Bench Racing the Salomon Atomic SHIFT Ski Binding

Post by blogger | August 10, 2018      
The object at hand. Game changer or ankle weight?

The object at hand. Game changer or ankle weight? Depends on your needs. Either way, bow before mechanical engineering excellence. (Click images to enlarge.)

Shop for Salomon SHIFT at Cripple Creek. (Available September)

While the Salomon Atomic SHIFT is a bit out of the WildSnow gamut for true ski touring bindings, it is so interesting I can not resist dissecting. We’ll have plenty of extended field tests as well, as we can’t let the other panting gear bloggers take it all! If you’ve been living inside a glacier, here is the elevator spiel:

An alpine binding TUV certified to DIN/ISO standard, with a clever hidden set of tech pins that when enabled allow you to ski tour, provided you have a boot with tech fittings as well as sole configuration that’s appropriate for using the Shift in alpine mode. Could be game changing for skiers who truly need a full alpine performance setup during their tours. For others it’s a yawner.

I’ve been privy to various efforts to develop this sort of binding. Doing so is not easy. You get into issues of how to provide heel lift in touring mode, how to lock the brake, how to stow the tech pins, weight; on and on. Follow along as we go through the SHIFT MNC.

While you don’t use the boot’s tech fittings for downhill skiing, as basis for comparison to other bindings (see our ramp and stack height chart), here are the numbers: While in alpine mode, the boot’s tech toe fittings are 37 mm above the ski, while imaginary tech pins are 46 mm above ski. (Bear in mind these measurements would vary with sole thickness, unlike true tech bindings that use the fittings to hold the boot in alpine mode.) Significant stack height (not the most we’ve seen, but up there at the top end of the spectrum), more or less zero ramp. Ramp (as I calculate) is exactly the same as a Salomon MTN tech touring binding.

Weight. This guy is light for what it is what am, though heavy for a touring binding: Heel 440 grams, Toe 444 grams, total 884 grams – 31 ounces (with screws). Many of you have spent years using bindings such as G3 ION and Dynafit Radical as hybrid resort/touring bindings — or more recently, the amazing Tecton. In that case you’re rocking around 600 grams per binding, around 300 grams less than SHIFT. That’s a noticeable difference that _will_ slow you down and make touring less comfortable. In that regard SHIFT is clearly not the holy grail (which would be a 550 gram binding that did the same thing), but it is a super cool and definitely useful tool for numerous applications. I’m thinking everything from the guy who’s mission in life is to use only one binding, all the way to stunt skiers who need alpine gear they can tour if the heli runs out of fuel or their producer runs out of cash.

No reason for me to duplicate content in terms of the ubiquitous how-to-use vid. Below is Atomic’s.

Going from downhill mode to touring.

Going from downhill mode to touring. Just push the blue block of plastic, toe wings open up and expose the tech pins for your walking pleasure.

Push down on the touring lock lever to open the toe pins farther, allowing insertion of your boot.

Push down on the touring lock lever to open the toe pins farther, allowing insertion of your boot.

Boot going in for the landing.

Boot going in for the landing.

Ready to tour (lock by pulling up on the blue lever..

Ready to tour (as with most tech bindings, lock by pulling up the blue lever at the front, otherwise you’ll walk out of the binding).

Due to the toe pins locating your boot farther forward, binding heel is out of the way.

Due to the toe pins locating your boot farther forward, binding heel is out of the way.

You flip up the brake lock _before_ entering the binding.

You flip up the brake lock _before_ entering the binding. You can either lock the brake by hand, or step down on it with your boot.

Heel lifter flips up, only one lift height option (other than boot heel flat)

Heel lifter flips up, only one lift height option (other than boot heel flat)

Lifter at the ready, brakes locked up.

Lifter at the ready, brakes locked up.

You've climbed, now for the sweet descent on a full alpine binding.

You’ve climbed, now for the sweet descent on a full alpine binding. Brake easily unlocks when you gently press on the arms. I’m wondering if it unlocks too easily. Consumer testing commence.

Begin by squeezing the toe wings together, which lifts the blue plastic tab you'll need to get your fingers under.

Begin conversion to downhill mode by squeezing the toe wings together, which lifts the blue plastic tab you’ll need to get your fingers under.

Squeeze wings together, which lifts the blue plastic block so you can get your fingers under it.

The “wing squeeze, oh so fine.”

Snap up the blue plastic block, doing final stowage of tech pins and converting the toe to a normal "toe wing" alpine binding.

Snap up the blue plastic block, doing final stowage of tech pins and converting the toe to a normal “toe wing” alpine binding. Next simply enter the binding as you would any conventional alpine binding: to in, then stomp down heel.

Clearly the mounting screw holes need to be accurately located.

Clearly the mounting screw holes need to be accurately located.

Boot length adjustment is fine tuned by lining the shiny metal up with the black arrows.

Boot length adjustment is fine tuned by lining the shiny metal up with the black arrows (click to enlarge, more obvious that way). Yes Virginia, this is a forward pressure setting! Finally, you can call the boot length adjustment FORWARD PRESSURE without getting scolded by me!

Nifty AFD height adjust for different boot soles.

Nifty AFD height adjust for different boot soles cranks up and down with pozi or flat blade screwdriver. Crampon hook is visible, appears to accept “Dynafit” standard spikes but in reality will need something specific to work around the large AFD.

Salomon uses the term MNC (multi norm compatible) to indicate the SHIFT functions with any DIN certified ski boot, touring or alpine. Further, it’s obvious the binding conforms to alpine DIN/ISO standards. We’re not clear if it’s also certified to the touring binding standard. The latter is not a concern. If it works for walking uphill, the overlap of the alpine standard with the touring standard takes care of verifying downhill performance (at least to the extent the standards do so, i.e., consumer testing is essential).

If you need and alpine binding that tours, by all means! Otherwise, lighter options are better choices. Most importantly, SHIFT will help move the ski industry away from attempting to provide brutal alpine skiing performance from the tech pin system, which was never intended to accommodate the forces produced by large boots, big skis, and high speeds.

Salomon mini site, best viewed on 110-inch Ultra HDTV.


Please Enjoy A Few Suggested WildSnow Posts


102 Responses to “Bench Racing the Salomon Atomic SHIFT Ski Binding”

  1. Travis August 10th, 2018 10:39 am

    Thanks for the coverage, Lou! It’s blazing hot in WA, and seeing this just added more fuel to my desire for winter! Do you really think this will get other companies to stop chasing the idea of a full-on touring binding with alpine release values? If so, than this binding is a game changer.

