The 5 Best Backcountry Ski Bindings of 2024

Best Overall AT Bindings

Black Diamond ATK Raider 12

Weight: 366 grams | ISO/DIN Certified: No

The ATK Raider 12 is the first binding we recommend for any backcountry skier. It does everything you need it to do with ease and clocks in at a very reasonable weight. What we deem “full-function” AT ski bindings have brakes, adjustable length and release settings, and three heel lifters. The Raider 12 incorporates all of those features, and the design of each feature is a bit more refined than the competition. More than a few of our testers returned from a ski day, noting how “smooth” the downhill skiing is with this binding underfoot. No other lightweight tech binding elicited this response, never mind the frequency we heard this term applied to the Raider 12.

Compared to the other top award-winner – the Atomic Backland Tour – the ATK Raider 12 weighs about 100 grams more per foot. Despite the refinement of the Raider 12, this is a significant weight difference. Although marketing materials might suggest that this ATK binding comes with a revolutionary adjustment of toe piece retention, the truth is that it's just another well-refined piece of technology that has existed for a long time. This binding does, however, improve upon the “elastic travel” of the heel piece by incorporating a heel gap and a sliding-spring loaded track. While the consequences of these design refinements haven't been fully proven on this relatively new-to-the-market binding, logic suggests that they likely smooth out the skiing experience. We may not yet know for sure, but we sure aren't complaining.

Read more: Black Diamond ATK Raider 12 review

The Other Best Alpine Touring Binding

Atomic Backland Tour

Weight: 286 grams | ISO/DIN Certified: No

We consider a full-function AT binding to have an adjustable release, adjustable boot sole length, three touring heel levels, and optional brakes. The Atomic Backland Tour – along with any identical version produced by Amer brands like Solomon and Armada – is nearly the lightest binding we have ever tested with all four of these key attributes. Few available bindings have all these “standard” attributes anywhere near this weight point. It was easy to grant this our highest award, and it is easy to recommend these bindings to you.

Now, this choice may be a little intimidating. First, these AT bindings are relatively minimal in appearance. Fear not, as we have tested them thoroughly and have had no major performance or durability issues. Especially when compared to much heavier touring bindings, these award winners are actually more durable and reliable. If anything, the simple construction is its greatest performance and durability attribute. Next, there is no certification of the release values. So-called “DIN” certification is something that alpine skiers are conditioned to look for, and this binding does not have that. Nor does the ATK Raider 12, or most other suitable options.

Read more: Atomic Backland Tour review

Best Bang for the Buck

Dynafit Speed Turn

Weight: 370 grams | ISO/DIN Certified: No

The Dynafit Speed Turn is the best deal available for a tech-style binding, costing much less than most other models. Although there were some nerve-wracking supply chain issues for a while, those seem to have been resolved, and this binding is readily available once again. And we're psyched. With its tried-and-true yet straightforward design, the Speed Turn is built to last, and we wouldn't hesitate to use it on remote trips.

However, because of its brakeless design, it takes more skill to deal with the nuances of backcountry skiing with no brakes. If you'd really rather have a binding with brakes – and that's a reasonable ask – it's unfortunate that the next most valuable option is the much more expensive ATK Crest 10. The ultra-classic Dynafit Speed Turn likely keeps costs low because it has seen very few incremental upgrades and refinements over 30 years of development. Speed Turn bindings don't look much different than the Dynafit tech bindings of the early 1990s; this is a good thing.

Read more: Dynafit Speed Turn review

Best Ultralight Touring Binding

Dynafit Superlite 150

Weight: 179 grams | ISO/DIN Certified: No

The Dynafit Superlite 150 is the best ultralight ski binding in our test. It matches the weight of skimo race bindings from just a few years ago but adds significant robustness and release value adjustment and range. Any binding with release adjustments from 4-13 is significant. That it is this light is remarkable. We do need to make one note on the weight because the marketing material for the Superlite 150 suggests that it weighs 150 grams. This award winner does indeed weigh 150 grams – just without the screws. Add the screws, and you get the weight we list above. Regardless of the length or how many, all bindings need screws to mount, so it only seems fair to include them in our measured weight.

