I got some new boots at the weekend (Tecnica Cochise). the tech sole is the same as the Zero-G one and is apparently ISO norm 9523 compliant.
I notice on my old semi-touring boots (Garmont Endorphin) that the touring sole has an AFD plate, the Tecnica one does not, so am a bit more concerned about release consistency in my Marker Dukes, any thoughts on that?
So question is, should I go full tech binding and abandon the Dukes, or put the Cochise DIN sole back on and live with lack of grip/walkability? Are tech bindings actually any better for release consistency?
I'm an infrequent tourer (should try harder!), so value downhill performance over weight - oh and not snapping my legs off
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Given that certain of my local rascal bootfitters (SOLE, Chamonix) replaced the hard plastic of my race boots with Vibram soles (no boot AFD) and assured me that this was perfectly fine, I am sure you will be too...
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
@stuarth, is that the new Cochise or the old ones?
For what it's worth I ran the go Cochise then Cochise Pro Light with touring soles on both in Barons, tech bindings (and later with the pro lights in Wardens) with no problems at all.
I recently received a pair of the new Cochises to test (though haven't got round to fitting/skiing them yet). You can't swap the soles on them - they are designed to work in tech, frame and alpine bindings (can't remember off the top of my head if this is WTR only?) as is.
If you're new boots are the old ones... Well the new ones are a pretty big improvement IMO (I did test them briefly last Feb) with a much more anatomical fit round the ankle.
@stuarth, is that the new Cochise or the old ones?
For what it's worth I ran the go Cochise then Cochise Pro Light with touring soles on both in Barons, tech bindings (and later with the pro lights in Wardens) with no problems at all.
I recently received a pair of the new Cochises to test (though haven't got round to fitting/skiing them yet). You can't swap the soles on them - they are designed to work in tech, frame and alpine bindings (can't remember off the top of my head if this is WTR only?) as is.
If you're new boots are the old ones... Well the new ones are a pretty big improvement IMO (I did test them briefly last Feb) with a much more anatomical fit round the ankle.
the new boot has an alpine sole with the pin inserts mounted into the frame of the boot, you can get a compatible touring sole if you want more rubber and a rocker.... it bolts straight on to replace the alpine sole unit (still allowing the pin system to be used) so you can swap the soles
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
clarky999 wrote:
@stuarth, is that the new Cochise or the old ones?
For what it's worth I ran the go Cochise then Cochise Pro Light with touring soles on both in Barons, tech bindings (and later with the pro lights in Wardens) with no problems at all.
I recently received a pair of the new Cochises to test (though haven't got round to fitting/skiing them yet). You can't swap the soles on them - they are designed to work in tech, frame and alpine bindings (can't remember off the top of my head if this is WTR only?) as is.
If you're new boots are the old ones... Well the new ones are a pretty big improvement IMO (I did test them briefly last Feb) with a much more anatomical fit round the ankle.
Yes, 2016/2017 ones.
Though the tech inserts are molded in, you can swap the sole between a DIN one, tech sole, and a WTR ride sole - though I can't quite see the point of the latter as it is kind of like the DIN sole with a rocker, so doesn't seem to offer much more grip at the expense of needing compatible bindings, also it would seem to cover the bit where the pins go in at the heel.
I swapped the full on touring tech sole onto it.
I notice on my old semi-touring boots (Garmont Endorphin) that the touring sole has an AFD plate, the Tecnica one does not, so am a bit more concerned about release consistency in my Marker Dukes, any thoughts on that?...
Are tech bindings actually any better for release consistency?
Some answers to your questions here (relevant bit from 4 mins, direct answers to your questions from 5:50 mins)
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
CEM wrote:
clarky999 wrote:
@stuarth, is that the new Cochise or the old ones?
For what it's worth I ran the go Cochise then Cochise Pro Light with touring soles on both in Barons, tech bindings (and later with the pro lights in Wardens) with no problems at all.
I recently received a pair of the new Cochises to test (though haven't got round to fitting/skiing them yet). You can't swap the soles on them - they are designed to work in tech, frame and alpine bindings (can't remember off the top of my head if this is WTR only?) as is.
If you're new boots are the old ones... Well the new ones are a pretty big improvement IMO (I did test them briefly last Feb) with a much more anatomical fit round the ankle.
the new boot has an alpine sole with the pin inserts mounted into the frame of the boot, you can get a compatible touring sole if you want more rubber and a rocker.... it bolts straight on to replace the alpine sole unit (still allowing the pin system to be used) so you can swap the soles
Thanks, that's good to know!! I should probably take a closer look at them when I get back to Austria
After all it is free
After all it is free
@Oceanic,
Thanks for that.
Think having seen that and talking to a few gurus I might stick the DIN sole back on until I get some tech bindings (which I will not lock out!)
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
Oceanic wrote:
Some answers to your questions here (relevant bit from 4 mins, direct answers to your questions from 5:50 mins)
Thanks; an interesting and rather scary presentation which makes me think about using my new Tecnica light pro boots with my marker f10 bindings. Having said that I did all my skiing and learning for years with Scarpa Denali boots (full rocketed mountaineering Vibram sole) on Diamir Eagle frame bindings and never suffered any problems with failing to release during many falls. I was always careful to set the height of the sole plate with a tissue paper thickness gap under the sole. Was I just lucky or is the danger maybe over stated a little? Would there be any point in greasing the sole plate?
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
I was In Pila for the fresh day before yesterday and was skiing with a lad who borrowed a pair of R108 from our test fleet. He swapped the soles on his K2's (something or other 130s) for DIN on the drive over so he could click into the alpine demo bindings, but whilst we were skiing we noticed that as he had a Dynafit Beast plate on the heel of his boot it was interfering with the boot's heel's ability to 'hook under' the rear binding. I had a Beast plate on my boot too, but if I had swapped to DIN (which I didn't as I was using my own Rags with Beast 14s) then the plate would have been swapped out with the heel assembly because I have older Technica Cochise.
Just something for everyone to keep in mind.
Our solution for the day btw was increase forward pressure and reduce DIN setting a bit, then just get on with it (all very scientific).
For reference the demo binding in question was a Marker Jester using the old screw adjustment system.
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads on Sat 24-12-16 16:29; edited 1 time in total
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
On the rocks wrote:
Thanks; an interesting and rather scary presentation which makes me think about using my new Tecnica light pro boots with my marker f10 bindings. Having said that I did all my skiing and learning for years with Scarpa Denali boots (full rocketed mountaineering Vibram sole) on Diamir Eagle frame bindings and never suffered any problems with failing to release during many falls. I was always careful to set the height of the sole plate with a tissue paper thickness gap under the sole. Was I just lucky or is the danger maybe over stated a little? Would there be any point in greasing the sole plate?
He doesn't say exactly which frame bindings he tested. Fritschi frame bindings are considered obsolete by many, so I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't included in the test.
I used to ski on Fritschi frame bindings with boots with a Vibram sole, and I remember that I had to increase my DIN settings because of problems with pre-release, so I would suspect that they do release at roughly the expected setting.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
Interesting I had exactly the same pre release problem with the Denalis. Are his full comparability results available on line?
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
On the rocks wrote:
Are his full comparability results available on line?
It's a while since I watched the video of the presentation all the way through, but I think he said that he was a bit cagey about naming specific boot / binding combinations that did or did not work. Not sure if that is a liabilty thing, or if he just doesn't want to upset any binding manufacturers / potential employers post PhD.
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