  2. Lou Dawson 2 August 10th, 2018 11:56 am

    Hi Travis, that’s a good way of looking at this in terms of it being a game changer; changing the game of binding design… Indeed, the pursuit of making a tech binding that’s an alpine binding has been somewhat silly (witness Kingpin), though some of the results are pretty amazing, such as Tecton. But if they can divorce the touring function from the downhill, and keep making it lighter, that’ll be exactly what thousands of people want. However, important to note that for core ski touring, a super-light tech binding and non-DIN boot will for the foreseeable future be the desired kit.

    As they say “interesting times.”


  3. Tom August 12th, 2018 8:29 pm

    Off topic (comments on the appropriate thread seem closed)
    I’ve just got a new pair of boots with a BSL of 12mm longer than my old Vulcans. This puts my boot centre 7mm behind the recommended point on my 176cm BMT 109s (it was previously right on centre with the Vulcans, bindings are Tectons)
    This seems to have made quite a difference to how they ski, & I’m considering remounting the toe 10mm forward. The ski seems harder to drive through the end of a turn and to pivot quickly, especially tighter turns on steeper terrain. I only weigh 140lb ish, 5’9″
    I loved the way the BMT skied at boot centre- Am I imagining the difference, or is it worth a remount?I’d rather not drill more holes in them if possible given the BMT mounting issues. I’ve had 4 hard snow days since the boot change, so it’s hard to compare, as the almost all the 12 days prior (NZ season) were in powder
    I really liked the versatility of the BMTs- the ability to pivot or carve a turn equally easily, & chuck them sideways if needed, as well as the stability at speed.
    Thoughts ?

  4. Lou Dawson 2 August 13th, 2018 6:02 am

    Tom, in my opinion, due to the BMT having “full” rocker your boot position is indeed best centered, I’d drill new holes. This especially if you experienced the “boot center” position being so good. That said, 7 mm is not much of a change (anything less than a centimeter is often acceptable), check the internal ramp angle and cuff angle of the new and old boots (with the boot in the binding), if those ergonomics are different, better ski your setup more before you drill, as the issue could simply be that of getting used to new angles. But I suspect you should get your foot into the same position on the ski.

  5. wtofd August 13th, 2018 6:59 am

    “Most importantly, SHIFT will help move the ski industry away from attempting to provide brutal alpine skiing performance from the tech pin system, which was never intended to accommodate the forces produced by large boots, big skis, and high speeds.”

    “However, important to note that for core ski touring, a super-light tech binding and non-DIN boot will for the foreseeable future be the desired kit.”

    Lou, could you talk more about matching boots, skis and bindings? I’ve been reading WS for years, so this isn’t a new concept; but I wonder if a post isn’t in order that helps unpack ideas around pairing your gear to allow for maximum up and downhill performance while retaining safety. IOW, which systems will complement each other, and provide (presumably through the boots) feedback to slow down.

    I’m looking at the Maestrale’s as my quiver of one boot because I think/hope they’ll perform acceptably on faster, wide open terrain. If they will, what should I be looking at for bindings and skis? Certainly a good shop can help, but am interested in your thoughts on this. Thanks.

  6. Lou Dawson 2 August 13th, 2018 7:47 am

    Hi Wtofd, that’s a good idea. Important to note that quite a bit of this is psychology and marketing. Reality is that some tech bindings sold as “freeride,” really are not much different than those sold as “touring.” As you know from being a regular reader, the first step is to differentiate between the “classic” tech bindings, meaning those with heel pins, and the hybrids, meaning those with a somewhat “alpine like” heel. The hybrids (so long as they don’t break) tend to be the “quiver of one” binding, e.g., Tecton, SHIFT, Trab. But yeah, perhaps a blog post. Lou

  7. Andrew Garcia August 13th, 2018 4:17 pm


    You know much more about this stuff than me, but I find the price point for the SHIFT binding to be pretty exciting, if only because it may put some pressure on the Tecton pricing.

    Any thoughts?

  8. Kevin Broderick August 15th, 2018 9:25 am

    Any chance you’ve got any Beast horseshoe-equipped boots to try fitting to the Shift, or did you notice any evidence of incompatibility? I’ve seen a rumor that the Shift won’t allow for a boot with the horseshoe installed, but I haven’t seen any actual evidence either way.

  9. john dough August 16th, 2018 10:43 am

    So who will be the first to offer an alpine style boot, with walk mode, and just a toe pin insert but regular heel? Seems like that could marketable? Despite many people’s opinions, this still seems to be the direction companies are headed.

  10. Dabe August 16th, 2018 10:57 am

    John, I’m curious if you couldn’t simply drive Phillips screws in on either side of the toe lug and then strip the heads since shift’s pins don’t really need to release? Other than the potential for geometry problems, steel threads in plastic issues, or maybe avalanche hazard if they truly would not release. Also, CAST offeres a toe insert installing service I believe?

  11. Lou Dawson 2 August 16th, 2018 12:38 pm

    Dabe, in concept that could be done, but the forces exerted on the toe fittings during touring are immense and will rip out just about anything.

    CAST has method that looks good.

    Barthel, before Dynafit began molding the fitting into the boots, inserted a steel bar in a transverse hole bored through the boot toe from one side to the other. That would probably be the DIY method to try.


  12. Greg Louie August 16th, 2018 2:50 pm

    Lou, regular tech crampons (Dynafit, B&D, Kingpin) won’t work as the wide AFD prevents them from lowering and you can’t simply cut away some of the aluminum as the mounting bracket is much wider – Amer says they have a Shift crampon on the way soon, though I have yet to see one (or even a photo).

  13. Lou Dawson 2 August 16th, 2018 2:55 pm

    Hi Greg, I thought I mentioned that, remember writing it! I probably forgot to save the edit. In any case, thanks, I’ll add it in.

    ……. actually was indeed in there, so I edited a bit to be clear.


  14. Ted August 17th, 2018 7:28 am

    “John, I’m curious if you couldn’t simply drive Phillips screws in on either side of the toe lug and then strip the heads since shift’s pins don’t really need to release?”

    Pretty sure Cast started with something similar to this. Maybe ask them why they moved on.

  15. Seb September 1st, 2018 9:12 am

    Hey Lou,
    I was thinking about getting the SHIFT to use on two pairs of skis with binding inserts. Since the heel has a “base plate” you could actually get a spare base plate to easily swap the heel unit between two pairs of skis (as long as the brakes are easy to swap as well?). Now I see on your picture that it might be a little bit trickier with the toe-pieces. It seems like there is some kind of smaller “base plate” and then three more screws (?) – could you elaborate a little bit on the mounting process of the toe-piece?
    Should be possible to swap the toe pieces between skis with the help of binding inserts but not sure yet if it’s gonna be a thing you can do in the car park within a couple of minutes.

