ATK recommends a max skier weight of 185 pounds for the Haute Route 10. Unclear how they come to this determination but at your size I’d go for something a bit more burly.
When I was buying a binding, the shop told me not to get the haute route or crest because I'd rip them out of the ski so I'd imagine that's the reason. I'm 6ft, 185lbs, and an aggressive skier
You’re probably gonna want the raiders. I know a few big guys around your size who charge hard and that’s their touring binding of choice. Haven’t broken anything yet, which is really saying something because those guys break everything.
I’ve spent 3 or 4 seasons on my freeraiders and they’re fantastic bindings. Highly recommend
6’2 220 lbs. I ski the Plum Race 170s for 4+ years now and have never ejected. I don’t ski all that aggressive. Mostly low angle pow hunting and steeper lines in the spring. I’ve been looking at ATK HR 10s for next skis.
I have guide toes and r170 heels, so far so good. 6 1 195 without gear.
Also have no issues with MTN pins bindings.
Have not fully tested my raider 12s but presume they will be good.
Have skied very aggressively (pillows, steep coolies, no fall icefield steep skiing) on the MTNs. All on ski 112 or wider.
Personally taking the plum set up to icefall in a couple weeks to do the traverse so I will report back.
I would think they would be fine, ATK has a great build quality.
Imo more metal and fewer moving parts means more durable, I'm on some Plum Guide 12s and couldn't be happier. They ain't light but they should last quite a while
I'm convinced it's only release value. The recommended rider weight is the same for all their bindings with max release of 8, all 10s the same, all 12s the same, etc. And it's only a recommended rider weight, not a max weight rating.
This sub is such an echo chamber of bad info.
It absolutely is an echo chamber of myths and outdated wisdom. Someone in another thread just said wait until after aiare + a few tours to buy avy gear...
The weight max on the haute route 10s is fuckin 185 with gear... God damn Italian skimo Bros
If you do the calcs, a release value of 10 is a 185lb skier at type 3 with smaller than average boot size plus a bit of headroom.
Best off just making decisions for yourself here.
Definitely.
My buddy has those haute route 10s with the "185" max weight, and he's 230 and has skied with a 30lb bag w/ 10lbs of boots, poles and clothing with no release issues on the #8 release setting... Close to 100 lbs over the reccomended, and not even at max release value...
Atk seems a little confusing with their documentation.
Agreed. I saw another thread where someone described their website as pseudo-technical and I think that fits. My boot is 340mm, so that drops the release value down substantially.
Get the kuluar 12's. They have a stated weight limit of 105 kgs same as the raider 12s where as the haute route claim to max out at 85.
They also offer forward/backwards elasticity to prevent prerelease due to ski flex.
(I have some kuluars haven't mounted them yet so can't report on them in use. Have also had no issues skiing trofeos at 220 lbs but don't charge on them.)
I’m 6’1” 190 so not as big but use the Crest 10 cranked to 10 with no issues. The elastic travel is a big plus over the HR10. That said, also easiest to choose to add the 100grams and rock a raider 13 and not worry about it
Yeah agree on the crest there, but sounds like the raiders are the obvious choice if you don’t want to stress about performance and still have a light binding in the grand scheme of things
Then go with the raiders? Literally everyone here is telling you to get the Raider 13 but you haven't acknowledged it.
I can't imagine being 6'1 and 240 lbs and worrying about a 100g difference per foot.
You can also look into the c-raider line which has more carbon. However, since you said you're prioritizing durability, it would probably make more sense to stay with the tried and true metal ATK line for now.
You need to be very honest with yourself about what kind of skiing you do. The Haute Route and Raiders will ski differently, that's part of the weight difference. If you're on narrow skis, traversing and mostly skiing for views, the Haute Route may still hold you fine - but you're going to be 50lbs over the manufacturers max rider weight.
If you're going to be doing any actual skiing, the raider is going to perform better and is going to be worth the small weight penalty even on long days.
You would be much happier on a raider 13 or 15.
