Swapping the Toe Pieces
Swapping out the toe pieces is incredibly quick and efficient. I had concerns originally about this in terms of cold hands, stuck parts, or the fit being too tight to handle at the top of a mountain. But you don’t even have to take off your gloves. I found it to be just as easy (if not easier) to swap the toe pieces on the SI&I than to swap a Duke from tour to alpine mode. And the new SI&I should be even simpler.
The only two moving parts in this system are the locking mechanism for the toe pieces and the climbing bails for the heel. This instills a lot of confidence that this system will hold up well over time, and could outlast many other touring binding systems that may use plastic or many more moving parts for the binding system as a whole.
(This is also why a cost comparison of this system to other traditional touring systems is a little tricky. Most other systems are going to wear out more quickly, whereas this system is strictly a connection plate and will last much longer because of its simplicity, material strength, and lack of moving parts. In other words, if a FKS / P18 ever wore out [yeah, right] you wouldn’t have to replace the plates also.)
One item that will be key to update is the durability and the icing of the locking slider, since I have no experience with this feature.
But again, knowing Lars and the team, I am willing to wager heavily that it works slick.
Plates = Solid
I have my CAST plates mounted to a pair of 190 Bibbys, my second favorite object on earth after the FKS binding. One nice design note is that the toe plate that is mounted to the ski is the same hole pattern as the binding itself. This means you don’t have to redrill any skis. Or you can install inserts on one pattern to take the plates on and off. What I noticed is that they were so bomber that I just left them on all the time, even inbounds.
At this point, I’ve got about 15 days of touring on this set up and about 40 inbounds days, and have yet to have an issue. There is no movement whatsoever in the toe setup when touring or skiing. One nice aspect of this system is that the toe plates slide in from the back. With the forward pressure of the binding, while in ski mode, the toe plate is always in compression and being pushed toward the front of the channel/flange system. This ensures no movement of the system.
Going Up
This is my first experience touring on a Dynafit toe. There is little to discuss here on that front—they work amazingly well and are efficient.
The only downside to the CAST system that people point out is that the heel is always attached to the ski, and you need to haul it to the top. I will get into the physics of that later, and I’m sure it will start some arguments. In the big picture, when compared to an MFD, Duke, Guardian, or really anything other than a full Dynafit touring binding, these things kick ass going up.
Going Down
Again, this is pretty simple: you have an FKS going down. It’s heaven. Need I say more?
My setup currently has a 10mm stack height in addition to the binding. The new ones will have 7mm. This, along with the additional weight (250 grams) are the only downsides over and against drilling a FKS directly to your skis, and let me remind you that it is very difficult to walk uphill on a FKS drilled directly to your skis.
In my opinion, the additional 7 millimeters and 250 grams are better “downsides” than any other alpine-oriented touring setup. There will never be a touring system that doesn’t compromise something when skiing—it’s that simple. And, if the only downside to skiing this system is 250 grams and 7 mm of stack height, then we have a winner.
I’m sitting here trying to think of other things to discuss about the touring and skiing aspect of the SI&I system, but, again, it is so simple and works so well, I really have nothing else to add.
Differences between Prototype and Final Run
The main differences and improvements between the prototype I have been on for the last year and the new system are as follows:
- Great reduction in weight. New system is (ONLY) an additional 250 grams to your normal binding.
- Stack height. My system was 10mm, the new system is 7mm.
- Integrated lock. My system had a cotter pin-type of system to remove. The new system has an integrated slide lock. Although I had few complaints on my cotter pin system, this is much, much cleaner looking and will be easier to use.
- Lifters: My system had one wire bail. The new system has three available heights and utilizes a more sturdy plate. With a 300mm boot sole, you’ll get 7, 10 or 14 degrees of rise for touring.
Some Common Questions:
Do I really have to tie my brakes up every time?
YES.
(I would love to leave it at that, but this is BLISTER, so I will elaborate:)
I have heard multiple times that people are concerned with the hassle of changing over this system. I’d like to try and put this to rest and say: there really is no hassle once you’re familiar with the system. They are quick, easy, and efficient to swap everything around. I would like to capitalize that last sentence, but I’ll leave it at that.
