Plum or Dynafit on Lotus 120 pure as a full time setup?

[Ski to Be]

I have read through a ton of stuff on both of these bindings and have some specific questions. I just bought some Lotus 120s and am going to go to probably the new Tecnica Cochise 120 light that is coming out next year and use it as a full time setup. I have toured on Dynafits for years and have had no issues with prerelease with the exception of sending it with a pack on and having the heel prerelease. The new radical din 12 dynos are better in this regard than my speeds? Dynafit improved the step in on the new models, does the plum step in as easily as the new dynafits? I was thinking that I could fashion a plate and use my wide Dynafit binding brakes on the new plums? Or I could just ski with leashes till a OEM brake is made? I would like an alpine binding feel in a tech binding setup that is durable enough for 50+ days a year. Any input is appreciated.
Thanks

[Ski to Be]

One more question. Will my B & D wide crampons slide into the Plums?

[Tutuko]

I read that the Plum brake will likely not be compatible with the current guides, someone correct me if i'm wrong, but that might simplify your decision somewhat.

[SB]

On my Plums (2010) the cramp slot needed a very slight dressing with a triangular file for the slot to accept a Dfit unit.

Basically it boils down to do you want brakes or not. If not the Plum is well constructed and goes to 12 DIN should you need that much. If you need/want brakes go with the ST Verticals, they have a proven track record.

Yeah there have been breakages on both. If you want a tech binding to replace an alpine binding you may be in for trouble.

Plums may or may not come out with a ski brake, they keep saying so but have yet to deliver. The binding works well with out it.

If you are interested I could sell my Plums, which are unused, for $450 shipped.

[thin cover]

I had this same set up this year and part of last year, 200 cm pure 120's, plum guides and cochises. Light and really durable with all you need on the down. I had the ft 12's before the guides and felt the guides had a more positive step in than the dynafits. But then I had a guide toe wing snap off on me in a bad spot with the guides, not into taking anymore risks so I went back to dynafit for now. For my size using it as a daily all condition rig has yielded problems and I only used them in the resort a handful of times. Not sure aluminum, although lighter, is the way to go if you are using them daily. But I have a few friends who have had no issues.

like scotty b said a small amount of filing will get the crampons to work no problem. I also heard from Plum that if a brake is forth coming it will not be compatible with the current iteration of the guide. I used leashes and did not mind it. In the end, even though they skied great, I just did not like the constant feeling of not knowing if I was going to be held in on every turn. Given that I have had a few issues in bad spots with new tech binder gear, It started to wear on me and affected how I was skiing. I am 6"4" 240lbs for reference.

[gregL]

Just what scottyb says. I filed the leading edge of the crampon slot with a triangular file to get my B & D cramps to fit. Doesn't take much.

For what I do, there's still no tech binding that takes the place of an alpine binding for everyday skiing.

[pfluffenmeister]

I had this same set up this year and part of last year, 200 cm pure 120's, plum guides and cochises. Light and really durable with all you need on the down.
...
I am 6"4" 240lbs for reference.

I'm looking at exactly this set-up for next year (i have 2 days on the 120's, but with STH16's & Titans).
120 200 Pures mounted with Sollyfit plates.
I haven't had a chance to try out the Plums or Cochises (but they are already in hand).

I'm 5'10" 150#, so I'm hoping/thinking this rig will be solid.


EDIT: I've put 8 days inbounds on a Lotus120 (190 Hybrid) mounted with Dynafit Vertical STs, wearing Dynafit Titans.
It felt very solid. Pretty much like an alpine binder; lots of feedback on hard stuff, though.
But I don't think that I would run that set-up as a regular inbounds rig.
(I'm a DynaJong and wanted to get most of my stupid mistakes out of the way in a more controlled enviroment).


EDIT: ThinCover - Did you experience any tech fitting deformation (in the Cochise) when using the Cochise with the Plum Guide's?

The recent thread regarding deformation of the toe tech insert when used with Dynafits has me concerned.