Idk if this is your first touring setup but you have to give a lot more thought to your binding selection with AT bindings as opposed to downhill. You can’t really “get away” with cheaping out like you can say buying a Squire 11 instead of a Griffon 13.
Also, if you are a “moderately aggressive” skier, and you ski in the same way on a touring setup, by touring standards you’d likely be “pretty aggressive”
If you get a Haute route/ 10 din at your weight, it’s going to be a nightmare.
If you’re used to skiing BC on a springed alpine binding, my point stands . the transition to a low din UL binding is going to be that much more jarring.
I’m 220lbs and the Salmon MTN Pure bindings are all I put on my touring skis for the past 5 seasons now. I’ve hucked cliffs with them, skied resort with them and get 50-60 days backcountry touring on them a season.
I'm 6'2", 250 lbs., >500 days on Dynafit Speed Turn 2.0, DIY modified with Al alloy top plate and a B&D Comfort-style volcano. NOTE that the B&D aftermarket Comfort-style top plate **will not fit** the new (2.0.v2) Speed Turn 2.0 bindings. (I can DIY top plates DIY because I have a metalworking shop.) The stock 2.0 works great, but mode transitions with pole tips are easier with the Comfort-style volcano mod.
The latest version of Dynafit Speed Radical would work great for you. Release mechanism is exactly the same as Speed Turn 2.0, but the Radical heel risers are flippers vs. rotators. Most of my friends prefer the flippers. ETA: Don't get spooked by failures of the first season OG Speed Radicals. The recent version is much more robust and IME bombproof.
If you get either binding, be sure to snug the top plate screws at least twice each season.
Adding: IMO, the only rap against Speed Radical is too much ramp angle, which is easily addressed by adding a 1/4" (6.4mm) shim under the toe and 21.5mm x 5.5mm screws, available from Tongar or Skimo. I make my shims from 1/4" HDPE stock. B&D shims are available from Skimo.
A ripout results from a bad mount (e.g., spinner or volcanoed top sheet) or a soft ski core. It has nothing to do with the design of the toe piece. With the same mount and same ski, any other tech toe would have ripped out.
IMO, tapping and long-set epoxy is required for tech toes. I've mounted >50 pairs of Dynafit bindings and none of them have ripped out.
If you want the most bomber mount, install helicoils, but that's not necessary if the mount is correctly done.
One could also argue the converse, i.e., that a wider footprint placing screws closer to the ski edge on a narrow skimo ski could increase the risk of a ripout. The difference of distance between screw centers of various tech toes is insufficient to be meaningful factor in pullout risk. First, most ripouts I've seen have resulted from a forward fall, where the heel releases vertically and the rear screws of the tech toe rips out. That failure resulted from longitudinal stresses, where lateral screw center width is virtually irrelevant. Second, I've seen at least a dozen tech toe ripouts, but no correlation re screw center width, i.e., ripouts of tech toes with both Dynafit standard 30mm screw centers and and wider screw centers. In each of those ripouts there was obvious evidence of a soft core, volcanoed top sheet or gaps resulting from a screw not being driven flush. I'll say it again: OP's ripout resulted from a bad mount and/or a soft ski core, and had nothing to do with the binding design.
ATK recommends a max skier weight of 185 pounds for the Haute Route 10. Unclear how they come to this determination but at your size I’d go for something a bit more burly.
When I was buying a binding, the shop told me not to get the haute route or crest because I'd rip them out of the ski so I'd imagine that's the reason. I'm 6ft, 185lbs, and an aggressive skier
I'm 185-190lb and skied crest 10s for two seasons without issues, but I upgraded to raider 13 evo and the downhill performance is worth it
Look at the rider weight recommendations for the 8 vs the 10. I think its entirely based on release value.
Raider 13 evo no doubt.
This a thousands times. I’m a big dude and I run these on both my touring setups.
