The Official Salomon S/Lab SHIFT MNC Thread -AMA

[gregL]

Not sure about the location of the screw, I have the factory jig and it seems fine, you just have to be careful sliding it from the big hole to the narrower slot (I've only mounted 3 pairs, though).

[Spyderjon]

Shift 10's just arrived.

[margotron]

Shift 10's just arrived.

Are they lighter?

[tgapp]

Are they lighter?

looking at the skimoco verified specs, no. unfortunately.

*edited to add* - not by much, anyway. 875g vs 906g.

[Spyderjon]

Measured on my postal scales the 10 din with 90mm brakes weigh 875g which is Salomons published weight. The 13's weigh 880g not 906g as stated above. The 10 & 13 are identical apart from the din range so the slight difference in weight are probably due to the differences in the weight of the springs.

And for 20-21 there are no changes (ie improvements) to the original Shift spec as launched two seasons ago.

[gepmeow]

The actual internal width of the Shift crampons is 5mm wider than their stated width.

I’ve got a pair of 100mm Shift crampons here, and it appears these crampons can fit up to 106.5mm areas underfoot.

This just barely conflicts with my Steeple 102 where the ski measures 106.67mm at the front of where the crampons make contact with the edges, so these skis would need next size up of 120mm crampons to work properly. This is mainly due to the RES shape from mid-sole forward with this ON3P ski design (Steeple, Billy Goat, C&D), so I would expect most 102mm underfoot ski designs to work fine with the 100m Shift crampons.

These 100mm crampons fit perfectly (no scrapey scrape) on Blizzard Rustler 10 which are also 102mm underfoot, but they do not fit on Salomon QST 106 skis

[rainy512day]

I’ve got a pair of 100mm Shift crampons here, and it appears these crampons can fit up to 106.5mm areas underfoot.

This just barely conflicts with my Steeple 102 where the ski measures 106.67mm at the front of where the crampons make contact with the edges, so these skis would need next size up of 120mm crampons to work properly. This is mainly due to the RES shape from mid-sole forward with this ON3P ski design (Steeple, Billy Goat, C&D), so I would expect most 102mm underfoot ski designs to work fine with the 100m Shift crampons.

These 100mm crampons fit perfectly (no scrapey scrape) on Blizzard Rustler 10 which are also 102mm underfoot, but they do not fit on Salomon QST 106 skis

What width brakes on the Steeple 102?

[gepmeow]

What width brakes on the Steeple 102?

100mm Shift brakes fit nicely on Steeple 102, I’m glad I didn’t go with 90mm

[aanev]

What width brakes on the Steeple 102?

this^

90mm brakes actual width is 98mm and barely fit Wren98. Definitely 100mm for Steeple 102.

[byates1]

going w shifts on legend pro 106 for the next half decade. basically an in area ski set up. will be skiing around the world in the next decade or so, figured shit should work for travel..

[Esses]

I apologize if this has already been addressed, but as much of this thread that I have read, I haven't gotten to all 108 pages.

I got some Shifts at the end of the season and have about four tours on them. I have small issue. When trying to kick turn or side step, the tails of the skis seem heavier than the tips from boot toe forward. This means that the tail of the ski stays in contact with the snow when I lift it. It's not much of an issue when trying to turn, as I can usually lift the tail with my pole, but with side stepping - I just can't get it to work on anything remotely steep. Setup is - Praxis Concepts mounted at -1 cm from dimple with Shift 13s, G3 Alpinist Skins, and Technica Cochise boots.

It's not a dealbreaker for me. I can just plan on not side stepping, but a buddy I was touring with just got a pair and he's thinking of looking at other options if this is common. Otherwise, I've been super stoked on this binding so far.

[gregL]

It's not a dealbreaker for me. I can just plan on not side stepping, but a buddy I was touring with just got a pair and he's thinking of looking at other options if this is common. Otherwise, I've been super stoked on this binding so far.

Your issue has nothing to do with the binding or any other item in your setup, it's simply the mount point. If you moved the mount back a few centimeters it would go away, but 98 percent of the time having the tip come up while touring is desirable. If you need to sidestep it usually means someone else set a poor skintrack; you are free to pick your own path. If you really need to sidestep due to lack of grip, you can always remove your skis and boot up. As for kick turning or breaking trail in fresh snow, you want the tip to come up. If you are happy with how the skis perform going downhill, just deal with it.

[Esses]

Your issue has nothing to do with the binding or any other item in your setup, it's simply the mount point. If you moved the mount back a few centimeters it would go away, but 98 percent of the time having the tip come up while touring is desirable. If you need to sidestep it usually means someone else set a poor skintrack; you are free to pick your own path. If you really need to sidestep due to lack of grip, you can always remove your skis and boot up. As for kick turning or breaking trail in fresh snow, you want the tip to come up. If you are happy with how the skis perform going downhill, just deal with it.

Well, yeah... like I said, I don't really have an issue with it. But, if you are coming from a Duke/Guardian background (like my buddy) the binding may actually affect this as the heel piece would be attached to the boot when touring and thus not weigh down the back of the ski as much. Obviously mount point would affect this. I was just trying to get a sense as to whether this was common with most setups. Asking for a friend - no joke.

