New Dynafit Gear 2012-13 — Beast Binding and the TLT Six Shooter Boot

Post by blogger | January 11, 2013      

If you’re looking for Beast 16 information, be sure to check our FAQ.

Big news is the TLT 5 last used for the new TLT 6 is wider by a full 3 mm.

Interesting news is the TLT 5 last used for the new TLT 6 'Six Shooter' (our term, see more below) boot is wider by a full 3 mm. This napkin sketch by Dynafit boot line designer and manager Giovanni shows the foot inside area where some of the space was added. Double hatched area is 2 mm more, single hatched area is one mm wider on that side of boot. On the other side (outside of foot), 1 millimeter was added and both will definitely help with making more room for the ball of the foot. Oh, and no more metatarsal bend. This is a boot I would kill for. Exactly what we've been begging for.

We’re over here in northern Italy (Dolomites) at Refugio Fanes checking out the new Dynafit products for 2013/14. I’m not sure what’s the most interesting, huge beefy bindings or lightweight ‘nearly one kilo!’ performance skis? Actually, I’m guessing we’ll probably be more into the low mass skis than the 850 gram appropriately named “Beast” binding. But it is all quite intriguing. More commentary from me soon now that Lisa and I have done some gear demos. Meanwhile, here is the party line (mostly PR copy, but with as much backstory and opinion as I can fit in.) Click most images to enlarge.

The Beast. Limited production run of under 2000.

The Beast. Limited production run of under 2000. I spoke at length with one of the engineers who worked on this binding. They shared that while the rig is indeed heavy compared to minimalist tech bindings, it has 'amazingly smooth and progressive' release and retention values that exceed those of many alpine bindings. This probably due to the steel-on-steel nature of the mechanism that allows consistent release, as opposed to plastic moldings that may have more imprecision or wear and tear.

One thing many of you will ask is if this will be the first TUV tech binding certified to DIN/ISO standards? According to Dynafit, they’ve actually made a strategic decision to bring the Radical series binding to TUV cert first, then the Beast because the way TUV works, if they get the first tech binding TUV cert for the Beast, all the crazy cool features of the Beast that make it release so well (we assume, kindly) will end up being retroactive to other tech bindings, and make them harder to certify. Thus, it’s better to go for the TUV cert first on a more classic and basic tech binding, then move up to the more complex. Whatever the case, whoever brings the first TUV certified tech binding to market stands to make a bunch of money due to it being favored by ski shops. The race is on.

For massive data dump please enjoy our Beast 16 Binding FAQ

Beast details: We like the improved tech fitting at the heel. Very smart way to change the standard type fitting but not change dimensions. Boot toe fitting remains the same, we'd like to see it improved as well but perhaps that's sort of like an unanswered prayer?

Beast details: We like the improved tech fitting at the boot heel, a very smart way to change the standard type fitting but not change dimensions. We're still waiting for tech 2.0 when everything really does get wider, but this is all a start. Wight of 935 grams per binding is pretty attractive if you're using something like a Marker Duke, and the engineering appears to make Beast incredibly effective for hard skiin, release value 16 and tons of energy absorption before release, thus preventing accidental release. Consumer testing will of course tell the tale, but meanwhile it's pretty fun seeing this kind of technology rise from the original tech system invented by Fritz Barthel way back in 1982. Click image to enlarge.

Beast page from the press release, click to enlarge.

Beast page from the press release, click to enlarge.

Press Release Info for Beast Binding
It’s all in the name – ski touring supplier DYNAFIT is presenting a brand new binding design for winter 2013/14. Dynafit’s binding designers have hit the fall-line and are targeting ambitious freeriders with a binding for all conditions and terrain types. The frameless system is combined with great stability and robustness up to DIN 16 integrating top performance on the ascent with an aggressive downhill ride. (Editor’s note, ‘DIN’ is of course a misnomer until the binding is TUV certified, but such is said to be in the works though not an immediate priority.)

Former pro freerider and design technicians Fredrik Andersson and pro skier Eric Hjorleifson have brought new disciplines into play for ascent-focused ski touring specialist DYNAFIT. Together, they have been developing the new binding model, the Beast 16. (Editor’s note: beyond PR copy, it’s probably a couple of smart engineers that really made this thing happen, it is quite complex mechanically and materials wise.) Their demands for the freeride binding were clear from the outset: top downhill performance, release value of 16, optimum ascent comfort all courtesy of the frameless system – and naturally not forgetting lightness.

The weight of 935 grams per binding makes the binding a maverick in the freeride binding ascent category (Edit note: heavier than normal tech bindings, but compare to normal freeride ‘frame’ bindings). The frameless system, which celebrates its 30th anniversary at DYNAFIT in 2013, saves lifted weight as well as saving overall mass and provides the ideal pivot point on the ascent. So the designers’ decision to arm the proven system with the requisite downhill characteristics was a logical step.

– The Beast binding has been fitted with a sophisticated release mechanism. This provides release at both the toe and heel units, while the rotating toe piece has been designed in such a way that it combats premature release potentially caused by sudden impacts.

– The binding’s ultra-low height gives freeriders perfect ski-to-snow contact. A stable and smooth ride thanks to the subtle lean-forward angle and high-level torsional rigidity as a result of the wide baseplate are all features unique to the new DYNAFIT binding.

– Freeride pros Eric Hjorleifson and Fredrik Andersson used their long years of experience, as well as their ethos of creating the ultimately versatile skiing experience, as inspiration for the new design. DYNAFIT athlete Hjorleifson said “New-generation skiers need equipment that ensures equally top performance whether you’re jumping, skiing off-piste and cross-country.”

– The Beast 16 is available this coming winter in a limited run of 2,500 bindings, all individually numbered and delivered worldwide.

– Perfectly complemented release mechanisms for toe and heel units.

– Rotating toe piece for ideally combating premature release caused by sudden impacts. (Patent pending)

– New, revolutionary design and setup for rear pivot points enable extra vertical movement thus increasing the release path/release value/tech gap (to 10mm from 4mm). (Patent pending)

– This design allows increased energy absorption through greater elasticity when performing dynamic actions (e.g. jumps). (Patent pending) ((Editor’s note those German copy writers. The word is “hucks.”

– Binding entry achieved by pressing the heel down with controlled force. Entry force is therefore low whatever the setting (DIN range 6-16), providing convenient entry in deep snow with higher DIN values. (Patent pending)

– Ultra-low binding height ensuring  at-to-ski contact for boot (DYNAFIT Vulcan: rear 23mm; front 17mm)

TLT 6 P is similar to TLT 5 P but includes a variety of tongues to tune stiffness.

