Salomon Guardian/atomic Tracker vs. Tyrolia Adrenelin (and whatever fischer is calling theirs..) - Page 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by dookey67 

 

As for Shredhead's comments, sure, in extreme conditions, but the bit about your buddy blowing out his ACL above you infers that you are actually out on a serious BC jaunt, not a short resort side-county excursion,

  See I think you should have them even for the short side country shots, like Munchkin's at AM.   How else can you get back up,  if you buddy needs help fast?

Grerat discussion guys,

I wanted to chime in and let you know why I am interested in an AT binding. I have to buy a new pair of skis/bindings this year and would like to start getting into short tours and slack country. I can only really afford 1 pair of skis and will ski 50+ with likely 90% being resort days. I am doing my 2nd season in Revelstoke BC and we get a ton of snow. Revelstoke is within an hour from the pass and has the longest peak to base run in north america (by 10' over whistler).  There is currently only 1 gondola that feeds two upper chairs. If you duck the rope to the right of the stoke chair you instantly enter the resort cat operation area which can be quite good fairly frequently. The resort is located basically on a ridgeline with a pretty rediculas amount of slackcountry available off to one side of the resort. This can be accesed by bootpacking and traversing but the further you go the better and less tracked out it gets (we bootpacked, traversed and cat skied this area frequently last season). And actually the extreme end of this area was a shooting location in the art of flight film last season. For me, a pair of powder skis that I could throw skins on and hit slack country with when the resort is skied out seems like a no brainer (in Revy specifically). Since the slack country that I plan on hitting in revy is also the cat ski area skins will make the trek out on the cat track way quicker too. Although I admit that if and when I get the cash it is likely that I will go with a dedicated touring set up. This set up would also allow me to hit high alpine BC terrain without having to make a day long event out of driving to the pass on an average midseason tuesday.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dookey67 

To speak to Marshal's post, I know that Technica boots tend to run smaller (i.e. Phil put me in a 25 Inferno last season and I'm in a 26 Nordy, he basically stated that you go one size smaller for this brand). As always, danke gracias for the tech info (though I still need to find me an AT boot that fits near well enough to my Aggressors, which, btw, have become really comfy after about 500 days...almost perfect for touring as long as I keep 'em unbuckled on the way up!

 

:)

 

To JayT, yeah, when I saw your post I was like "WTF?"

 

My comments should be caveated by the fact that I don't know JayT. We met once last season in passing, introduced ourselves, shook hands and that was that. Thus, I have never skied with JayT. I do not know what type of gear he uses, what type of conditions he skis, or, more importantly, how he skis.I also have no idea what JayT's AT background is. I only know that he skis at Northstar and Northstar doesn't have any terrain that would warrant the use of an AT binding.

 

All I can speak to is that his comment of purchasing a >$500 AT binding to put on powder specific skis that would be used 90% inbounds at a resort perplexed me. 

 

For me, I tend to do most of my touring early season (Oct/Nov) and late season (March/April/May and into summer conditions permitting). I have never done an overnight tour, but I have done 6+ hour full day tours that probably ranged in the 6-12 mile roundtrip category. My two previous touring set-ups were Dukes on a 99mm waisted ski and then the same Dukes on a 94mm waisted ski. I had some Dalbello Virus for a season and hated them (too upright). I have also toured on borrowed AT skis that ranged from 88mm to 105mm. Most of my tours have been done in my race/work boots (size 26 Nordica Doberman Aggressor) because I have yet to find an AT boot that I like. Additionally, given the predominant conditions in/around Tahoe (where I do most of my touring, along with down Mammoth/Tioga/Sonora Pass way) tend to be very variable. Thus, I have yet to find the need to tour on a powder specific ski (again, this also plays to one's definition of what a "powder specific" ski is: to me that would be anything between 115 and 140mm underfoot). I've actually found that between 90 and 100mm is an optimal width for a touring ski in/around Tahoe. Additionally, the fact that local  Tahoe ski company Praxis, who were at the forefront of the whole fat ski movement, just released their first bonafide touring ski and it's 94mm underfoot, leads me to believe that folks are coming back down to earth and looking at skinnier (85-95mm) mid-fats as optimal touring skis for the variable conditions we have here in/around Tahoe. 