  16. Lou Dawson 2 September 1st, 2018 9:39 am

    Seb, if the rear plate and toe unit fittings are available, you could use inserts in just two holes! So yes, you could end up with a rig that’s parking lot swap-able. I found the install process to be a bit complex, but after doing it a few times that wouldn’t be a factor. So yeah, get all the ski-mounted fittings, stick them on a ski, and you’ve got a very swapable rig. Question is, will just the fittings be available? Lou

  17. Seb September 1st, 2018 1:02 pm

    Thanks for the quick answer. I don’t think they will be selling the ski-mounted fittings, but I guess with contacts to core shops and/or people at the company it should be possible to get extra parts.
    So dismounting the brakes from the heel-piece and swapping them for larger brakes is also straightforward? And what exactly is the purpose of the center screw of the toe-piece? Is it part of the ski-mounted fittings for the toe-piece?

  18. Lou Dawson 2 September 1st, 2018 1:21 pm

    That center screw and fitting is typical of Salomon alpine bindings, the toe unit slots into it. Check with a full-service dealer about parts. I don’t recall the brakes being any problem. The entire configuration is nicely engineered. Lou

  19. Ryan Anderson October 15th, 2018 2:24 pm

    Do you believe that the binding brakes will be interchange to different sizes? I cannot find anything online if extra brakes could be procured to transfer the bindings across two skis. From
    The picture you posted looks like the brakes stay with the heel, is that true or do they look to be removable?

  20. Chris Mills October 21st, 2018 9:52 am

    I’ve read a lot about how this binding works downhill. What about uphill? Does it tour as well as others?

  21. Vlad bogdan October 21st, 2018 2:11 pm

    Hi there. I have one importsnt question for you guys.
    I planed to order the binding from a store in europe. Begor buying i asked a question to the store, if the binding is compatible with la sportiva syncro boots that i own
    They said no, because of the agresiv rockerd profile of the boot sole. It is strange because la sporriva is iso 9523 certified and salomon says shift will accept any certified ski boot… Where do you think is the problem, should i go on and order? Thanks in advance! Bogdan Vlad

  22. Dabe October 21st, 2018 2:55 pm


    I don’t have shifts, but I do have Sideral 2.0 and Spectre 2.0 and several pairs of Salomon/Atomic Warden MNC and they are at their limit of toe adjustability to handle the Sportivas.

    My guess is the issue is the AFD adjustment range. You could almost certainly remove sole rubber to ensure they release properly, though that kind of sucks.

  23. Lou Dawson 2 October 21st, 2018 2:56 pm

    If a shop said no I’d tend to believe them… Sorry I don’t have any Synchro here at the moment, but I tested with Spectre and yes the toe of the boot is slightly too high when placed in the binding, in alpine mode, causing too much pressure on the AFD. This could be easily correct by removing material from the boot sole. I used the paper test (sheet of paper between boot and AFD, attempt to pull out).

    (Revision, December 7, my testing indicates the Sportiva toe fittings ride under the Shift toe rollers in such a way as to possibly be incompatible. In my opinion, they are indeed incompatible.)


  24. Lou Dawson 2 October 21st, 2018 2:58 pm

    Thanks for the help Dabe.

  25. Vald Bogdan October 21st, 2018 10:56 pm

    Thanks guys. Yes, Spectre and Syncro have same sole so automatically same problem. I will order them and then correct it by removing some ruber…

    One last question. Do you thing an 110mm break will clear an 115 ski. im not sure on witch skis to mount them and if I order 110m i have the options to move them on 2 pair if skis if i decide.

    Thanks a lot!

  26. Collin November 19th, 2018 8:05 pm

    Does anyone know if these are verified as compatible with boots with Dynafit Quick-Step-In inserts, like my Scarpa Maestrale RS? I see in the pictures above the binding definitely is in contact with the quick-step inserts, but without actual testing I have no idea if this is a problem. I figured this was a non-issue but when I contacted Salmon I got a concerning e-mail that they “think they are too wide”. This is an incredibly poor response in my opinion. Either the bindings are tested with these inserts and they meet spec, or they don’t. I have also contacted Scarpa because they list the Maestrale as ISO 9523 compliant, but I am not clear if that spec refers only to the sole of the boot or also sets specs for the toe welt. Taken at face-value everything should be fine as the Maestrale’s are listed as ISO 9523 compliant and Salomon says ISO 9523 boots work perfectly with the Shift. So then why is Salomon giving me vague answers? Their full text response is below:

    “Hello Collin,

    All the boots with touring soles that do not follow a norm i.e they are not certified soles, will not work with the Shift bindings.

    Basically, the Shift bindings will not work with boots that are only compatible with low-tech bindings such as Salomon X-ALP range of boots, dynafit, Atomic Backland, etc.

    To clarify, the Shift bindings will ONLY work with boots that have certified soles and tech inserts. Therefore the boots that you use with these bindings will have to be either ISO 5355 compliant, ISO 9523 touring compliant or ski boots equipped with “WTR technology” pads or with “GRIPWALK” pads.

    For this reason, you will need to contact your boot manufacturer for an exact answer. We can see that your Scarpas are ISO 9523 but we are not sure if the Dynafit Quick-fit Scarpas follow this norm too. We think they may be too wide.

    I would contact Scarpa for this reason.”

  27. Collin November 20th, 2018 8:48 pm

    Well I called Scarpa and they said the boots are ISO9523 compliant and are compatible with the Shift binding. I also called Evo in Denver and they said they would mount the Shifts to the Maestrales, no problem. So I guess that answers that. The Salomon reply is still a little fishy and Scarpa only answered once I called them as opposed to putting anything in writing, so I suspect the lawyers might be watching some of this closely…

  28. Steve Slipp November 23rd, 2018 1:26 am


    Let’s talk about rockered vs flat soled boots and ramp angle.

    The trouble I’m worried about is all the lightest stiff boots have rocker (Vulcan, atomic carbon backland, etc). There aren’t all that many sub 1300g stiff boots with flat soles and large range walk of motion.

    Currently I ski a pettitor 120, on old din Solomon’s with flat boots in resort.

    I have the same ski mounted with kingpins that I ride wearing Vulcan’s, for backcountry. I haven’t skied a powder touring set up that feels better.

    I’ve skied dukes, dynafits, plums, and played with shims for years. I have a lighter set ups for big missions and traverses but I spend 80% of the year chasing pow on the kingpins and vulcans.

    If I were to move to the shift I’m worrie how my vulcans are going to feel. Are people going to enjoy this binding more with lighter flat soles boots like 2018 zero pro or the 2019 Hawk ultra Xdt 130? If I understand your ramp angle chart my Vulcan toes will be closer to 1cm lower than I’m used to and like?

    Should I put a pair of carbon backland upper cuffs on the hawk ultra lowers? (Why didn’t atomic release this with the shift; it seems we have a new great option for bindings but no boots to match). Any recommendations for flat, light, walkable boots?

