Backcountry touring ski upgrade

My detailed Scarpa F1 hack how-to article is half a decade old now — a lot has happened in the years since then … actually, only a few weeks after writing that I was able to pick up a pair of Dynafit DyNA boots, and that was pretty much the end of all that hacking.

The boots in that AK article weight ~2/3 more than my current boots, yet those hacked boots have far less range of upper cuff motion while touring, and also ski way worse too. (I tried a similar Dynafit boot setup before I hacked those F1 boots.)

And now with normally priced boots available from Dynafit, Scarpa, and La Sportiva, at the penalty of only a few trivially ounces, hacking does have much of a $ justification.

As for the skipping the heel pieces, that's the lightest & cheapest part of a rando race binding, so no longer makes any sense.

(I do remember that ttips article years ago on the Marine setup — an impressive combination of very heavy weight yet very poor skiing control.)

Will, I ran fishscale skis with tech race bindings and race boots the other winter. Range of motion in the ankle and toe pivot is functionally infinite, but you absolutely loose some ability to apply downward kick/traction by having a rigid sole. This loss is pretty signficant, I'd spitball 30-40% though that obviously varying massively according to snow conditions. I'd assume you'd have a similar effect running kickwax.

The benefit is of course added warmth and weather resistance, which is why the AK guys moved towards that setup (read: overflow), as well as the potential for better turning control if you run heel pieces and an unmodified boot. The downside is multiday comfort. For most people it will take a lot of experimentation and customization to get a plastic shell and thermo liner to be truly comfortable for multiday kick and glide tours. If you're lucky enough to have a good bootfitter nearby this process can be simplified greatly; if not, good luck. Folks doing tours-for-turns on volcanoes aren't going to stress their boot/feet interface to the same degree, as a general rule.

All of which is to say that I moved back to a fabric/leather 3 pin boot for rolling tours last winter. It wasn't as warm as my tech boots, and the boots/binding combo was a few ounces more for the 3 pin rig, but my feet were a lot happier. If my normal terrain had overflow and colder conditions, and fewer stretches of wind scoured hiking, I'd probably be tempted to do a tech-touring rig.

Tell me if I'm right—

Sportiva Siderals:

37.5 oz each

Garmont Excursions:

48 oz each

Dynafit TLT Speed Radical:

24 oz

Voile Mountaineer w/ cable:

28 oz

—

So for about $300 (shopping around) you save a pound and a quarter and:

[] extremely better downhill performance
[] crampon compatible, better sole for scrambling
[] lighter uphill and on the flats
[] equal kick-and-glide performance as other setups when you are wearing skins (zero)

Doesn't this make T4s / Excursions quite a niche, for when AT setups don't permit enough kick and glide, but leather / NNN boots don't offer enough control?

Let's hear from someone with experience on both!

Johathan Sheffetz wrote: "(I do remember that ttips article years ago on the Marine setup — an impressive combination of very heavy weight yet very poor skiing control.)"

OK, your pile-driving irony had finally broken your POV through my thick skull. (Density plus AT-newbieness put me off the durometer scale.) Way out of my league in this field of evanescence.

Although La Sportiva Sideral boots + Dynafit Speed Radical bindings would certainly be a nice combination for some applications, for a comparison with a 48oz (per boot) Garmont/Scott Excursion + 28oz (per pair) Voile Mountaineer w/ cable, while keeping the price at the level of typical alpine gear (as opposed to all the cf & Ti high-end race gear) a much more suitable combination would be one of these boots:
http://skimo.co/la-sportiva-syborg-boots
http://skimo.co/dynafit-pdg-boots
http://skimo.co/scarpa-alien-boots
… for as low as 28oz (per boot), with a Frankenbinding Dynafit Speed Radical toe and Plum 145 heel:
http://skimo.co/dynafit-binding-toes
http://skimo.co/plum-binding-heels
… for about 16oz (per pair).
And compared to a 3-pin setup, not only are you saving up to 20oz per foot of lifted weight, plus another 12oz of sliding weight on the snow, but your strides don’t have any resistance, whereas striding on a 3-pin binding is like driving with the parking brake on. Sure, with a broken-in leather boot it isn’t *too* bad, but with a plastic boot like the Excursion, you’re fighting the bellows on each and every stride.
(BTW, re all those volcano tours-for-turns, the lower flanks usually have long flat approaches, so many alpine tours entail extensive nordic tours too.)

"Doesn't this make T4s / Excursions quite a niche, for when AT setups don't permit enough kick and glide, but leather / NNN boots don't offer enough control?"

I think that's a fair characterization. There's a place for light plastics and 3 pins for skiers who bushwack in thicker terrain with lots of ups and downs.

It's worth mentioning that some skins can have quite a lot of glide. I've taken to keeping two skins in my pack most of the time: one full coverage with tip loop and tail hook, and one ~55mm wide mohair race skin with tip bungee. You can get a lot of glide out of the later in certain conditions, and the added grip can make it the most efficient option for rolling ascents with false flats and steeper sections (where scales might struggle).