You can add aftermarket adjustment plates and brakes to the Superlite 150 and still have a pretty lightweight package. But if you want those features, you are better off choosing one of our higher scoring options that come standard with those features, like the Atomic Backland Tour. Choose the Superlite 150 to optimize uphill performance, with just enough downhill performance to instill confidence in any scenario you might find yourself climbing into.

Read more: Dynafit Superlite 150 review

Best for Crossover Resort Use

Marker Duke PT 12

Weight: 1219 grams | ISO/DIN Certified: Yes, Alpine and AT

Choose this binding for optimized downhill performance, but do so with caution. Regarding the inherent compromises we make with all backcountry ski gear, we can seldom make absolute claims. However, we can definitely assert that the Marker Duke PT is the best alpine skiing binding that can also tour. Aside from minor points, the Duke PT skis as well as basic to above-average resort bindings. That certainly sets it apart from most other bindings in this review.

That, though, is where the applause ends. To get that downhill performance, the Duke PT is too heavy and complicated to compete on any level with actual touring bindings. The Duke PT is literally seven times the weight of the lightest binding we tested (and 12 times the weight of the lightest options on the market!) For all that weight, you might get downhill performance that is twice that of the other lightweight options. That's tough math to reconcile, even compared to similar but lighter-weight options like the Salomon S/Lab Shift MNC. Basically, these bindings are for the resort or other mechanized skiing (i.e., helicopter or snowcat) that may involve only short ascents. “Regular” backcountry skiing is best done with regular and much lighter backcountry ski bindings, like the similarly priced Plum Summit 12.

Read more: Marker Duke PT 12 review

Compare Products

Compare select up to 5 products to compare

	Score	Product	Price
	73	Black Diamond ATK Raider 12 Best Overall AT Bindings	$700
	72	Atomic Backland Tour The Other Best Alpine Touring Binding	$800
	72	Plum R170	$445
	71	ATK Trofeo	$500
	71	ATK Haute Route 10	$600
	71	Plum Race 99	$619
	70	Marker Alpinist	$550
	69	Plum Oazo 8	$490
	69	ATK Crest 10	$500
	68	Dynafit Superlite 150 Best Ultralight Touring Binding	$650
	68	Ski Trab Titan Vario	$500
	68	Plum Pika	$539
	68	G3 Zed 12	$572
	66	Dynafit Radical Binding	$550
	66	G3 Ion 12	$664
	60	Dynafit TLT Expedition	$500
	60	Plum Summit 12	$629
	57	Dynafit Speed Turn Best Bang for the Buck	$400
	55	Fritschi Xenic 10	$520
	54	Marker Kingpin 13	$700
	51	Salomon S/Lab Shift MNC	$600
	50	Marker Duke PT 12 Best for Crossover Resort Use	$600

Why Trust GearLab

Testing backcountry ski bindings involved some lab time and then a whole lot of skiing. We weighed each binding (including mandatory mounting screws) to the nearest gram (and then made conversions). We obtained measurements of the stack height and binding delta for each binding to get a numerical idea of the edge-to-edge leverage and forward-to-back weight distribution. Next, things got fun. We put in tens of thousands of vertical feet in all sorts of conditions. Our team put each of these bindings through the wringer to take the guesswork out of your decision-making experience. Virtually all of our backcountry ski binding testing took place in the actual backcountry. This lattermost fact alone sets apart our review from many other reviews on the internet; to test in true backcountry circumstances is harder but far more useful. We hold ourselves to a high standard. Plus, we love backcountry skiing.