TLT 6 P 'Six Shooter' is similar to TLT 5 P but includes a variety of tongues to tune stiffness AND NO METATARSAL BEND. Last width at forefoot is wider by 3 mm, which for some of you might be the big news. Wider last will make this boot warmer and easier to fit, though performance fit might be harder to acheive for skiers with narrow feet (nothing a good bootfitter can't deal with). With more warmth TLT 6 will thus be better for frigid climates such as Colorado, Wyoming and Canada (and Denali?).

TLT6 Performance – Press Release
The top choice for skiers who demand the best boots for climbing light and skiing strong. When used without the tongue, the TLT 6 is ideal for training and short races. Its up to the user to adapt the flex index to the type of activity: super high flex index with black tongue, high with colored tongue, standard without tongue. The carbon cuff provides an impressive level of forward support, with or without an additional tongue. As with the TLT 5, the new TLT 6 features a short rockered sole and perfect crampon compatibility; the Ultra-Lock system allows incredible cuff rotation and uphill agility, with a super-fast, single-motion transition from walk to ski mode; the new rear spoiler provides an adjustable forward lean angle. Also available in M’s & W’s MTN.

Grand Teton Ski honors the late Steve Romeo, ski blogger and all around enthusiast.

Grand Teton Ski honors the late Steve Romeo, backcountry skiing blogger and all around enthusiast. Ski dimensions: 130-106-120, lengths 173, 182, 191, said to be specific to the North American market.

Grand Teton ski PR copy
Created in memory of Steve Romeo, an influential ski mountaineer and backcountry advocate. The “Grand Teton” boasts an amazing swing weight, beefy sidewall construction, and a carbon stringer, with a continued focus on saving weight. Additionally the Grand Teton has a long rocker shovel, a revolutionary bamboo-beech core, and weighs in is less then 1550 grams. Light enough for serious ski mountaineers and burley enough for whatever the mountain delivers.

The one kilo ski in wider widths is a holy grail of ski design. This almost gets there.

The one kilo backcountry ski in modern (though a bit narrow still) widths is a holy grail of ski design. Cho Oyu almost gets there at a nicely figured shape for ski touring: 125-89-111 -- 1080 grams for the 174 cm length. That's a rather amazing weight, considering a Manaslu 178 weighs 1428 grams and a Goode Carbon 95 in 162 cm weighs exactly the same 1080 grams. And guess what? Dynafit does achieve the legendary 1 kilo ski in their Nanga Parbat at 171 cm, which in 164 comes in at 1000 grams -- though without much width under the foot. Presumably, the way Dynafit makes these skis is by using 'tons' of carbon, but also by hollowing out selected areas that are obvious at the tip and tail. In their words they 'combine technolgy,' meaning they work with everything from carbon to aluminum, sidewall construction, and so on. Extrapolating, with my ear to the ground I'm sensing we'll see an uptick in competition between ski companies for lighter weight backcountry skis. Note the Dynafit designed and specified skis are now refined and manufactured by Fischer. Insiders have told me that's a very good thing, as the ski designers at Fisher are top notch and put lots of attention into these projects. But carpe skium of course.

A note about Dynafit’s product categories. Main segment is probably their ‘speed touring’ product category. That’s where most of us are. In their language this simply means a combo of what works good for up as well as down. However, I figured out the reality: “speed touring’ simply means skipping lunch till you’re back at the beer stube. Typical euros.

Dynafit PR copy re Cho Oyu ski
Despite the wide geometry of the ski, the weight is only 1080grams and is thus perfect for deep snow as well as mountaineering and ski expeditions. The Cho Oyo offers a new 3-D flex-tip design and a micro sidewall construction to achieve optimum weight reduction. With ‘scoop’ rocker, triple radius, a paulownia wood core, and new carbon speed stringers the Cho Oyo will have you begging for more laps in the backcountry. CHO OYO Available length of skis: 174,182,191, MSRP $799.95

More backstory on the ski weight issue. As I suspected in comments above, one of the product line managers I spoke with agreed with my take that lighter skis that actually ski is a rapidly growing trend. He mentioned that the legendary 1 kilo ski used to only be a rando racing plank, and is now a ski touring ski. When they get the wider boards down to that weight it’ll be truly amazing, but for now I did ski on the Cho Oyu and yes, they do fly uphill and do quite well on the down. In detail, I found the sidecut to be a bit much in breakable crust (we did find a tiny bit) but they’re fine in powder and edgy on hardpack. I’d use them for winter powder and spring skiing.

Another thing, re ongoing issues with other companies making tech fittings that work poorly, and end up causing bindings being blamed for problems actually caused by the fittings: Insiders here are saying that yes, Dynafit will soon implement a program of certifying inserts made by other companies and used in other brands of boots. That is a very positive development in my book.

And why can Dynafit do all this stuff? They were nearly bankrupt in 2003, and grossed fifty million euros in 2012. That is a heck of a lot of gear, and I can’t help but be delighted that our sport can create that sort of prosperity for the individuals involved — and result in more and more amazing gear for all of us.

All the new gear will be available beginning October 2013.


Please Enjoy A Few Suggested WildSnow Posts


109 Responses to “New Dynafit Gear 2012-13 — Beast Binding and the TLT Six Shooter Boot”

  1. Lou Dawson January 11th, 2013 8:41 am

    Clarification about weight of Beast, it’s 935 grams per binding, 1850 for a pair. Apologies for any confusion in the blog post. Lou

  2. jerimy January 11th, 2013 8:53 am

    Is there a spec weight on the TLT6? Looks like it finally has a nice micro adjust on the lower buckle which is a much needed improvement over the cheap lower buckle on the TLT5.

    Nice to see the GT ski for Steve. Seems to have identical dimensions to the Stoke. Is it the same ski?

    PR says 2500 units for Beast, photo says 2000??

  3. Greg January 11th, 2013 8:55 am

    It’s good to see a ski named after Steve.

    I miss his blog.

  4. stewspooner January 11th, 2013 9:14 am

    Two and half times the price and at a 50% weight penalty (over my Speed Radicals) to guinea-pig Dynafit’s complicated new engineering marvel that solves, well actually it doesn’t solve any issue of mine. I’d just like to see more precise engineering tolerances on the pins, and a heel post alloy that’ll withstand more than 100 days of skiing.

  5. Frame January 11th, 2013 9:36 am

    Lou, any word or perhaps ‘a nod is as good as a wink’ on if the Beast will have a little bro in the future.
    I don’t need the big RV/DIN, but would like one binding to cover resort and out of resort as I travel long distances to ski and a one ski/binding quiver is desirable. Cost wise also, as opposed to binding inserts, 2 bindings…

    Doubt Dynafit are giving out that info now as the want to focus on the Beast… but hey I’m asking all the same.

    Does ‘Feature 1’ in the dynafit marketing picture mean the toe releases? …perfectly complemented release mechanisms…

    Enjoy the rest of the trip.

