AT setup vs downhill setup

[skiMEbike]

Curious to hear from those that have made the switch from downhill boot/binding setup to an AT setup. Any noticeable differences when it comes to downhill performance? I am in need of new ski boots & considering doing the switch to an AT setup. The obvious benefit would be the opportunity to do some skinning & BC exploration, however I would primarily use it for DH and very little touring. The ability to tour would be a great asset and provide more opportunity to get out & explore. I wouldn't want to sacrifice any part of the DH experience. I am at the moment a "1 ski quiver guy, so unfortunately not in a position to buy/justify a whole other AT setup of skis/boots/bindings. Would like to hear thoughts about performance, boot, feel, and equipment abuse tolerance when comparing to a DH setup.

 

[catsup948]

I skied with touring boots for several years, I still use them for touring now. Garmont Argons. I beefed them up with a booster strap to help make them stiffer. They are great for walking around, great for uphill, great for softer snow touring but they really just can't handle groomers and variable conditions. I eventually decided I needed alpine boots and got Nordica Patrons. They do make stiff touring boots but they seem to be a bit on the heavier side for uphill touring.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

 

[Not Sure]

Curious to hear from those that have made the switch from downhill boot/binding setup to an AT setup. Any noticeable differences when it comes to downhill performance? I am in need of new ski boots & considering doing the switch to an AT setup. The obvious benefit would be the opportunity to do some skinning & BC exploration, however I would primarily use it for DH and very little touring. The ability to tour would be a great asset and provide more opportunity to get out & explore. I wouldn't want to sacrifice any part of the DH experience. I am at the moment a "1 ski quiver guy, so unfortunately not in a position to buy/justify a whole other AT setup of skis/boots/bindings. Would like to hear thoughts about performance, boot, feel, and equipment abuse tolerance when comparing to a DH setup.

You don't have to buy AT boots if you go with a binding like Marker Duke or other Frame binding http://www.evo.com/guides/how-to-buy-alpine-touring-bindings .Dukes DIN in 6-16 pretty beefy. I was a one ski quiver guy for a while and am older so the weight of the frame binding cathches up with me when doing a lot of skinning. Frame bindings are heavy but ski like conventional downhill bindings.
Recently bought lighter Dynafit radicals and mounted them on Nordica Steadfast's , Amazing difference 3lbs per ski lighter with AT boots . If your planning on casual AT skiing go with a frame binding you could just replace your existing bindings and get some skins.
The pin bindings are not nearly as heavy but at a cost . I only ski groomers with my Dynafits as they don't have the clearence for boot heel compression like a conventional heel piece. The stack height is greater with a frame binding but it was not an issue for me.

 

[Tin]

GF got me a pair of Baron's for Christmas, they get mounted next week. I have some Lange SX 120s that I have actually done a decent amount of uphill hiking in this year to get to untracked areas (nothing more than about 800' of vert though) and they are very comfortable. Hoping everything translates well with my new A/T set up and looking forward to getting off resort trails (or at least doing some dawn patrols).

 

[crank]

I used to use my old Lange race boots with Fritschi frame bindings. Other than being heavy they work fine. Have done tours in the 2k vert range.

I now ski in a pair of Technica Cochise boots that are billed as being good side country boots. Plenty beefy for inbounds and super comfy though possibly a bit heavy for long climbs. I am looking for a pair of dedicated, light AT boots and planning to get some tech bindings as well.

 

[Hawk]

Most of this is covered above. The simple rule of thumb is this. The classic front pin touring setups that use Tech bindings i.e. dynafit or Kingpins are not recommended for front side skiing if you ski bumps and/or woods. They simply do not hold up in extreme dynamic conditions and you also risk injury because of the uncertain release patterns. If you are skiing groomers they should be fine. If you only ski side country then a regular ski boot and a frame type binding are fine. You do pay a weight penalty but the assumption is that you will not be doing repeated runs with multiple change overs with big vert. If that is the case then a true back country set up with tech bindings and AT boots rule the day. Way lighter which will give you more energy and endurance in the long run.