  29. BobKedski November 26th, 2018 9:27 am

    Spectre are compatible with Shift .

  30. Lou Dawson 2 November 26th, 2018 9:41 am

    Thanks Bob. Lou

  31. Gavin November 26th, 2018 7:42 pm

    Hey Collin, let me know if the Maestral RS boots fit the SHIFT bindings when you get them. I’m looking to try to get a pair of the SHIFTS and am wondering the same as it seems that there are some issues with comparability with the SHIFT bindings overall. Thanks!

  32. Pez November 27th, 2018 8:21 am

    Hi all I bought atomic shift binding and planning to mount them on salomon mtn 95 for light touring. I have spectre 2.0 and asked lasportiva:Hi I have spectre 2.0 I want to find out if it’s compatible with Atomic/Salomon Shift binding? Can you confirm? cheers Pez
    Their answer:
    “thank you for contacting us.

    We would like to inform you that since we are not technical equipment and hardware producers, we are not able to suggest specific brands and products to use with La Sportiva boots: hardware and technical equipment are constantly evolving and improving so we suggest you to ask for information to your local dealer.
    If you are not going to purchase your crampons and technical equipment by an outdoor shop with the proper help from the shop’ staff, we suggest you to buy crampons and technical equipment only after having tried and possibly tested it.

    We remain at your disposal for futher information”

    Interesting isn’t it?

    I also contacted French ski equipment retailer and posted on ski forum, all people in the know confirmed spectre is compatible with shift. Cheers pez

  33. Jacob December 3rd, 2018 5:15 am

    Hey Lou,
    Looks like you’re using the alpine (mtn piste) sole in the heel of that freedom sl.
    Any particular reason? Lower ramp vs the at sole?
    Just curious
    Thanks, nice write up.

  34. David December 3rd, 2018 8:45 am

    I’ve got a pair of Spectre 2.0s and just mounted up some Shifts. I think they’ll work OK, but the gap between the AFD and the sole is a little less than Salmon calls for, with the AFD maxed out. I’m measuring ~0.28mm, spec calls for 0.5. Boots are pretty new, so there’s minimal wear on the soles.

    I’d guess (though can’t confirm) that the bigger the boots are the better clearance would be, since the rocker line for the sole probably moves back? Mine are 27.5s.

  35. Pez December 3rd, 2018 8:52 am

    @David -thanks for that!
    Got the same setup/sizing but no shifts mounted yet.kinda shit that there is a level of uncertainty and noone takes responsibility. I need those shifts and if worst come to worst I will buy different boots. FU Lasportiva!

  36. David December 5th, 2018 11:43 am

    Worst case you could just sand the tread on the boot down a hair. It would be lame to have to do so, but since the only potential issue is AFD clearance, it doesn’t seem like the end of the world.

    Interestingly, Wardens easily go low enough to clear the Spectre sole. Seems like the Shift has less AFD travel.

  37. Dabe December 5th, 2018 1:32 pm


    Sportiva’s molds exisited long before the SHIFT and several people here including me have commented on Salomon MNC bindings/Sportiva sole rocker. No need to curse the Italians on this one. The boots will work with minimal modding and unless you do a ton of scrambling/ sledding you won’t miss the rubber.

  38. Lou Dawson 2 December 5th, 2018 3:17 pm

    Pez, there will always be uncertainty about boot binding compatibility. Too many standards, lack of standards, differences with worn or fresh soles, and on and on. As has always been the case, the ultimate take is obtained by physically adjusting a binding for a given boot, then running the setup through a reasonable amount of bench testing. To be fair, sure, it’s nice to know what’s _probably_ going to work, but that’s just _probably._ Lou

  39. Pez December 5th, 2018 3:34 pm

    Hi guys! You are all right and I agree. Just frustrated that there is sometimes lack of clear information/support from companies we pay salary to! Stay safe on the hills wherever you are and thanks for all your replies! Pez

  40. Lou Dawson 2 December 5th, 2018 4:17 pm

    I totally agree. The ski touring industry is not known for being particularly adept at promulgating information. But the same is true in many other spaces. It’s not always the company’s fault. Legal issues intrude, and budgets, and the challenge of finding good PR and marketing folks who understand the power of clear information. Lou

  41. Greg Louie December 6th, 2018 10:07 am

    @Collin: Not sure who is answering your questions at Salomon, Scarpa or evo Denver, but the official Amer Sports position at present is that QuickStep inserts protrude beyond the sole perimeter of the boot and do not meet the ISO 9523 spec. As such they will not be indemnified for MNC bindings including the Shift, Warden 13 an Warden 11 MNC.

    Talks are apparently underway between the two companies and I hear Scarpa will revert to the original Dynafit toe inserts for 2020.

  42. Collin December 6th, 2018 10:02 pm

    @Greg Thanks for the info; that does seem to be the latest information as I am now learning. I am now leaning towards getting Tectons to replace my Dynafit Radicals. They don’t have quite the elasticity as Shifts but their weight and ability to release in climbing mode should make them better for touring. They also been in the wild now for a year. I wonder which binding releases more consistently with a rockered sole boot? I would think Tectons are rather independent of the sole whereas the Shifts might have issues as Jeff Campbell’s presentation demonstrated with certain bindings. It’s great both companies are innovating but I do think Salomon could be a little more forthcoming with information.

  43. Pez December 7th, 2018 5:37 am

    I am thinking of returning the shifts due to lack of clarity Re rockered sole boots (spectre) and buying kingpins which are spectre compatible. I am tired of this situation.

  44. Lou Dawson 2 December 7th, 2018 7:04 am

    Pez, there are all sorts of conflicting takes circulating, regarding Shift boot/binding compatibility. Bottom line, first pick a boot that appears to conform to DIN/ISO 5355 (alpine boots) or 9523 (ski touring boots). The main distinguishing feature in “norm” boots is that they have a duckbill toe of a certain dimension. The 9523 is described here.

    Next, stick the boot in the binding and attempt to adjust, then do hand check for release-retention, and paper test for AFD (pedal) clearance.

    For example, with all the confusion about the Dynafit Quickstep fittings, rather than listening to all the blather I simply grabbed a pair of Maestrale, put them in my Shift bindings, and check function. They work fine. The raised portion of the Quickstep fitting is located outside and away from the Shift binding toe wing roller, and during release or elasticity it never touches, on either left or right. (See in photo above.) As my cautious self, I’d ski them anytime, anywhere.

    I’ll do the same evaluation with Master Step fittings today, and report back.

    Likewise, if a boot has too much rocker it’ll probably be a minimal amount, easily fixed by removing a few millimeters of sole material over the AFD.