  6. Frank K January 11th, 2013 10:04 am

    Price aside, it’s great to see Dynafit address some of their binding’s shortcomings. I’ll take the extra grams if it comes with some elasticity and I don’t have to lock out the toes anymore. Exciting stuff if it all works as planned.

    Now about those performance lightweight skis, perhaps a model called the “jumbo shrimp”? (grin)

  7. Lou Dawson January 11th, 2013 10:44 am

    Frame, as far as they’d go when I asked, they said “maybe,” with a smile. Geovani is right next to me…

  8. Lou Dawson January 11th, 2013 10:46 am

    Frank, indeed, this is your binding if it works as claimed. Very impressive. I mean, rocket science. It won’t be needed at that weight by ski tourers like me, but man,, for guys like you it is just so cool.

  9. Tuck January 11th, 2013 10:47 am

    Lou, I’m really getting fed up with this.

    When I bought my Vertical FT 12 Bindings, you immediately released news of the Radical. I consoled myself that the Radical would probably need a bit of burn-in (as it did).

    This afternoon I am driving to get my Radical FT 12 fit to my skis, and you do this to me. Instead of a having a happy day, you’ve turned it into one full of regret and binding envy. Again, I will console myself that this binding probably needs some burn-in… And I gather that you need new boots with the new fitment? These are not backwards-compatible with existing tech boots?

    Nevertheless, my next call may be to Boulder to check availability…

    Sigh. Thanks. A lot. 😉

  10. Lou Dawson January 11th, 2013 10:47 am

    Jer, I specifically asked about weight of TLT Six Shooter. Same as TLT 5 and it has the short sole !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  11. Fede January 11th, 2013 10:48 am

    Lou, tell giovanni they could have put a bit more effort on the ahestetic restyling of the TLT5… 😉
    Have fun in Fanes and say bye to all the team!

  12. Lou Dawson January 11th, 2013 10:50 am

    Tuck, nature of the game… but yeah, I totally understand. Good point about the burn-in, I would highly recommend paying attention to that. The kind of skiing this binding is designed for is not where you want to be doing beta testing.

  13. Lou Dawson January 11th, 2013 10:52 am

    Fede, these guys say stop wasting time on ski porn websites (grin). Lou

  14. Fede January 11th, 2013 11:00 am

    I love it, will never stop wasting my time, especially on your blog 😀

  15. Charlie January 11th, 2013 11:17 am

    Any chance they’ll bring back the original TLT classic/speed? It’s the low-cost and reliable way to get into the mountains. Plum delivers in that market, but by restarting the line, Dynafit could beat them on price.

    New boot heelpiece looks neat, though it retains the screws that can break or loosen. It’s a hard part to make, as it takes a beating from the heel pins.

    Big ups for making a ski for Steve. Perhaps the advertising copy might be modified to include his ski partner that day, Chris Onufer?

    Thanks for all the news!

  16. Russya January 11th, 2013 12:22 pm

    Lou, does the tlt6 have the double hinged upper buckle like the one/mercury/Vulcan? Or is it the old tlt5 style?

  17. Nexus6 January 11th, 2013 12:38 pm

    Why is everyone making their boots wider? It seems all the light touring boots out there are built around 100 – 103 mm lasts now. The TLT5 was barely narrow enough for me, I’m sure I’d be swimming in the TLT6.

    Any word as to if the TLT6 different stiffness tongues will be usable in the TLT5?

  18. Frame January 11th, 2013 12:54 pm

    I can live with ‘maybe’ and a smile. Cheers Lou and Geovani

  19. Robin January 11th, 2013 12:59 pm


    Thax god for a wider touring boot. Im dying in the TLT5. who is everyone ? Couse I cant find a singel booth below 1200g that is wider then 98mm.

    I know I will buy tlt6 the moment it hit Sweden.

  20. Nexus6 January 11th, 2013 1:24 pm

    Robin. I looked at the TLT5 P, Dynafit Mercury, Scarpa Mastrael RS, and Garmont Cosmos (didn’t even bother trying on the cavernous BD boots). These are most of the boots in the “light and powerful” category right now and all except the TLT5 they were in the 100 mm plus range. My alpine boot is a Lange 92mm WC race plug so that gives you and idea of my chicken feet.

    My problem with everyone going so wide is that you can make a smaller boot bigger by punching it you can’t make a too wide boot narrower in any kind of effective way. A boot with too much volume way more of a problem for skiing than one that has too little.

    A lot of the new alpine and freeride boots that are coming out are being offered in multiple lasts widths, suck as the Lange’s XT boots or the new K2 boots. It would be nice if that was offered in true touring boots as well, but the sales volumes are probably too low to justify it.

  21. Kyle January 11th, 2013 1:29 pm

    That’s a nice, classy move to put out a ski for Steve Romeo. Thumbs up and looks like a nice ski.

  22. Lou Dawson January 11th, 2013 1:36 pm

    Russiya, yes, it has the articulated buckle. I definitely expected that. Works well, though I think I’d still also rig with our patented WildSnow buckle tour mode mod.

  23. Lou Dawson January 11th, 2013 1:39 pm

    Kyle, it appears to be an excellent ski, something Steve would have liked. We’ll get on some, perhaps it’s Ultimate Quiver material! Lou

  24. stevenjo January 11th, 2013 3:50 pm

    Lou – do we have a sense of the 6-shooters stiffness (assume black tongues) relative to the 5? Somewhat had to ask:)

  25. Tom Gos January 11th, 2013 5:01 pm

    I’m “stoked” to see the Steve Romeo ski (pun intended). Seriously though, it’s a cool move on the part of Dynafit.

    Lou, any confirmation to the rumor that the Beast binding will have an MSRP of approximately $1000 US? I agree with some other posters here that I would like to have a Dynafit compatible binding suitable for everyday resort use by a 195lb guy like me, but at $1000 a set I might have to put my faith in tech/alpine binding compatible boot soles instead.

  26. Gavin January 11th, 2013 6:55 pm

    The Grand Teton ski looks like it could be exactly what Ive been looking for. Any word on whether Dynafit will be putting inserts on this ski? As a telemarker, I hope not – my wife has so much fun on her Stokes and I thought that they would be awesome for what I want to do, except the damned inserts…

  27. JakeS January 11th, 2013 7:09 pm

    Darn it, I always thought Hoji was Canadian. ;-))

  28. barry January 11th, 2013 7:17 pm

    Thanks Lou, Beast is the right name for that monster.

    FWIW, Eric Hjorleifson is Canadian, born and raised in Canmore, Alberta.

    I spent last winter in Italy and just the word refugio makes my mouth water for polenta taragna and stinco al forno. Enjoy!

