MNC bindings that work with ALL boot soles - which is the best...

[gregL]

Has anyone heard any rumors of an MNC AFD plate for the Pivot 14 Dual WTR?

No. Look wants to forget WTR and MNC (both Salomon concepts) ever existed.

[galibier_numero_un]

No. Look wants to forget WTR and MNC (both Salomon concepts) ever existed.

That was my guess. Thanks!

... Thom

[Spyderjon]

Had my Look rep in my shop yesterday asking why I've ordered so few bindings for 19/20. My answer was the same as last year: "no MNC offering" I sell loads of Wardens and Attack AT's, in both the retail & demo versions and have both Warden and Attack AT Demo's on our demo skis.

[gregL]

"no MNC offering" I sell loads of Wardens and Attack AT's, in both the retail & demo versions and have both Warden and Attack AT Demo's on our demo skis.

Same with us. Look has never had an ISO 9523-compatible binding (unless you count the re-branded Dynafit "HM") and they stopped making the Dual WTR this year. We still get plenty of people who want to use touring soles with their alpine setups.

[galibier_numero_un]

Had my Look rep in my shop yesterday asking why I've ordered so few bindings for 19/20. My answer was the same as last year: "no MNC offering" I sell loads of Wardens and Attack AT's, in both the retail & demo versions and have both Warden and Attack AT Demo's on our demo skis.

Same with us. Look has never had an ISO 9523-compatible binding (unless you count the re-branded Dynafit "HM") and they stopped making the Dual WTR this year. We still get plenty of people who want to use touring soles with their alpine setups.

I guess Look has defined their target market and that's that.

I'd love to have been a fly on the wall, to learn if their engineering team ever considered an MNC AFD redesign - whether they did and concluded that they didn't like the viability of the solution.

It must be that their biggest touring market (Europe) doesn't do much crossover activity (not enough money in it for Look), but WTF do I know.

... Thom

[DougW]

any problem issues with Rossignol Axial 3 120 Dual WTR ? was going to pick up a pair cheap and mount up for my technica OGs tours as a alternate resort ski.

[gregL]

any problem issues with Rossignol Axial 3 120 Dual WTR ? was going to pick up a pair cheap and mount up for my technica OGs tours as a alternate resort ski.

If the boot you have is a current model Tecnica Zero G Tour Pro, Scout, or Tour it has an ISO 9523 sole which is not replaceable. That's not the same as a WTR sole, which has a smooth AFD contact area.

[galibier_numero_un]

If the boot you have is a current model Tecnica Zero G Tour Pro, Scout, or Tour it has an ISO 9523 sole which is not replaceable. That's not the same as a WTR sole, which has a smooth AFD contact area.

What Greg said.

I just sold a couple of pairs of Pivot-14 WTRs subsequent to my acquisition of some Z-G Pro Tours. I wanted to have the option of running both my XT Freetours and Z-Gs on all of my skis (travel flexibility), so I'm about to mount Warden MNCs on the two pairs which had the Pivots. The Attack2 14 ATs are also an option (I already own the Wardens so the decision was easy).

... Thom

[td_05]

Thread resurrection!

Thanks for all the info on this thread. I think I know the answer is no, but hoping some of you guys on here could shed a little more light on this topic.

I have ~2018 Look Dual Pivot 14's with sliding AFD on some Black Crows. Ordered new AFD's that are WTR/GW compatible. I have old Technica Cochise pro light boots with the alpine 9855 soles. I am interested in getting my first AT set up, but not interested in getting new boots fitted, broken in etc. My boots have the option of swapping in a touring toe and heel which I have also purchased. I am hoping to use the same boots with ISO 9855 soles on new AT set up and old alpine black crows. Local shop's Look Rep states that the binding with the new AFD is ISO 9855 compatible, but I am not so sure. If you guys could clarify I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

[gregL]

Thread resurrection!

Thanks for all the info on this thread. I think I know the answer is no, but hoping some of you guys on here could shed a little more light on this topic.

I have ~2018 Look Dual Pivot 14's with sliding AFD on some Black Crows. Ordered new AFD's that are WTR/GW compatible. I have old Technica Cochise pro light boots with the alpine 9855 soles. I am interested in getting my first AT set up, but not interested in getting new boots fitted, broken in etc. My boots have the option of swapping in a touring toe and heel which I have also purchased. I am hoping to use the same boots with ISO 9855 soles on new AT set up and old alpine black crows. Local shop's Look Rep states that the binding with the new AFD is ISO 9855 compatible, but I am not so sure. If you guys could clarify I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

ISO 9855 soles do not exist; the ISO standards define Alpine Ski Boot Soles as ISO 5355 and Touring Standard Soles as ISO 9523. WTR and GripWalk are separate designs, most of which conform to ISO 9523 specs (though not all do, or at least have not been certified as such).

The Cochise Pro Light options were ISO 9523 or ISO 5355. Technically the WTR/GW AFD's are not compatible with the former, but fine with the latter. Just leave the flat alpine soles on and try your hand at touring; if you like it enough you'll end up buying a new setup anyway and chances are very good the new boot will have a GripWalk sole.