    BUT, in the case specifically for Sportiva, in my opinion, their multi-compatible tech fittings at the toe are _not_ compatible with Shift as the protruding part of the fitting rides against the Shift binding toe wing rollers.

    Another thing regarding the toe fittings. If you are using your boots in Shift only, I’m certain you could simply grind the toe tech fittings smooth and they’d still work fine in the Shift, though you wouldn’t want to use in bindings where the safety release depended on the fittings (though perhaps they actually would work, I’ll experiment).

    I’ve been working on a blog post about all this, but production is going slow due to, yeah, the confusing and conflicting infos coming from the players.


  45. Pez December 7th, 2018 7:09 am

    @LOU The amount of knowledge and expertise is amazing on your site both from you and other readers! Cannot thank you enough! Pez

  46. Lou Dawson 2 December 7th, 2018 8:05 am

    Thanks Pez! And everyone, let us not forget the Tecton. The Fritschi offering is an option, and has a ton of side elasticity at the toe as well as vert at the heel. Shift might have slightly more, but for most people the difference is meaningless. Plus, the way Tecton utilizes the tech fittings for both up and down modes is genius. All “toe wing” alpine bindings, including Shift, have potential problems when boot toes are worn and-or dirty. Tecton eliminates much of that concern. Lou

  47. Collin December 7th, 2018 8:41 am

    @Lou, thanks for the updates and testing the Maestrale fit. My biggest takeaway from your site has been that touring bindings of any type are not highly refined idiot proof products; users should really investigate them, bench test them, and see where potential problems arise. Its not so easy to make a thing that going up lets you move and going down locks you in. There will always be some compromises. Looking forward to the latest blog post!

  48. Vald Bogdan December 7th, 2018 9:40 am

    “BUT, in the case specifically for Sportiva, in my opinion, their multi-compatible tech fittings at the toe are _not_ compatible with Shift as the protruding part of the fitting rides against the Shift binding toe wing rollers.”

    Man, thats a bummer! I just got mine this week and they looked pretty ok. After reading this i check the binding and yes, that toe tech fitting its the fist thing touching the rollers… 🙁 That looks like hard metal, i tried to remove some with a metal saw but does not work…
    Any sugestion? havent had the chance to ride the setup yet but its a freeride setup, its not meant to go easy, and now i dont know how safe it is… :(.
    Any suggestions will help.

  49. Lou Dawson 2 December 7th, 2018 9:54 am

    Bench test for safety and watch for wear on the rollers. The way to smooth off the insert is a disk grinder, water cooled, probably with a sanding disk. Danger is that the modified fittings won’t hold while in touring mode. Like I said, I’ll try this eventually but not today. Lou

  50. Lou Dawson 2 December 7th, 2018 10:00 am

    Just evaluated Dynafit Beast boot with Master Step, due to shorter boot toe lip, the fittings are directly under the rollers, with raised area of the fitting under the roller. I’m not comfortable with this setup. Interestingly, the papers that come with the boot say it is “TUV certified boot-binding system in combination with Dynafit” Radical ST and Beast bindings. That means they paid TUV to “certify” to their own standard. Which is good, but does not mean the boot is certified to any DIN/ISO norm. It also means Dynafit is implying you only get “certified” performance if you use Dynafit bindings. This extrapolates to my take, that the Beast boot is _not_ compatible with Shift. Clear as mud? If not, blame the ski industry (smile). Lou

  51. Lou Dawson 2 December 7th, 2018 10:05 am

    It’s interesting to me that all you guys are trying to force touring boots to work in a binding that’s really just a “semi” touring binding. There are plenty of boot options for you, just look for boots such as Lange XT Free and Tecnica Cochise. Most importantly, you want a boot with the old style tech fittings, basic, smooth, no fancy notches or ribs. Or, like I wrote, it appears some of the boots with Quickstep (not Master Step) will work, such as the Scarpa Maestrale I evaluated. Lou

  52. Vald Bogdan December 7th, 2018 10:14 am

    Lou, you’re gold! the sand paper does the job. I did a bit by hand and after 5 min looks like it works.

    I dont think that the fittings will not hold. I also have a la sportiva spectre first version and it did not have those wings and they worked ok.
    This is just some silly R&D from La sportiva. Looks like they are not considering these boots to be used with alpine bindings… my guess.

    I think ill smooth the wings off to be sure the boot fits correctly in the binding :).

    Thanks again and cant wait for you”re update on this!

  53. Vald Bogdan December 7th, 2018 10:17 am

    Another detail, i also have some markers baron and the toe piece of marker is way more pronounced and the boot looks like it stays better in there.
    What i want to say is that Shifts have a thinner toe piece with less edge hold 🙂

    Over and out! 🙂

  54. Lou Dawson 2 December 8th, 2018 7:59 am

    Much of the compatibility of the various Dynafit type fittings and the Shift binding have to do with the length of the boot toe “duckbill.” If the duckbill protrudes far enough, it prevents critical portions of the fittings from being under the small rollers on the Shift binding wings. Or, shorter, and the fittings end up farther under the rollers. Easy to evaluate on workbench. Lou

  55. Lou Dawson 2 December 8th, 2018 8:06 am

    BTW, just thinking outloud… Salomon apparently has already sold an enormous number of Shift bindings. One has to wonder how many of those are being happily used with boots that have Quick Step or Master Step…

    Also thinking… I’ve always been a fan of the original type Dynafit toe insert. Fun to see the poor disparaged little thing again become so desirable (smile). The boot companies that have to use it instead of Quick Step or Master Step, due to cost and restrictions of licensing, must be laughing, as now their boots are entirely compatible with Shift, while Dynafit’s boots have a big question mark.

    Man, this industry is a never ending soap opera!


  56. Lou Dawson 2 December 8th, 2018 8:26 am

    Hey Collin, regarding your comment: “My biggest takeaway from your site has been that touring bindings of any type are not highly refined idiot proof products…”

    Actually, alpine bindings are pretty funky as well. If you took the average ski slope full of skiers, grabbed say 50 binding sets and tested, you’d discover that a good percentage are either adjusted incorrectly, or don’t function properly due to boot wear, dirt, or icing.


  57. Lou Dawson 2 December 8th, 2018 8:47 am

    New post, specific to the G3 Zed stomp pad issue:

  58. Greg Louie December 8th, 2018 9:16 am

    “For example, with all the confusion about the Dynafit Quickstep fittings, rather than listening to all the blather I simply grabbed a pair of Maestrale, put them in my Shift bindings, and check function. They work fine.”

    Lou, I came t the same conclusion this summer playing around with a Maestale RS in a Shift, but I have several emails from people in the Salomon NA organizaton saying the combination is a “no go.”

    As we all know, the luxury of having a binding manufacturer back up a shop in an injury lawsuit and being able to release adequately in 98 out of 100 falls do not necessarily go hand in hand, but for people who depend on a shop to mount and adjust their bindings it’s a factor that needs to be considered.