  29. Chris Cawley January 11th, 2013 11:11 pm

    So, TLT 6 is wider overall than TLT 5, or just in the forefoot? I’ve never been happier, fit-wise, in a ski boot than I am in my TLT 5s, and I’ve never been happier with a touring boot performance wise; however, without the super low volume fit I think TLT 5 would ski like garbage. I could use a little room in the toe box but if I can’t have that ankle security they’ll be a no-go for the skinny-footed. Ho hum…

  30. Lou Dawson January 12th, 2013 1:04 am

    Chris, I’m pretty sure the heel pocket remains the same. The change is where Giovanni sketched, smaller area on the other side not shown in sketch.

  31. Lou Dawson January 12th, 2013 1:07 am

    Not sure why they say Hoji is US pro skier in the press release. I’ll go ahead and change it to Canadian. The PR guys will see this eventually and clarify.

  32. tony s. January 12th, 2013 1:08 am

    Wow, this is sad. I was hoping they’d come up with maybe a wider speed radical with a beefed up heel assembly and free of useless gimmicky plates. Maybe it could have gone around 450 grams or so and they could have sucked another 6 hundo outta me, but no thanks. I don’t need to spend a grand to blow my knee in the backcountry with bindings barely lighter than marker tours. If you are as rad as Hoji or Seth or weigh 250lbs maybe you do but at that point we may as well be on to a tech 2.0.

  33. Lou Dawson January 12th, 2013 8:06 am

    Tony, why do you need wider bindings? Psychological, or are you actually ripping them out of skis? I’m trying to figure out the consumer dynamic behind all this stuff. Your insights appreciated.

    As for Beast, what I can’t help but wonder is if a person actually skis at RV 16, why is that any different than simply skiing in a locked binding? Someone, please explain.

  34. Tom January 12th, 2013 10:36 am

    Nice move with the RandoSteve Teton ski. That was a dark day in Jackson when we lost him. I already have the Stoke but I’ll probably buy the Teton just to show support.

  35. Craig January 12th, 2013 11:27 am

    Just saw the Beast at a rep show in Denver. They are a game changer. Simple heel lock mechanism, no ramp angle, user friendly toe piece and new heel plate. I think that Dynafit has taken it to the next level and again set the direction for the industry and category. They will get the weight out as this binding type sees more development. Kudos to the design team, this is
    no small feat to design a backcountry tech binding that has repeatable RV values. I believe this will obsolete the frame style bindings.

  36. Flax Fjord January 12th, 2013 12:16 pm

    Hi Gavin-

    The Grand Teton ski will NOT have inserts!
    Just like the Huascaran you may mount it tele or any way you like!


  37. Daniel Dunn January 12th, 2013 12:45 pm

    once again, I’ll agree with Lou here. Who skis at a DIN of 16 beside Bode and the Herminator?! I’m 145 lbs and skied at a 6 DIN setting!!! Granted, I may be lighter than most, but come on folks, learn how to ski, what are you doing out there.

    I also am extremely pumped for Dynafit to put out a ski honoring Steve, he was an inspiration for us all to just get out and SKI!

  38. tony s. January 12th, 2013 12:48 pm

    Lou, it’s not psychological. I want a 120 mm ski with as much power transmission and edge grip as possible for those times when it’s not soft, like in a steep chalky couloir or in spring conditions. I want it to be as resistant to pullout as possible, I don’t want to experience this ever, and it seems like an enourmous amount of torsional forces are placed on a wide ski by something as narrow as a speed radical. You all use those power plates for your Verticals on wide skis, don’t you?

    Every time I get on a wider ski, it is better in every concievable way than the skinny one it replaced, so I just think it’s time for bindings to catch up, much the same way head tubes on mountain bike frames, the stachion tubes on the forks, and the axles in the hubs have all been “oversized” (widened) to handle the forces the big forks generate. It’s common sense. Oversize the contact point, the new skis are being pushed harder and faster than ever, just like the new bikes. Would anyone want to ride a Fox 36 vanilla rc with a 9 mil xc axle?

    As you have said, maybe a tech 2.0 system with wider spaced, beefier pins and housing would be needed to realize the full potential of a wider platform, but you could still do all that at the weight of the Radical FT 12 without the useless gimmickry. We deal with new and improved standards constantly in the mountain bike world, why not ski boots and bindings? I just don’t think having a din of 16 should have been the #1 priority for this phase of their product developement. It offers everything I don’t need. We shall see what kind of untapped market there is for such a thing and how the current heel pins stand up to such applications.

  39. Dimi January 12th, 2013 12:53 pm

    Lou, about the high RV numbers.
    If a car as top speed of 150 mph, doesn’t mean it likes to cruise at such. No one i know has their Duke set to 16 either. but i believe users have the same ‘cruising speed’ attitude 🙂

  40. etto January 12th, 2013 2:43 pm

    Interresting to see a ski with about the same dimensions and weight as the Movement Logic X, but with a rocker! Looks like an awesome ski for long tours.

    Regarding the binding, hard to say from just the pictures, but it seems way more complex than the traditional tech binding. Not a good thing for the back country in my opinion, I like my gear simple and reliable.

    A warmer boot with the same weight and performance as the TLT 5, yes please!

  41. gillesleskieur January 12th, 2013 2:52 pm

    TLT6 IS warmer, and still perform just as well as TLT5 even for skinny frets… buckles (especially lower one) are a good upgrade, but warmth is one of the best “new feature” and the most noticeable at first.

  42. etto January 12th, 2013 3:05 pm

    gilleskieur, those orange boots in this picture ?

  43. gillesleskieur January 12th, 2013 3:07 pm

    well, they are indeed green, thx to photoshop they turned orange for some days…

  44. David Aldous January 12th, 2013 6:44 pm

    My impression on high release values is that people are trying not to be near the extremes of the release values of their bindings. I think this is partly because they feel it is likely to work better in the middle range of release values and partly because it may provide better elasticity in a jumping situation if there is a little more spring left to compress. I ended up buy radical ft bindings for my current touring setup figuring that at my weight and boot sole length I’m supposed to have a release value of 8 or 9.5 depending on what skier level I call myself. I figured I would rather not be that close to the end of the adjustment range if I go with the higher value.

  45. Pete S January 13th, 2013 12:25 pm

    Haven’t seen this anywhere…

    Do you have to get out of the toe to free the heel?????? One of the main shortcomings of a tech binding.

  46. Lou Dawson January 13th, 2013 2:08 pm

    Pete, actually, most people really don’t care much about that feature one way or the other. I don’t mind it, but apologies for it being off my radar. Easily answered by the Dynafit guys, but my impression is that you have to remove the binding from your boot before you can switch from alpine mode to touring mode.

