Not all freeskiers are big and hulking.

With just as much fatty-wielding power as the beefiest Marker bindings, the Griffon Ski Binding provides a secure hold and hard-charging performance with a lower DIN range for lighter-weight skiers. It's got re-sculpted Triple Pivot Elite toe and Inter-Pivot heel to match the Duke and Jester for freeskiing burliness, and it weighs less than both of those hard-hitters. An integral part of the Royal Family, the Griffon holds a high rank for designated alpine rippers.

  • DIN 4-13
  • Triple Pivot Elite toe
  • Inter-Pivot heel
  • AFD stainless steel gliding plate

Share your thoughts

What do you think of the

Marker Griffon Ski Binding

? Share a...

Write a review

No file chosen

Rather attach a photo from another website?

Rather attach a photo from your computer?

  • Product review:
  • Share a video
  • Share a photo

How familiar are you with the product?(Optional)

Only jpg, jpeg, png, gif or bmp files please.


Here's what others have to say...

Unanswered Question

Hey I'm thinking of purchasing the Mr. Pollards Opus's at 178 cm and I want the marker griffin binding but don't know what size to get. can I get some help?

Purchased head cyclic 115, what size bindings do I need? Which other binding would be good for these skis?

Responded on

Hey Farmboy,
You can bend the 110mm brake and make it work! Or you could go with something like the Rossignol FKS that comes in a 115mm brake! Those would be my top picks!
Here's a link to the FKS 120:

The FKS 140 and 180 have higher DIN ranges and cost a bit more!
The Look Pivot is the EXACT same binding, different paint job!

Hit me up if you have any questions!

Just got the Icelantic Shamans and they are 110 underfoot. Would the 110 Griffon work or do I need the 136 Griffon?

Responded on

The Icelantic Shaman Ski's have a 110mm waist width. So pairing them with the Marker Griffon or Jesters in the 110mm size would be perfect.

Thinking of getting these bindings alongside my new 106mm Soul 7s. Should I go with the 110mm? or is there a more appropriate binding that I don't know of for my ski?

Responded on

These (110mm brake) would be great with that Soul 7!
There are plenty of other options out there, but the Griffons are my favorite alpine bindings.
My other top picks would be the Rossignol FKS or Look Pivot - there are a few different versions with different DIN ranges.
Here's the FKS 120 (DIN 4-12):

Sidenote - you would want the 115mm brake for that.
The Look Pivot 12 is the exact same binding, just a different paint job.

Let me know if you have any further questions!

I just purchased the 2015 Blizzard Bonafide they have a 98mm underfoot should i go with the 90mm or 110mm?
Thanks in advance

Responded on

I'd go with the 110mm! The 90mm MIGHT work but that's kind of a long way to bend that brake.

I have brand new sick day 95s. I am looking at mounting the griffons. Would I be better of with the 90mm or 110mm?

Responded on


I had a pair of Sick day 95's and the Griffon 90 worked perfectly.

My skis are 98mm underfoot. Will these bindings fit ok? They are the Rossignol Sin 7

Just bought a pair of Armada Halo 2's! Size 170 is 93mm under foot. Would it be worth bending the griffon 90mm to fit or should I buy the 110mm? Will the 110mm leave too much room on either side of the ski? Thanks!

Responded on

90mm brake width all the way and it won't need to be bent to fit that width. Generally speaking you have around 5-8mm of wiggle room, anything over that may need a tweak.

Enjoy your setup

Will a 110 mm binding work if my ski width is 118"? It seems like a small enough difference that you could compensate by bending the brakes a little. Or would that not work ?

Responded on


I have a Griffon 110mm on my JJ with a waist of 115 and it has about a mm left on each side and it hasn't been tweaked at all. I always tell people to call the shop that will be mounting the binding and get their opinion. Some shops will not bend the binding for liability reasons and will leave that up to you.

