Snafflecock

I'll take a guess and say that your buddy probably is using the Dynafit Tri-Step binding....(that or he's just not locking his binding into 'tour' mode properly). The Tri-Step was a change to the original binding and had a different toe piece design...this design was fatally flawed and Dynafit offered a revised plastic piece that could be changed out to reduce the release-while-touring problem...and ultimately they dropped the design completely after about a year and a half and now only use their tried and true original toe binding for all their various models. I had the Tri-Steps for a season...they sucked...I shipped them back to Life-Link and they gave me a new set of Dynafit Comforts that have worked flawlessly since. If every Dynafit user was blowing out of their binders while touring, I doubt they'd be as popular as they are....so don't assume that all the Dynafit binders have that problem. But hell...if you're happier using Fritschis or Naxos or whatever, more power to ya...its just gear...just getting into the backcountry by whatever means possible is the important thing.

just curious under what criteria do Fritschis outperform Dynafits? each has their own advantages/disadvantages. yes, Fritschis don't have those fiddely little toe pins and you can use any boot with them (particularly nice that you can use alpine ski boots with them). but, Dynafits are pounds lighter than Fritschis and they have a much better track record for breakage issues. I've seen and heard about Fritschi heel locks breaking (usually user error of forcing the heel into the lock with snow/ice built up in the binding), but I've never seen a busted dynafit or even heard of one falling apart (except for an occational heel lifter breaking, but that doesn't render the binding unusable in the field). Also, you mentioned needing to redrill skis adjust Dyanfit bindings...thats not entirely correct, the standard Dynafit binding is only compatible with one size of boot, but the Dynafit Comfort binding is adjustable to fit several foot sizes without needing to redrill. I like Fritschis for in-bounds out of bounds rigs (so I can use regular ol' alpine boots), but for a dedicated backcountry set-up I'll take dynafits every time.

sorry 'bout that, i should have mentoned which store. all my experiences were with the shop on Aurora....the dynafit screw-up was last season, the forgotten tune-up and tele botch were two years ago.

I've had less than stellar service at ProSki They botched a dynafit mount job on a pair of my skis They've botched a tele binding mount for a roommate of mine (actually mounted the bindings 3" apart from one another when comparing the two skis) They've called me before to tell me a tune job was done...I've driven across town to pick up the boards only to find that no work at all had been done...they said they'd tune them quickly...but then a buddy of their came into the shop and his skis moved to the front of the queue...and I waited for over an hour. yeah, they're nice enough guys, but the quality control has been lacking in my experience....

not to nitpick but doing a little fact checking and spell checking might instill a bit more confidence in your call to find partners. the big everest accident was in 1996 never seen a 'burkshard' before, seen lots of bergschrunds though.

did you dig any pits on the way up to evaluate the snow stability? any idea how far down the whumping layer was? why climb when avy danger was high?

you might have better luck finding a partner if you post the route you're wanting to go up, your previous climbing experience, and fitness level.

Supposedly Garmont AT boots do have the smallest volume relative to the length, but the garmont liners are also some of the thinner heat moldable liners out there. This could be a load of bs but I was told by some folks at a local shop that Garmont teleboots have a wide last, Garmont AT boots have a narrow last and Scarpa boots are just the opposite AT-wide, tele-narrow????strange, huh? I have a pair of Garmont Megarides and after a few trips I've given up on the Garmont liners and put my old, thicker, wrap-around tounge Raichle Thermoflex liners in the shells and they fit much better. If you are willing to pay a little extra, you can take a tighter fitting pair of AT boots to a bootfitter shop, Jim Mates-Custom Boot Service 6500 4th Ave NW Seattle 206-297-9298 is one local option. A good ski bootfitter should be able to heat up and stretch the toebox of the shell a little to make room for your toes. Expect to pay at least $60 for this, and Jim is not good with giving out cost estimates over the phone, in my experience. If you opt to stick with the boots you've got, you can always use a thicker pair of socks or put some shims under your footbed to take up room...but if you are already cranking the buckles down all the way, I'd really take a look at a smaller shell size and then having those shell cooked and stretched. Unless you're thinking of using the boots for high altitude or long cold weather trips, get them tight...then just pack a pair of down booties to switch in to when you get to camp!

Some friends of mine were up at Emmons Flats this weekend and saw all of this going down...they said the weather at Schurman saturday evening was 20 F (they had a thermometer) and that is was quite windy...so who knows...it was probably damn cold on the upper mountain, but -30....hmmmm the windchill at 0 F with a 60mph wind is -30...I think they may be exaggerating a bit or something was lost in the translation to the media. One thing that kind of grinds on me is that the Everett Mountaineers were on a climb that many of the folks needed in order to graduate from their basic course....I know its total speculation but do you think that that the fact that the students needed to summit to complete their graduation requirements contributed to their decision to go for the summit despite the rather nasty forecast?