  59. Greg Louie December 8th, 2018 9:37 am

    PS I doubt that Master Step compatibility is much of an issue – is there any Master Step equipped boot that actually has an ISO 9523 spec toe lug?

  60. Pez December 8th, 2018 10:14 am

    Ok, just checked inserts on my wife’s atomic backland carbon and they don’t protrude like spectre ones, they are flush. Haven’t checked if they are ok with shift because haven’t mounted the bindings yet!

  61. Lou Dawson 2 December 8th, 2018 10:18 am

    Greg, good point about if any 9523 boots actually have the Master Step inserts. Let me know if you see any at Evo, I’ll check my usual sources of info. Thanks, Lou

  62. Lou Dawson 2 December 8th, 2018 10:24 am

    Pez, yeah, some of the inserts are set into the boot toe a bit, and so forth. As most ski touring boots are _not_ specifically built to any ISO standard, you’ll find all sorts of toe shapes when you start looking at the details. The Backland, I recall, has a shorter toe than 9523 so it would not be compatible with Shift.

    Tecton, Tecton, long live the Tecton. Something made me want to say that (smile).


  63. Lou Dawson 2 December 8th, 2018 10:34 am

    Greg, you are exactly correct about the indemnification issue. Shops need to know the facts, and what is _approved_. Presently, from what I see there are two very different stories out there, both being attributed to Salomon. This is an aspersion on Salomon and Atomic’s systems of promulgating information. It appears they need to get their voices aligned, internally and without. Or, perhaps I’m just misunderstanding things. Am in the process of getting it sorted out. Lou

  64. Michael C. December 8th, 2018 5:16 pm

    First broken Shifts reported on TGR, heels to blame. “Don’t use 1st year tech bindings” seems to be impacting more than just the Zed.

  65. Greg Louie December 9th, 2018 11:08 am

    Master Step inserts. Every boot we carry with them has either no toe lug or a shortened sole, to my knowledge.

  66. Ray Blum December 9th, 2018 6:02 pm

    Anybody with experience with Scott Cosmos and Salomon Shift?

  67. J Griess December 14th, 2018 5:44 pm


    I ski the Shift with a pair of Scott Cosmos 2.

    I haven’t experienced any issues as far as binding/boot compatibility – they have released when I wanted them to, and haven’t when I haven’t wanted them to. The AFD adjusts fine to them.

    One thing I have noticed mounting and adjusting the Shifts has been the fact that there is a small black tab on the toepiece, that the front of the toe rests against. If the AFD plate is adjusted too low, the boot toe will actually sit below this tab, and the binding is NOT adjusted correctly. The top of the toe lug should sit up against the toe wings of the binding. I pointed this out to our rep, took a look at his bindings, which do not appear to have the tab (maybe pre-production?). Odd little thing to keep an eye on.

  68. Lou Dawson 2 December 15th, 2018 6:21 am

    Thanks Griess, appreciate folks helping each other here.

    I have some Cosmos here, and a Shift, but my Cosmos have a trimmed toe so I can’t test in Shift. Nonetheless I would add that the stock Cosmos is clearly an ISO 9523 boot and is thus is a boot specified by TUV in their certification of the Shift binding.

    MAINLY: Any boot/binding combination should be thoroughly tested by an experienced technician before actual use on snow. Otherwise, it is all theory; do you want a theory to protect your bones from exploding into fragments?

  69. Collin December 15th, 2018 9:01 am

    I received another response from Salomon regarding Scarpa boots. However, as Lou said a qualified person really needs to verify the boots fit in the binding properly. Here is the reply:

    The SHIFT MNC 13 binding answers to ISO 13992:2015, ISO 9462:2015 and ISO 11087:2016 standard requirements with the following ski boots:

    Ski boots for alpine skiing (DIN ISO 5355)
    Ski boots for alpine ski Touring (DIN ISO 9523)
    Touring ski boots with tech insert according to Dynafit specification for ski boot compatibility edition 25.09.2009
    As I had a lot of questions from the market concerning Scarpa boot, we discussed directly with Scarpa brand concerning the compliance of their ski touring boots with ISO 9523 standard and with Dynafit specification about tech inserts.

    Scarpa company confirmed us that these parameters are fully respected by following Scarpa boots:

    Freedom RS
    Freedom SL
    Freedom SL Woman
    Maestrale RS
    Gea RS

  70. Lou Dawson 2 December 15th, 2018 10:47 am

    Collin, I’ve been working on this issue. To clarify, the Shift has TUV certification to ISO norm 9523, with a note on the certificate indicating boots can have tech fittings conforming to “Dynafit specification for ski boots compability (sic) edition 25.09.2009” which is a voluntary specification provided by Dynafit, for their Quick Step fittings. Clearly, a boot with the old style tech fittings will also work in Shift, but there has been some question about how the Quick Step and Master Step fittings do. I bench tested, and while in my opinion the Quick Step indeed works fine, as indicated by the TUV cert, the Master Step does not. Note that Master Step is only provided on a few Dynafit brand boots, so not a big deal, but a bit ironic. More details forthcoming.

  71. Lou Dawson 2 December 15th, 2018 10:50 am

    P.S., I have a copy of “Dynafit specification for ski boots compability (sic) edition 25.09.2009” to verify, as the name of the document doesn’t specify which of the three tech fitting variations are now in use. Lou

  72. warren December 21st, 2018 9:21 am

    Great article Lou, I am interested in this binding for my daily driver, I have a full touring set up but want something for a resort ski that can get into the slack country. My resort ski is currently a Volkl 100eight mounted with a Marker Griffon, so this would be a second mount. My question is, would there be a conflict with the drilling pattern? I would like to get the shift mounted in the same boot location, is the hole pattern going to allow enough space from the current holes? or will I have to push it forward or backward? Thanks in advance, Warren

  73. Lou Dawson 2 December 21st, 2018 11:05 am

    Warren, I’ll bet you’d be able to work with the existing holes, but I’m not sure. Lou

  74. AAG December 29th, 2018 8:38 pm

    Lou, I know I have mentioned before that I thought the Fritchi Tecton pricing was off given the Solomon Shift price point. I had an interesting conversation tonight with a significant east coast retailer of backcountry gear. Apparently they have sold out of all of their shift allocation and next year Solomon will be raising the price (~$50) as they believed they misspriced the product too low.

    Good for Solomon, not great for consumers. I would assume Solomon priced the product with a gross margin that covered their R&D and expected returns given eatimated demand. So, an increase in price just illustrates how inneficient the existing market is. Win for Frichti + Solomon.

  75. Steve January 7th, 2019 12:03 am

    I just did two back to back 7 day hut trips in BC with the shifts; for the love of god save your money.