You can find Marker 120mm brakes for a price if you can't get the 110 to work but I honestly think you will be fine with a minor tweak.

My advice is to verify with the ski shop that will do the work unless you are mounting them yourself.

I am debating these or the Baron for my new Blizzard Sambas. Other than the AT aspect, how are these different? Do they ski different? Does one sit lower to the ski? I already have a tele setup for skinning, so this will will be a resort ski... But debating Griffon or Baron, if I got baron I would likely tour at some point with it, but don't want to sacrifice any downhill performance for that possibility, since I have another option. Any opinions are welcome.

Responded on


Griffon has 22mm of lift, Baron 37mm because of the AT ability. Griffon will be lighter by quite a bit plus a substantial cost difference as well.

If you want the AT ability then that pretty much sums it up. But if you don't care about turning the Samba into an AT setup then I think you're crazy, pardon my French, to add the weight, the uneccesary height, additional moving parts, and the added expense of the Baron.

You said any opinions welcome so I hope my opinion helped:)

Responded on

Thanks much, Skifreak! That's what I was thinking, but I've been told over & over again that the performance is the same, and thus, I should get the Baron. But my concern is even if they ski similarly, there is no need for the weight & additional parts, if I'm not regularly using the AT aspect (and have a light tele setup for that). I feel like AT is so "hot" right now, folks are pushing it a bit much. Thanks!

Responded on

I always remember a buddy buying a baron thinking he was going to do AT and never did. He didn't like the added weight and wasting the money on something not being used. If you decide down the road to go AT its only money right, lol.

Responded on

I agree with SkiFreak go with the Griffon, its lighter and cheaper. When you want to go AT then get a tech binding set up and forgo the heavy weight frame binding options. AT is super hot right now but, I know a lot of people with touring gear that sits in a closet. So when you are ready to get out in the backcountry go full bore and get a lightweight tech binding coupled with a touring boot and a lighter ski.

would the 136mm brakes work for a ski with a waist of 135mm?

Best Answer Responded on

Definitely. The 136 mm would be perfect.

I'm thinking about putting these on my Atomic Rituals which have a 103 waist. Would the 110s be too big?

Responded on

The 110's will be just fine on the Atomic Rituals , but if you did not know this. If you put Atomic Bindings on Atomic Skis you increase the warranty of both the skis and the bindings to 2 years. Might want to consider that.

5 5

These were my first upgrade...

  • Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

The griffons were my first binding after quitting racing. While racing, I had some pretty burley bindings that were heavy as hell and had a bunch of metal. It was so nice to transfer over to these. They are super lightweight but hold up to all my abuse and they hold me in really really well. I love that the DIN goes to a 13. One of my favorite specs of these compared to other bindings is the fact that the toe piece is so wide. I feel as if the energy transfer from my legs/boots to the ski is so much easier with these because the way the binding puts torque on the ski. Anyway 10/10. Also for anyone trying to decide between these and the more lightweight Squire, go with this any day. The squire gets torn apart and tests pretty funny when we put them through the on ski torque and pull tests.

Responded on

thanks for a very helpful review. I've been happy on Marker Griffons on my K2 Apache Coombas for 4 seasons now and was wondering whether to get the latest Griffons on a nearly-new pair of Rossignol Soul 7s or go for the Squire which the seller was offering as a combo deal. "Griffon again" seems to be a no-brainer thanks to your review.

I'm about to buy my first set of skis...

I'm about to buy my first set of skis (maybe). Will these work with the K2 Press (169) skis? The 90mm option is the only size available. Please no scientific answers just a yes or no. Trying to find the right skis/bindings/boots has been enough of a headache already lol. Thanks in advance!

Responded on

yes these will work perfectly on them. There is only a -5mm difference between the breaks and your skis which is pretty much ideal. If you're going to be doing park with these bindings (considering the Press' are a park ski) be careful. The breaks on Marker bindings LOVVEEEE to break and they are $50 a pair to replace. Otherwise, go for it man. You have nothing to lose. They'll fit perfectly.

