School Me On WTR Bindings- Are Cochise Pros w/ Tech Soles Compatible?

[Kevo]

I've got a pair of 2015-2016 Tecnica Cochise Pros with swappable soles- one set of sole blocks for DIN bindings, one set of sole blocks for tech bindings.

Turns out I never really want to swap out the soles so I don't ski my alpine setup as much as I'd like.

I'm contemplating changing out the Pivot 14s that I have for a pair of Pivot 14 WTRs.

Do the Cochise tech sole blocks meet whatever standard there is for WTR bindings? The little bit of research that I've done seems to suggest that certain boot manufactures participate in the WTR standard, but that tecnica might not? Are the Cochise tech sole blocks bompatible with WTR bindings?

Thanks, mags!

[doebedoe]

Pretty sure they are the AT norm not WTR or Gripwalk. While a WTR binding may release and release better than a standard alpine clamp, an at certified with mechanical afd would be preferred : Salomon Warden, Attack At, Griffon ID.

EDIT: Assuming your sole blocks look like the pictured tech ones, I wouldn't ski them in a WTR/Gripwalk binding if you care about good release characteristics. There is no solid AFD on the sole to interface with the solid AFD on WTR/Gripwalk. Spring for a pair of clamps with a mechanical AFD.

[N1CK.]

my Cochise tech soles have smooth pads to face off the sliding AFDs on my Wardens. Perhaps those would fit the '15 boots too?

[doebedoe]

my Cochise tech soles have smooth pads to face off the sliding AFDs on my Wardens. Perhaps those would fit the '15 boots too?

Just to be clear to the OP -- Wardens are WTR, but they are also AT Norm certified (sliding AFD). Pivot WTR is solid AFD and only WTR/Alpine certified.

[Kevo]

OK, good to know. Yep, I've got the DIN soles pictured. Guess I'll need to swap for the DIN soles.

One other question- does anyone ski Pivots/ Cochise combo with the tech heal blocks and DIN sole blocks? I think it would work, but there would be some increased ramp angle due to the tech blocks being thicker.

[galibier_numero_un]

Just to be clear to the OP -- Wardens are WTR, but they are also AT Norm certified (sliding AFD). Pivot WTR is solid AFD and only WTR/Alpine certified.

Wardens are MNC (multi norm compatible): ISO 5355 (std. alpine), ISO 9523 (AT), WTR, and possibly Grip Walk (not sure about this last one).

... Thom

[gregorys]

Wardens are MNC (multi norm compatible): ISO 5355 (std. alpine), ISO 9523 (AT), WTR, and possibly Grip Walk (not sure about this last one).

If I'm not mistaken, there are two "Wardens" one is MNC and the older version is WTR.

The WTR version is *NOT* ISO 9523 certified, and is "certified" only with boots that bear the WTR label, and obviously Alpine boots (ISO 5355)
The MNC [multi-norm-compatible] version is fine with WTR, ISO 5355 (Alpine) & ISO 9523 (Most tech/AT boots, as long as ISO certified.)

[galibier_numero_un]

That's my recollection as well. I forget that folks scour gear swap where this piece of information has relevance.

I think that in the current lineup, the 11 is 5355 only. The current 13 is MNC.

Also, from what I've been reading, it appears as if Grip Walk has a slightly lower rocker profile than 9523 and WTR. That would imply (to be verified) that an MNC toe would work. How strange ... with the word "walk", they scaled back the rocker.

... Thom

[XavierD]

Warden13s are an MNC binding. They will work for 5355 (traditional alpine) and 9523 (most backcountry, to include gripwalk and WTR). The new soulID marker griffons and jesters are likewise compatible with a wide range of boots.

WTR branded bindings are technically compatible only with 5355 and WTR boots, but not other 9523 boots.

GripWalk bindings (Marker Demos, and Tyrolia AAATACK2, among others) are compatible with 5355 or GripWalk, but not WTR or other 9523 boots.

The 9523 standard is not as specific as 5355. There is much more room for variation in sole height and curvature. Walk to Ride and Grip Walk are both 9523, but are not the same as each other or cross compatible. There are other backcountry boots that satisfy 9523 but are not WTR or GW compatible. Scarpa Maestrale for example. There are also BC boots which don't conform to 9523, such as the Atomic BackLand, TLT 5/6/7, F1, and other light BC boots.

One other question- does anyone ski Pivots/ Cochise combo with the tech heal blocks and DIN sole blocks? I think it would work, but there would be some increased ramp angle due to the tech blocks being thicker.

I skied pivots this way for years. Never wanted to take the tech heel off. You'll have to adjust your forward pressure a bit.

[Kevo]

Great info. Thanks.

