Salomon Announces S/LAB Shift MNC Binding

[nay]

I really reeeeally want these bindings. Now, I need to find out which boots fit me best. Tried the S/LAB MTN's and fit me great but did not love the way they flexed. Felt a bit odd. It was not too soft just different feel the way the plastic contorted.

I’m in the QST Pro 130 this season and so far the out of the box fit with the Endofit tongue is the better than I’ve been able to achieve with bootfitting and custom liners with regards to some alignment issues I have, particularly bowed tibia. No complaints on the flex feel (I’ve been in X-Max 120s)

Since this is a MNC binding and the QST is making a (claimed) greater nod to alpine downhill while still clocking in at 1,650 grams with the same walk mode as the MTNs, albeit reduced forward ROM due to the Endofit tongue, this could be an intriguing combo.

 

[neonorchid]

I’m in the QST Pro 130 this season and so far the out of the box fit with the Endofit tongue is the better than I’ve been able to achieve with bootfitting and custom liners with regards to some alignment issues I have, particularly bowed tibia. No complaints on the flex feel (I’ve been in X-Max 120s)
-

@nay, is QST Pro's arc across the front of the toes as generous in shape and width as X-Max 120 (out of the box fit for me)? Or is it more like MTN Lab, which are much to tappered to a point for my feet? If QST Pro is cast from the same mold as MTN Lab as they appear to be form pic's, they won't work for me.

 

[Smear]

Really cool product. Look like a transformer toy, hope it's more durable than a toy.

I can totally see a use for this in my quiver. Currently I have sollyfit plates on my powder skis, BD Megawatt, and use them sometimes for touring with dynafit bindings and tech boots and other times with STH14 and alpine boots. This would be like that setup but without all of the time consuming screwing inbetween.

But I no longer have much use for powder skis, don't even use them every year, so I don't think I will upgrade to this in any forseeable future. Days (and hours) of backcountry and offpiste skiing got instantly reduced like 20X after getting kids...

 

[nay]

@nay, is QST Pro's arc across the front of the toes as generous in shape and width as X-Max 120 (out of the box fit for me)? Or is it more like MTN Lab, which are much to tappered to a point for my feet? If QST Pro is cast from the same mold as MTN Lab as they appear to be form pic's, they won't work for me.

I think the QST mold has to be unique to that boot because of the tongue and buckle design. The toe box fit is similar to the x-max for me with a B width foot lacking anomalies.

But...the buckling system and tongue manage how your foot is held in the boot and how and where compression occurs quite differently, and this may affect how toe fit (and other fit) happens over the flex range.

My toe box fit is nailed when my upper buckle is nailed. That’s how heel placement is achieved in this boot with the integrated shell tongue, and it’s way different from other boots I’ve skied even with Zipfits or foam injected liners.

That may just be me...or may not...

 

[davjr96]

These will definitely be replacing my frame touring bindings next year, though I am hoping this spurs more similar products by other manufacturers. Competition never hurt!

 

[neonorchid]

I think the QST mold has to be unique to that boot because of the tongue and buckle design. The toe box fit is similar to the x-max for me with a B width foot lacking anomalies. -

-

Ok so the question should've been if you tried on a pair of MTN Lab's and if they fit the same in the toe as QST.

 

[neonorchid]

These will definitely be replacing my frame touring bindings next year, though I am hoping this spurs more similar products by other manufacturers. Competition never hurt!

Like this ... actually, they beat Solomon to the punch - http://www.bavarianalpinemanifest.com/en/home

 

[James]

Like this ... actually, they beat Solomon to the punch - http://www.bavarianalpinemanifest.com/en/home

Pretty cool!
--------------------
The company Bavarian Alpine Manifest GmbH (B.A.M.) was founded on November 19, 2014 by the Bavarian ski manufacturer and binding enthusiast "Bambam" Markus Steinke. With the PINDING®, the young start-up from Ascholding near Munich has developed an innovative touring and freeride binding. In November 2015 the idea for this new binding system was successfully introduced to the public by a crowdfunding campaign . In April 2016, the Bavarian State Ministry for Economy and Media, Energy and Technology took up the PINDING® into a support program called BayTOU.

The team of B.A.M. consists of the CEO "Bambam" Markus Steinke, the Technical Director and engineer Michael Kreuzinger and Hanna Finkel, responsible for marketing and communication.

http://www.bavarianalpinemanifest.com/en/ispo217_pinding_by_bam
------------------------
Looks like '17/'18 is hhoped for release of some product.


Here's their product vid.

 

[Yo Momma]

Totally interesting developments in BC. I listened to most of the interview linked by @neonorchid. From what those guys were saying they didn't give the Shifts the "Ok" until they were bulletproof and dead on target.

I'm no longer loving my frame bindings. I did an experiment and took a set of frame bindings off of my BC skis Line Sick Day 102's, and put alpine bindings on them. OMG it's like a different ski! I HATED this ski w/ the frame binding. Now w/ the alpine binding, it's one of my favorite skis........... Hmmmm....... I had no idea the frame affected the feel of the ski to that degree! I'm thinking........... maybe, no more frame bindings for me?


On another note, I used to LOVE my 2016 Mantras..... then I converted them to frames ............ now a totally different feel to the ski.......... I'm not liking it! I'm also thinking of reverting those back to alpine bindings in addition to the other skis mentioned above. I've got some more testing to do and I'll report back.... may need to invest in some Shifts depending on the reviews...........

 

[nay]

Ok so the question should've been if you tried on a pair of MTN Lab's and if they fit the same in the toe as QST.

Short answer on MTN is “no”. I was trying to find a way to relay my thoughts that the endofit tongue and buckling system affect the shell shape differently and that might affect the comparison with either boot as well as how you experience the toe box.

