Telemark Talk / Telemark Tips Forum

It seems Lundhags Guide 75mm (previously Lundhags Husky 75mm) is the holy grail for an all-around fjellski boot, in terms of camping, hunting, waterproofness, and durability. The lightest binding for these seems to be the Rottefella NATO M98 (commercial version Riva C). I learned a lot from this thread.

However, I can still get the Lundhags Husky 87-91mm a lot cheaper here in Scandinavia. What’s the lightest binding that doesn't sacrifice stability? Rottefella NATO 120 sounds too heavy. And all of the other universal Berwin-style bindings aren’t suited for steeper terrain.

Any thoughts on the Finngrip Erä? This is basically the Vita Blixten binding, or the NATO 120 alternative used on most Scandinavian military skis. But with a lot less metal, so I assume much lighter. How would this compare to NATO M98 / Riva bindings in terms of weight and stability?

I plan to use this boot / binding combo with the Åsnes Combat NATO 190cm for steeper use in the Scandinavian fjells and in deep snow forest. I already own the Åsnes Amundsen Fram 201cm + Alfa Guard Advance NNN-BC boots for long-distance fjell trips like Kungsleden in Sweden.

Any comments would be much appreciated! Particularly hoping for input from: @lilcliffy @bgregoire @TheMusher @telerat

I have extensive experience with Finngrip Erä, mostly with Nokia Naali boots. That is still probably the most common boot/binding pairing in Finland for the use you describe.

Talking about downhill support, I consider the combo better than some flimsy Salomon BC boot + binding I once had, for example. Therefore, I guess Finngrip Erä might give acceptable support with a boot like Husky, but I think Finngrips lateral support is far less than Nato M98, or at least the later Rivas I am familiar with. Other binding that works with this norm that i have tried is Jofa, much like Nato 120. The impression was left with is that they had better support, but slightly worse ease of use and xc performance. Good thing with Finngrip Erä + matching boot is that they are possibly the most reliable boot / binding combo if you carry spare parts. Serious overflow in -40c, no problem whatsoever!

Hi trite,

So that I am on the same page here-

Does the "Husky 75" have a 3pin sole? I have considered these boots many times over the years- and have been left confused as to the outsole used in different models-

I have seen photos of boots with a 3-pin outsole- that would allow the use of a 3-pin binding.
I have also seen photos of boots that have a 75mm duckbill, but do not have a 3pin outsole- therefore would require a "cable" binding that does not have a 3-pin bale.

What is the outsole on the boot you are considering?

Another question- is the recommendation against a 3pin binding a function of boots without a 3-pin outsole, or is it for some other reason (i.e. damage to the sole/rubber base)?

Another question- why the 75mm version and not the Guide/Expedition BC?
Gareth

For those having never seen them there very good views of both the boots and bindings being discussed here, briefly, at about 1:28 minutes in this video.

@havuja
The sort of insight I was hoping for, thanks!

@lilcliffy
Husky 75mm is just the older version without 3-pin holes. This was Lundhags' own sole. For the Guide 75mm, Lundhags switched to a Vibram sole with 3-pin holes, but they still say to not use normal 3-pin bindings. I assume if Vibram were to manufacture 75mm soles without holes, Lundhags would use those instead. This is all according to @bgregoire from this post.

I want the Husky/Guide 90mm because it's cheaper and the duckbill also doesn't protrude as much. Also better for walking. My question remains: what is the best binding (lightest and most support for steeper terrain) for the Husky/Guide 90mm?

Re: Guide NNN-BC vs Guide 75/90mm. NNN-BC is a ski boot. The 75/90mm is a real winter boot that you can walk in. Many people in northern Sweden also use them as all-around winter boots when not skiing. This concept has been used by Scandinavian military for decades. Not perfect but lagom.

Thanks!

Right- now I understand!
And makes sense to me (especially the sole with shorter duckbill and without 3pin holes) for use as a cold winter boot that doubles as ski boot.

Hmmm...
My only limited experience here is a universal binding (e.g. X-Trace) like I have on my Hok ski. Excellent binding for shuffling around in a work environment- but very limited range of movement for any serious striding and climbing...

I would think that most current non-3pin cable bindings (e.g. switchback) would have too much tension/activity for the sole of those boots?

@lilcliffy
Do the Switchback fit 90mm boots?

trite wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 13, 2022 7:53 pm

@lilcliffy
Do the Switchback fit 90mm boots?

OH!!! WOW! The duckbill is 90mm?!
No- the Switchback is designed for a 75-NN duckbill.
I have no experience or knowledge of a 90mm duckbill.
Sorry!
But- will follow this thread carefully now- very interesting...
Can one still get this boot with the 90mm "short" duckbill, without the 3pin holes?

lilcliffy wrote: ↑

Sun Mar 13, 2022 8:33 pm

I have no experience or knowledge of a 90mm duckbill.

But weren't all cable bindings width-adjustable from the 1920s-1970s? The NATO 120 today is just the military version.

• Langrennski laga av tre. Kandahar binding.

• Kandahar Bindings on 'Popular' Wooden Skis
  

Trite

No first hand experience with these bindings unfortunately.

However can only vouch for the quality & comfort of the Lundhags Guide Expedition 75 and Lundhags in general - but it sounds like you're familiar with this already! Reckon it will be the perfect setup for winter camping & hunting. Just bring plenty of beeswax

Edit: Where are you buying these boots at a favorable price?