  47. Lou Dawson January 13th, 2013 2:34 pm

    David, that’s a good theory but I’d suggest that it might need to be proven. Quite the opposite appears to be the case. For example, with a conventional tech binding the vertical release and elasticity at the heel is a simple function of the heel pins moving to the side. Even at max RV setting, that spring does not bottom out when the pins move, so the elasticity is the same no matter what setting. Side release, same thing. The spring moves just the same amount and does not bottom out. Thus, setting at higher end of range is simply not an issue in terms of elasticity.

    What’s ironic, is in the case of for example the Vertical FT, a washer was added behind the lateral release spring so the settings could be higher, which ironically gives the spring _less_ space to move in. That’s double opposite your theory (grin).

    Of course, the marketing guys know that lots of men out there want their bindings to have high numbers printed on them even if they’re skiing at RV 9 (grin). Ink is cheap.

  48. Arci January 13th, 2013 6:47 pm

    I see two potential issues with this binding (please correct me if I’m wrong):

    1. the new boot insert protrudes from the boot considerably. Once it’s mounted, I assume that it will preclude the use of the boots with older tech bindings, as in order to allow the correct gap between the boot and the binding, the heel piece would have to be moved back to the point where not much of the pins would still make contact with the inserts.

    2. it seems that it is not possible to switch the binding to walk mode without any climbing aid engaged.

    Assuming that the rotating toe piece really allows a consistent, predictable release, I hope that in the future Dynafit will offer it paired with a more traditional heel piece (which has never been a source of much complaint, by the way…I can’t see the point in messing with it, making it much heavier in the process).

  49. Lou Dawson January 13th, 2013 11:32 pm

    1. Arci, if the pins in the Beast are mounted wider and are larger, there will indeed be no compatibility. If it’s just a matter of adjusting the binding farther back, that won’t be a problem, probably…

    2. Am pretty sure you’re correct about walk mode.

    3. Not fixing what works is a good goal (grin).

  50. Keijo V January 14th, 2013 8:06 am

    The heel piece of the new binding seems quite open and framework like and thus prone to ice build up. The case might be twofold: Annoying extra weight + less ease of use and on the other hand safety issues – icing preventing the binding release in a fall.

    Is this going to be a problem?

  51. David Aldous January 14th, 2013 11:17 am

    I was more trying to answer the question of why there is a demand for DIN 16 bindings out there. I wasn’t thinking of tech bindings when I talked about elasticity but alpine and at plate bindings. From talking with people who prefer the beefy bindings and reading reviews of those types of bindings I get the impression that the elasticity and wanting to be in the middle of the adjustment range are their reasons for getting those bindings not because they actually ride them at the upper end of the adjustment range.
    In the case of tech bindings it sounds like the elasticity idea wouldn’t be realistic. There are a lot of things that work better in a middle range of operation and not so well on one end or the other like scales and speedometers. This could be a moot point in the case of tech bindings too but I think the idea is pretty well ingrained in the types of people who buy Dukes and Guardians and it may be easier to get into that part of the market by building something that conforms to those ideas whether or not they are applicable.

  52. Lou Dawson January 14th, 2013 1:09 pm

    David, yes, part of selling anything is reaching consumer expectations whether real or imaginary… I do believe that some machinery is indeed best operated in the middle of its “range.” Whether that is the case with any ski binding is in my view a question that could only be answered with some pretty rigorous bench testing. More, one has to wonder, if that’s the case are World Cup downhill racers running their DIN 16 bindings at DIN 8? Lou

  53. David Aldous January 14th, 2013 3:50 pm

    Marker makes a binding that has a DIN range from 11-20. Atomic makes one from 12-20. I can’t speak much for racers because I don’t know any. If they are making a binding like that someone is running their RV higher than I ever expect to.

  54. Chris January 14th, 2013 4:33 pm

    TLT 6 looks to answer my prayers! Glad they replaced the lower buckle, but not sure why it still opens downward. It drives me crazy how that buckle on the TLT5 opens every time I step off my skis. Does the new buckle on the TLT6 lock closed somehow?

    Any chance they’ll be available later this season??

  55. tony January 14th, 2013 5:44 pm

    Does the TLT6 have the same BSL in a given size as the TLT5? What BSL is the 27.0/27.5 TLT6?

  56. skimole January 15th, 2013 2:16 am

    @lou and steve re: width

    Why is wider better?

    There are a lot of things out there that people intuitively feel are correct, but don’t necessarily pan out in real life. But these feelings are there, so when marketing a product, you sell to them.

    Other examples
    -liquid is better than power laundry soap (powers _do_ work better)
    -carbon is always the best material (ask any roadie)
    -more pixels in a camera is better
    -etc, etc

    I won’t defend any of the above points, exercise of the reader to find out more, the point is people believe certain things to be true, so you make a product that speaks to those feelings in people.

  57. Gillesleski January 15th, 2013 3:18 am

    Same bsl as tlt5

  58. Giovanni January 15th, 2013 8:39 am

    don’t panic guys! The width at the forefoot is only 2 mm wider, the new liners foreseen will be developed consistently to the new last. everything runs and must work together. TLT6 isn’t a simply upgrade but a new redesigning where every detail becames from the market, from every user. It’s the result of a long time spent to hear, to listen, to look at, in every corner of the world.
    Our difficult task was to make happy both the TLT5’s consumers and who TLT5 couldn’t step-in.
    The liners will be totally new, lighter than TF-X (but definitely havier than TF), warmer (thanks to a more room inside as well), with the same walk ability but with a super tongue that provides much more smooth distribution of the power on the boot frame.
    I skied with TLT6 more than 20.000 meters of vertical gain skinning up, much more down hill, in every condition, on hard and steep snow as well. My feet are pretty regular on the in-step, just a bit wider on the forefoot. They well worked on TLT5 and they still work on TLT6.
    Gilles has a thin foot, skies 200 days per year and seeing his performance he may confirm that the enlargement doesn’t influence negatively the performance but answers instead to our first goal.
    TLT6 will be even more the boot with the widest range of use, from running to strong skiing through the ski expeditions and the alpine ice and mixed climbing when the skis are your best friend to approach mountains and couloirs and quickly get home enjoing.
    Have trust on the new platform and expect you much more comfort and performance in the meantime.

  59. Lou Dawson January 15th, 2013 8:54 am

    skimole, with a properly constructed and molded liner, a few mm of width difference will NOT be noticeable. On the other hand, you can make up for a poor fitting boot by just using a smaller shell and suffering if necessary. But that’s so `1970s. Lou

  60. Lou Dawson January 15th, 2013 8:55 am
  61. Lou Dawson January 15th, 2013 9:26 am

    Giovanni, pretty funny, Dynafit gets a new boot guy with wider feet then Fede, and the boots get wider (grin)? I love it. Lou

  62. skimole January 15th, 2013 9:28 am

    I meant the binding mount pattern:)

  63. Charlie January 15th, 2013 9:38 am

    Another vote for unlocking the heel without clicking out at the toe. I do it perhaps every third tour – helps to keep the flow going. In rolling terrain, or when a descent becomes a trip across a frozen lake, it’s a nice feature to have.