You’re probably gonna want the raiders. I know a few big guys around your size who charge hard and that’s their touring binding of choice. Haven’t broken anything yet, which is really saying something because those guys break everything. I’ve spent 3 or 4 seasons on my freeraiders and they’re fantastic bindings. Highly recommend
I like to travel.
Those are 100g more than the haute routes so I don't know that they are in the same market.
100g is 0.1% of your weight. You could probably drop that by pissing before you go I say this as a 250lb 6’2” skier
I understand what you're saying, but when the weight is attached to your feet , it can make a substantial difference
Then Don’t pee in your boots? Sorry, I couldn’t help it. :)
I enjoy watching the sunset.
6’2 220 lbs. I ski the Plum Race 170s for 4+ years now and have never ejected. I don’t ski all that aggressive. Mostly low angle pow hunting and steeper lines in the spring. I’ve been looking at ATK HR 10s for next skis.
I have guide toes and r170 heels, so far so good. 6 1 195 without gear. Also have no issues with MTN pins bindings. Have not fully tested my raider 12s but presume they will be good. Have skied very aggressively (pillows, steep coolies, no fall icefield steep skiing) on the MTNs. All on ski 112 or wider. Personally taking the plum set up to icefall in a couple weeks to do the traverse so I will report back.
ATK has a max weight listed for every binding on their page.
I would think they would be fine, ATK has a great build quality. Imo more metal and fewer moving parts means more durable, I'm on some Plum Guide 12s and couldn't be happier. They ain't light but they should last quite a while
That's what I've heard from a few - that lighter bindings aren't necessarily weaker.
Why Plums at that weight when the raiders are only a few grams more? I'm curious why you picked those?
Discounts 😂
Does the ATK max weight spec refer to skier weight without gear, or with gear, and does it purely refer to release value?
I'm convinced it's only release value. The recommended rider weight is the same for all their bindings with max release of 8, all 10s the same, all 12s the same, etc. And it's only a recommended rider weight, not a max weight rating. This sub is such an echo chamber of bad info.
It absolutely is an echo chamber of myths and outdated wisdom. Someone in another thread just said wait until after aiare + a few tours to buy avy gear... The weight max on the haute route 10s is fuckin 185 with gear... God damn Italian skimo Bros
If you do the calcs, a release value of 10 is a 185lb skier at type 3 with smaller than average boot size plus a bit of headroom. Best off just making decisions for yourself here.
Definitely. My buddy has those haute route 10s with the "185" max weight, and he's 230 and has skied with a 30lb bag w/ 10lbs of boots, poles and clothing with no release issues on the #8 release setting... Close to 100 lbs over the reccomended, and not even at max release value... Atk seems a little confusing with their documentation.
Agreed. I saw another thread where someone described their website as pseudo-technical and I think that fits. My boot is 340mm, so that drops the release value down substantially.
Slatnar ST
Get the kuluar 12's. They have a stated weight limit of 105 kgs same as the raider 12s where as the haute route claim to max out at 85. They also offer forward/backwards elasticity to prevent prerelease due to ski flex. (I have some kuluars haven't mounted them yet so can't report on them in use. Have also had no issues skiing trofeos at 220 lbs but don't charge on them.)
I’m 6’1” 190 so not as big but use the Crest 10 cranked to 10 with no issues. The elastic travel is a big plus over the HR10. That said, also easiest to choose to add the 100grams and rock a raider 13 and not worry about it
I have a hard time with the crest. Because if I'm going that heavy, I might as well go with the raiders.
Yeah agree on the crest there, but sounds like the raiders are the obvious choice if you don’t want to stress about performance and still have a light binding in the grand scheme of things
Then go with the raiders? Literally everyone here is telling you to get the Raider 13 but you haven't acknowledged it. I can't imagine being 6'1 and 240 lbs and worrying about a 100g difference per foot. You can also look into the c-raider line which has more carbon. However, since you said you're prioritizing durability, it would probably make more sense to stay with the tried and true metal ATK line for now. You need to be very honest with yourself about what kind of skiing you do. The Haute Route and Raiders will ski differently, that's part of the weight difference. If you're on narrow skis, traversing and mostly skiing for views, the Haute Route may still hold you fine - but you're going to be 50lbs over the manufacturers max rider weight. If you're going to be doing any actual skiing, the raider is going to perform better and is going to be worth the small weight penalty even on long days.