[gregL]

ISO 9855 is this:

ISO 9855:1993
Ambient air — Determination of the particulate lead content of aerosols collected on filters — Atomic absorption spectrometric method

[td_05]

ISO 9855 soles do not exist

Sorry for the typo I meant ISO 9523.


"Just leave the flat alpine soles on and try your hand at touring...."

Are you saying that Cochise had a AT capable sole that is ISO 5355? Or, just give touring a whirl and pony up? I have toured, I'm more interested in a set up for slack country, and only having to bring one pair of boots on a trip.


Thank You,
TD

[gregL]

Sorry for the typo I meant ISO 9523.


"Just leave the flat alpine soles on and try your hand at touring...."

Are you saying that Cochise had a AT capable sole that is ISO 5355? Or, just give touring a whirl and pony up? I have toured, I'm more interested in a set up for slack country, and only having to bring one pair of boots on a trip.


Thank You,
TD

Sorry for the confusion - the soles for that older Cochise were either flat ISO 5355 or full touring with tech fittings ISO 9523, the latter will not work with any form of Pivot AFD. You could "dabble" in touring with a frame binding with the 5355 sole no problem, if you intend to use a tech binding you will need to swap out for the ISO 9523 tech soles. I wouldn't recommend swapping the soles on a regular basis, the screws are only anchored by plastic and they will eventually strip out the material.

If you upgrade, say, to a newer Cochise or similar current "hybrid" boot, the tech fittings are molded into the sole and only the rubber pads change, but you can tour effectively with the ISO 5355 pads on and still use a tech binding, then step directly into your alpine setup.

[XavierD]

I just jammed my 9523 touring soles in my pivots (15/18 single pivot toe) and called it good. I was using the bindings to keep me on the skis anyway. Those soles didn’t ski as well as the 5355 ones.

Also boots have come a long way since those.

[gregL]

I just jammed my 9523 touring soles in my pivots (15/18 single pivot toe) and called it good.

Shop guy and pro patroller attitude . . .

[hafjell]

Bump / resurrect. Just got my Zero G's into a pair of railed / system Markers and the guy at the shop said, "No way." Unsafe. Any new options?

[gregL]

Bump / resurrect. Just got my Zero G's into a pair of railed / system Markers and the guy at the shop said, "No way." Unsafe. Any new options?

Same options as before. Pull off the rails, fill the holes, and mount a Royal Family ID binding, Salomon/Atomic/Armada MNC binding, or Tyrolia AT binding (or tech binding). Or use your old boots when using that ski. Or disregarding the guy at the shop and just cramming your 9523 sole in there.

[Spats]

Keep in mind that Tyrolia makes a lot of bindings that are GW compatible but not AT compatible.

The Attack GW models are Gripwalk only. They won't work with touring soles.
The Attack MN models are multinorm and work with AT as well as WTR and Gripwalk.

New for this year, the "Protector" bindings with horizontal heel release are now available as MN.
Also keep in mind that Tyrolias are sold as Fischer (most common), Head, Elan, and other ski brands. Sometimes they're cheaper. I've found great deals on Fischer-branded Attack MNs.

The biggest practical difference I've found is that the Marker "ID" MN bindings, like the Griffon ID, don't have enough adjustment to fit some touring soles. (Their touring bindings (Duke, Baron, F12, F10) have a different AFD with wider range than the ID alpine bindings.) Salomon and Tyrolia don't have this problem: their adjustment range is wider.

The biggest difference here is that Salomons adjust by moving the toepiece up, while Tyrolias adjust by moving the AFD down -- so with touring soles, Salomons end up with a lot less ramp than Tyrolias. This can be good or bad depending on how much ramp your other binding setups have. Dynafits tend to have a lot of ramp, so Tyrolias will feel closer to them than Salomons will. I'm not sure about the other brands of pin bindings.

[gregL]

Keep in mind that Tyrolia makes a lot of bindings that are GW compatible but not AT compatible.

The Attack GW models are Gripwalk only. They won't work with touring soles.
The Attack MN models are multinorm and work with AT as well as WTR and Gripwalk.

New for this year, the "Protector" bindings with horizontal heel release are now available as MN.
Also keep in mind that Tyrolias are sold as Fischer (most common), Head, Elan, and other ski brands. Sometimes they're cheaper. I've found great deals on Fischer-branded Attack MNs.

The biggest practical difference I've found is that the Marker "ID" MN bindings, like the Griffon ID, don't have enough adjustment to fit some touring soles. (Their touring bindings (Duke, Baron, F12, F10) have a different AFD with wider range than the ID alpine bindings.) Salomon and Tyrolia don't have this problem: their adjustment range is wider.

The biggest difference here is that Salomons adjust by moving the toepiece up, while Tyrolias adjust by moving the AFD down -- so with touring soles, Salomons end up with a lot less ramp than Tyrolias. This can be good or bad depending on how much ramp your other binding setups have. Dynafits tend to have a lot of ramp, so Tyrolias will feel closer to them than Salomons will. I'm not sure about the other brands of pin bindings.

Good clarification, Spats. Pin binding ramps are all over the place:

https://skimo.co/pin-heights#:~:text...measurement%29.

And going forward, manufacturers (including Amer) will be using the abbreviation "MN" (not MNC) to denote bindings that will accept an ISO 9523 sole as well as GripWalk ISO 23223 and ISO 5355 Alpine.