Which Dynafit?

Sklar

Sklar

Active member
Staff member
Okay, so I'm looking to get some tech bindings.

The trend of everything seems to be going towards bigger/burlier, which has me wondering what I really need.

Me:

6' 175lbs ish

Ski fairly fast/aggressively, but tend to stay mostly on the ground. More popping little trannies and slashing around.

These will be pretty much exclusively for touring I have a setup with big skis and dukes for inbounds stuff.

Have my dukes around 10-11 DIN

I'm looking primarily at DYnafit as they have the best used market (Realistically I'm not going to buy new bindings)

Pretty much wonder if I should go FT or can I probably get away with the ST?

Is anyone selling any?
 
either one would be ok. i know a lot of people prefer the ST over the FT. personally, i ride the FT and they have been nothing but great so far.
 
Think I found some Radical ST's

Kind of curious about the Surface Chronicle to mount them on. They look interesting but there isn't really any info on them online and I'm a bit skeptical about surface
http://www.surfaceskis.com/hardgoods/backcountry/chronicle/index.html

185cm - 140 / 112 / 125

chronicle.png
 
No idea about the skis, but for the bindings - you will probably do just fine on the st. I have the ft, but I'm 6'1, 190lbs and I'm addicted to jumping off of shit. It's a miracle I haven't broken the things yet. Third season of no giving a fuck hucking and slashing on them with no issues. Even my dukes break every year and a half or so.
 
13301123:Drail said:
No idea about the skis, but for the bindings - you will probably do just fine on the st. I have the ft, but I'm 6'1, 190lbs and I'm addicted to jumping off of shit. It's a miracle I haven't broken the things yet. Third season of no giving a fuck hucking and slashing on them with no issues. Even my dukes break every year and a half or so.
Click to expand...

I've heard such awesome things about the FTs in reviews by people that actually own them but when I'm in the shop everyone tells me they're sketchy if you want to actually jump off of anything.

Not sure if I should go with the FTs or with the beasts personally - I will probably ride them in-bounds a few times as well though. Only about a $120 difference between the two, which isn't terrible at that price point for some added piece of mind.

Sklar, backcountry.com has a bunch of really helpful reviews on the FTs, maybe you'll find them helpful:http://www.backcountry.com/dynafit-...ml0IHJhZGljYWwgZnQ&skid=DNF0066-ONECOL-S110MM
 
13301128:bocuma said:
I've heard such awesome things about the FTs in reviews by people that actually own them but when I'm in the shop everyone tells me they're sketchy if you want to actually jump off of anything.

Not sure if I should go with the FTs or with the beasts personally - I will probably ride them in-bounds a few times as well though. Only about a $120 difference between the two, which isn't terrible at that price point for some added piece of mind.

Sklar, backcountry.com has a bunch of really helpful reviews on the FTs, maybe you'll find them helpful:http://www.backcountry.com/dynafit-...ml0IHJhZGljYWwgZnQ&skid=DNF0066-ONECOL-S110MM
Click to expand...

Who are you more likely to believe/trust? Those of us who use them, or people who work in a shop and don't really ski very much in all reality? Especially if they are trying to up sell you to a more expensive binding? Obviously there is a bit of stereotyping going on, but you said it yourself. User reviews are good, shop workers say otherwise.

Sounds like any amount of pro user reviews won't change your skepticism. Either way - I highly recommend you DO NOT use tech bindings in bounds. I have no say in the beasts though, I've barely even touched them in the shop.
 
13301152:Drail said:
Who are you more likely to believe/trust? Those of us who use them, or people who work in a shop and don't really ski very much in all reality? Especially if they are trying to up sell you to a more expensive binding? Obviously there is a bit of stereotyping going on, but you said it yourself. User reviews are good, shop workers say otherwise.

Sounds like any amount of pro user reviews won't change your skepticism. Either way - I highly recommend you DO NOT use tech bindings in bounds. I have no say in the beasts though, I've barely even touched them in the shop.
Click to expand...

Sorry man, I suppose you're right. Not trying to question your experience. This would be my first AT setup though, so coming from alpine bindings just makes it hard for me to understand how a binding as tiny and light as the FT can be so burly. If I were to use this setup in bounds it'd just be for the occasional epic pow day or slackcountry access - wouldn't be shredding moguls or anything.
 
Found a deal on some ST's, so I pulled the trigger.

Gotta find some skis to put them on now...
 
13301152:Drail said:
Who are you more likely to believe/trust? Those of us who use them, or people who work in a shop and don't really ski very much in all reality? Especially if they are trying to up sell you to a more expensive binding? Obviously there is a bit of stereotyping going on, but you said it yourself. User reviews are good, shop workers say otherwise.

Sounds like any amount of pro user reviews won't change your skepticism. Either way - I highly recommend you DO NOT use tech bindings in bounds. I have no say in the beasts though, I've barely even touched them in the shop.
Click to expand...

They are fine if your not dialing shit in the park, wear and tear on the mechanisms. If you just charge hard and not hucking spins you will be sweet inbounds on dynafit beasts, wouldn't try it on anything else going as hard. Also have a pair of plums and they are a nightmare to get out of gnarly shit without exploding
 
I think you could realistically get away with either the Radical FT or the ST. I use the FT for the increased DIN capability in the heel (12 as opposed to 10). The FT is only 136 grams heavier per pair of bindings...so pretty much negligible weight difference between the two. Even less difference if you don't ski with the carbon plate on the FT, which I do not.

You probably wouldn't want to ski either binding in the resort regularly, but I would recommend doing it at least once prior to touring on them to get a feel for the difference in how they ski.

You will likely notice: 1) larger ramp angle heel-to-toe, 2) very little shock absorption, 3) slight lack of power transmission due to the rotating heel.

Overall I am amazed at the durability of those bindings, and you really can't beat the uphill performance.

Sure, you definitely lose some downhill performance BUT, most of the time, when you are touring you are going to ski much more conservatively than you would in the resort anyhow.
 
If you have the money and are a moderately light weighted skiier not hauling a shitload of gear to any camp site, recommend the plum yaks. Such an easy system to use especially in powder
 
13315393:B-Wald said:
While we're on the subject, does anyone have experience with any other tech binders? specifically the G-3 Ions? Gonna pick a pair up soon and I'm wondering if I should consider anything other than Dynafits
Click to expand...

Picked up a pair recently, after reading up on them as much as I could they pretty much sounded like a radical with some minor improvements. They're my first pair of tech bindings so I nothing to compare them to but I'm very happy with them so far - tour like a dream and haven't had any issues skiing on them in BC or resort yet (only a few days on them so far though).
 
I just got home from day 1 on my new (to me) touring setup up on Rainier,

183 Atomic Coax, Dynafit Radical ST

Stoked on the dynafits, made skinning a lot less tiring, especially coming off my 191 Billygoats with Dukes.

I had some issues with one of my toe pieces coming loose, i guess I didn't use enough threadlocker in the inserts.

Definitely can't drive the Coax as hard as the Billy Goats, but they should be fun, and the price was right
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top