  64. Giovanni January 15th, 2013 9:55 am

    Yes, but be quiet, I hopefully should stay in the Dynafit R&D at least 5 years, therefore the fit as well 😉

  65. Tim January 15th, 2013 11:20 am

    Figures.. I go out buy the mercurys, get them blown out to fit my wide foot and you come out with the TLT6 😥 …. just my luck… at least I’ll be able to ski the Mercurys till the release of the new ones… 😉

  66. Giovanni January 15th, 2013 12:36 pm

    no worries, your Mercury is a very good toy and my advice if you can, obviously, is differenciate your set gear and have both.

  67. Richard January 16th, 2013 1:50 am

    Giovanni, great new products from Dynafit again 😀
    My 2 questions on TLT6:
    What about pivot rivet wear? Fede promised it will be solved but it doesn’t seem to be as Lou commented on the photo or?
    And – will you plan to produce 2 versions of that boot as it was with TLT5 – Performance and Mountain?

  68. wbarker January 16th, 2013 12:18 pm

    Hi. Apologies if I missed this somewhere but two quick questions:

    * When will the TLT 6 be available in the US?
    * For those of us with larger feet, will there be a shell that accomodates size 30/30.5?

    Thanks and keep up the great work,

  69. Plinko January 17th, 2013 1:19 am


  70. Harpo January 17th, 2013 12:50 pm

    How stiff is the tlt6 with each of the two different tongues as well as tongueless? A comparison to other dyna boots would be great.

  71. Giovanni Pagnoncelli January 17th, 2013 10:44 pm

    Tlt 6 will be available in October.
    The family stays unchanged, mountain and prrfotmance.
    The old down booster tongue was rightly in the middle in terms of stiffness.
    Give you a comparison it s difficult for us that don t agree with the current methods used by the competitors. And consider that every boots has a owhn behavioour depending from materials, temperature, the matching between cuff and shell (carbon cuff for ex), how mutch the skier is high…

  72. Flax Fjord January 17th, 2013 11:32 pm

    Hi Harpo-
    Of the two tongues that come with the TLT 6 one is stiffer and one is softer than the singular tongue of the present TLT5. We can’t put a number on it, but you will feel it when you try the boots and ski them all three ways. Tongue out for uphill travel makes the most sense in terms of striding efficiency and freedom of movement if you don’t mind the extra step during your transition to put your chosen tongue back in for the down.

  73. Jason4 January 18th, 2013 3:48 pm

    I think this is the first time I’ve left a comment on here, the TLT6 looks like what I’ve been wanting for about a year now. I’ve just made the switch to a dynasplit setup and the unofficial preference of the HB community is the TLT5. When I was trying boots on there was no way I could get the TLT5 to fit my mid foot and the boot fitters that I talked to were split on whether they could successfully punch that part of the boot out to fit me. I ended up in the BD Primes and have been reasonably happy with them but a softer flex and lighter weight would be a very good thing for my purposes.

    As for the DIN of 16, I know several skiers at my local mountain that ski their bindings that stiff. When asked most of them will tell you that it is because they ski in “no fall zones” where a released binding and lost ski is just as deadly as a blown out knee and so they don’t take the chance. Skiing around the ski area they probably don’t need them that high but that’s what they are comfortable with. These guys all come from a competition background with tons of skiing experience at a very high level.

  74. pagno January 20th, 2013 6:08 pm

    The green tongue for men and the blue tongue for women are thought rightly for Americans who don’t like put in and take out the additional tongue. it provides quite elasticity for a good walk ability. BUT I still educate without loose hopeful 😉 explaining simply: 1 minute of work against 4 hour of walking doesn’t worth? For me the choice must be: Ok, the Performance is stiff enough? I don’t use the tongue anymore except for some case (very steep couloir, high speed…), but the Mountain for my experience requires the tongue which provides much more structure and the best behavior when prompted. I would love that the additional tongue was understood as a benefit not as disadvantage. However, TLT6 will be how you want it.
    About the wear of the pivot I need to get my office and explain better the situation from point of view technical. I’m skiing in Utah in these days and I’m discovering different habits and different point of view although I practice back country from a long long time in the Alps and around the world.
    The main issue I wanted underline if Fede didn’t do in the past (but I think yes) regards the TLT5 skills: very good climbing ability thanks a race platform (DyNA), good down hill performance thanks to a tight last and durability proportioned to a regular use (skis within 70 to 90 mm). The lifespan is in average 150.000 m of vertical elevation (UP & DOWN), then they need service.
    So, I’ll be available to OR for whoever wants to try and discuss about it with me.
    Have a good skiing like me in these days!

  75. Erik Erikson January 21st, 2013 2:37 am

    I have a general question reffering to boot-fit: My problem is having an extremely narrow heel – so I never get enough heel fit in any boot (and I tried a lot…) and unbearable heel-raise while skiing..
    Does anyone have similar problems or or advices for me?? I tried a lot of “homemade troubleshooting” like sticking additional material to the inside of the shell and stuff like this…

  76. Lou Dawson January 21st, 2013 3:37 am

    Erik, one common solution for that is to downsize your boot shell and punch out the toe area so you still have enough room. That’s generally what I do. A slight lift under the heel can help, or a shim under the liner that covers the whole boot board, hence raising your foot up inside the boot. Another solution is to move the instep buckle to the rear a small amount, so it cinches down on your foot better. Changing brand/model of boot is always something to consider. Likewise, services from a boot fitter. Generally, glomming material onto the outside of the liner or inside of shell doesn’t work that well for touring boots, as it gets evenually peeled off by all the movement while walking, and is really just a band-aid solution. Lou

  77. Erik Erikson January 21st, 2013 3:56 am

    Thank you, Lou! Never thought of downsizing and punching out the toe area.. good advice!!
    Nevertheless I always felt that the best way would be to put actually something INSIDE the liner – like an orthopaedic insert. So in someway your heel inside the boot would get wider, and not something would press the liner together from the outside (while your heel inside stays the same size)..
    but never heard of that solution..

  78. markshelp January 21st, 2013 5:30 pm

    hi guys.

    i am torn.

    i love the last of the tlt5. i have a achilles area that has been worn thin as a razor by 20 years of touring

    i don’t like the ‘metatarsal bounce’ caused by the yellow ring. i would love to see that go.

    Sounds like tlt6 is on the way – wider or not. A little more width is certainly warmer, and opens up the boot for a stiffer after-market liner. Not a bad thing.

