Am I Making a Terrible Decision for AT setup?

[adrenalated]

Titan UL not even close to a TLT6 (or Mercury) if you want narrow forefoot and heel. It's a fine boot and certainly much cheaper, but it's not a narrow, which seems to be her chief goal.

Agree. For AT boots, Dynafit TLT6 or Mercury, or Scarpa Gea RS or Freedom/Freedom SL are going to be your best bets for finding a boot that fits. TLT6 and Mercury are going to be a little wider in the forefoot, the Freedom/Freedom SL are going to be a little wider in the heel. My narrow feet and heels are happy in a Maestrale RS, and I'm quite happy with the downhill ski performance of them.

The range of motion of a good AT boot like those listed above will make every bit as much, and perhaps even more of a difference than Tour F10 vs. Dynafit. In other words, I'd mount with the Tours, shop for a good AT boot that has the stiffness and fit you want first, use them in your Tours while you save up for bindings, then get Dynafit bindings when you can.

[powder fiend]

In other words, I'd mount with the Tours, shop for a good AT boot that has the stiffness and fit you want first, use them in your Tours while you save up for bindings, then get Dynafit bindings when you can.

Was just about to write this. The F10 should fit any AT boot. Once you ski dynafits, you'll likely never go back to the tours, but boots are the most important piece of ski equipment, and until you find a pair that works for you, there's no point putting your money elsewhere.

[userA]

that just makes way too much sense.
b

[lpkdz]

Was just about to write this. The F10 should fit any AT boot. Once you ski dynafits, you'll likely never go back to the tours, but boots are the most important piece of ski equipment, and until you find a pair that works for you, there's no point putting your money elsewhere.

I agree with this, and I really appreciate all the input from everyone. I get what everyone is saying about just getting the dynaduke plate, but as I said before, the F10's are way lighter than the dukes, so the plate would damn near negate the weight difference I would be getting between my F10's and dynafits. I get there are other benefits of the dynafits besides just being lightweight, but I think taking the time and getting the money together to get a boot that fits me well and then fully switching to the dynafits seems like a better plan. I'm getting the rockettes for a steal.. one redrill isn't the end of the world. Thanks all! 'Preciate ya

[My Pet Powder Goat]

Dynaduke plate's weight is negligible. I believe around 7oz, and honestly the only reason I trust My dynafit is because they are mounted on the plate, which has a much wider footprint then the dynafits

[auvgeek]

Dynaduke plate's weight is negligible. I believe around 7oz, and honestly the only reason I trust My dynafit is because they are mounted on the plate, which has a much wider footprint then the dynafits

I don't believe you need the wider footprint, but if you decide to transition to a pure dynafit setup, you can remove the dynaduke heel plates and reduce the ramp angle by 6mm. If you're used to alpine bindings, you'll definitely want to reduce the Dynafit ramp angle.

Also: lifted weight is HUGE. It's not an "other benefit besides being lightweight," it's a KEY aspect of why they are lightweight. Unless you're mainly bootpacking, the real advantage of dynafit binders is the lifted weight. That's why so many new touring binders are trying to incorporate a low-tech style toe with alpine-style performance.

[sb]

If I were you I'd mount with dynaduke plates now, use the f10 & langes and shop around for a dynafit compatible boot that works. That way no re drilling later and you'll be able to pick and choose which binding/boot set up you want in the future.

this

1234

[userA]

she doesn't like this option unfortunately for her.
b

[Lindahl]

I don't believe you need the wider footprint, but if you decide to transition to a pure dynafit setup, you can remove the dynaduke heel plates and reduce the ramp angle by 6mm. If you're used to alpine bindings, you'll definitely want to reduce the Dynafit ramp angle.

Also: lifted weight is HUGE. It's not an "other benefit besides being lightweight," it's a KEY aspect of why they are lightweight. Unless you're mainly bootpacking, the real advantage of dynafit binders is the lifted weight. That's why so many new touring binders are trying to incorporate a low-tech style toe with alpine-style performance.

Agree with all of this, ESPECIALLY the last part. Also, only some people are sensitive to ramp angle (I'm not).

[Fortune_Cookie]

why lug a 12 pack when a couple doobs ill do

^ The most sensical thing SFB has ever said.

Go Dynafit (boot AND binding) and don't look back!

[lpkdz]

Ha, whelp, you dynafit lovers were right... I toured a decent day with my F10's and did much better than in the past, but my hip flexors were killing me. I was still in the return window for the F10's, so decided to mount the new skis with dynafits and endure the shitty boot. The dynafits changed my life. I toured 2 days after my F10 tour when I was still sore from the last time, and managed to have a bigger day than on the F10's and felt significantly better/faster. The boots sucked on the downhill... I was swimming in them, and had a hard time driving a bigger ski with such a floppy boot. I was able to pick up some dynafit gaia's for a decent price, and am hoping that will do the trick. I did notice the ramp angle and didn't love it, but it's hard to tell how much of that was boot issue. The whole day was great, but when I got down to the parking lot I realized the toe release lever was completely gone on my dynafits! No idea how that happened, but backcountry and dynafit warranteed it, so it's getting fixed now. Other than that it was an amazing day... I'm looking forward to trying em out with decent fitting boots!

[XXX-er]

HMMM I'm just not used to hearing a woman say I was right