WildSnow Reader’s Rides — Brian Litz Dynafit on Rossi

Post by WildSnow.com blogger | May 13, 2009      
Backcountry Skiing

Binding Mount

Guidebook author and Backcountry Magazine founder Brian Litz stopped by the other day for a Wildsnow workshop hit. Plan: Mount a pair of Dynafit FT10 backcountry skiing bindings on his shiny new Rossignol SC-97 Phantoms.

Phantoms are said to be sweet planks. The new look is white, our favorite ski color. Dimensions 130 /97/115 are definitely in the zone of performance width, but not so wide as to cause slogitis.

Backcountry Skiing

Big guys need big tools. Editor's choice for release check? Four foot wrecking bar.

Backcountry Skiing

Crux of any Dynafit mount is removing and replacing the lateral release spring cap. Here Brian takes his time to get it right. Best strategy, pop your Tecate AFTER this stage of the mount, otherwise you might be digging around on the web for Dynafit's customer service number.

Backcountry Skiing

Payment for the WildSnow shop treatment is sporting our sticker on your planks. Brian figured a hit with the waxing iron would help.

Backcountry Skiing

A man and his ride (or in this case, a variety of rides.) Brian's choice in boot is Garmont Radium.

Shop for Dynafit bindings here.


Please Enjoy A Few Suggested WildSnow Posts


10 Responses to “WildSnow Reader’s Rides — Brian Litz Dynafit on Rossi”

  1. Tim May 13th, 2009 10:21 am

    How long are those Phantoms?

  2. Pierce May 13th, 2009 12:04 pm

    Just bought my second pair of verts at Bentgate the other night. The first pair is on a set of Goode Vision 96’s making for a ridiculously light, yet poweful BC set-up. The next pair is going on a set of last year’s seth vicious skis for my everyday touring set up, and I still love my Radiums. I’ve tried naxos and fritchis for several seasons, and I’m not going back. Fritchis are going on Craigslist!

  3. Jay May 14th, 2009 12:55 pm

    Hey Lou,
    Since you’re the web dynafit guru I figured I’d see if you can help me out with a dynafit issue that has stumped every ski shop in town (denver).

    I just picked up some older dynafit tourlite techs (the neon-ish purple and green ones) and when i put my boot into the toe piece, they won’t go into the touring lock out. It seems that the jaws of the toe piece are not closing far enough on the boot and this prevents the toe lever from going past a plastic ‘stop’ on the toe piece (a little confusing to explain).

    It will go into the touring lock out just fine without a boot in the binding and it doesn’t seem to be a boot issue as multiple boots have been tried with no luck.

    Any ideas?

  4. Lou May 14th, 2009 1:10 pm

    I know exactly what you’re talking about Jay. That is usually caused by use of a non compatible plastic plate under the toe unit. In other words, you sometimes have to use the same plate as the year the binding was sold, or at least close.

    All that said, are you familiar with the Dynafit binding? Are you sure they are actually malfing, and not just behaving in a way that you’re not up to speed on?

    Good you eliminated boots as the cause…

    Perhaps email me a good quality photo of the toe unit, viewed from above to the side, without a boot in it. Perhaps I’ll see something funny. Might make a good blog post once you figure this out.

  5. Ryan December 10th, 2009 11:11 pm

    I just had a pair of Coombacks mounted up at the local shop with Vertical ST’s. When I got home and compared them base to base, I realized that one of the bindings seems to be higher than the other. The difference is slight, but I’m wondering if this is an issue I should be concerned about. At the very least it seems like inaccurate workmanship. It might be based on inaccuracies in the mid-sole marks on the ski itself. This is only the second pair of skis I’ve ever had mounted, so I don’t know what the usual tolerances are. I never looked that closely at my last mount.

    Any thoughts?

    Pics: http://picasaweb.google.com/ryanmalarky/DynafitMount_2#

  6. Lou December 11th, 2009 8:12 am

    Ryan, I assume by “higher” you mean in a different for/aft position and slightly closer to the tip of the ski?

    A difference of a few millimeters will not affect how the skis ski unless you’re a World Cup slalom medalist. On the other hand, having that happen indicates very poor craftsmanship and would reduce the value of the skis if they were sold used and you were honest and disclosed the mount defect.

    FYI, in my opinion the tolerance for this in mounting skis is that they’re visually identical, but if measured might be off a millimeter or two.