[galibier_numero_un]

Well, yeah... like I said, I don't really have an issue with it. But, if you are coming from a Duke/Guardian background (like my buddy) the binding may actually affect this as the heel piece would be attached to the boot when touring and thus not weigh down the back of the ski as much. Obviously mount point would affect this. I was just trying to get a sense as to whether this was common with most setups. Asking for a friend - no joke.

So your friend will always have this problem with any tech bindings that are in his "use category". Obviously, an ATK Trofeo is super light (and not in his sphere), but if he's a Duke/Guardian/frame guy, then he'll no doubt experience this with any binding he's considering (e.g. Tectons, Vipecs and Kingpins).

... Thom

[wendigo]

what gregL said. tips coming up = positive
the number of times i've side stepped in skin mode in the past 20 yrs is ~3.
if it is more than 3 steps lock the heel down and do it right.
if you really have a problem with it then get up earlier and set the track your own damn self.

[gregL]

Well, yeah... like I said, I don't really have an issue with it. But, if you are coming from a Duke/Guardian background (like my buddy) the binding may actually affect this as the heel piece would be attached to the boot when touring and thus not weigh down the back of the ski as much. Obviously mount point would affect this. I was just trying to get a sense as to whether this was common with most setups. Asking for a friend - no joke.

Tell your friend that if the tip coming up really bothers him/her, they can glue 400 grams of lead to the tip of each ski and still have a lighter setup than with a Duke/Guardian.

The way it works with "most setups" is people mount them where they think they will ski the best, not where the ski balances when suspended, and count themselves lucky if the tail is slightly heavier than the tip.

[HAB]

and count themselves lucky if the tail is slightly heavier than the tip.

For real. I *wish* more of my touring setups had that "problem".

[galibier_numero_un]

Tell your friend that if the tip coming up really bothers him/her, they can glue 400 grams of lead to the tip of each ski and still have a lighter setup than with a Duke/Guardian.

The way it works with "most setups" is people mount them where they think they will ski the best, not where the ski balances when suspended, and count themselves lucky if the tail is slightly heavier than the tip.

His friend will likely sell his touring rig as soon as there's a guarantee that the lifts will be spinning next winter.

... Thom

[Esses]

So your friend will always have this problem with any tech bindings that are in his "use category". Obviously, an ATK Trofeo is super light (and not in his sphere), but if he's a Duke/Guardian/frame guy, then he'll no doubt experience this with any binding he's considering (e.g. Tectons, Vipecs and Kingpins).

... Thom

This is what I was thinking. Thanks for the confirmation.

[Esses]

His friend will likely sell his touring rig as soon as there's a guarantee that the lifts will be spinning next winter.

... Thom

Uh, no... but, I do think he's trying to put together something that can be used inbounds on occasion - hence, the Shift.

[blur]

My new 50/50 don’t know what I will find setup, 2021 Corvus Freebird with Armada Shift 13. Been using Kingpins on everything else, looking forward to seeing how the Shift performs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[snowsprite]

Well, yeah... like I said, I don't really have an issue with it. But, if you are coming from a Duke/Guardian background (like my buddy) the binding may actually affect this as the heel piece would be attached to the boot when touring and thus not weigh down the back of the ski as much. Obviously mount point would affect this. I was just trying to get a sense as to whether this was common with most setups. Asking for a friend - no joke.

Just curious, can you still side-step if you have downhill mode engaged and have gotten into a tangle? This happens to me sometimes because I don't plan ahead and have to step out of some dumb ravine or something. Don't cry for me, it's part of my skiing experience.

[snowsprite]

This pic was posted on the sollie web page. Guy said he's seen 5 like this. Was this someone in here?

Any changes with the 2021 model?

That's a lot of force. I am 130 lbs and 5'3" , and wondering if this is happening w/ lighter weight skiers or the larger/taller crew.

[snowsprite]

So on this thread it's looking like 100 does not really fit 100 skis (I am looking at Nordica 2020 Santa Ana 100s) because they are a tad large. But the next size is 90. Hmmm.

Not clear if tightening the 100s is possible. Why are they making a 100 larger than an actual 100 anyway? Are they trying to protect the skis from negative self image of feeling their "waist is too big" or something?

One of life's mysteries.

[anotherVTskibum]

So on this thread it's looking like 100 does not really fit 100 skis (I am looking at Nordica 2020 Santa Ana 100s) because they are a tad large. But the next size is 90. Hmmm.

Not clear if tightening the 100s is possible. Why are they making a 100 larger than an actual 100 anyway? Are they trying to protect the skis from negative self image of feeling their "waist is too big" or something?

One of life's mysteries.

If the brakes don't deploy because the sidecut is more significant (i.e. the skier widens more quickly from the waist), there's a potential liability issue should a runaway ski occur.

If the brakes are too wide, you potentially annoy people skinning with them.

I've got 120s on Bent Chet 120s and am happy with the wiggle room; my wife has 100s on Cham 107s, and I had to do a little Dremel work to get them to deploy consistently (and they still need attention when stepping out—any sort of significant impact, as would occur during a crash, will cause deployment, but if you're subtle enough, one of the brakes can get hung up on the ski edge). YMMV, of course.