Salomon Guardian/atomic Tracker vs. Tyrolia Adrenelin (and whatever fischer is calling theirs..) - Page 5

Not to be a nag. But the hassle, expense, risk, etc in some of those options is pretty real. Tapping that many super-precision holes in a high end exotic layup ski... Sticking plates on said skis... Not saying it is "wrong". But often practice deviates from theory in this sort of circumstance.

For my .02, just throw an EPF Duke or Tracker/Guardian on one pair and ski & skin one good day. Your informed decision making capacity will be much enhanced. I learned so much in my first 30 minutes it still makes me laugh - mostly about my amazing super-gaper powers...

I have the dynaduke plates which I bought after considering the quiver killers. I think the plates are much more idiot proof and easier to install. With the inserts, I think there is more risk of screwing it up. 

In truth, I think the dynafits ski about as well as most alpine binders. In the future, if I were mounting a powder oriented ski, had a 120-130 flex AT boot (e.g. cochise), then just mounting dynafits with no alpine option is a decent way to go. 

Plates are the way to go if you want to switch between multiple bindings ie guardian/duke and dynafit. QK inserts are better IMHO if you are only using one pair of bindings. Less holes in the skis and no riser. I use both systems because some of my skis I want to have the dynafit option and some I don't. I agree the plates are easier to instal but they are also more $. Jon from binding freedom is awesome though, he makes a good product and is a mag over at TGR.

I definitely disagree. I like my dynafits when up matters, but I don't feel like I can really put my faith in them in all situation. I've blown out two sets of dynafit toes in the bc and now I'm on plums instead. Plums are awesome, plain and simple. No problems with them so far, but without brakes I wouldn't want to ski them inbounds. I also still believe that I get a significantly better skiing experience with an alpine crossover binding like the guardian. The guardian skis wayyyyyyy better than dynafits and I would always choose those over dyna or plum for alpine/sidecountry set up. I know higher dins are "over rated" here on epic, but in reality running at the top of your din range (I usually ski around an 11 or 12) isn't the best for the binding. Why else would so many 110lb racer girls ski on 16-30 din race bindings? When pre releasing isnt an option, I would much much rather have an at crossover binding on my feet than dynafits.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tromano 

In truth, I think the dynafits ski about as well as most alpine binders. In the future, if I were mounting a powder oriented ski, had a 120-130 flex AT boot (e.g. cochise), then just mounting dynafits with no alpine option is a decent way to go. 

while i agree with this, i also don't agree with this.

simply put, a tech binding is every bit as responsive and precise as alpine bindings, which means they ski well on groomed and soft snow.  however, since tech bindings have way less elasticity, if you mach thru cut up pow and crud pre-release is likely.  if you ski clean and round and deliberately thru cut up snow, then they will likely work well for you inbounds.  

Finndog: I am beginning to gather that you have never toured at all. If this is the case I would highly recommend that you borrow/rent a set-up before purchasing any form of a touring binding. I know quite a few folks who got all gung-ho about touring, bought the full monty and then went out and realized that it was a lot of work that they weren't really that gung-ho about doing in regards to the hike-to-turn ratio (the same can be said about patch skiing: it's a lot of work for very few turns, which is why you don't see a bunch of folks out on the hiking trails around the Sierra lugging skis throughout the summer). I borrowed gear (and was prepared to rent, just lucked out that several buddies of mine have the same BSL) for the first few tours I went on just to make sure that I wanted to invest in the gear. 

Of course if you have the disposable income burning a hole in your pocket, buy away!

:)

Well put Marshall. Some people's skiing style can fit with dynafits inbounds, but its just not for me. I guess you have to figure out if you are the type of skier that could go only dynafit Finn but I'd still recommend the plates if you have the money to pull off two pairs of binders.

On the other hand, if you do go with one of the Guardian / Trackers / Markers / Adrenaline and decided it's not your cup of tea, it should be pretty easy to sell barely used.  Same deal with dynafits, plums, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayT 

On the other hand, if you do go with one of the Guardian / Trackers / Markers / Adrenaline and decided it's not your cup of tea, it should be pretty easy to sell barely used.  Same deal with dynafits, plums, etc.