Our testing of AT bindings is divided across five metrics:

• Weight (35% of total score weighting)

• Downhill Performance (25% weighting)

• Touring Performance (20% weighting)

• Ease of Use (15% weighting)

• Durability (5% weighting)

To test AT ski bindings, we leveraged the background of our most knowledgeable tester for all things snow. Jed Porter is an internationally certified IFMGA/UIAGM mountain guide, holds AIARE pro level 3 certification, and instructs avalanche safety courses. Jed's primary gig is guiding backcountry skiing in his home Teton Range and around the world. Find him at www.jed.ski Jed spends a great deal of time climbing mountains and skiing back down them. To put it mildly. He has notched a summit-to-sea ascent and descent of Mount Saint Elias and made the first integral and first solo completion of California's historic Red Line Traverse. In 2020 he logged 800,000 vertical feet of human-powered mountain terrain. Including a period in which he logged “half a mil in half a year”, all on skis. Jed consulted with peers, partners, and clients for general feedback on bindings and extensive sharing of the tested bindings. In 2021, he expanded and formalized his Teton region test team to include an even wider range of backgrounds. That test team remains intact and psyched into the 2023-24 ski season.

Related: How We Tested Alpine Touring (AT) Bindings

Analysis and Test Results

Your absolute most important consideration is your application and usage patterns. Be real about how you will use your ski gear and think critically about marketing copy and the appeal of overblown generalizations that promise more than they can deliver. AT ski bindings can be light, simple, and enable amazing adventures. Or they can be entirely unsuitable. Few categories of outdoor equipment are available with such a wide range of functionality. Further, few categories of equipment have the most “exciting” developments in the most ineffective and niche subcategories. Buyer beware and read carefully.

Related: How to Choose AT Bindings

What's the Best Value?

AT ski bindings span a wide range of prices. What do you get at different price points? As bindings get lighter, they get more expensive. Bindings also get more expensive and heavier with incrementally greater safety and downhill performance. Spend more in the lightweight direction, and you can cut the weight in half. Spend more for greater downhill performance, and that downhill performance increases by a marginal amount. If you are looking for “bang for your buck,” going lighter is better than going for more downhill performance.

The least expensive bindings are light and straightforward but not super light. Paradoxically, there is an inverse relationship between price and durability. Normally, we might expect more expensive products to last longer. In the case of AT ski bindings, the least expensive are the most robust and longest-proven designs. We love this sort of synchronicity.

Subtract weight from something proven and affordable, and it gets more expensive and less durable. Add features (and, inherently, weight) to that same binding, and it gets more expensive and less durable. A good value in AT ski bindings is an excellent, lasting value at a reasonable weight.

With the addition of the Salomon Shift and Marker Duke PT to the market, our review, and the award selection roster, we acknowledge a discussion of value decisions around these appealing “hybrid” resort/backcountry bindings. With acceptable resort performance, we know that it is tempting to choose the Shift or Duke as bindings to anchor a sort of “quiver of one” for resort and backcountry skiing We advocate against this strategy, as it likely won't have the value or performance you hope for. If you're interested in a deeper dive into this conversation, our lead tester takes an editorial slant to this discussion.

Weight

While weight is a factor regarding touring performance, we kept it separate for our OutdoorGearLab scoring purposes. More than most other types of gear, the difference in weight from one binding to another is quite large. Look at the approximate 1-kilogram difference between one of our review's lightest bindings, the Plum Race 99 (121 g per foot), and the heaviest, the Marker Duke PT (1219 g per foot). That is an immense difference, and that weight will have a major impact on your experience. Overall, touring on lighter bindings is noticeably easier. The old adage, “a pound on your foot is like five on your back,” runs at least slightly true, as people can endure noticeably more vertical gain with less weight on their feet.

There is a significant difference among tech bindings, especially when comparing a top performer like the Atomic Backland Tour (286 grams) to the Marker Kingpin (737 grams). The Kingpin has all the same major features as the Backland but weighs much more.