Sent from my Pixel using TGR Forums mobile app

[bern43]

One other question- does anyone ski Pivots/ Cochise combo with the tech heal blocks and DIN sole blocks? I think it would work, but there would be some increased ramp angle due to the tech blocks being thicker.

I've also skied my Cochise boots like this for a few years. They've released fine. I haven't noticed the increased ramp angle.

[gregL]

\How strange ... with the word "walk", they scaled back the rocker.

They didn't really scale back the rocker, they indented the AFD contact area so the overall height is lower in the binding. So far the adoption of GripWalk soles is limited (mostly K2 rental boots) but the new Dalbello AX boots will ship with it and I've heard rumors that there will be one for the Cochise/Zero G boots.

[galibier_numero_un]

That's interesting. Thanks, Greg. The good news out of all of this is that the Grip Walk toe height is bracketed by 9523 and WTR at one extreme and 5355 at the other, so MNC covers it.

What a bummer for the consumer however - another competing standard with (as far as I can tell) the primary distinguishing attribute being a restriction on cross-compatibility with dedicated WTR (i.e. Look).

I can envision what went on with the design team meetings ("we can't let the French bindings control the dialog. Let's have our own standard"). Screw them. I hope this bites Marker. This is reminiscent of those dedicated binding rail systems in terms of limiting choice.

... Thom

[gregL]

If I'm not mistaken, there are two "Wardens" one is MNC and the older version is WTR.

There were two Guardian versions, the first generation was WTR only (no sliding AFD) - after the first year they changed the design and they are now MNC. The Warden 13 was always MNC.

[gregL]

That's interesting. Thanks, Greg.

What a bummer for the consumer of course - another competing standard with (as far as I can tell) the primary distinguishing attribute being a restriction on cross-compatibility.

I can envision what went on with the design team meetings ("we can't let the French bindings control the dialog. Let's have our own standard"). Screw them. I hope this bites Marker.

... Thom

I believe the initial impetus for the GripWalk development was for the rental market - let new skiers walk to the lift or through the parking lot without falling and hurting themselves, but with soles that will fit in existing rental bindings (as long as they are Marker). Of course, it's evolved into a political decision, and I wouldn't expect to see widespread adoption of GripWalk outside of the K2 "family" sphere (K2, Dalbello, Full Tilt's new touring boot, etc.) Marker makes Blizzard system bindings, so that includes Tecnica to a point.

[galibier_numero_un]

That's basically the story I heard as well.

It's the politics (or narrow thinking) that bugs me, but whatever. I hate the idea of a boot selection dictating binding choice.

This is the sort of short term, zero sum thinking which ultimately benefits no one.

/rant

... Thom

[gregL]

Actually I have no problem with the GripWalk concept - if I bought a boot with a GripWalk sole, I'd feel confident pairing it with any binding that said "WTR" or "MNC." The problem now for those who try a lot of skis during the season is that the Marker Griffon demo bindings (which are probably the most popular choice in the demo market) don't accept WTR or ISO 9523, so lots of people are either not able to try skis or waste time running back to the car to swap boots.

[galibier_numero_un]

Actually I have no problem with the GripWalk concept - if I bought a boot with a GripWalk sole, I'd feel confident pairing it with any binding that said "WTR" or "MNC." The problem now for those who try a lot of skis during the season is that the Marker Griffon demo bindings (which are probably the most popular choice in the demo market) don't accept WTR or ISO 9523, so lots of people are either not able to try skis or waste time running back to the car to swap boots.

If I understand correctly, running a Grip Walk boot in a WTR binding means you'd have bit of vertical slop. Of course, with MNC you could adjust that.

I wasn't trying to come off as a curmudgeon, but was (over)reacting to compatibility issues like the demo fleet one you pointed out. This just seems to me like the industry needlessly shooting itself in the foot.

... Thom

[XavierD]

If I understand correctly, running a Grip Walk boot in a WTR binding means you'd have bit of vertical slop. No?

I wasn't trying to come off as a curmudgeon, but was (over)reacting to compatibility issues like the demo fleet one you pointed out. This just seems to me like the industry needlessly shooting itself in the foot.

... Thom

WTR has a thicker lug than Grip walk. With STH2s you can adjust the height to be more inline with GripWalk. With the Look Dual bindings you will likely have some slop

[gregL]

If I understand correctly, running a Grip Walk boot in a WTR binding means you'd have bit of vertical slop.

I suppose a GripWalk boot in a Pivot WTR Dual would have the potential to be sloppy on the WTR setting and tight on the ISO 5355 setting, but I don't have one to check. At this point I think the onus is on the binding manufacturers to get together and agree to make all future adult alpine bindings compatible with both ISO 5355 and ISO 9523 soles (and everything in between, which would include WTR and GripWalk). The heel is not too big a problem as the height specs are so close, but height adjustability and sliding AFD at the toe are critical.