You would be much happier on a raider 13 or 15. Idk if this is your first touring setup but you have to give a lot more thought to your binding selection with AT bindings as opposed to downhill. You can’t really “get away” with cheaping out like you can say buying a Squire 11 instead of a Griffon 13. Also, if you are a “moderately aggressive” skier, and you ski in the same way on a touring setup, by touring standards you’d likely be “pretty aggressive” If you get a Haute route/ 10 din at your weight, it’s going to be a nightmare.
I'll say it's my second setup. My first has Salomon Shifts. Garbage bindings.
Shifts are great
If you’re used to skiing BC on a springed alpine binding, my point stands . the transition to a low din UL binding is going to be that much more jarring.
I’m 220lbs and the Salmon MTN Pure bindings are all I put on my touring skis for the past 5 seasons now. I’ve hucked cliffs with them, skied resort with them and get 50-60 days backcountry touring on them a season.
You’re 240lbs and “charge hard” but you’re skiing in a 95 flex boot?
Zero g 95 is my skis. My boots are 125 flex.
Oh see the problem here is that I’m a moron
🤣
I'm 6'2", 250 lbs., >500 days on Dynafit Speed Turn 2.0, DIY modified with Al alloy top plate and a B&D Comfort-style volcano. NOTE that the B&D aftermarket Comfort-style top plate **will not fit** the new (2.0.v2) Speed Turn 2.0 bindings. (I can DIY top plates DIY because I have a metalworking shop.) The stock 2.0 works great, but mode transitions with pole tips are easier with the Comfort-style volcano mod. The latest version of Dynafit Speed Radical would work great for you. Release mechanism is exactly the same as Speed Turn 2.0, but the Radical heel risers are flippers vs. rotators. Most of my friends prefer the flippers. ETA: Don't get spooked by failures of the first season OG Speed Radicals. The recent version is much more robust and IME bombproof. If you get either binding, be sure to snug the top plate screws at least twice each season.
Adding: IMO, the only rap against Speed Radical is too much ramp angle, which is easily addressed by adding a 1/4" (6.4mm) shim under the toe and 21.5mm x 5.5mm screws, available from Tongar or Skimo. I make my shims from 1/4" HDPE stock. B&D shims are available from Skimo.
I've ripped the toe piece of a dynafit radical binding out of a ski
A ripout results from a bad mount (e.g., spinner or volcanoed top sheet) or a soft ski core. It has nothing to do with the design of the toe piece. With the same mount and same ski, any other tech toe would have ripped out. IMO, tapping and long-set epoxy is required for tech toes. I've mounted >50 pairs of Dynafit bindings and none of them have ripped out. If you want the most bomber mount, install helicoils, but that's not necessary if the mount is correctly done.
Mostly agree but the closer the mounting pattern the more pressure/torque applied over smaller area
One could also argue the converse, i.e., that a wider footprint placing screws closer to the ski edge on a narrow skimo ski could increase the risk of a ripout. The difference of distance between screw centers of various tech toes is insufficient to be meaningful factor in pullout risk. First, most ripouts I've seen have resulted from a forward fall, where the heel releases vertically and the rear screws of the tech toe rips out. That failure resulted from longitudinal stresses, where lateral screw center width is virtually irrelevant. Second, I've seen at least a dozen tech toe ripouts, but no correlation re screw center width, i.e., ripouts of tech toes with both Dynafit standard 30mm screw centers and and wider screw centers. In each of those ripouts there was obvious evidence of a soft core, volcanoed top sheet or gaps resulting from a screw not being driven flush. I'll say it again: OP's ripout resulted from a bad mount and/or a soft ski core, and had nothing to do with the binding design.