[AsheanMT]

I'm 210 6'2" without gear and ski fast but don't huck. Last year I ski'd about 50 days (majority inbounds and slackcountry) on FT12's on Manaslu's without any binding issues. (The skis are a little too light for inbounds hammering). This year I ski'd more of the same until about a month ago when I got 193 Nordica Patron's with some Radical FT's. My boots are the Dynafit Titan. I ski that setup very fast and hard and have had no touring days on them. The Radical feels burly and I've had no prerelease (or any release yet for that matter). I intend to do all of my inbounds skiing on that setup based on how well its performed.

[auvgeek]

Inserts or Dynalook/SollyFit plate are your friend. Why use a tech binder in the resort when you can use a solid alpine binder?

But then again, I (at 5'11", 165#) just pre-released out of FKS set at 12-13 so maybe we ski a little differently....

ETA: By contrast, I've never pre-released out of a tech binder because I dial it back when in the bc.

[Dromond]

Inserts or Dynalook/SollyFit plate are your friend. Why use a tech binder in the resort when you can use a solid alpine binder?

But then again, I (at 5'11", 165#) just pre-released out of FKS set at 12-13 so maybe we ski a little differently....

While I'm the same height and weight, I never pre-release out of my alpine binding at 8.5. Still, skiing tech bindings in the resort seems like false economy to me. You are just going to wear out your really expensive touring binding much faster than you would if it was restricted to touring. I know people who do it without problems, but I think that unless you are extremely lightweight or only ski powder you are going to unnecessarily shorten the life of your tech binding. One season I put maybe 10+ days at the resort (on firmer snow) with a pair of Dynafit Comforts in addition to maybe 35 days of touring and ended up with a stripped and worn heel piece. The only time I prereleased those bindings was carving a 100mm ski on refrozen hardpack/ If you must just use one pair of skis, do yourself the favor of using plates or inserts IMHO.

[Ski to Be]

Thanks for the feedback TGR always delivers. I ski hard and fast 6 foot 195lbs. But I only jump off things on powder days and never over 25 feet. I have eight sets of skis in my quiver and frankly would like 1 sweet setup that I can use 85 percent of the time and always have skins and be ready for action anytime. I skied ZZues Dynafit boots on my Mt Baker Superlights on my Dynafits on some rockies trips and many times ( over 75) inbounds with few issues. My standard setup now is Garmont Adrenalines with racing liners so my thought was to get a comfortable but stiff tech boot and my problems are solved. I typically don't ski unless it is a powder day and believe it or not I like skiing moguls on dynafits. So it seems like for me anyways this is the answer. The whole Cochise tech sole deformation has me concerned though. I will also keep my Baker Superlight dyna setup for long multiday tours and 4k+ day tours.

[Wetdog]

I think the paranoia of using Dynafits at the resort is just that. It is all psychological. I wouldn't ski them on blue ice groomer days, but I don't ski at all on blue ice groomer days. For the resort on a powder day or soft snow day, I have had no issues. I wouldn't mount skis with Dynafits specifically for resort skiing, but plates and inserts and all the added cost and weight and bother of remounting and fiddling around just to have the psychological comfort of skiing at the resort seems a waste of time, money and energy to me. I am 6' 4" 185lbs 48 years old and have been skiing almost since I could walk. I have resort set ups, but have been liking my Wailer 105's with ST 10's and Wailer 112's with Radical FT's lately for resort powder and decent snow days and have no issues skiing hard with them. It is nice to be able to head out for a tour off the resort if the conditions warrant it. The 105's are in their 2nd season and the 112's their first with no issues, and no wear. I did pre release on the 112's the first time out, but I was skiing Titan's for the first time and I cranked up the DIN one notch and had no further issues. The stiffer boots, like the Titan, seem to put more strain on the heel piece requiring a slightly higher DIN than some of the softer touring boots. With my older Zzeros I can get away with a lower DIN.