 

[wtcobb]

I have a Dynafit setup for my touring skis (Speed Radical binding, TLT6 Performance boot). Very lightweight, very comfortable, but a definite sacrifice on downhill performance. The stiffness is lower (I use 110 flex Salomons downhill, for comparison) and the binding can't handle a thrashing unless you lock the toe pins (and risk splintering your tibia on a fall).

That said, they do perform well. I've skied hardpack, powder, corn, and mixed in them. I need to adjust my skiing style and know that I can't be as aggressive as in my alpine setup, but that's simply the trade off. On uphill the boots are extremely comfortable (TLT6 has a removable rigid tongue for easier movement) and the lightweight bindings make longer tours easier on the legs. I'm very happy with the performance I do get and what I'm able to do in my setup.

If your goal is to mainly use them on downhill with very little touring, you may want to stick to lift-serve in general. Get a backpack that can carry skis and find a boot with a reasonable walk mode (Tecnica Cochise is a good recommend). When you do want to get off resort, get slack packing and wear snowshoes so you don't total the skintrack. A typical backcountry touring day is 4 hours skinning up, 7 minutes skiing down. Primarily touring, very little downhill. Unless you have a friend with a heli.

 

[wtcobb]

Most of this is covered above. The simple rule of thumb is this. The classic front pin touring setups that use Tech bindings i.e. dynafit or Kingpins are not recommended for front side skiing if you ski bumps and/or woods. They simply do not hold up in extreme dynamic conditions and you also risk injury because of the uncertain release patterns. If you are skiing groomers they should be fine. If you only ski side country then a regular ski boot and a frame type binding are fine. You do pay a weight penalty but the assumption is that you will not be doing repeated runs with multiple change overs with big vert. If that is the case then a true back country set up with tech bindings and AT boots rule the day. Way lighter which will give you more energy and endurance in the long run.

+1 to all of this.

 

[Smellytele]

Tele :razz: - light weight, can handle anything, comfy boots.

 

[ironhippy]

I bought a set last year that I expected to only use when touring.
After trying it out at the local hill, I haven't switched back to my other boots/bindings. But that is probably because I like my touring skis better than my other skis.

I'm not even sure what brand my bindings are, but they have the pins in the front. I haven't had any problems skiing woods, bumps or anything else... yet.

I ski with AT bindings in the woods, because all my touring is done in the woods so I don't have a choice.

 

[Not Sure]

Carry some tools the bindings can get fouled by ice/snow . Had to clear the rails on my Dukes a few times in order to get them latched.First time with the Dynafits skied for groomers 4 hours and when I came out had 3 pre released before I discovered the spring clearance on the toe had some ice under it.

 

[Not Sure]

I bought a set last year that I expected to only use when touring.
After trying it out at the local hill, I haven't switched back to my other boots/bindings. But that is probably because I like my touring skis better than my other skis.

I'm not even sure what brand my bindings are, but they have the pins in the front. I haven't had any problems skiing woods, bumps or anything else... yet.

I ski with AT bindings in the woods, because all my touring is done in the woods so I don't have a choice.

Skiing bumps puts a lot of flex on the ski , not sure which tech you have but Dynafits have 5mm clearance between the boot/ bindings.
You run the risk of braking the post or pulling the heel binding out.

 

[wtcobb]

Carry some tools the bindings can get fouled by ice/snow . Had to clear the rails on my Dukes a few times in order to get them latched.First time with the Dynafits skied for groomers 4 hours and when I came out had 3 pre released before I discovered the spring clearance on the toe had some ice under it.

Yup, and the heel piece can get fouled up too. Snow/iced over when you go to turn into downhill mode.

 

[mr magoo]

I skied AT skis (Garmont/Fritschi) inbounds for 3 years and was happy. last year I went back to downhill boots/bindings and was quite surprised at the extra control. Forgot/didn't know what I was missing. I think all would agree that AT won't last as long inbounds regardless how tough it is built. I keep the AT gear at the ready for the appropriate days, but the right tool for the job counts here.

 

[ironhippy]

Skiing bumps puts a lot of flex on the ski , not sure which tech you have but Dynafits have 5mm clearance between the boot/ bindings.
You run the risk of braking the post or pulling the heel binding out.

that's a good point, I didn't ski many bumps last year because our season was crappy.

I'll switch back to my other skis for the ski hilll once the ice thins out (my touring skis have much sharper edges!)