Dynafit TLT Comfort vs. Classic?

[chris]

The only difference I can tell is the heal post and a $20 difference in price - has anyone had problems with the heel post on the Classics?

[Bigtree]

Clipped from Wildsnow.com:

 

"The TLT (Tour Lite Tech) is a basic version that's been available for more than a decade. The Comfort model combines an improved heel with a slightly improved toe and adjusts for a wider range of boot length. Vertical FT and ST are the latest models, and are basically minor redesigns of the Comfort."

 

Accommodating a wider range of boot lengths is helpful if you were to change boots (i.e., eliminates the need to re-mount the heel piece).

 

The slightly different heel design of the Comfort also adds about 60 grams of weight.

 

Edited by adding the following:

 

"In alpine downhill ski mode, the Dynafit TLT binding places the heel of your boot 20 millimeters above the ski, and the toe about 12 millimeters above the ski (measurement is not precise because of difference in randonnee boot soles). The Comfort yields even more rise, with 30 millimeters at the heel and about 20 mm at the toe.

 

Thus, not only do the Dynafit bindings provide fairly substantial "rise," but the lower toe provides more "positive ramp angle" for your boot sole, thus compensating somewhat for the neutral stance of randonnee backcountry ski boots.

 

The theory of riser plates is that they provide more leverage to the ski edges by increasing the length of your lower leg "lever." I've meet few randonnee skiers who believe they need more rise than the Dynafit binding provides by default. Interestingly, in the 1970s some of the world's best ski racers felt that having their feet closer to their skis was better. They would grind down their boot soles and hollow out their boot interior foot-beds to accomplish this. In my opinion, both extremes, (rise or drop), are a waste of energy for a rando skier to worry about. I've skied on the Comfort, with its 30mm rise, and while I noticed being higher on the ski felt different in a turn, I didn't feel it made my skiing any better, or easier."

 

 

Edited January 8, 2007 by Bigtree

[snoboy]

The pins are also longer on the Comfort, so there is less chance of releasing from the flex of the ski.

 

There is tons of Dynafit info over at Wildsnow.com

[kioti]

The vertical has some nice upgrades over the comfort as well. Works better with brake, one peice heel piece, longer throw to lock into tour mode. Worth a look. Basically the next generation of the comfort

 

[skykilo]

Get the Classics. The Comforts have more plastic and the brakes suck. I haven't noticed any added release problems with the shorter pins on the Classics. They're lighter, cheaper, and better.

 

The Verticals are retarded. The Comforts dumb down Dynafits; the Verticals dumb them down more.

[bigwallben]

Comfort Classic brakes are no longer available fyi.

[skykilo]

Yes, now we have to write it Classic/Speed

http://www.life-link.com/dynafit_bindings.htm

 

Ahh, you said brakes! Excuse me, my reading comprehension is lacking this afternoon.

Edited January 11, 2007 by skykilo

[Alex]

"Has anyone had problems with the heel post on the Classics?"

 

Nope.

[korup]

The whole advantage of Dynafits is that they are light as hell. So, why add weight with no real benefit with the Comforts? Classics or nothing IMHO. All the newest bindings, and the burly 4-buckle alpine weight Dynafit boots are just idiotic, me thinks...

[wfinley]

Don't get the Verticals - give them a season to fix what will break (I know a guy who busted the heel piece of the Verticals). As for Comforts - I've broken the front plastic (under the toe piece) twice - it's a pain but I like them b/c the binding can be adjusted 2 sizes which means my brothers (who are one boot size larger) can borrow my skis.

[cj001f]

The whole advantage of Dynafits is that they are light as hell. So, why add weight with no real benefit with the Comforts? Classics or nothing IMHO. All the newest bindings, and the burly 4-buckle alpine weight Dynafit boots are just idiotic, me thinks...

 

Big boots add benefit if you want to ski big skis.

 

Verticals and Comforts (and the brakes) add no benefit.

[ericb]

One (perhaps small) benefit of the comforts is that with the hollow heel post, you can insert your pole into it and rotate the turret for different touring inclinations with out stooping down. Again, perhaps not worth the weight differential, but I find it a nice feature.

[sill]

The classic TLT is the way to go. after using them a while you'll be able to flip them around with you're ski poll just like the comforts. I have not used the ski breaks in a few years now, but I thought they sucked.

[snoboy]

The whole advantage of Dynafits is that they are light as hell. So, why add weight with no real benefit with the Comforts?

 

Because they are fairly solid, have less slop than other bindings, and they tour so well.

[Lowell_Skoog]

I have several pairs of Dynafits and I've always bought the Comforts. I want more boot-length adjustment in case I buy different model boots. Maybe this isn't a big deal, but I'm conservative about it. I'd rather not re-drill my skis.

 

After my brother died, I selected one of his pairs of skis to add to my outfit. Thanks to the Comfort bindings he had on them I was able to adjust them to my boots without remounting. I wouldn't have been able to do that with Classics.