[Ski to Be]

While I'm the same height and weight, I never pre-release out of my alpine binding at 8.5. Still, skiing tech bindings in the resort seems like false economy to me. You are just going to wear out your really expensive touring binding much faster than you would if it was restricted to touring. I know people who do it without problems, but I think that unless you are extremely lightweight or only ski powder you are going to unnecessarily shorten the life of your tech binding. One season I put maybe 10+ days at the resort (on firmer snow) with a pair of Dynafit Comforts in addition to maybe 35 days of touring and ended up with a stripped and worn heel piece. The only time I prereleased those bindings was carving a 100mm ski on refrozen hardpack/ If you must just use one pair of skis, do yourself the favor of using plates or inserts IMHO.

I don't mind going though a set of bindings per year if I can achieve setup nirvana. My issue is more retention and performance and of those 2 which is better. I may sit on this till fall & see what new changes have been made on both of those bindings.

[auvgeek]

Don't forget the Dynafit Vulcan boot, if you're going for "setup nirvana". I haven't tried it, but if they fit, I plan to drop the Cochise.

Also: I've skied my super-stiff, all-carbon 191 Fats (similar to the L120, but much stiffer and slightly more sidecut, maybe a little heavier.) with both alpine and touring setup (Full Tilt #10 tongue/FKS 180 and Cochise/Plum). I definitely think the alpine setup skis better. But maybe I'm just weird. My bias: I've been skiing alpine since before I could walk and just started skiing in the bc last season. YMMV and all that good stuff.

[Ski to Be]

I have wide feet so I don't think I could fit in the Vulcan. I will try them on in the fall though. What is really driving this whole thing is that I have been always been so uncomfortable in Alpine boots for 25 years. When touring boots came out it was a breath of fresh air that I could ski all day in a boot with without suffering. If they have made Alpine boots that comfortable in the last five years then I will take a second look. I only ski inbounds on powder days or tour so it seems like the way to go.

[Ski to Be]

[QUOTE=thin cover;3597159]I had this same set up this year and part of last year, 200 cm pure 120's, plum guides and cochises. Light and really durable with all you need on the down. I had the ft 12's before the guides and felt the guides had a more positive step in than the dynafits. But then I had a guide toe wing snap off on me in a bad spot with the guides, not into taking anymore risks so I went back to dynafit for now. For my size using it as a daily all condition rig has yielded problems and I only used them in the resort a handful of times. Not sure aluminum, although lighter, is the way to go if you are using them daily. But I have a few friends who have had no issues.

With the experience you had it is a wonder you even still ski tech binders. I thought that the Plums were supposed to be stronger than the Dynafits? That really gives me pause. The new Radicals are supposed to have ironed out their problems by next year. It seems like everything outside of Speed/Verticals is in Beta stage right now.

[auvgeek]

The issue tc had is well documented in the plum guide thread. There appears to be one other failure of the same nature (toe-wing snapping), and a few heel-pin failures. But some have been using Plum's just fine all season. The supposed advantage of Plum is that it offers better retention - which is slightly different (IMO) than being "stronger."

Frankly, I haven't skied my Plums hard yet, so I don't want to weigh in on which is better. Just trying to clarify a bit.

[Mofro261]

I looooove my Lotus 120 F3's and Ft12 set up in anything soft. But I do have them on a dynaduke plate and run that set up with brakes, and while maybe not a true comparison, that set up "feels" much more bomber than my W105's with ST's, no brakes or plates, notably so while skiing lift served. I run both set ups ~DIN 9-10 with Dynafit Titans, 5'7" 150lbs, and tend to only have one speed which is full tilt. I have had no issues with pre-release that weren't related to having the recessed holes cleaned of snow and ice with 100+ days on this set up.