 

Additionally, if I were to purchase an AT binding, I would wish to put it on a versatile ski as opposed to a powder specific one. But that's just me. Plus, I'd make it AT specific (i.e. a ski that I would rarely, if ever, use at the resort). Again, these are just my thoughts based on how I ski, where I ski, what conditions I prefer, and the type of ski I like (I've spent the past 2 seasons on 86mm and 87mm skis as my everyday ski for both work, freeskiing, and boot-packing/patch skiing, borrowing a 99mm ski for touring from a friend). I'm not interested in going any fatter than 100mm for my AT specific set-up (in fact the skis I have been seriously considering for a new AT set-up are the Bushwacker (88mm) and the Bonafide (98mm). Given the propensity for Tahoe boilerplate or Sierra Cement to be the snow condition in the backcountry, I'm looking for a nimble ski that can handle those conditions and also be compatible for those sweet days of neo-blower (something between 85 and 105 with a short/medium radius and some rocker is optimal).

 

Again, this is all based on my personal experience and not knowing JayT's, just going with his original post earlier.

 

As for Shredhead's comments, sure, in extreme conditions, but the bit about your buddy blowing out his ACL above you infers that you are actually out on a serious BC jaunt, not a short resort side-county excursion, which is the scenario that I'm gathering most folks here on Epic are interested in getting the binding for. And those are the folks that I'm perplexed by. An AT binding at a resort is kind of pointless, especially if you are only taking a 1 week a year trip out west to ski in Colorado or Utah where most of the stuff you would probably be doing would be short boot-packs to terrain above the lifts. Again, folks rarely, if never, skin at the resorts in Tahoe unless the resort is closed (I have skinned Alpine Meadows both pre-lift-served season and post-lift-served-season).

 

I'm not trying to dissuade anybody from purchasing either of these bindings, but my feelings are that if you're not going to use them at least 50% of the time for touring, then why bother? Again, if you're unsure whether you'll like touring, then borrow or rent some gear first and try it out before laying out >$500 for a binding that is predominantly intended for touring but you plan on only using at the resort.

 

My long-winded monotribes aside, I'd still like to read some really in-depth reviews of the two bindings and how they stack up next to the Dukes (I personally don't see a need to compare/contrast them to Plumbs or Dynafits).

You're spending a lot of time making generalizations, and assumptions based upon when, where, and what kind of touring YOU do. Just because you tour early and late season to ski shit conditions does not mean that is everyone else's intent. Some people just want to be able to hit some additional backcountry/sidecountry pow stashes in between storms.

JayT, seems like we might wish to consider linking up and touring this coming 12/13 season...

Quote:

Originally Posted by dookey67 

JayT, seems like we might wish to consider linking up and touring this coming 12/13 season...

For sure.  A good friend of mine just moved back to the bay area from the east coast and his brother has a place in T/D, so I'm hoping to be up there a lot more this season.

skiersam, you sound like the perfect candidate for the duke/guardian, et al binding setup.  you are describing literally exactly what those bindings are for.  

as far as which one, that will be more a matter of brand preference and faith than anything.  they are all pretty competitive with one-another in all factors (retention, weight, ease of use, ski performance etc)

so, wait, Marshal, have you skied the Solly and the Tyrolia joints? I know you're a Plum patriot, but curious about how the others hold up to the Duke, whose only problem I've had was the negative ramp angle (my first gens never developed toe slop and they were burly and confident on a wide variety of terrain from Truckee down to Mammy).

Just my $0.02 worth.  I've had at least one pair of Duke equiped skis since the binding first came out five years ago. And my first AT binding/boot set up was Freeride + and Adrenalines (purchased 6 years ago).  For the touring that I do (5-10kms out then back, mostly rolling ground and maybe 1,000m climbing), I really appreciated the lighter weight of the Freeride/Adrenaline setup up over my Duke equiped skis.  Ive also done multi night tours on the Freeride/Adrenaline carting a 25kg backpack (no way would I do that on Dukes).

