• Forums
  • Gear Talk
  • Attack 2 11 for big mountain pow. Icelantic Nomad 115 skis

Member of the Month

X_MEMESWERVE_XX
March, 2025

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Attack 2 11 for big mountain pow. Icelantic Nomad 115 skis

profile picture
Kulharin
Posts: 97 - Karma: 133
I have attack 13's on my other skis and love em. Only gripe I have is the newer Attack 2 GW 13's are heavier and pricier. Would the 11's be sufficient? I read they are less durable with decreased performance? My other skis are din set to 9.
6 years ago
1 0
profile picture
Rum_Ham
Posts: 1449 - Karma: 4,483
Don’t get 11s. They’re beginner bindings on the level of the squire but more durable. 2 piece heel instead of the 3 piece like the 13s and 16s. If you’re din is at 9 and you’re skiing hard go for the 13s at least
6 years ago
5 0
profile picture
freeskibum82
Posts: 6355 - Karma: 5,056
Rum_HamDon’t get 11s. They’re beginner bindings on the level of the squire but more durable. 2 piece heel instead of the 3 piece like the 13s and 16s. If you’re din is at 9 and you’re skiing hard go for the 13s at least


only half true. they are not a "beginner" binding. They are suitable for novice to advanced lightweight skiers who do not need a very high din. I could easily run the 11s for a daily ski that doesnt see much park abuse or cliff drops. If you are skiing pow and keeping the landing gear on the ground or close to it then it will be fine. While its best to set a DIN in the middle of the range on a binding, 9 on an 11 max binding will be fine. You really dont want to max out the spring or set it at the minimum. They carry the same toe piece as the 13s but have a different heel piece and just a lower din.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Rum_Ham
Posts: 1449 - Karma: 4,483
Yeah I’d be worried about retention at the heel for an aggressive skier because of the difference in design.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Non_State_Actor
Posts: 5055 - Karma: 18,292
freeskibum82only half true. they are not a "beginner" binding. They are suitable for novice to advanced lightweight skiers who do not need a very high din. I could easily run the 11s for a daily ski that doesnt see much park abuse or cliff drops. If you are skiing pow and keeping the landing gear on the ground or close to it then it will be fine. While its best to set a DIN in the middle of the range on a binding, 9 on an 11 max binding will be fine. You really dont want to max out the spring or set it at the minimum. They carry the same toe piece as the 13s but have a different heel piece and just a lower din.


The ramp angle on the 11 is geared more towards beginners and intermediate level skiers. That said my wife can stomp them pretty hard and likes the light weight and easy and secure step-in.

You can run dins anywhere in the range for a specific binding. They're tested all the way through, you're probably better off choosing a binding where you don't fall on either extreme of the din range for multiple factors but you can also run 13 on a 13 din binding. This thinking is kind of the old school way.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Greg_K
Posts: 963 - Karma: 2,791
As Mystery3 above said, the issue with the 11 is the ramp delta. Heels much higher in level than the toe pice to force beginning/intermediate skiers especially women to lean forward more. This might be too much of a good thing and force more advanced skiers to feel like they are in the backseat.
The Attack 12 or Attack2 12 has the same heel as the 13 but only in white color in the Attack2.

Look for places that still have the 2018 Attack2 13 in stock as there are deals still out there on them if you don’t see any deals on original ones.
There has been lots of talk of how the Attack2 series is way heavier but it’s only 30 grams/1 oz heavier a pair. 2040g a pair on the Attack and 2070g on the Attack2.
6 years ago
1 0
profile picture
Non_State_Actor
Posts: 5055 - Karma: 18,292
Greg_KThere has been lots of talk of how the Attack2 series is way heavier but it’s only 30 grams/1 oz heavier a pair. 2040g a pair on the Attack and 2070g on the Attack2.

I'm pretty sure the difference is 200-300g but it's always hard to find consistent numbers on binding weights w/ and w/o brakes. I'm about to pull a pair and I'll weigh them and post up.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Greg_K
Posts: 963 - Karma: 2,791








Have had about 10 pairs of Attacks and the originals weigh 855g per side without brakes and 95mm brake is 160g. So 1015g side/2030g for the set of original Attacks. Have a few sets of Attack2 and this is the weight(with box zeroed off and all screws etc inside) with original Attack 95mm brakes. Attack2 brakes are actually slightly lighter, so about 2060 for Attack2 set.

They always listed the “without brake” weight online and that has stuck in people’s mind of the original Attack and now it’s always listed as “weight with brakes” on the Attack2 causing the confusion I think. Either one is a great binding!

**This post was edited on Oct 18th 2018 at 11:50:43pm
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Greg_K
Posts: 963 - Karma: 2,791
Double post

**This post was edited on Oct 18th 2018 at 11:51:56pm
6 years ago
1 0
profile picture
Non_State_Actor
Posts: 5055 - Karma: 18,292
I stand corrected. Thank you for recording weights. I started a weight thread in the AT/Backcountry forum just to track and record weights on stuff mostly. Feel free to add any good info you have or care to share. Some of this information is difficult to find, getting easier though it seems.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Non_State_Actor
Posts: 5055 - Karma: 18,292
I have 978 and 977 all in for each side on 16/17 Attack 13, yeah I thought the were ~ 100g lighter than that per side. Oh well beats the 1232g per side the Attack 16AT I just weighed that are going to replace my Attack 13s so I can run WTR soles and not redrill.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Greg_K
Posts: 963 - Karma: 2,791
The Attack 14 AT is supposed to be 1115g per side so closer to the Attack 13 in weight if you want WTR compatibility.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Non_State_Actor
Posts: 5055 - Karma: 18,292
Greg_KThe Attack 14 AT is supposed to be 1115g per side so closer to the Attack 13 in weight if you want WTR compatibility.


Yes but I found a good deal on the 16s, they'll be fine.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Greg_K
Posts: 963 - Karma: 2,791
mystery3Yes but I found a good deal on the 16s, they'll be fine.


You’ll save money on the bindings to pay towards the gym membership so you can bulk up for the extra 100 grams! 😂
6 years ago
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4); Currently it's 10:07PM