    Not sure if my pair were particularly bad but everyone was having issues with them (4 people in our crew had them, not one pair worked well).

    We were skiing in really deep snow, in stormy conditions. (Presumably what these were designed for)

    1) brakes don’t stay down. They will stay down longer if you clean them throughly at every transition budget 5 extra minutes for gaffing while your friends wait. But eventually when your breaking trail they will pop down you’ll walk on them and bend them without knowing.

    2) while your walking, snow will get into the binding. When your ready to ski there’s no way to get your ski off as the snow will have jammed the toe peice. I had to forcefully torq my boots out on a couple of occasions; I had no other option. This cracked the plastic of my dynafit vulcans (good bye $1000 shells). What if your caught in an avalanche while the toes is jammed? (You’re f*#*#*d)

    3) others were having issues with the toes holding onto their boots when walking and loosing skis left right and ceneter. What if this happens in a no fall zone? (You’re f*#*#*d)

    This is a shit design, backed by marketing dollars and pro athletes that might have legs of steel but are spineless for standing behind such a dangerous product.

    This is only going to end in a mass recall; save your money.

  76. Lou Dawson 2 January 7th, 2019 5:40 am

    Hi Steve, I’ve been waiting for the consumer testing to commence, thanks for your take! Indeed, I’ve wondered how the Shift will be for “real” touring. The weight alone is not encouraging. Your comment begs the question, why do you guys feel you need that binding instead of something like a G3 ION ? Lou

  77. Steve January 7th, 2019 2:14 pm

    I have lightweight tech set ups for longer / higher mileage days. But when I’m just shredding pow, and skiing more committing terrain, with short approaches, I’m willing to pay a weight penalty for knee safety and the confidence inspiring feeling of being more solidly connected to the ski.
    I was only given one set of knees…

    The kingpin 10 was DIN ceritifed and I felt more connected to the ski on it then any other pin binding I’ve tried. Before this season it was my binding of choice for this aforementioned purpose.

    I was disappointed the shift was even heavier than the kingpin but thought the safety of not having pin toes when skiing would be worth it. Downhill the shift skis great and so if it wern’t for the major issues with brakes popping and toe jamming I would have been satisfied with the product despite the weight penalty.

    Given my testing of the consumer version I think the binding has been miss marketed/ sold. It’s a great tool as a resort binding where you have the option of touring for a lap or two in the slackcountry. It might also preform well in dryer climates with less snow. But given my experience it’s not a great tool for long days of shredding pow laps the type of skiing glorified by many of the athletes that endorsed the product.

  78. PEZ January 7th, 2019 2:29 pm

    Kingpin went through more consumers than shift I am i inclined to buy kingpin and wait for shift 2.0 I wish I could have both @the current time but cannot justify two quivers.

  79. AAG January 7th, 2019 2:50 pm

    Steve, thank you for the update. It is the first negative review I have seen of the binding, it is also one of the few reviews I have seen where the author has spent 14 days using them.

  80. Tom January 8th, 2019 8:42 am

    Could somebody explain to me why the Salomon Shift is a safer binding than the Fritschi Vipec/Tecton? Both release at the toe…but as far as I know the Salomon has more travel?!? And: Is it fundamentally safer?

  81. Lou Dawson 2 January 8th, 2019 10:17 am

    Excellent marketing, nothing more. Lou

  82. Lou Dawson 2 January 8th, 2019 10:21 am

    Also, “releasing at the toe” does do a better job of protecting against lower leg fractures, but it does a worse job of protecting you from knee injury. In my opinion the main reason for “release at the toe” is that you can have solid heel hold, and the binding can be less prone to pre-release WHEN ADJUSTED TO CHART SETTINGS. Pretty much any binding can be rigged for zero pre release by cranking the release values way up, which is common with tech bindings, due to the side release at the heel. All of above depending on your style of skiing — lots of people ski tech bindings at normal settings with good success. Lou

  83. Lou Dawson 2 January 8th, 2019 10:22 am

    An interesting part of all this is the conflation of the Kingpin with bindings such as Shift and Tecton. Kingpin still releases to the side at the heel, it LOOKS significant, but isn’t much different than other tech bindings. Lou

  84. Tom January 8th, 2019 11:36 am

    Thanks!! I suppose there is no data concerning fractures/knee injuries with different type of bindings? And is this assumption correct: If I hit something with the front part of my ski…or the ski gets caught in the front somehow, a front release binding will release better/faster?

  85. Chris Mills January 8th, 2019 11:54 am

    So, I went ahead and purchased the Atomic shift. I only have 2 days on them, so I’m still forming opinions. As Steve indicates, I too had issues with the brakes going down. I thought they stayed on very well however. I didn’t have any issues changing to downhill either. I enjoyed the firm feel on the downhill.

    When walking, I felt like my boot had a nice strike when connecting to the lifter. On the G3’s Ion’s I feel like I’m hitting a slippery ball at times. I do prefer the extra height of the G3 Ion’s lifter when climbing steeper terrain.

    I think they ski really well, I don’t notice the weight difference that much. I’m going to play around with them, to try to figure out why I was having brake issues.

  86. Chris Mills January 8th, 2019 11:55 am

    I wanted to add, that I’m fairly heavy. 6’1, 220lbs. I love the mobility of the G3 Ion, but I’ve released to easy a few times. Perhaps, I need the DIN set to a more difficult release. The Shifts stayed on and I had no issue. They didn’t feel they were going to release at all. .

  87. Martin January 9th, 2019 3:07 pm

    Hey Lou,

    Can’t seem to find this in my searches online. How much adjustability in boot length do you have with this binding? Wanting to know as I am always between a 28.5/29 which between manufacturers I would think could be up to a 15-20mm difference. I see your photo of the forward pressure adjustment which would also accomodate different boot lengths. Just want to know if I should commit to a new pair of boots before picking these up and have them mounted based on the new boots instead of going with what I have now and then being stuck with not enough adjustment range. Thanks.

  88. Lou Dawson 2 January 9th, 2019 4:01 pm

    About 30 mm. As always, to be sure they fit a specific two pair of boots, best to mount with both boots available, and if necessary adjust fore/aft position of the heel. Best wishes. Lou

  89. Juergen January 28th, 2019 6:28 am

    I had 11 days on the shift, totally agree with Steve, had the same problems in similar conditions. It is a nice downhillbinding useable for short slackcountrylabs on fine weather days with little snow near the resort especially on groomers during a press or promoevent…..Do not believe the hype, in my opinion you can not use it reliably in a real touring wildsnowworld under challenging conditions.
    I also have a lighter set with dynafits for longer tours and have used before i got the shift the 2013 CAST system for short to medium tours, which is much more reliable and the transitions(hard to believe) way easier and faster.