Both the Atomic Backland Tour and ATK Raider 12 earn our highest award in great part due to their weight. We have scoured the market and have found no lighter binding with the feature set of the Backland. Step up in weight (about 100 grams heavier) to the Raider 12, and you get the same basic feature set, but those features are more refined, and downhill performance is noticeably enhanced. The additional weight of the Raider is worth it to some. But those that choose to save grams with the Atomic won't suffer either.

We grant the Dynafit Superlite 150 our specialty award for its sweet spot ultralight construction and adjustable release value. The ATK Haute Route 10 is a close contender to the Dynafit Superlite. The insanely light Plum Race 99 is too fragile for all but the most specialized users. Both the Plum R170 and ATK Trofeo are sturdy skimo race bindings that can be pressed into all-around backcountry use.

Special mention must be made of the ATK Crest 10. This binding weighs significantly less than the top-tested models and has all the major features we look for in a touring binding. However, some of those features significantly compromise utility, so it hasn't yet earned an award. Similarly, the Plum Oazo might have just the features you want and cuts weight from other fully-featured bindings. But it doesn't have all the features most people want, and it is heavier than similar ultralight options. But there's always the chance that the Plum Oazo strikes the perfect balance for your setup.

Additionally, we took the raw weight data and adjusted it for features. To compare “apples to apples,” we tried our best to correct for optional add-ons. For instance, some bindings have optional brakes. When we tested with the brakes, their weight was indicated in the raw weight data. These different weight measurements are broken down in the overall comparison chart.

Downhill Performance

For our downhill performance score, we compared how well each AT binding performed on the down. We divide our assessment into two main categories: how does the binding perform in “routine” downhill, and how is it designed and built to work when a release is required? While most felt great in softer snow, we made sure to compare them in harsh, icy, and variable snow and at higher speeds where our testers could feel more of a difference.

Several factors contribute to downhill “routine” performance. We look at overall rigidity, release elasticity, stack height, and ramp angle (e.g., heel-toe-delta). A more rigid initial connection between ski and boot lends better downhill performance. Binding “elasticity” – or elastic travel – is the distance your boot can move within the binding before it is released. Bindings with more elasticity allow the boot to get deflected by normal skiing forces and then return to the center for the next turn.

If a binding had zero elasticity, every lateral boot force would result in a complete release. Longitudinal ski flex creates the same sort of issue. This is undesirable, as normal skiing forces “appear,” to a binding, to be the same as the forces associated with a fall. Your binding cannot “decide” which forces lead to an injury and which are just “normal.” The elasticity gives you some time and space, measured in split seconds and millimeters, to adjust and correct. If the force is short-lived, you hopefully won't get injured, and the elasticity of the binding will put your ski back in line with your boot. If that force continues, the ski comes off, and the force is relieved before it is transmitted to your bones and connective tissues, in theory. Of course, binding release isn't perfect, and people get injured all the time. This is a risk you must be willing to take with ski bindings.

Release performance is difficult to objectively assess, as we can simply not crash enough to collect reliable data. We're trying, but we are imperfect. What we look for here first are certification standards. Then, we consider the range of adjustment and type of non-certified release methodology.

AT bindings that form a more positive connection between the boot and the ski tend to perform better on the downhill, because you are able to directly transfer energy from your boot straight into the ski. Of the touring bindings we have reviewed, only the Salomon Shift, Marker Duke PT, and Marker Kingpin have at least some part of the sole of the skier's boot pressing onto the binding. The Kingpin presses at the heel, while the Shift and Duke PT have a firm downward hold at both the toe and heel. These bindings also provide some “forward pressure” that assists in the elasticity of the binding. This forward pressure is best handled by the two (Shift and Duke PT) with “standard” looking toe pieces. The Kingpin presses forward into pin-in-socket touring-style toe pieces, which is less impactful.