I use Voile straps. It takes 2.32 seconds at the bottom to tie up and 1.48 seconds at the top to take them off. That is per binding. That equates to a total of 7.6 seconds during one lap.
For all the obsessive dawn patrollers that try to drop Superior on 36” of fresh in considerable avy conditions as the sun is coming up over Grizzly, this system is definitely not for you, because the dork behind you might get first tracks. For everybody else, don’t sweat it. The brakes aren’t an issue.
Do they ice up?
Well, maybe. As with any touring binding, you need to be aware of snow. Once the plate is inserted, no more snow is getting in there. So if you put the plate in when it’s dry, and at the top you are careful and keep snow out when switching, it is not an issue.
It will ice up, however, if you somehow drop the entire thing in the snow, jam a P18 toe piece into the plate, step in, and ski. (Don’t ask me how I know.)
We will have to revisit this on the new system, as there are some changes to geometry, cutouts, etc. They are also using an anodized process that injects teflon into the aluminum to reduce the ice-up issue.
But in short, in my experience having skied these in everything from 0-degree blower to 60-degree slush, these have iced up less than my Dukes. And as with any ski setup, Pam spray is your friend.
What about my boots?
Converting your boots is to me the current biggest downside of the system, as I mentioned above. Mine were modified using Lars’ jig and installing a hex allen insert. This has been bomber so far, and although I only have 15 days of touring on them, I can’t see this wearing out any time soon.
The new system utilizes a modified stainless steel tech insert and boot bottom to produce a more robust insert.
This is definitely a better design. But you do have to send your boots to CAST to get them modified, and a shim is added to the bottom of your boot to increase your stand height off the ski. (Some will probably consider this a bonus, but it comes down to personal preference.)
This is also a decent cost adder to the system when you have to ship your boots back and forth. But I’ll say it again, it’s well worth the time, money, and effort.
Why can’t I remove the binding heel in the same way I do the toe?
This question has already created some discussion. To me, the weight attached to the boot is much more important than the weight attached to the ski. One needs to move X amount of pounds from the bottom to the top. It doesn’t matter if it is on your ski, in your pack, or on your gut. Since your ski is being dragged the entire way (minus the kick turns), it is similar to the fat on your stomach. So if you were to add a slider to the heel, it would actually add weight to the entire system rather than subtract. And it will definitely add cost to the system. Although this is simplified, and it would no doubt be lighter and more efficient to have no weight on the back of the ski, it isn’t that large of an issue in the big picture. To me, even if this was an option at the same cost—I would stick with the current layout.
The real problem in touring setups is the weight on the heel of your boot that you lift up and down every time you step. And that is what is removed in the SI&I system.
I also find that having the extra weight of the heel on the back of the ski actually helps during a kick turn, as the ski immediately pivots into place with the ski tip to your knee. The SI&I system kick turns easier than anything else I have been on.
The other argument for the slide-off heel is that it would allow you to have one set of bindings and plates on all your skis. You could then just slide on and off as needed.
I would agree that this would be a nice benefit, but binding inserts will do the same trick, although it involves a bit more hassle. And CAST will be selling individual toe mounting plates that will allow you to do exactly this.
Finally, P18s are bulky. Having both heel pieces and toe pieces with plates in the pack would take up a decent amount of volume. For me, it’s just not worth it.
Why are these expensive?
Between the plates, the boot modification, the binding, and the tech toe piece, you could spend $1,000 to get into this setup. But if you already have the FKS bindings, you are looking at $600 for the plates, boot mod, and a tech toe.
If you want a pair tomorrow, and you don’t have tech toes or bindings, then these won’t be cheap, but they will be worth it.
Down the road, I can see these becoming much cheaper. First, if they can increase productivity, the plates will drop in price—they aren’t that complex. In addition, there will be more availability for different binding types, therefore allowing folks with Plums, Verticals, Salomons, etc. to jump on board with what they already have. And finally, if this really catches on, shops could start modifying boots, therefore reducing the tech insert install cost.
For me, today, it’s worth the $600 startup, as there is nothing else on the market that measures up.
And again, keep in mind the simplicity of this system. Because of that, these will probably outlast any other system on the market, making your money for the plates go further than other touring setups over time.
Bottom Line
If you’re looking for the closest thing to a no-compromise touring system to go up and down, you ought to support this project.
