Daymakers or Salomon Shift?

C

CUSHKOMA

Member
Finally bought me some pow skis (ARV 116 JJ) and have been on the lookout for the right bindings. I plan on buying them from the ski shop I bought the skis from so I can get them mounted/tuned for free. Since I plan on getting out in the backcountry this season, I’d like to get something that would allow me to skin around if I wanted to. I don’t plan on making this my pure backcountry set up though as I’m mostly a resort shredder.

I’m caught between getting one of the following alpine bindings with a pair of daymakers:

Tyrolia Attack 13

Marker Griffon

Look Pivot (not sure if adapter would work for this)

Or I was also told about the new Salomon Shift which has an alpine friendly toe piece but is also equipped with a heel release system that would allow me to skin around in the backcountry. I know I’d be spending roughly the same amount of money with whichever route I take, and although I don’t know a whole lot about the Salomon Shift it would definitely be a lighter option than having adapters. Performance and durability are definitely huge factors at play here, just thought I’d get some opinions from anyone who is knowledgeable about bindings or skis a nice balance of resort/backcountry. Any words of advice would be greatly appreciated!!!
 
The main thing with the shift is that you would need a boot with tech fittings in the toe. So without knowing what boot you have its hard to tell you what’s going to work.

That said assuming you have tech fittings in your boot. The shift seems to be a very good option. The only other system that offers similar in bounds and touring capabilities is the cast sytem, but a lot of people do not need a pivot 18, especially when touring.

Some more usefull information would be your boots, how long tours you plan on going on, what you ski inbounds/ perfentage inbounds vs touring, how hard you are on ski gear typically. Then some better suggestions can be made.
 
13947206:TheWeaz said:
The main thing with the shift is that you would need a boot with tech fittings in the toe. So without knowing what boot you have its hard to tell you what’s going to work.

That said assuming you have tech fittings in your boot. The shift seems to be a very good option. The only other system that offers similar in bounds and touring capabilities is the cast sytem, but a lot of people do not need a pivot 18, especially when touring.

Some more usefull information would be your boots, how long tours you plan on going on, what you ski inbounds/ perfentage inbounds vs touring, how hard you are on ski gear typically. Then some better suggestions can be made.
Click to expand...

I currently have Dalbello Kryptons, definitely no tech fittings in those. I’ve never toured in my life so I feel like I would take it slow to start off with, that being said I definitely spend a higher percentage inbounds. I ski hard most every day but take every measure to keep my gear in the best condition possible, obviously I don’t plan on taking these in the park nor when there is little to no fresh inbounds snow.
 
13947213:CUSHKOMA said:
I currently have Dalbello Kryptons, definitely no tech fittings in those.
Click to expand...

If you plan on touring those boots you will either need Daymakers or a frame-style touring binding. Just know that with that boot you will not be enjoying the up, at all. Touring boots & Side-country boots have a mechanism on the back of the boot that allows the cuff to disengage from the shell so it can move with your leg while walking/skinning. If you do want to get into touring, definitely look for boots with a ski/walk mechanism.
 
sounds like your best option for this season is daymakers paired with whatever you like as an alpine binding, pivots, aatacks, sth, I think they all work with daymakers. Daymakers are much better than any frame binding on the market if most of your skiing will be inbounds, because you will be mostly skiing on your plain alpine binding.

Onenerdykid is correct though, once you start doing longer adventures you will probably want to look into a touring/ sidecountry do it all boot of some sort. If you like the way the kryptons ski the lupo is pretty similar, otherwise pretty much every company makes a boot with tech fittings that can also ski inbounds pretty well. When you get to that point start with a bootfitter at your local store to detirmine which ones fit your foot shape. For just getting into touring though your boots will suffice with the buckles undone.
 