The G3 Ion LT, G3 Zed 12, Ski Trab Titan Vario 2.0, ATK Crest 10, ATK Raider 12, and Marker Alpinist also provide some simulated “forward pressure” that, theoretically, creates a more secure fit. Other pin-style bindings accommodate longitudinal flex and play with a gap between the boot and heel piece. In these, the pins slide in and out of the boot heel fitting, allowing the binding to compensate for the flex of the ski underneath your boot. But the Raider 12 has both a heel gap and a spring-loaded heel piece. This unique combination is what we credit to the unanimous feeling of “smoothness” while skiing downhill in the Raider. At the other end of the elastic spectrum, the Dynafit Expedition heel piece does not rotate at all. This means it has no lateral release, no change to heel elevation, and zero potential for lateral, elastic travel in the heel.

Binding geometry varies from one product to the next. Each binding puts your boot sole at a different distance from the ski, and each binding has a different “heel-toe-delta.” The distance between the boot sole and ski top sheet is called “stack height.” While some ski racers like more stack height, most skiers, especially backcountry tourers, prefer to be closer to the ski. This gives the user a better balance and “feel.” Generally speaking, most manufacturers compete to see who can get the lowest stack height possible. The more sophisticated tech bindings have a greater stack height. The Kingpin, Plum Summit, Dynafit Radical, and G3 Ion LT, among others, all have stack heights over 39 mm. The Raider 12 has a 37 mm stack height. The simpler Plum, ATK, and Dynafit Superlite bindings keep your foot closer to the ski. The lightest bindings have the lowest stack heights. The Dynafit Expedition and Plum Race 99 both have a stack height of 30 mm, which is 3/5ths the greatest stack height we tested.

The skiing ramp angle is the angle between your foot sole and the ski top sheet. This angle depends on boot size, insole choice, boot sole geometry, and binding construction. Here, we focus on the binding component of this equation. The binding affects your ramp angle in that different bindings have different relative toe and heel heights. We call the difference between toe and heel height “toe-heel-delta,” and we measure this by measuring the distance from the ski surface to the center of the effective toe pins and to the center of the effective heel pins ("effective" because not all bindings have heel pins and two do not use their toe pins in downhill mode). AT bindings tend to feature a greater toe-heel-delta than most downhill bindings to, theoretically, help make up for generally softer, less aggressive, and forward-leaning boots.

Unless you are 100% confident that you have strong preferences in ramp angle and you know your boot size and boot geometry (as it pertains to ramp angle), we don't recommend thinking too much about binding toe-heel-delta. If it matters to you, realize that the ATK Trofeo and Haute Route 10, Marker Alpinist, Dynafit Expedition, G3 Zed, Plum Race 99, Plum Oazo, and Plum R170 have really low binding delta. The Salomon Shift, Dynafit Speed Turn, G3 Ion LT, Raider 12, and Plum Summit have high binding delta. Otherwise, the remainder are relatively similar to one another, falling in the middle and sitting within a few millimeters of each other.

There are three main categories of AT bindings in terms of release value adjustment. First, some have no adjustment to the release. The Dynafit Expedition and Plum R170 are in this category. The Plum Race 99 and ATK Trofeo have slight variations available at mounting or purchase, respectively.

Next, there are the adjustable release bindings with no certification. This subcategory includes the ATK Haute Route 10 and Crest 10, the Dynafit Superlite 150, the Marker Alpinist, Atomic Backland Tour, Dynafit Speed Tour 2.0, G3 Zed 12, ATK Raider 12, Plum Oazo, Dynafit Radical, and Plum Summit 12, among others.

Finally, there is the category of AT bindings that have third-party-endorsed release values. It is important to make further notes on ISO/DIN certification and the “alphabet soup” that surrounds this topic. DIN is a German organization that defines binding release parameters. ISO is an international organization that does the same thing, meaning ISO and DIN parameters are the same. ISO and DIN both write standards for alpine bindings as well as for AT bindings. The Marker Kingpin and Duke, and Salomon Shift all meet the AT binding release standard. The Shift and Duke also meet the alpine binding release standard. The alpine release standard is more stringent than the AT standard. TUV is a company that tests ski bindings to the ISO/DIN standards. It's a common misconception, but you can't actually have “DIN-certified” bindings. The bindings are “TUV-certified” to the DIN standard. It may be semantics, but perhaps it's important to you.