    BTW, what usually causes this is an inattentive craftsman who doesn’t compare the printed mounting marks on the skis, which are sometimes off because the top graphics get shifted during construction of the skis. When that happens and they’re not too different, a good tech will just average the two marks by measuring up from the tails of the skis with a tape measure.

    I’d take the skis back and complain.

  7. Ryan December 11th, 2009 8:33 am


    Thanks for the reply. I did mean that one of the bindings appears to be more forward on one of the skis. It looks like the mounting marks on the ski might be a little off, which I think led to the inaccurate mount. The tech actually said to me, something to the effect of, “These came out the best I’ve ever done them. The midsole mark really helps.” Not exactly inspiring.

    My other question is that when I get them remounted do I need to worry about having the new screw holes near the old ones, in terms of structural integrity? Because it appears that the difference is not that great in where the binding is and where it should be, I wonder if the new holes won’t be right on top of, or very close to, the old ones.

    Finally, can two skis out of a pair have different balance points (if you were to ignore the midsole marks and just balance the ski on a straight edge) and how does one deal with that when mounting?


  8. Lou December 11th, 2009 9:58 am

    In my opinion, the ski balance point is something not even worth thinking about. BUT, you would want it to be similar for each ski. Otherwise you’d have to use a different kick turn technique depending on if you were turning left or right, and swap that technique when you swapped skis from left to right.

    New holes won’t be a problem if they’re a few millimeters from the old ones, and the old ones are filled with epoxy. But if a mount at a shop results in a new set of holes, they owe you a new set of skis.

    For what it’s worth, I ALWAYS measure up from the tails of the skis to make sure I’m mounting the bindings in the same for/aft location.

  9. Ryan December 11th, 2009 10:07 am

    Thanks for your input. The amount of info on this site never ceases to amaze me.

    Just to clarify: you’re suggesting that a remount in this situation warrants a new pair of skis?

  10. Lou December 11th, 2009 10:27 am

    Ryan, yes, I’d say that they could POSSIBLY owe you a new pair. It’s a negotiation situation.

  Your Comments

  Recent Posts

Facebook Twitter Email Instagram Youtube

WildSnow Twitter Feed


  • Blogroll & Links

  • Welcome to Louis (Lou) Dawson's backcountry skiing information & opinion website. Lou's passion for the past 50 years has been alpinism, climbing, mountaineering and skiing -- along with all manner of outdoor recreation. He has authored numerous books and articles about ski touring and is well known as the first person to ski down all 54 of Colorado's 14,000-foot peaks, otherwise known as the Fourteeners! Books and free ski touring news and information here.

    All material on this website is copyrighted, the name WildSnow is trademarked, permission required for reproduction (electronic or otherwise) and display on other websites. PLEASE SEE OUR COPYRIGHT and TRADEMARK INFORMATION.

    We include "affiliate sales" links with most of our blog posts. This means we receive a percentage of a sale if you click over from our site (at no cost to you). None of our affiliate commission links are direct relationships with specific gear companies or shopping carts, instead we remain removed by using a third party who manages all our affiliate sales and relationships. We also sell display "banner" advertising, in this case our relationships are closer to the companies who advertise, but our display advertising income is carefully separated financially and editorially from our blog content, over which we always maintain 100% editorial control -- we make this clear during every advertising deal we work out. Please also notice we do the occasional "sponsored" post, these are under similar financial arrangements as our banner advertising, only the banner or other type of reference to a company are included in the blog post, simply to show they provided financial support to WildSnow.com and provide them with advertising in return. Unlike most other "sponsored content" you find on the internet, our sponsored posts are entirely under our editorial control and created by WildSnow specific writers.See our full disclosures here.

    Backcountry skiing is dangerous. You may be killed or severely injured if you do any form of ski mountaineering, skimo randonnee and randonnée skiing. The information and news on this website is intended only as general information. Due to human error and passing time, the information, text and images contained within this website may be inaccurate, false, or out-of-date. By using, reading or viewing the information provided on this website, you agree to absolve the owners of Wild Snow as well as content contributors of any liability for injuries or losses incurred while using such information. Furthermore, you agree to use any of this website's information, maps, photos, or binding mounting instructions templates at your own risk, and waive Wild Snow owners and contributors of liability for use of said items for ski touring or any other use.

    Switch To Mobile Version