And even if this particular system is not for you, backing this company and this product will only progress the current state of touring bindings, and that’s a gain for the entire ski community.
Keep in mind, too, that this is not merely a donation, you are paying for the boot mod, the plates, the bindings—or even a finger painting from Silas. Kickstarter is about the size of the community supporting a given project, not necessarily the size of each pledge.
Let’s get this done.
Hi!
250 grams of additional weight per pair?
Thanks.
Pietro
No, per binding.
Thanks!
Awesome write up, I’m sold!
Nice review, thanks!
But one thing is wrong: it makes a huge difference if you have more weight on moving parts or in your backpack. I wouldn’t change the system, it seems just fine. The difference is the acceleration needed on moving parts: the heelpiece of the binding has to be accelerated each step if it is on the ski by your foot. If it’s in the backpack that acceleration is not needed because the upper body doesn’t have to be moved like that. Consider a bicycle wheel and attach some weight to it, the farer away from the axis, the stronger you have to pedal – same with boots, bindings and skis, they are moving to get you up. The torso itself doesn’t move, it is moved. Just go running with you skiing boots on and compare it to having them in you backpack and notice which one costs more of youre legs energy.
sorry for my lacking english skills
Hi, Burny – I agree with your point. What I was focusing on was that removing the weight of the binding from the heel of the boot during touring is the major benefit, and that is more important than reducing weight on the ski.
Not only are you accelerating that extra weight on the heel, but you are also pivoting and lifting it up and down with every step. The ski stays at a consistent height compared to your torso, and is moved the same number of vertical feet. Since nobody’s going to use this system for rando racing, I was emphasizing that this a bomber alpine system that also tours incredibly well compared to anything but a full tech setup. Some people will want that removable heel for the reason you mention, I’m just not one of them.
But you make a great point, we will revise and try to clarify. Thanks for reading and for the comment.
Yes, that’s totally correct – in fact that is one of the major benefits of the dynafit invention. It’s great to see that idea in combination with a true alpine binding. The system Silas and his brother came up with is so simple, yet it seems the right path.
Joe, you downplayed having a removable heel piece but the reason I would be very interested in that option would be to have the same flexibility as the MFD system and swapping to other skis. For $75 you can get the mounts on another set of skis and just swap the MFD plate around on different sets of skis (assuming brake width is adequate for the various sets of skis). Without the removable heel piece with the CAST system, you need to own/buy another set of bindings for another set of skis you want to make compatible. Am I missing something in my logic? MFD is a very cost effective way of making multiple skis AT compatible, especially when I paid just $140 for a new MFD system.
By the way, love all the write ups. Thanks.
Slide,
I mentioned this briefly at the end of the section discussing the removable heel. To me, I’d rather deal with binding freedom inserts on he heel (half as many as the total binding, not too bad) and not have the added weight skiing, or the manufacturing cost. You are still able to swap all bindings between skis, although now it will take 5 minutes versus one. It’s all a personal preference. I completely understand wanting the swappable heel plates, but they aren’t for me personally.
The added 5 minutes of switch over time in the garage will be saved by the quicker skin to the top when compared to the MFD.
And the swappable heel plates will be a reality some day, but this project started off to make a bomber touring setup, which they did. Once we fund that, who knows what CAST will come up with next, but I guarantee that swappable heels is on the list.
can you use at boots with this?
Rob,
Going up you’ll be on just the dynafit toe piece, so that would work fine. Going down, you’d have to check the compatibility of the boot with your current alpine binding setup. Personally I feel you need a sliding afd to work with vibram soles, but some people have made them work by modifying the toe piece or the boot sole.
Joe
For the latest on AT/technical boot compatibility with alpine (DIN) bindings – see Backpacker Magazine, Sept 2014 (pg 46). Engineers at Uni Of Washington/Seattle tested 120 combos of AT boots & alpine bindings for their release capabilities. And found that very few combos will release correctly. Even if the boot fits into your alpine binding, you’ll very likely never be sure it’ll release when or how it should. And you may even be damaging those bindings. Hmmmmm…
I H8 those dorks behind me who freely mooch off my trail breaking efforts and then have the unmitgated audacity to poach my pow line. (there’s got to me a snowmenclature term for that!)
