Randonee Binding Info Wanted

I'm in the process of buying Randonee gear. Sometime soon, I will probably buy the bindings (assuming I can find boots that fit me). I have spent most of my adult life cross country skiing and much of that has been in the backcountry. Even though I enjoy stretching the limits of my flimsy gear, I've decided that it makes sense to get more robust gear. I will use this for touring around places like Paradise (Muir and Mazama Ridge) and Artist Point (I would like to ski Ptarmigan Ridge) as well as tour oriented places. When I go along the flats, I stride and glide (I don't like to skate ski).

So, assuming I buy Randonee boots that use the Dynafit system, what would people recommend? For the sake of argument, assume that money is no object (it is an object, but one I can easily measure). Here are some bindings I'm considering:

www.dynafit.com/product/bindings/low-tech-race-auto -- Really light. Can you put your foot down completely (when touring)? Not clear to me. If not, that's a deal breaker.
www.dynafit.com/product/bindings/low-tech-radical -- Quite light. Combination of the front end of the Speed Radical and the back end of the Low Tech. Same question applies as above (since it is the back end I'm concerned about).
www.dynafit.com/product/bindings/tlt-speed-superlite -- Quite light. Same weight as the Low Tech Radical.
www.dynafit.com/product/bindings/tlt-speed-radical -- A bit heavier, but still pretty light. Significantly cheaper (and may have other advantages, I don't know).
www.sportiva.com/products/ski/bindings/rt-binding -- Another really light option

There may be other models I should consider (Plum?).

Other than weight or price, I'm not sure how to compare these. I'm not a very aggressive skier, and my main interest is in touring. A spring trip to Ptarmigan ridge is a good example of why I'm going to buy this equipment (mostly gradual terrain but a few spots where I would need to make sharp turns on a fairly steep slope). As I mention, if the binding doesn't have a mode that allows my foot to be flat, than I won't buy it (even if it is really light). There may be other advantages to one binding over another as well (such as the ease with which one can switch from one type of skiing to another).

Thanks for any advice. Note: I cross posted over at nwhikers as well.

Don't forget the TLT classic/speed. It's still for sale in europe, and theoretically over here. Primary drawback is the limited adjustment range. Elsewise, it's a simple, light, time-tested, and bomber binding.

The Low Tech Race and Low Tech Radical (same three-hole race heel with a regular Radical toe) have just one touring position, on top of the flipper that covers the heel pins in the picture. There isn't a true "flat" position. The Speed Superlite doesn't let your boot go flat either, but is nice because you don't have to turn the heelpiece to access touring mode and has two climbing levels (the only one of their bindings that's designed like this). This is nice because you can forget about the current problems involving the anti-rotation pin in the other Radical series bindings . . .

The base model Speed Radical lets your boot go about as flat to the ski as possible (to the heel base plate); people I know using the binding set on a lateral release value of 9 or 10 are having reasonable success using this without the anti-rotation pin. As you note, it's also relatively cheap. The ATK/La Sportiva RT also lets your boot go flat and could be a contender for your purposes - I haven't heard of any problems with it so far, but the user sample size is very small. Plum Guide is a possibility as well, I've had good luck with mine.

Keep in mind that your requirement that the boot go flat to the ski in touring mode may be related to how much cuff articulation you have in your boots - I find that higher lifter levels or not stopping to rotate my heels to "flat" position is much less annoying with my Dynafit TLT 5 boots than any previous AT boot I've owned due to cuff mobility . . .

Ross, have you considered a telemark setup?

I came from the same background. I primarily cross country skied through my childhood and teens, mostly off track, in Czechoslovakia. 3-pin classic on flimsy XC gear.

When I came to Vancouver and tried XC skiing in the Coast Mountains and North Cascades I realized it is a different game here, especially around treeline and in the alpine.

I rented different AT gear five times to test it out before committing the huge sums to buy the equipment. Somehow I just had hard time skinning up, it was really unnatural movement compared to XC. Maybe I did not give it enough time, maybe I was doing something wrong but when I rented skis with telemark setup I knew this was it in the first 100 m. I was flying!

On the downhill I often do alpine turns on the steeper parts and telemark turns on the mellower slopes. It works very well for me and I am happy with my setup. It works pretty much everywhere around here from yo-yo skiing trees, bowls or touring Baker, St. Helen's or Rainier.

I don't have any specific gear recommendation but I think you might benefit from renting an AT setup for one day and a telemark setup for another.

Have fun finding your new gear!

The "Speed Radical" gets my vote for what you describe -- the versions that are lighter that are more for "Randonee Racing" than for general usage. I almost bought "Speed Radicals" myself this fall -- but opted instead for the "Radical ST" -- which adds the ease (and weight) of ski brakes.

Unless you are putting in more than 10 hours a week in training / fitness workouts and have a goal of competing or doing really long tours, I don't think the weight reductions of the lighter versions make up for their decreased versatility and extra cost.

I agree with Randy and Greg.  I considered the Low Tech last year, but the idea of walking around with my heel more elevated than normal in a Dynafit binding was not appealing.  Not a concern in racing where it is either up or down; but a real concern in touring where you may be on the flats quite a while.  Another related concern for me was the tendency for snow to build up, pack, and turn to ice on the shelf of the level position on the Vertical ST and FT bindings.  Again, not a concern going up when you are on the 1st or 2nd lift, but a real concern in moist or sun affected snow when you are breaking trail and snow falls underfoot to compress and build up--putting you up on the ball of your foot or on your toes.

I bought the Speed Radicals because the old speeds were not to be found.  The boot heel position on the Speed is actually slightly negative, which is nice, and allows a little snow build up without negative effects.  The binding design without the heel shelf does not collect snow as fast as a Vertical.  But it will collect snow eventually.  I have mine mounted such that the adjustment screw and most of the mounting food were well under the heel piece to reduce tendency to collect snow.

The Dynafit bindings are so light that they are really insignificant contributor to weight on the foot when you are using a bc ski and boot (compared to a racing ski and boot); so I would not worry about the weight differences between the tech bindings.

The only disadvantage to the Speed is that you can not use a brake.  I have 4 skis with Dynafit bindings, all were mounted without brakes.  But I decided to put brakes on my Manaslus and I am glad I did. I use them in the deeper and more tricky snow.  I have my Speed Radicals on Karhu Guides without brakes (brakes will also contribute to snow buildup) that I use on nordic ski patrol; I add leashes when it is icy or rough.  I don't have brakes on my Verticals on my Seven Summits and Snowwolfs; I use them for spring/summer skiing and icy conditions and I use B&D leashes.  The added weight of either the brakes or leashes is really insignificant unless you are racing or doing thousands of feet of vertical gain quickly.