touring. Width has never been an issue for me with Dukes, and they've worked well for me on Lhasa's, Lotus 120's and Solly Rockers (all >115 underfoot) both inbounds and backcountry.

[ZomblibulaX]

I definitely noticed some torquing underfoot with duke's on '07 Big Daddies, but I attribute that to the foamy nature of the ski rather than any issue with the binding. It was enough to make me strip them off and put some 916's on though. The bindings skied very well, I was just worried about tearing them out of the ski.

Touring is definitely not the priority of the set-up, it would mainly be an afterthought. I just don't want to sacrifice my everyday use of the skis for a binding I might only use for touring a few times this season.

Touring is not the priority of dukes either, IMO. Its a nice option to have, in case you need it. Like a lonely chubby girl.

You're going to get a beacon/shovel/probe/training with your touring bindings, right?

x2.

[gramboh]

You're going to get a beacon/shovel/probe/training with your touring bindings, right?

Factor this into the cost, $200 beacon, $75 shovel+probe, $xxx avy rec course (depends where you are), $120+ skins, and the Dukes will of course cost more than alpine bindings (and yeah $200 on PX14 is a huge rip off).

[pfluffenmeister]

Touring is not the priority of dukes either, IMO. Its a nice option to have, in case you need it. Like a lonely chubby girl.

^^^ haha

You're going to get a beacon/shovel/probe/training with your touring bindings, right?

x3 (no judgements, i need the same things as i hope/plan to get after it in the bc this season)

[Angel]

The answer to your question is no. As you can see, many, many people tour on skis that wide and wider.

[McDee]

There is trekkers if you don't want a pair of AT-bindings

Might be a problem, afaik trekkers are (were?) incompatible with look/rossi bindings due to heel piece.

[DHogg]

Might be a problem, afaik trekkers are (were?) incompatible with look/rossi bindings due to heel piece.

I've used trekkers on fks (and PX). They take more messing around with than some other bindings, but it can definitely be done.

[fat yeti]

I wonder how many people with dukes actually use them. I'm sure plenty due, but I have met my share of people that put them on a ski just to have the option but they have never used that option. Most have a touring set up for those days or they do not have the other gear. I say if your not going to tour or there is only a slim chance get a Alpine binding. Here are two better bindings for your money than the px 14
http://www.levelninesports.com/Salom...-Binding-13290
http://www.levelninesports.com/Head-...cksilver-10115

[time2clmb]

^ I have 2 pairs of skis with Dukes, and 1 pair with Dynafits. Each individual pair of Dukes sees more use than my Dynafits. Maybe 100 days last season where they were used in tour mode.

[fez]

i have dukes on blizzard titan pros (135-119-125) and bluehouse shoots (149-128-133) and have had no problems. well other than my legs falling off when i try to skin....

[hiplainsdrifter]

There is no way that will work for you. It is impossible for you to ski boards that wide without permanently welding your legs to your skis.

Seriously though, you could ski CRJs with 3-pins in powder if you have good technique.