    BUT: This is huge and is not spoken about enough: We need to get somewhere on standardizing the length of the sole on specific sizes. Adjusting between the One and TLT is a bit unnecessary.

    One poster (gilles??) mentioned the BSL (boot sole length, correct?) is the SAME on the TLT5 and TLT6. Is this true?? Please confirm. Some of the ultra light rando bindings don’t adjust…..

  79. Mike January 22nd, 2013 9:33 pm

    I have been very happy with my Maestrales, but recently tried on the TLT5 and Sportiva Sideral out of curiosity. The range of motion was amazing in both of these boots. I found the TLT5 to be too narrow so I am very happy to see this change for the TLT6 in addition to dropping the metatarsal flex. I think my next boot will be in this category. Any idea when Scarpa is going to introduce a boot to compete in this category? Something between the Maestrale and the Alien with Quick Step fittings and a tongue I do not need to fiddle with would be my perfect boot.

  80. Mike January 29th, 2013 1:12 pm

    I caught a few comments about “who actually skis with their bindings at 16”.

    I do (well, actually, at 15. I was always taught that at the maximum limit, the release value of the springs gets questionable).

    That’s where I feel comfortable that I won’t pre-release, but know that if I really screw up, the skis will come off.

    A lot of people will laugh at this, but I view 14 as the “minimum” I’d want.

    Sidebar: When I was racing, I had DH boards with Salomon Couriers. Not many folks will know that name. The DIN went from 18-22. Bigger than the Comps (aka the Green Springs).

    My point is that there are a lot of young (or young-ish) ex-racers out there who like to run their DINs high. Some guys feel is it more dangerous to ski with a low DIN setting, than with a high one

  81. Fraser February 8th, 2013 5:49 pm

    In regards to a 16 din binding for backcountry, who needs it? It seems to me that in the past 10 years what used to be called ski touring has evolved into a new sport of backcountry freeriding. With new equipment and younger blood in the game people are approaching skiing in the backcountry differently. It’s no longer rare to have friends hucking off cliffs, skiing incredibly fast, and generally riding much harder than used to be possible. Advances in equipment has been a big part of this and for people who really embrace the backcountry ethos having a light binding with similar release characteristics to true alpine bindings is needed.

    While I enjoy my plums and there 12 din setting, they have pre-released on me on a few occasions, usually when trying stomping a big landing.

    To those who say “Learn to ski” to those of us who want a higher din, I would say “learn to ski hard!”

  82. Tob February 10th, 2013 2:15 pm

    Will the tlt6 mountain have the same fiberglass rear cuff as the mercury? The mercury cuff seems plenty stiff, and at a much easier price!

  83. pagno February 13th, 2013 1:54 pm

    The TLT5 and 6 Mountain cuffs are made in Pebax, in the Mercurys the cuffs are made Nylon with Fiber Glass addition.

  84. Carver February 15th, 2013 9:33 am

    Boots look great, and the lack of metatarsal flex will be an excellent improvement, but really! The lower buckle! I reeeeeally hope someone in any sort of decision making position reads my rant, but does anyone in the dynafit team ever bootpack!? Greg! Where are ya man!
    My point is, the tlt5 lower buckles open in stiff snow every third or so step. Even after a drastic angle grinder modification to make the bottom edge a negative angle so as not to hook up so easy. So, what do i see! A new improved boot, with surely a loftier pricetag, and a bigger buckle to hook up even worse!
    Ok, i see the little rib built in to the side of the lower, but it doesn’t look sufficient to me to divert snow and avoid hook up of the buckle.
    Smeone please tell me there is a catch im not seeing here.
    Colin Carver

  85. Phil February 18th, 2013 10:15 am

    Yes, I agree with Colin’s comment that the buckle placement on the TLT5s is a problem for booting. I had hoped that would be revised to the more sensible placement of the buckle on top of the arch. Disappointing that it hasn’t been addressed in the TLT6 since everything else looks outstanding with that boot.

    Friends have retrofitted their TLT5s using the ratchet buckle/strap systems from old Scarpa F1s or various tele boots. Are there any other successful mod ideas out there to solve that problem?

  86. Lou Dawson February 18th, 2013 10:39 am

    Carver, I totally agree, it just seems like it would be sooo easy to locate some sort of buckle on top instead of on the side. For example, the Garmont/Scott Cosmos did it beautifully. There are probably some hidden gotchas with that, but I’ll bet they could be overcome. Modders have already done it. I’ve had the buckle-opening problem myself while booting. In Europe. With another guy who’s buckles opened. Lou

  87. Harpo February 18th, 2013 2:37 pm

    It looks like the lower buckles on the tlt6 r the same as the mercury/Vulcan, in which case u r worrying about nothing. The m/v lower buckles don’t pop open like those of the tlt5. They r spring loaded or snap shut or something.

  88. carver March 4th, 2013 4:58 am

    Yo harpo.
    If it is “nothing” go golf. For the rest of us that are keen on the advancement and improvements in the industry, and spent a ridiculous number of our limited days in demanding environments and situations, we shouldn’t have to buy gear that doesn’t work properly. Drop a grand and pull out a drill! Seriously. They are marketing tech gear, with irritating obvious flaws.

  89. JCoates March 4th, 2013 6:05 am

    Carver, the TLT buckles bug me occasionally too.

    At least in theory, I think the Boa lace system is a better system. It would seem to provide a more uniform distribution of compression and the “buckle” is mounted on the forefoot. Not sure how they work (at least on ski boots) in reality though.

    How are people liking the Boa lace system on the Scarpa Aliens?

  90. Tim K March 12th, 2013 7:42 am


    ” I think I’d still also rig with our patented WildSnow buckle tour mode mod.”

    what is this mod you speak of?


  91. George S March 13th, 2013 11:54 am

    Hello everybody!
    any idea of the Nanga Parbat ski tip / waist / tail dimensions for 164 length?


  92. Flax Fjord March 13th, 2013 12:00 pm

    Hi George-
    I don’t know the dimensions for a Nanga Parbat in 164 but the 171 is published as 116/80/104


  93. George S March 13th, 2013 12:13 pm

    With a bit of youtube search I came across this vid

    (it is in italian – numbers are internatinonal though)

    so, the dimensions of the Nanga Parbat ski are
    163cm – 115 / 79 / 103, R 15.5 / 9.5
    171cm – 116 / 80 / 104, R 17.5 / 11.5
    179cm – 117 / 81 / 104, R 19.5 / 12.5

  94. Carl March 19th, 2013 6:59 pm


    This may have been asked already, but will the TLT-6 be available in a 31.5, as the mercury-one-vulcan’s currently are? I ride a tlt5 mountain in a 30.5 and it really is on the small side. Perhaps, with the wider forefoot of the tlt6 and a larger length sizing selection, I should try the tlt6?