As you ponder your binding choice, especially as it pertains to downhill performance, consider the following. Yes, you are here for the downhill. We all are. Nonetheless, you have to accept that you will spend 80-90% of your backcountry skiing time going uphill. Lighter gear gets you up the hill faster, with more energy to spare at the top. Bindings that go downhill better are heavier. More precisely, bindings that go downhill a little better are a lot heavier. The heaviest bindings we have tested are more than four times as heavy as the lightest but go downhill marginally better.

We've skied 50-degree, no-fall-zone, high-altitude lines on the lightest race bindings tested here. Sure, something beefier would be better in that instance. But overall, the beefier bindings just weren't the right choice. That is likely your situation as you investigate your purchase. The certifications, springs, retention, and associated mass are appealing; you want to enjoy that downhill part. Further, heavier bindings look more like the resort bindings you are accustomed to. This perception and familiarity and its biasing role in your decision-making cannot be ignored. Familiar-looking equipment might make you feel better about the equipment, but is that based in reality? Can you do something else to be comfortable with proven and effective equipment? After watching hundreds of skiers of all abilities use dozens of different bindings, we can say on good authority that more minimalist bindings enhance your experience more than beefier ones do, all else equal.

The absolute best case to be made for this might be in what Grand Teton National Park's guide pool is using. As we survey the entire team of human-powered ski guides in the Teton region (arguably the most voluminous ski touring guiding community in the US), we can't envision a single guide regularly using bindings weighing more than 375 grams per foot. And all are skiing downhill (a lot) at a high standard, in legit terrain, with high energy and confidence.

Touring Performance

We tested and compared the heel riser range, variety, deployment, touring range of motion, and the binding's resistance to icing up during certain conditions for our touring comparison. We kept weight and ease of use separate for this comparison category even though these things also affect touring performance.

First, everything about heel risers. How easily does each heel riser engage and disengage? What does it take to switch between modes? Most of the products we tested have three levels of touring mode. All the bindings we tested have a “flat on ski” mode, except for the Dynafit TLT Expedition. We compared how easily the heel risers were to engage and disengage while using our poles, ideally, so we wouldn't have to bend over when we wanted to use them. As a whole, manufacturers have taken note of the consumer desire for easier and quicker-to-engage heel risers and have answered with continuously easier-to-use designs.

The G3 Ion and Zed 12, Plum Pika and Summit 12, and the ATK Raider 12 have risers that are the easiest to learn, engage and disengage. The flip-flop style lifters are intuitive and fast becoming a standard.

Next, we looked at each binding's toe piece range of motion. Some touring moves require more hinge range at the toe than others. A “normal” touring stride requires a little bit of heel lift (about 6-8 inches, at most), and all the bindings we tested allow enough for this. Steep uphill terrain requires a specialized “kick turn” technique. The most efficient kick turners get the tip of the ski to their knee (and, therefore, the top of the toe of their boot) near the top sheet of the ski during a kick turn. Most bindings we tested allow you to have all of the range of motion you need. However, there are notable exceptions to this rule.

The complicated toe piece of the Fritschi Xenic has bulk and parts that limit the range of motion. In efficient kick turning, this compromised range of motion is noticeable and unfortunate. The close competitor Marker Kingpin has less range of motion than other bindings but more than the Xenic. All the other award winners have all the range of motion you need.

The final step in binding touring mode examination was to assess how each contender resisted icing. All bindings ice up to some extent and need to be chipped free from time to time. Our review's simplest, lightest bindings are also the least prone to icing. The Shift, Duke, and Kingpin bindings have more moving parts that collect ice. Any binding with brakes is more prone to icing than those without brakes.