This year I've finally ditched the Freeride/Adrenaline and gone Dynafit and Cochise.  The Cochise is heavier than the Adrenaline, but I never really liked the way the Adrenaline skied and with the Dynafit bindings, the net weight saving is 215g per leg (skis are reasonably light G3 Barons).

Why the Cochise rather than a lighter weight AT boot? I travel a lot to ski, often taking two pairs of skis overseas, and locally (which is still a 7 hour trip) 3-4 pairs of skis and 2 pairs of boots.  Anything that can cut down my travelling ski locker is going to be appreciated.  My alpine boot is a Lange Comp 100, which have had six years of tweaking. Out of the box (before custom footbed), the Cochise gave me fit and feel that is similar to the Langes.  Hopefully, except days when I'm running gates, the Cochise will be my regular alpine as well as my AT boot.

And regarding a place for Duke type bindings.  With a DIN compliant boot sole, the Duke is as reliable and safe as virtually any alpine binding.  I've been comfortable skiing Dukes/alpine boots as I am with my Vist equiped alpine skis.  Plus, if I want to go side country I can, just whip skins out of pocket (backpack or bum bag) and start climbing.  My versatile one quiver travel ski is now a Stockli Stormrider VXL with Marker Tour 12.  That ski plus the Cochise will go to New Zealand with me in a few weeks.  I think it will be a pretty flexible combination, working inbounds/on-piste and giving the option out laying skin tracks for an hour or two.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dookey67 

so, wait, Marshal, have you skied the Solly and the Tyrolia joints? I know you're a Plum patriot, but curious about how the others hold up to the Duke, whose only problem I've had was the negative ramp angle (my first gens never developed toe slop and they were burly and confident on a wide variety of terrain from Truckee down to Mammy).

dookey, i only have limited time on the guardian, and no ski time on the tyrolia.  i can only armchair here, but the tyrolia appears to engage with similar points of contact as the guardian.  honestly, i think the tyrolia a pretty decent arrangement that has seen very very little real world testing outside of tyrolia.  

IMO the guardian is an incremental improvement over the original duke.  first reports on the new duke design state its a small incremental improvement over the original.  better or worse here is in my mind pretty subjective.  they are all pretty similar in terms of design, and i highly doubt that someone would be ultra bummed if they bought any of them, and most users would have a hard time telling the difference if they skied them back to back.  

i personally have no desire to ever skin more than a thousand vert on the guardian/et al, considering how much better the tech stuff goes up and down in the backcountry, but i will be testing the guardian directly against alpine bindings inbounds as a resort setup and compare its ability to drive a ski compared to the new duke, tyrolia and p18.  this class of bindings are all sufficient in my mind for shuffling around a bit away from a lift, but simply not efficient if you ski a 2000+ vert almost every morning under your own power.  

^^ Ditto for me.  I'm not going to be covering any serious vertical, so my concern is much more skewed towards the downhill performance.  Anyway, I appreciate the various comments and feedback in this thread.

JayT - i also suppose the flip-side of my statement is also true, if i was consistently skinning 500-1000 vert, and mostly using machine power to assist (sleds, lifts, etc), i would likely just use a guardian/duke type setup, and not have a specific touring setup...  

which sounds like exactly what skiersam and yourself are after.  

after watching both the promotional films for the Guardian/Tracker and the Adrenaline, I'm leaning towards the Tyrolia model. It just seems to be a bit more versatile, what with 3 different walk modes, ski crampons, and the locking mechanism in the back. I've only fondled both when they were on display at Start Haus, but not side-by-side. The Solly seems a bit more burly, but again the Tyrolia seems to have more things that I would find useful than the others.

Thanks, as always, for the input Marshal. I'm not at the 2000+ every morning mark yet, but I did summit Lassen on a pair of Dukes and in my race boots and I did okay in terms of keeping pace (I was right behind my buddy who was in full Dynafit mode and kept up with him well enough--he's also 15 years younger than me, so that factors in, as well).