5 5

Burly but Light

  • Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

I have a pair of these on my AR7's and love them. I have only released early once and it probably wasn't even that early thinking back on it. I love the middle of the road DIN settings that the griffon offers. It also has a good meaty construction without being heavy. Very predictable and reliable piece of equipment.

The griffon 110's work with the Volkl Kiku,...

The griffon 110's work with the Volkl Kiku, right? It's got a 107 mm waist.

Responded on

definitely. So long as the ski doesn't have a channel or binding specific construction you can use this on any ski (taking into account your waist vs brake)

Responded on

Will the 110 MM Griffins work on 2014 Sir Francis Bacons? The bacons are 108 underfoot and i know that's only a 1 mm on each side. Worth stretching the break a little wider or bump up to a larger break? I just think 130 mm with 11mm on each side is too much

Will the Griffon 90's work with the Volkl...

Will the Griffon 90's work with the Volkl Bridge? It's got a 95 mm waist, so I'm guessing I need a bigger brake. Are the 110 mm versions too big? Is there something in between?

Best Answer Responded on

Hey Will,

It would definitely be alright to go with the 90's. You can bend the brakes to an extent to get a perfect fit. With a 95mm waist you would only have to bend each brake arm 2.5+ mm

Responded on

Careful here! I have broken a brake on a Griffon trying to widen it slightly. Make sure to clamp the metal arm of the brake in a vice before trying to bend the arm. The center section of the brake is plastic, and will break if you just try and pull the arms wider.

90 or 110 brake on the moment PB&J's at...

90 or 110 brake on the moment PB&J's at 101 underfoot?

Best Answer Responded on

Griffon 110 for sure!

Have fun with your new setup and hopefully you get to use them before season ends. Where I live it's ending too soon for my liking.


Will the Griffon 110 brake width work with...

Will the Griffon 110 brake width work with the Atomic Automatic ski (these are 117 underfoot)?

Responded on

I use a Griffon 110 on my 116JJ and it works. The Automatic is a little wider in the tip and a smidge more in the waist. I think you will be just fine but may require a tweek to the brake. Please call the shop you will have it mounted at to make sure they are ok doing that, or at least see what they recommend before ordering it. 130mm is a little excessive but it is a more powder oriented ski.

Responded on

While I don't disagree completely with SF, I personally think you are pushing the limits with the Griffon brake width on that ski. I would suggest that you also consider something like the Rossi FKS 140 in a 115mm as an alternative.

Responded on

I would agree with Mike. If you wanted to stay Griffon your are in a gray zone. One is tight and one is big. One more binding to throw at you is the new Salomon STH WTR 13 with a 115mm brake. The Silver and Gray would be awesome on that ski, unless you want some wow factor with the bright green or Rossi/Look pivot colors.

Best Answer Responded on

I ordered the Griffon 110, laid them on top of the Automatics and didn't like how much I was going to have to bend the brakes to get them to fit. So, I sent back the Griffon 110 and ordered Salomon STH STH 2 WTR 13 with a 115 mm Brake. Thanks Mike and SkiFreak for your help.

Responded on

Yes, it will work fine after being bent. The 110 mm width Marker brake is what I have on my Automatics and it's perfect. The 130 would be way too wide. The last ski I needed a 130 brake for was the K2 Darkside and they were really wide, I don't remember exactly how wide but I want to say at least 120 mm underfoot.

Does the brake width 90mm fit ARMADA T-hall...

Does the brake width 90mm fit ARMADA T-hall ski, which has body width of 86mm?

Responded on

The Griffon would be an excellent choice for the Armada T-Hall.

However, if you really want a binding that matches that ski perfectly and will give you a more versatile ride, I would recommend the Marker Griffon Schizo. With its multi-stance adjustment you can dial it forward for better balance in the park and pipe, center it for groomers, or dial it all the way back for deep pow riding.