  90. Lou Dawson 2 January 31st, 2019 7:18 am

    Shift 2019-2020 has a few improvements. Brake is more reliable and the blue lever on the toe is more ergonomic. Went over it at OR show yesterday. Lou

  91. Jim Jakobsen February 10th, 2019 5:41 pm

    I have Shifts mounted on Völkl Katana V-Werks with Atomic Hawx 130 Ultra XTD, and so far I had 3 tours and one trip to the local ski center, and I had no issues with the toe at all so far. Brake did release a couple of times over the three tours I’ve done. Keep them clean underneath and they seem to work just fine so far.

  92. Lou Dawson 2 February 10th, 2019 6:05 pm

    Thanks Jim. Lou

  93. Jim Jakobsen February 10th, 2019 6:26 pm

    I can bookmark the page and let you know after a season here in Lofoten in Northern Norway! Very mixed weather here normally, 50cm powder one day, rain the next week, then -10°C and no snow for a week. They will see mixed conditions for sure! Downhill they are a dream on the Katanas, which also are a dream to ride! If they work uphill, or a recall fixes the reported issues, I am positive this idea has a bright future when you want a proper binding downhill and don’t mind the extra 300-500 grams. Also the ski flexes freely under foot, without knowing newer AT bindings, my old Fritchi Diamir AT/frame bindings felt odd under foot to me, and others have said they kill the flex in the ski, by stiffening it too much.

  94. James March 11th, 2019 3:58 pm

    As a response to Steve’s post about the issues with the shift.

    (I’m not sponsored and have received anything from Salomon)

    I’ve got two weeks of touring in and can note two issues he mentioned.

    1- Brake popping out. Happens irregularly, normally I’ve stepped on my own ski/brake. But this could be an issue if one doesn’t realize it and bends or breaks them. This occurred when I first started using them. But haven’t had any issues since.
    2- Skinning Off cambre and unexpected toe release. Without a picture I can’t say his particular issue. But I had my learning curve. I wasn’t fully locking the toe piece out. Face palm. Takes quite a bit of force and if there is some snow or ice in the pin insert it can affect required force.

    I’ve never been unable to eject from the binding after skinning.

    They are first year tech. I’ve been warned. But I’ve had a good experience and my friends have as well.

    Week in Japan in deep glorious powder, and week touring in the Rockies in be bold start cold conditions.

    When skiing downhill.. Deadly. I’m 6’3″ and with a pack and gear pushing 210lbs. I’m not a pro or sending it by any means. But I ski fast and hard.

  95. John R March 14th, 2019 10:11 am

    Thanks Lou & others.

    Has anyone had issues adjusting the toe height for touring boots? I’ve got mine cranked all the way down, *I think*, and the AFD still doesn’t slide as easily as it should (ie., it slides either way, but doesn’t return to center of its own accord). Boot is a Scott Cosmos III. From the manual, it appears there should be .5mm like other alpine toes.

    I mention I *think the height is maxed. That is because It feels like the pozi screw is out of thread or running into a stop — it seems to be all the way to the left. I do note however that there is still a good bit of that white hashing visible (about like the pictures above) on the mechanism, which tends to suggest there is more adjustment available.

    Both my toe pieces are the same, though, so it doesn’t appear that I have a bad toe piece.


  96. Lou Dawson 2 March 14th, 2019 11:20 am

    John, in all seriousness, it sounds like in your situation the adjustment tool of choice is a belt sander. Lou

  97. John R March 14th, 2019 11:41 am

    Lou, thanks. I had (unfortunately) the same thought. I guess compliance w/ ISO standards is … loose.

  98. Lou Dawson 2 March 14th, 2019 12:00 pm

    The ISO standards usually have a fairly significant range, which I think is good, but requires retailers and consumers to be wary. Nothing that unfortunate about grinding a few mm of sole at ball of foot area, the toe under the fittings is what usually wears first from walking. Lou

  99. Wtofd March 14th, 2019 2:37 pm

    John, what does, “when skiing downhill? Deadly.” mean?

  100. Lou Dawson 2 March 14th, 2019 3:24 pm

    I assumed John meant he is a brute, but perhaps he is a local who seeks to discourage visitors (smile)?

  101. AAG March 14th, 2019 3:28 pm

    So, I broke down and purchased the Shifts from Aspen Expeditions in late February. I mounted them to DPS w99 Pure 3’s which had previously been mounted withw Tour F12 frame bindings. I have about a half dozen days on them.

    Initial impression is that I have experienced both the brake release issue (every single day I have used them) and the toe releasing while in walk mode. I think the former is a design issue with the switch moving too easily (I can now quickly pop it back down with grip of a ski pole not losing much time). The later I believe is user error and that I am not exerting enough pressure to get the toe piece into locked-out walk mode for fear of breaking it.

    Other observation, I find lining up the pins a bid more fidgety than G3 ion or Dynafit rotation. I am sure there is a trick I just have not figured out yet.

  102. Other Aaron April 29th, 2019 9:53 am

    Just bought a pair of shifts for next season (shop was doing a tax free sale, and well with 10% sales tax, that makes buying early worthwhile, even if there are no changes next season)

    I had a thought if anyone is unsatisfied with the heel risers. It seems that the heel riser is just held in place with a single continuous pin, it should be possible to unpin the riser and replace with a custom fabbed one, or even two, if you mount the second outside of the current edge of the brake/riser unit. Only drawback is needing more metalworking tools than I have at my disposal

Anti-Spam Quiz:

While you can subscribe to comment notification by checking the box above, you must leave a brief comment to do so, which records your email and requires you to use our anti-spam challange. If you don't like leaving substantive comments that's fine, just leave a simple comment that says something like "thanks, subscribed" with a made-up name. Check the comment subscription checkbox BEFORE you submit. NOTE: BY SUBSCRIBING TO COMMENTS YOU GIVE US PERMISSION TO STORE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS INDEFINITLY. YOU MAY REQUEST REMOVAL AND WE WILL REMOVE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS WITHIN 72 HOURS. To request removal of personal information, please contact us using the comment link in our site menu.
If you need an emoticon for a comment just copy/paste off the following list, or use text code you might be familiar with.

:D    :-)    :(    :lol:    :x    :P    :oops:    :cry:    :evil:    :twisted:    :roll:    :wink:    :!:    :?:    :idea:    :arrow:   
Due to comment spam we moderate most comments. Please do not submit your comment twice -- it will appear shortly after approval. Comments with one or more links in the text may be held in moderation, for spam prevention. If you'd like to publish a photo in a comment, contact us. Guidelines: Be civil, no personal attacks, avoid vulgarity and profanity.

  Your Comments

  Recent Posts

Facebook Twitter Email Instagram Youtube


  • 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 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