:)

FD: this is just me, but I wouldn't go dedicated until you know you're REALLY into touring. Again, I don't tour nearly enough as I'd like or as some, but I tour a lot more than the average Tahoe skier. I've never had any issues with my Dukes and I've had them on some fairly long day trips: Mammoth Crest, No Name on Sonora, False White on Tioga, Virginia Lakes, and most recently Lassen. Again, having never experienced the Dynafit/Plum stuff, I have nothing to compare to. Additionally, not having found the right fitting/performing AT boot also factors in. I'd say getting something like the Duke/Guardian-Tracker/Adrenaline is a good intro to touring and the binding is versatile enough that it can be used as a resort binding should you decide that touring ain't your bag. That's kind of why I was suggesting mounting it on a more versatile ski than a powder-specific one. 

The thing I don't like about the Tyrolia is the taller stack height, which is also one of the things in particular about the Guardian / Tracker that appealed to me vs. Marker's offerings.  I believe the Tyrolia's stack height is even more so than the Duke, but I could be wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayT 

The thing I don't like about the Tyrolia is the taller stack height, which is also one of the things in particular about the Guardian / Tracker that appealed to me vs. Marker's offerings.  I believe the Tyrolia's stack height is even more so than the Duke, but I could be wrong.

you are skiing pow, man!  stack height is irrelevant. ;)

of course of firm snow, with a 110mm waist ski, 35mm stack vs 25mm stack equates to ~8% more leverage.  if that's make or break for you, i don't know.  compared to a p14/18 as an example, the 35mm stack is about 17%, the 25mm stack is about 10% more leverage.  

i would argue that stack height only matters on firm snow though, and free play in the system controls/dominates in virgin snow.  

finndog- reading into it too much.  i stopped referencing you, as i thought you were settled in your choice!

okay, to sort it all out:

Tyrolia Adrenaline stack height = 35mm

Guardian/Tracker stack height = 25mm

Duke/etc stack height = ?

I normally ski in a P14, though this past season I was in the Marker IQ set-up on the Blizzard 8.7 (any clue what the stack height on those puppies was/is?)

Honestly, if the Tyrolia is anywhere in the ballpark with the original run of the Dukes, then that's my choice as I've never had any issue with the Dukes on hard/variable snow other than the negative ramp angle, which I hated (coupled with stiff, upright boots it totally sucked in terms of stance).

Quote:

Originally Posted by msolson 

 

you are skiing pow, man!  stack height is irrelevant. ;)

 

of course of firm snow, with a 110mm waist ski, 35mm stack vs 25mm stack equates to ~8% more leverage.  if that's make or break for you, i don't know.  compared to a p14/18 as an example, the 35mm stack is about 17%, the 25mm stack is about 10% more leverage.  

 

i would argue that stack height only matters on firm snow though, and free play in the system controls/dominates in virgin snow.  

 

 

 

finndog- reading into it too much.  i stopped referencing you, as i thought you were settled in your choice!

I've only been on Dukes for one day and based on that very limited experience I'd tend to agree with you, although it bothered me in crud as well as on groomers / hard pack.  I don't know, maybe it was all in my head, but it was noticeable to me.  Regardless, for an AT binding that I'd also use at a resort a fair amount, the low height of the Tracker seems particularly appealing.

I wonder how much technique and skiing style plays into being bothered by the stack height.  It seems to be a big deal for some people while others barely notice any difference.

Duke stack height is 36mm - http://www.earlyups.com/featured/gear-burly-at-binding-feature/

Yeah, just Googled and stumbled upon that site where they compare all 3. So, basically, the Tyrolia is a Duke but with a few extra frills (i.e. crampons).

I'm actually surprised that Tyrolia went with the 36mm stack height, since, if I'm not mistaken, their popular Mojo binding was really low and close to the ski. I've skied the Mojo and wasn't particularly overjoyed by it, not like I am about Look P and PX (still need to get on a real turntable, though).

While the Solly still seems appealing based on the brand's durability and love amongst the multitudes, I'd really like to see Look/Rossignol enter this field...

I'm also a bit bummed that it's damn near impossible to demo a Dynafit set-up (granted, I've never seriously researched if shops do demo them, but I've never heard of a shop that does).

DOG had a sale yesterday with the F12 for $107.  I had them in the cart, but I just couldn't get myself to buy them.

For me, they just don't fill a need.  I think they're too light for resort abuse and if I go dedicated tour rig, I'd go Dynafit.