The ultra-low-profile heel pieces of the Dynafit Expedition, ATK Trofeo, Plum R170 and Race 99 collect virtually no ice. In sticky snow conditions, the G3 Ion and Zed and Plum Pika gather ice that simulates informal “heel lifts”, even when the binding is in low tour mode. Almost all “traditional” tech toes collect ice under the center of the toe piece. This manifests as toe pins that won't close entirely. In this case, the ski needs to be removed, turned upside down, and the ice cleared out. It may appear that your boot toe holes are full of ice or dirt, but the more likely culprit is ice between the toe piece and the ski top sheet.

The Plum toe pieces are especially vulnerable to this problem. The ATK Raider 12 and Crest 10, G3 Ion LT and Zed 12 seem less prone to toe-piece icing than nearly every other binding we have used. The Marker Alpinist is in line with the G3 bindings. The beefier and bulkier Plum Summit and Marker Kingpin collect more ice than most.

Ease of Use

Ease of use is summed up (you guessed it) by how easy the bindings were to use. First, we looked at how easy they were to step into and out of and how easy it was to transition to touring or downhill again. We also compared how easy it was to make adjustments to release value and boot length.

Ease of entry for tech bindings is hands down where the G3 bindings take the cake, and it's the feature that impressed us the most about the two bindings we tested. Instead of nearly all other tech bindings, where you need to either “hook” one side or line up your toe holes and use downward pressure to engage the front pins, both G3 bindings feature two vertical levers that, when lightly pressured, engage the side pins. Most of our team agrees that the Ion or Zed is the answer for folks who struggle with getting into tech bindings. It is worth noting that one of our regular and reputable testers vociferously disagrees. He finds the G3 toe pieces very challenging to get in and out of. We respect his opinion and keep him around for exactly this reason, but we also have to dismiss this particular finding of his in the face of otherwise unanimous contrary findings. The toe piece of the Fritschi Xenic is engineered entirely differently, but the result is similar in terms of ease of entry. Its spring-loaded closure was very sensitive, and when most folks first start trying to use it, their toe closes before their boot is in position. Once accustomed to it, getting into the Xenic goes smoothly.

The Marker Kingpin was likely the next easiest of the tech bindings to get into. Similar to the Dynafit TLT Expedition, it features two “posts” that help line your boot up correctly. The toe piece of the Atomic Backland Tour has a sort of guide that helps you line up the toe pins.

Different products have different advantages while transitioning. From up to down matters more, and nearly every backcountry tour will have at least one of these types of transitions. Many skiers regularly take their skins off without removing their skis. A binding that allows you to do this is an advantage, particularly while in deep, soft snow, where if you step down with a “ski-less” foot, you will plunge that leg to your hip.

On the flip side, it is challenging to put skins on your skis while they remain on your feet, so being able to transition on this end more quickly is a slightly overrated, over-publicized feature. The one time we dig being able to go into “cross country” mode where you want your heel free, but no skins on, is during the descent and while traveling on long, flat, snow-covered roads and frozen lakes.

The Atomic Backland Tour transitions pretty easily but requires an extra step with the brakes. The brakes must be manipulated by hand every time you switch from down to up or vice versa. You can also buy and mount this award winner without brakes. Transitions with the Dynafit TLT Expedition, Plum R170 and Pika are quick and easy.

Transitions with the Plum Summit, ATK Raider 12and Crest 10 are very similar and about average. Salomon Shift and Marker Duke transitions are among the more onerous. Disengaging the Shift brake from tour to ski mode can be downright dangerous. One tester lost a fingernail early in the testing process. Further, you absolutely have to remove the Shift from your boot to go either direction between tour and ski mode. Transitioning the Marker Duke involves, in some cases, completely removing the toe piece and stowing it in your backpack. In just one year of availability now, we have heard multiple stories of people ending on top of their ski run with no Duke toe pieces. This is annoying, at best.