Still, I prefer not to ski dynafits while riding lifts because while they are brilliant for touring, they're simply not the best option for day in day out lift served skiing. Part of it is a confidence factor of riding on pins(I can usually overcome this within a day of hard railing), part of it is the lack of elasticity within the connection and a greater translation of vibration from the skis to the legs (again not really a prob in soft snow), and a part is not wanting to break or beat up the binders so that they're still working when it's time to tour (I've broken base plates, others have had worse). My L120's have close to 200 days on them and the bases are still absolutely bomber; most of the in bounds they've seen this year has been with Barons on them.

[Ski to Be]

I think I will wait another season for the tech stuff to get more proven, and refined. Really is a first world problem and I like what I have. I have just burned through so much money in the past being an early adopter of the latest greatest etc to sell or give away because I wasn't happy with it.
Thanks again for the feedback.

[marshalolson]

Don't forget the Dynafit Vulcan boot, if you're going for "setup nirvana". I haven't tried it, but if they fit, I plan to drop the Cochise.

Also: I've skied my super-stiff, all-carbon 191 Fats (similar to the L120, but much stiffer and slightly more sidecut, maybe a little heavier.) with both alpine and touring setup (Full Tilt #10 tongue/FKS 180 and Cochise/Plum). I definitely think the alpine setup skis better. But maybe I'm just weird. My bias: I've been skiing alpine since before I could walk and just started skiing in the bc last season. YMMV and all that good stuff.

vulcan
+very rockered sole
+not replaceable sole

personally think the cochise pro w/ booster strap is closer to ultimate.

[auvgeek]

No, I 100% agree - think I actually noted that in another post somewhere today. But he's talking about using them only with a tech binder, so that's not a concern.

[thin cover]

EDIT: ThinCover - Did you experience any tech fitting deformation (in the Cochise) when using the Cochise with the Plum Guide's?

The recent thread regarding deformation of the toe tech insert when used with Dynafits has me concerned.

I did not have any issues that I noticed but I only put about 10 days on the guides with my cochise, the rest were in my Scarpas. I saw that thread and it has me concerned, I just picked up some clearance BD primes and calling tecnica here to see whats going on. May trade them up for the scarpas again depending on what they say. Coming out of your tech fittings in the wrong spot is no fun, trust me.


Ski to be- I question it as well, hence why i am so cautious and sold the plums. For pow conditions and multiple tree laps I like using tech binders it does make it noticeably easier, for terrain of consequence you wont see me on anything but f-12's or dukes, they have more then proven themselves to me in every condition and pitch I have had them in. I dont trust the radicals yet either, I am also hoping that they iron out the issues since I plan on buying the improved radical iteration for next season. Pretty sure I am done with Plum altogether at this point unless they start using steel.

[Dromond]

vulcan
+very rockered sole
+not replaceable sole

personally think the cochise pro w/ booster strap is closer to ultimate.

Marshal, may I ask for your reasoning? I've always thought that a replaceable sole was a big compromise in terms of weight, stiffness, etc without a real benefit. I suppose if your tech fittings wear out you would want those. Rubber can be resoled on most any boot, right? (I've never had it done myself.) There may be a downside to a rockered sole that I'm not aware of, I've only found it to improve walking. FWIW I do minimal rock scrambling so my priorities may be different.

[auvgeek]

In case marshal doesn't see this:

[...] i will not buy an AT boot without replaceable soles, otherwise i will have to throw the boot away every season due to use, but i think its funny that the titan and vulcan weigh the same, once you factor in replaceable soles.

Read the posts below the one I quoted for more discussion. The very rockered sole is an obvious problem if you're using them in alpine binder.

I do agree that the Cochise Pro wit both DIN and tech soles is much closer to the ultimate boot. However, if you're just skiing in tech binders, the requirements change...

[Dromond]

In case marshal doesn't see this:
Read the posts below the one I quoted for more discussion. The very rockered sole is an obvious problem if you're using them in alpine binder.

I do agree that the Cochise Pro wit both DIN and tech soles is much closer to the ultimate boot. However, if you're just skiing in tech binders, the requirements change...

Understood. One boot to rule them all and all that.