Some pics might help. Here’s QST and X-Max side by side.

Here you can see how different the buckling fit and shell shape are for the instep - both boots are just storage buckle tight. The QST system wraps the shell around the instep, both in shell shape and buckle system function where the traditional overlap of the X-Max does not, so how much the toe box compresses under buckling is different.

This view might help as well - I know pics don’t say how a foot will fit in a boot, but how the toe box compares I thinks shows up here.

 

[neonorchid]

Thx @nay.
QST toe box doesn't look as high as X-Max which has been great for fitting a chemical pack toe warmer above my toes. Also looks slightly pointer. Not sure if this is the adjustability you mention but QST appears to have more volume above the articulation point of the arch/instep vs., X-Max low volume there which works well for me.
I like that you find them comparable enough to X-Maxx to be a OQB for double duity in the resort. Will try to find my size in a shop, see if they fit. Had walked around a ski shop in MTN Lab, terrible, couldn't get them off fast enough. I hoping QST will be better.

 

[nay]

Apologies for the thread drift, but I’ll claim we’re on topic because Salomon is, IMO, designing a binding like Shift to a boot like QST: standard MNC, the boot is in the range of basic touring weight and has the same cam strap, walk mode design and AT soles, but it’s a downhill oriented boot in at least much of its design, noting the obvious difference in forward lean.

Which with respect to the Shift bindings is to say: if I like a really light inbounds AT boot that has excellent lateral stability and quickness (check), and I like really light inbounds skis (check), and I’m honest about the relatively low percentage of non-lift uphill I’m likely to actually do (check)...is Salomon designing me a system that I could truly use without a quiver? If it proved out, then the Shift is relatively cheap, because nothing costs more than a quiver.

I don’t think you’ll get a toe warmer in the QST. The boot shape is much more anatomical to the slope of the foot - I have consistent contact from top of the toes to shin. The instep area right at the middle buckle is lower ceiling height than the X-max so if you like the low ceiling of the x-max with its more generous toe box width, the QST is certainly worth a store test, noting that its walk mode ROM is mostly to the rear due to the endofit tongue staying in place (everything is nicely upright).

I’ll leave you with a visual of what Salomon sez about the QST being derived in part from its mountain trail running shoe design. Those shoes practically beg you to run down the mountain while you stay planted back in the heel pocket...

Anyway, I’ll be watching the Shift reviews for sure. If this wasn’t relevant to this thread, mods please feel free to move to a QST thread as I don’t think we have one and it sure seems a design worth some discussion and feedback.

 

[neonorchid]

Thx @nay, for taking the topic sideways and giving us a great review

These new product developments make me happy for not pulling my Look Pivot non-WTR bindings from the old skis and spending extra on a Pivot WTR for the lattest skis.

Solomon Shift is something I've been impatiently waiting for since first seeing a Marker Barron at REI around a decade ago. I don't even want to get into how many AT bindings since Duke/Barron, frame and pin, I've gotten excited about only to be let down when they made it to market and in the field. I've high hopes for this one!

 

[BMC]

Totally interesting developments in BC. I listened to most of the interview linked by @neonorchid. From what those guys were saying they didn't give the Shifts the "Ok" until they were bulletproof and dead on target.

I'm no longer loving my frame bindings. I did an experiment and took a set of frame bindings off of my BC skis Line Sick Day 102's, and put alpine bindings on them. OMG it's like a different ski! I HATED this ski w/ the frame binding. Now w/ the alpine binding, it's one of my favorite skis........... Hmmmm....... I had no idea the frame affected the feel of the ski to that degree! I'm thinking........... maybe, no more frame bindings for me?


On another note, I used to LOVE my 2016 Mantras..... then I converted them to frames ............ now a totally different feel to the ski.......... I'm not liking it! I'm also thinking of reverting those back to alpine bindings in addition to the other skis mentioned above. I've got some more testing to do and I'll report back.... may need to invest in some Shifts depending on the reviews...........

I have two pairs of Salomon QLabs. One is mounted with Salomon Sth WTR 13 alpine bindings, and the other with Tyrolia Adrelain 13 AT bindings. While they do ski a bit different I don't think it's a "love/hate" issue. With the Tyrolias at least the feel is a little calmer, perhaps because the heel is free floating, and perhaps (perhaps) the Salomons a bit more precise, but the differences are very small indeed and just downhill skiing I don't even think about it.

 

[crgildart]

This is pretty close to what I've been waiting for in boot development.. getting rid of that narrow plank current boots have been built on top of for the past 50 years and making the bottom of the boot more like the bottom of a shoe.. How wide is this on the bottom across the ball of the foot?

 

[JayT]

As far as safety is concerned, I think at this point for touring bindings it's basically (highest to lowest):

- Shift / all frame bindings (Guardian, Duke, Adrenaline)
- Vipec / Tecton / Ski Trab TR2 (lateral toe release)
- all other tech bindings. (Yes there is some variation, but no others have lateral toe release or toe elasticity.)

Kingpins go in the "all other tech" bindings from a safety perspective. Even if their skiability is higher.

You forgot the Beast... which is probably closer to the Vipec and definitely safer than all other tech bindings.

And of course CAST is as safe as Shift, but also a PITA to transition.

 

[Philpug]

I jsut skied the Shift. Preview/Review coming.

 

[Yo Momma]

Any chance of an early release on these? Would love to try these out!

 

[lonewolf210]

You forgot the Beast... which is probably closer to the Vipec and definitely safer than all other tech bindings.

Safer then the Tecton?

 

[jmeb]

From pure safety perspective:

Shift > Tecton = Vipec > Beast > other tech.

But Beast is discontinued so sort of not important. Also not including Ski Trabs binding which requires a different boot.