  95. Lou Dawson March 19th, 2013 7:27 pm

    Carl, that’s getting a little beyond even my psychic powers (grin). But perhaps Giovanni can answer if he’s around.

    Punching the TLT6 out in size length 1/2 cm should be easy, so perhaps that’s all you’d need along with some aggressive liner molding.

  96. Giovanni March 20th, 2013 3:44 am

    Yes, Lou, you are right. The 31 size isn’t existing in the TLT6 sizes field, but Carl could punch the 30.5 one gaining some millimiter. Carl, (only 😉 in this case I have to suggest you the Dream Liner low thickness. Compared to the our standard liner that Intuition style has much more stretch ability, good after the shell worked by a (good) boot fitter.

  97. Lou Dawson March 20th, 2013 5:51 am

    Thanks Giovanni of Dynafit, always a pleasure for you to visit. Lou

  98. Steven March 22nd, 2013 9:28 pm

    What would be warmer and ski better: TLT5 with Intuition pro tour liner, or the TLT6?

  99. Daniel May 21st, 2013 6:50 am

    hi all
    wondering which dynafit boot might be the best bet for me for next season. now skiing zzero4 px in 27. with some pinky toe punch the shell fits great. chose px over carbon for the smoother forward flex. in tlt5 i could only have skied the 28 shell. do not want to upsize for fit.

    might the tlt6 mountain fit the bill? or rather the ONE px?

  100. Chuck July 21st, 2013 9:23 am

    So has anyone skied the Grand Teton ski yet? Is it the upgraded version of the Stokes?

  101. steve sellers September 16th, 2013 3:08 pm

    Just got my TLT6er’s in the mail today. Super stoked! They look great, feel absolutely bomber. I like it that the metatarsal flex is gone. With choice of 3 tongue configurations you can really dial in your ride. I got these to replace my Dyna’s that I”ve used for touring and general skimo race training. I used those 6months+ each year 4-6 times a week. They were still stiff enough to drive my heavier skis like Manaslus, but these TLT6’s will do a waay better job (might be overkill for my race sticks though). I was a little disappointed that they came in 230g over the stated weight (1050g). The liner weighs 280g, I suppose I could lose 100g with a lighter liner-we’ll see. Can’t wait for snow!

  102. Lou Dawson September 16th, 2013 3:37 pm

    Hi Steve, the official retail ver WildSnow Six Shooters came today as well. I amended the latest post with some weights and thoughts.

  103. Sherry Bunch December 27th, 2013 6:13 pm

    I’m coming to the conversation rather late in the game here…
    I don’t ski anything like Eric Hjorleifson and I couldn’t even fake it at a long distance view but I really wanted a tech binding that would hold me in the bumps for in-area skiing, not to mention stiff mank and other such cuttery (refrozen crud, anyone?).
    After numerous pre-releases on my STs and looking at what else is out there for a touring option, I am springing for a set of these. Well, let’s say I paid for them but haven’t chosen a ski pairing just yet. Good-bye tax refund!
    Yeah, I know, I could just buy a dedicated alpine set-up and be done with it but that is blasphemy for me. Tour or die, I say!
    At 180lbs but still skinny as a rail (I’m tall), I hope I’m not making a mistake. They are still in the box. So many comments on “the right person” for this binding… can they be for me if I ski like an ordinary mortal but want an “alpine worthy” touring binding? Looking for some reassurance… comments? anyone? 😳 Not interested in carrying a Marker Baron up the hill and I’ve seen some press on the new Fritschi Pivec.

  104. Lou Dawson December 27th, 2013 6:38 pm

    Sherry, at your weight you should be fine and yes it’ll probably hold you in better, but do full release checks in shop before skiing any binding. Lou

  105. Walt December 27th, 2014 8:43 pm

    Please correct me if I’m wrong but can not find a review of the Dynafit Grand Teton ski. How is this possible? Lou, you were friends with Steve Romeo, who inspired the ski. It looks like awesome , versatile ski, just the right size too. Yet you review a lot of junk far less important than this ski. It’s been out a year now. I don’t get it. Why?

  106. Lou Dawson 2 December 28th, 2014 12:37 pm

    Hi Walt, of course Steve and I were friends, R.I.P., and we do have a pair of his commemorate skis permanently in the WildSnow ski collection and hope to hang them in a place of honor someday. Frankly, myself and our testers were pretty neutral about how they skied, so reviewing them wasn’t a priority. We probably won’t review that ski, lots of other ones are the priority. Lou

  107. Walt December 28th, 2014 12:53 pm

    “Neutral on how they skied”? Please elaborate. I haven’t found a bad review yet on these skis. But I trust Wild Snow the most. You reviewed the narrow ass Denali and Cho Oyu. And you reviewed the Huscaran which though wider, is a noodle. Seriously, you think those Dynafit skis are better? What didn’t you like about the Grand Tetons?

  108. Lou Dawson 2 December 28th, 2014 3:54 pm

    Walt, using praise and scolding me at the same time worked when I was in kindergarten… (grin). We’re not a gear review website though we do review gear. We trend to reviewing what’s on the plus side of the equation, though we wander around on that one. It’s been too long since we messed around with the Grand Teton skis, but I can say I found them desirable in terms of graphics and the honor to Steve, but did not get excited about them as to how they skied or toured. Remember this all happens in context with other skis at that point in time, there are no absolutes. A ski we find wonderful one year might feel average a few years later due to the market changing what’s available. Why the sudden interest? You find a deal on a pair? Lou

  109. Walt December 28th, 2014 8:03 pm

    My interest is that I’m looking for a ski like this… An all mountain backcountry/ tour/variable condition ski. It’s not because of any deals (not this time of year)… Though you can find them with maybe $100 off. It just doesn’t make sense for you to exclude this one ski when you reviewed all the other Dynafit skis. You guys are all about Dynafit.
    I thought you would have jumped all over these. It just doesn’t seem fair. After all, you spent time to review the cho Oyu (seriously?) I mean talk about a speciality quiver ski. Other reviews out there say the Grand Teton is great (Powder and backcountry mags), but who knows? I guess it’s the chance you take you buy a ski. You never did say what you didn’t like about it? Was it the weight? It’s a little heavier but still light enough. I know you guys are really into that weight weenie thing. But for some people, weight , though important, is not the most important thing. I’ve got big skis for bottomless days (like the last 4 days), but what other ski would be better in this size and weight? (I’m looking at the 191 cm with the 108mm waist). The Denalis are light for long range touring on smaller dump days >8″, but too narrow to float me (210#) in the deep. All the G3 skis in this size are noodles. K2s? – not really a fan. What’s better and why?

  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 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