I've heard a lot of people suggest undoing buckles or a walk mode but IDK if it helps. Just experiment and do what is best for you. I used to tour in some Nordica Dobermanns and it was way more comfortable for me to tour with them buckled. It rubbed and didn't give me a better motion undone. I now have pinnacle 130s that have a walk mode but I don't even notice a difference with the walk mode. Probably better just to leave it in ski mode all the time IMO then I won't have to remember to switch it back. Different boots and people are probably different but this was my experience. I've used frame bindings and daymakers and I agree that the daymakers are way better on the up.
 
So Daymaker sent me some adapters about a year and a half ago, and I have been majorly slack with getting a review up. That's partly because I still don't tour that often, so it's taken me this long to get much use out of them. I have used a Salomon Guardian (and a Duke once) as my main reference point for frames (also, tried pins once but it doesn't sound like you'll be using those, at least at first). I would love to test the SHIFT but like you, do not generally use boots with pins (that's something I'm hoping to figure out this winter).

All that said, there are definitely positives and negatives to both Daymakers and frame bindings.

On the downhill there is a clear winner for me, the Daymaker. You get to ride your regular binding and to me that is most comfortable. The Guardian and Duke both ski fine on the downhill, but I don't love the higher stack height, and they don't feel quite as secure/predictable to me (that could well be mostly in my head, but I've had the odd weird release, especially jibbing).

On the uphill leg both have positives and negatives. I'm far from a touring expert but my impression is that the walking motion of the Daymaker is more comfortable. On frame bindings I've tended to get sore hips from the slightly uncomfortable hinge point, and I didn't get that with the Daymaker. However the stack height on the Daymaker is really high, and I felt less secure on steeper terrain, as my connection to the ski felt less direct/close. Flipping between the different riser modes on the Daymaker is also a pain, and much easier to do with a pole on the Guardian in my opinion. However, the Daymaker offers more different angle options so again, mixed comparison.

To me though the most major difference is the transition between modes. Daymakers are a bit of a pain in the ass to get on and off. You have to clip the binding on to your boot first, then click into the binding. It might not seem like much but they are kind of fiddly to get on the boot in the first place, especially at first, and if you're doing a tour that involves multiple mode changes, the fiddliness does get old pretty fast. It's also an added complication if you are trying to change mode in an exposed or awkward spot. By contrast, with the Guardian you can change mode without taking your ski off. And while, I haven't mastered taking off skins with my skis still on, that is still a useful option to have in sketchy terrain/when traversing etc. Frames are so much easier to just click into on the fly that on trips that involved a lot of switching or having to take skis off and go scramble over some rocks, I've found them preferable.

I do prefer the Daymakers for both the comfort of touring mode itself, and on the downhill leg. I've also found them to hold up durability wise with no issue whatsoever. I'd definitely put up with the fiddly riser heights for that comfort, however I have been on trips where I really would have preferred the simplicity of a frame binding when it comes to changing mode. To me though it sounds like you'll mostly be doing some short backcountry tours that would likely only involve minimal mode changes. And that most of your ski days would be resort based without the need for touring bindings at all. And for that, I'd say the Daymaker with one of those bindings (Attack 13 is my personal preference of those) would be definitely the better option because most of the time, you're just skiing your regular binding.
 
13948034:.nasty said:
Had to macgyver my BCA skins with some different tail straps to fit the tail shape but all worked out in the end.
Click to expand...

Toured on the Sakana a bit last spring. Such a fun corn ski. The tails can catch on each other a bit while skinning, but it's pretty easy to adjust your skinning stance. Overall, an awesome 50/50 ski for carving up everything.
 
13948100:patagonialuke said:
Toured on the Sakana a bit last spring. Such a fun corn ski. The tails can catch on each other a bit while skinning, but it's pretty easy to adjust your skinning stance. Overall, an awesome 50/50 ski for carving up everything.
Click to expand...

I was sold after skiing it in some deep snow in Japan last year. For a 105 underfoot ski, the swallow tail really allows the tip to plane really well in deeper snow, felt like it was 120 underfoot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top