Quick question that I have due to looking at the above pictures.
One of the benefits of the Pivot system, is that your heel can “pivot” out when the binding releases. However, looking at the pictures the, side of the risers when locked down look as if they would prevent this from happening as the boot heel would catch on them.
This seems a pretty big problem or is it just the angle the pictures are taken from??
Thanks.
Steven,
I don’t have the updated system yet (should in a few weeks here and will update). But I believe it is the angle of the picture. I can’t imagine that would be an issue. Although I do see what you are looking at.
I’ll update when I receive the new setup.
Joe
Thanks.
Yea, it would be very odd for that to be the case, but would still be good to have an affirmative answer.
Enjoy when it arrives! I’m jealous!
Hello,
I’m thinking of getting a Cast setup and had an auxiliary question. What’s your opinion on riding bindings at the very lowest end of its DIN setting (8 in the case of the CAST-compatible FKS18)?
Thanks
Vince,
There are a couple good write ups on the site in the Bindings 101 and 201. These discuss this exact question.
Personally, if you are going to rock a p18 on 8, I would be inclined to go with a p14 to save weight. The toe is a slightly different design, but you still get all the benefits of the pivot heel.
If you aren’t concerned about weight, there is no reason you can’t run a p18 at the low DIN setting.
Joe
There exists such a thing as a single-pivot toe in a 6-15 DIN: Rossi FKS155. Once I get the new (apparently only available in Canada, suckers :P) WTR compatible AFDs for them (just to be clear, only for single-pivot toes, no such thing for 14 DIN toes), and some wide brakes, I’ll have a pretty sweet setup for my Kuros. Oh, and save up $275USD at a craptastic exchange, guess I shouldn’t have mocked y’all.
Joe, couldn’t agree more about single-pivot Look/Rossi, and about sliding AFDs. Sounds like you value your knee ligaments as much as I do.
All this effort to be able to use one set of boots for alpine and touring, which is key when you gotta fly to the goods.
Andy
Nice write up on the CAST system. Quick question. Does the dynafit crampons work with the Cast plates? Looks like it should fit no problem but would be nice to get a confirmation that they don’t interfere.
Slightly off topic but do you know if a BD Factor 130 w/AT sole fits in a Look P14 toe piece. Deciding between them or the Salomon STH2’s to pair with a CAST setup.
Thanks in advance,
Supra
I imagine you Joe or some of the other guys at Blister will have put a bunch of more days on this system this season. It would be really good for another update, especially as I read they have dropped the weight down to 180g per ski.
Considering the snow in Tahoe this year…unfortunately I haven’t put a “bunch more” days on these. However, I’ve put enough on them that I have stopped even looking at what else is coming down the pipe line in terms of AT setups. IMO, there isn’t a design that compares if you’re looking for a system that is alpine oriented. It makes almost no compromises on that end, while being very efficient on the touring end when comparing to a Duke, etc. I always joke with my buddies when I’m switching over about how “inconvenient” the system is to transfer over. Some folks think/say it’s a pain. But it’s only the folks that have never used them that have those comments. They are awesome, on all fronts, period.
SI&I for Atomic Tracker?
…or any frame AT system for that matter. Brilliant thought. TotAlly blows away the foregoing discussion. Well played, sir!
Hey all. I realize this is an old thread but the Blister site is pretty active and generally has helpful comments so I figured I would post this here.
I have been using (and loving) the CAST SI&I setup since their kickstarter campaign. It’s totally bomber on the downhill and tours great going uphill with only a minor delay when switching over (seems comparable to the swap time of my old dukes, mostly because you have to take your boot out of the binding during the changeover). I’ve ran into a discouraging issue this fall, however, when trying to use a pair of Scarpa Freedom RS boots. It seems the rockered “Mountain Plus” sole (the ones with the tech toe piece) will not work with Look Pivot toe pieces (too low of a stand height, around 20mm). This means the incredibly popular Scarpa Freedom boots can’t be used with the SI&I system unless one was to modify the “Piste” (DIN) sole to have a tech toe.
Does anyone have experience with this issue? It’s a pity they aren’t compatible as they are both awesome products.
Hi Dylan,
Are you using a standard Look Pivot toe piece?