Ski Crampons

Depending on where you ski and how much springtime touring and ski mountaineering you do, ski crampons can matter a tremendous amount or very little. We rarely bring ski crampons mid-winter when conditions are consistently cold, and we often ski at or below treeline while basically looking for only powder snow. However, once the melt-freeze cycle starts (or between storms in windy climates) and you start thinking about skiing corn or higher-elevation mountains, ski crampons can save you a tremendous amount of effort. In very windy climates, you will use ski crampons all season long (High Sierra, California, you listening? Colorado 14ers skiers, you dig?). The ease of use rating also considers the options and complications of employing ski crampons. G3's proprietary ski crampon system is excellent but heavier and bulkier than others. Marker's heavier bindings use special crampons, as do the Shift bindings. The remainder of the bindings on the market use a similar (if not exactly the same) method of attaching ski crampons. It isn't super convenient, but it is simple, light, and proven.

Durability

For our durability test, we did our best to compare how burly each product was. For this comparison, we not only pooled our own experience but talked to over a half dozen reputable backcountry ski shops, mountain guides, and a few sales reps; we wanted to see what broke, how often, and on which models. Overall, there is a pretty strong correlation between durability and simplicity. Simple, proven products will last better. Very lightweight designs and, at the other end of the spectrum, very complex designs will be the least durable. Everything in the “middle” will be pretty close in terms of durability.

We have almost a half dozen seasons now on the Atomic Backland Tour. Durability and function continue to be reliable, and we have had zero issues with the binding. The Dynafit TLT Expedition is purpose-built to optimize for durability. Ease of use and release function suffer, but these bindings are truly bomb-proof.

Some versions of the Marker KingPin are currently under recall. Marker seems to be standing by the product, but this is a real issue for some products in some circumstances.

The specialized Salomon Shift incorporates more moving parts than typical for touring bindings. The Shift does indeed present some issues in durability and usability. In a few seasons now of use, certain patterns have emerged. The toe pieces can break. Also, the brakes engage while touring. Both of these are annoying, at best. In our testing, we have found that two major behavioral adaptations can mitigate both of these. Since the Shift looks like a resort binding, people use them like resort bindings. Two behavior patterns stand out. First, resort skiers are accustomed to cleaning the soles of their boots before entry by scraping or kicking their boots against the toe piece of the binding. Don't do this with the Shift. Next, we carry our skis around with their brakes interlaced. When you deploy so-stowed skis equipped with Shifts, do so by delicately de-lacing the brakes. Jerk them apart, as you can with regular resort bindings, and you risk bending crucial, low-tolerance parts in the brake stowing mechanism. Be gentle; these aren't resort bindings.

The Marker Duke PT snags an award from the Shift mainly due to differences in durability. Early testing (and beyond) indicates that the Duke is exempt from the durability and functional issues of the Shift. This is what we would expect from a second-generation product in any given subcategory. Salomon forged the way with the Shift, while Marker took time with a more refined product. Both, though, are heavier and more complicated than is necessary for most backcountry skiers.

The Fritschi Xenic feels significantly less robust than the similar Marker Kingpin. We broke an important part in the first tester pair of Xenic bindings. They worked to get us back to the trailhead, but even after replacing the entire toe piece, we remain suspect of their longevity.

Conclusion

We test these bindings repeatedly across seasons to help you identify the best backcountry binding for your new setup. New technology in touring bindings offers an excellent opportunity to cut weight and improve performance, but discerning the differences can be difficult. We review, compare, and report on bindings for human-powered backcountry skiing for this very reason. Some or all of this gear can and will be pressed into other uses, but our reporting and scoring are based on classic, ever-more-popular, human-powered backcountry skiing. Our review insights are based on real-world, true backcountry skiing, conducted by a team with widely varying experience and skill sets. Don't let your ski binding choice become an “afterthought” to the more exciting boot and ski purchases. We're here to help.