Or you could just ski the shit out of them.

finndog- don't over think it man.

if you have, or are buying tech compatible boots, and do not intend to ski the skis often inbounds unless its soft, then get tech bindings.

if you are planning on using alpine boots or non-tech AT boots, then get the guardian/duke/tyrolia solution that seems to speak to you (of note the salmons are NOT compatible with a rocketed AT sole).

cheers!

ps- and to those that asked, i believe a pair of adrenaline's are headed to SA with blister, and I will have new dukes, guardians and adrenalines to test as soon as there is snow in utah.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by esales09 

Plates are the way to go if you want to switch between multiple bindings ie guardian/duke and dynafit. QK inserts are better IMHO if you are only using one pair of bindings. Less holes in the skis and no riser. I use both systems because some of my skis I want to have the dynafit option and some I don't. I agree the plates are easier to instal but they are also more $. Jon from binding freedom is awesome though, he makes a good product and is a mag over at TGR.

 

 

I definitely disagree. I like my dynafits when up matters, but I don't feel like I can really put my faith in them in all situation. I've blown out two sets of dynafit toes in the bc and now I'm on plums instead. Plums are awesome, plain and simple. No problems with them so far, but without brakes I wouldn't want to ski them inbounds. I also still believe that I get a significantly better skiing experience with an alpine crossover binding like the guardian. The guardian skis wayyyyyyy better than dynafits and I would always choose those over dyna or plum for alpine/sidecountry set up. I know higher dins are "over rated" here on epic, but in reality running at the top of your din range (I usually ski around an 11 or 12) isn't the best for the binding. Why else would so many 110lb racer girls ski on 16-30 din race bindings? When pre releasing isnt an option, I would much much rather have an at crossover binding on my feet than dynafits.

They are fine for me and the way I ski but don't work for you where you ski. I was suggesting that he could try them and see if they work for him. If it works that's great to save money and have a more simple more lightweight setup with less stuff to break. Or if its not working and he need more binding then plug the holes, mount the swap plates and be done with it.  

The flip side of that, would be to just mount dukes / guardians and see if he ever goes touring at all... 

I have the dynadukes and swap mine as well, but on powder days I have gotten by with dynafits with out a problem. I usually ski at around a 9-9.5 din. My home mountain is small and has "fun terrain" not much extreme.  I don't clearly remember the last time I skied "no fall terrain where a release isn't an option". Even at 40* falling in powder you won't slide too far. Finndog skis steamboat, not snowbird, he might be able to get by with dynafits on a powder ski.

Quote:

Originally Posted by msolson 

 

while i agree with this, i also don't agree with this.

 

simply put, a tech binding is every bit as responsive and precise as alpine bindings, which means they ski well on groomed and soft snow.  however, since tech bindings have way less elasticity, if you mach thru cut up pow and crud pre-release is likely.  if you ski clean and round and deliberately thru cut up snow, then they will likely work well for you inbounds.  

Yea, the lack of elasticity is an issue and prevents great crudbusting. But I was talking about how dynafits work for me for skiing utah powder at an uncrowded ski hill, not doing something else somewhere else. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by msolson 

(of note the salmons are NOT compatible with a rocketed AT sole).

 

That right there is another + in favor of the Adrenalin (at least from the Fischer demo video it appears that the Adrenalin is compatible with all forms of boots).

So whats the verdict?  This thread died before the Gaurdian/Tracker was available.  What the consensus?  Is it worth the money to have them in a daily driver lite touring setup?  When I say lite, I mean short time wise, not ascent or aggressiveness.   

I've only toured on them a few times so far, but I've been pretty happy with them both at the resort and away.  They feel as solid as any other binding when skiing in bounds / busting through chop, etc.

I used a pair of Adrenalines in Gulmarg and my guide had the Solomons.  Both worked ok, although the snow does get compacted between the binding and ski and reqiored removing the ski to close the binding.

I have heard ot5her peeps complain about the absence of the second heel lifter.  Does the Tyrolia have 2?

Quote:

Originally Posted by EasideSoulSkier 

I have heard ot5her peeps complain about the absence of the second heel lifter.  Does the Tyrolia have 2?

Yes, one on each ski!

It has a multi position lifter similar to the Dukes.  The Solomons, on the other hand, is fixed to the ski.  I didn't have any issues with twist, but we didn't do a lot of significant sidehill.

Mike