CAST have just listed some WTR AFD plates that replace the standard ones, this should mean that your Scarpas fit in.
http://casttouring.com
Steve
One year after the last guy…but I’ll give it a shot.
The last two seasons I have toured with my snowshoe/snowboarder friends, key is we ALL use snowshoes. Needless to say, this is probably the most annoying and heaviest way to tour, as I was putting my alpine boots and my skis on my back. This year, I refuse to keep doing this and would like to purchase a touring setup. However I don’t like the idea of sacrificing a pair of skis to touring since I will only do it about 5-10 times a season.
I am still planning on getting a pair of WTR boots, potentially Salomon’s, and have been considering the Marker Kingpin. But this means on ski trips I still have to bring two pairs of skis. I like the Cast system because you get the best of both worlds on one pair of skis, as well as not sacrificing the performance of the alpine binding inbounds or in rough out of bounds conditions. Am considering this system with the Look Pivot 14s. Are the WTR AFD plates needed for the 14s or only the 18s? Or was it only for Scarpa?
I have no previous experience on pin bindings, but the idea of them going downhill seems crazy. How would you rate this system compared to whats out there for the 16-17 season?
Hi Elise:
I know this is a late reply and you’ve probably already purchased your bindings and have been skiing on them all season, but here are answers to your questions in case it helps you or others:
Boot Compatibility:
Keep in mind that WTR is a design specific to Lange and Rossignol boots, so technically WTR AFD plates are only certified to work with Lange or Rossi boots with WTR soles. That said, they might work with other rockered soled boots.
If you buy rockered soled boots or WTR boots, you will need one of the following bindings:
1) New Look Pivot 14 Dual WTR bindings (switchable AFD between WTR and DIN boot soles)
2) Look Pivot 18’s with aftermarket WTR AFD plates (CAST sells these replacement plates, they seem to be rather rare but CAST must have bought up a stockpile directly from Look)
3) Choose another binding with adjustable height AFD, Marker and Salomon both make adjustable height AFD bindings and CAST made systems for both brands of binding.
If you choose to buy non-rockered boots and do a CAST tech sole conversion:
1)Use old-school solid plastic soled boots and DIN standard AFD’s on Look Pivot 14 or Pivot 18.
I sent CAST a pair of solid-plastic soled boots from 2008 and they did a great job on my boot sole conversion. If you want to put tech inserts on a different boot (not solid-plastic soled) you will need to contact Lars at CAST and find out if he can convert it for you. Since Lars’ personal boots in his videos are race boots with solid plastic soles, I suspect that the solid sole conversion systems have gotten plenty of R&D.
How I would rate these bindings compared to other AT options this season:
All told, the CAST system is more expensive than most of the other burly AT binding options, but it is the only system that does not sacrifice performance anywhere (climbing efficiency or skiing power and security). I’m sure other people on the internet will argue, but those people probably think that Marker Kingpins (or insert favorite tech binding here) release and retain their boot just as well as Look Pivot 18’s. I don’t think so. If you want to be able to ski resort and backcountry terrain on the same solid setup, without missing a beat or ever second-guessing your equipment, CAST is the best option. If you can afford to have a quiver of skis, boots and bindings and don’t mind changing from one setup to the other from resort to backcountry to optimize for skiing vs climbing depending on the day then there are other viable options out there.
I hope this helps! I have been skiing the resorts on my Look Pivot 18 CAST system all winter and they work flawlessly. I can charge hard in my race boots or my softer CAST converted tech boots (same BSL, DIN standard soles) without making any adjustments to my bindings or skiing style.
I have only used the walk-mode of the bindings 3 days this season, and those were mostly shake-down runs for my new toys. The changeover was a little fiddly if I got snow in the interface, but I have since rubbed some Holmenkol yellow ski wax on the interface to keep snow from sticking and I’m planning to do some spring tours in the coming months to try them more. I love the confidence of clicking into my Look Pivots on the changeover, I have always skied on race bindings and I know when they’ll stay on or come off. With Look Pivots I can run a nice safe-for-my-knees DIN of 10 without having pre-release problems.
Cheers!
Clayton
I am still using these in 2024.. you could get these with a lot of different bindings with the originals. I am still running marker squires and K2 pinnacle-mind bender boots. The only time I had a pre release was when I skied into a stream. Like them a lot.