I really like the Siderals. Not the lightest option, but IME more durable and weatherproof than many competitors. The forefoot it quite narrow, but according to the local boot guy easy to punch (he did mine).

Now we just need a ~kilo ski with scales and an all-terrain flex. If Voile put scales on their WSP and made it in 180 I'd be psyched.

All of which reminds me that there's a lot to look forward to once hunting season is over.

Just wanted to add my general agreement there — plus nice to hear some owner feedback on the Sideral. The Dynafit TLT5/6 has been deservedly popular, but odd that La Sportiva's similar boots have received almost no attention (at least in North America). Scarpa is finally entering that market this year with the F1 Evo, which is already getting lots of attention.

I wonder if emails from potential buyers of a patterned-base WSP might sway Voile? Certainly would seem to make more sense than their patterned-base versions of ~7-pound skis!

I also extra pair of new unused straight mohair skins for sale if anyone is interested.

Hi,
after lots of research about what my local pretty limited resources have to offer here's what I found.

Coming from the land of Alpina I had a chance to try Alaska NNN boots and they fit my wide feet very well and so should 75mm version (same boot different binding) and I wonder if Alaska 75 mm would be strong/stiff enough boot to handle wide Madhsus Annum skis which are also available in my neck of woods. I ski mostly over rolling terrain with some kick and glide but do like to climb hills and telemark downhill…touring..heard/read lots of good stuff how comfortable the Alaskas are but haven't found anyone running them with wide Annums..

My more rugged ski setup (to what I have now) therefore would be:

– Alpina Alaska 75mm,
– Madshus Annum
– Voile 3 pin binding with cables…

it might not be the optimal setup lacking plastic Tele boots (T4, Excursion) but I am happy to compromise if skis can be turned with leather boot..and I can do some more steep sections:)

Backcountry touring gear is in minority here taken over by Alpine Touring boots/skis etc..so I need to go with what I find localy..boots and skis can be found here only bidings will have to be imported but shipping costs to do so are more affordable…

Thank you again for your help

Cheers

As I stated above, I use my Vasque double layer leather 3 pin boots with my 210 cm. Asnes touring skis.

But for steeper and "turnier" terrain I have to use my Atomic Tele skis and plastic Scarpa T3 boots. Those boots are the minimum in height, weight and stiffness for a plastic backcountry boot. And mine are comfortable (except for the weight, natch).

I have yet to get my hands on a pair of Alaskas, but from what I have heard on another forum, you'd be pushing it to try to handle Annums with them. Epochs would be a better matchup probably.

As has been amply noted, it all depends on the terrain and conditions you expect to encounter, the distance you are trying to cover, and what kind of skiing you enjoy and/or are skilled at.

Personally, I don’t think the Voile 3 pin telemark cable bindings or the Alpina Alaska 75 mm backcountry boots are strong enough for powder, groomed slopes, and heavy spring snow, but I guess it depends on how steep you want to go. Plus I hate lace-up boots. Better than your current rig though.

My ski touring has mostly been week-long telemarking trips in the high backcountry of the Sierra Nevada and Trinity Alps, with one trip to Mt. Washington in New Hampshire (including descent of Tuckerman Ravine). On these tours snow conditions are highly variable, ranging from powder to chopped up crud to icy hardpack. And my preference is to shred the downhills, rather than merely survive them.

For these types of terrain and conditions, and style of skiing, climbing, traversing and descending are the top performance requirements. I have always opted for strength, control and turning power in my ski set ups, and been willing to pay a weight and price penalty for it. Being able to safely climb and descend steep slopes in unpredictable and variable conditions, especially when carrying a pack, takes priority over striding speed and distance covered per day.

So I use the same rig with tall plastic boots, bomber cable bindings, and short wide alpine skis with plenty of sidecut for both backcountry touring and resorts. Unless you are especially skilled and experienced, this is the type of equipment you will need “to ski any descent.” For touring, I add climbing skins, heel lifters, crampons (both ski and boot), adjustable self-arrest ski poles and ice axe. The ski crampons compensate for the sidecut when edging on steep, icy traverses.

IME patterned bases do not provide nearly enough traction for serious climbing – skins are a must. But oh do they give traction. It's like 4-wheel drive. Combined with ski crampons, they're as good as snowshoes.

I am fortunate that my feet are pretty much average size and shape, and I have not had any comfort problems with tall plastic boots, even on week-long tours. And I have not had a problem doing real touring and going decent distances with such set ups, as opposed to only going up and down the steeps. I just loosen the buckles and plod along. So even on flat/gentle tours I use the same rig (plus I don’t want to spend the $$$ for a second rig that will see only limited use).

My slowest day on skis is still way faster than my fastest day on showshoes. In the Sierra Nevada I skied from Kearsarge Pass to Mt. Whitney and then to Wolverton Corral (about 35 miles as the crow flies – more like 50 on the ground) in 6 days. Others have done these routes much faster on lighter ski rigs carrying less equipment (like no tent or sleeping bag!), but to me that’s like free solo rock climbing without a rope.

My current set up is 181 cm Atomic Access skis, Scarpa T1 boots, and Axl bindings from 22 Designs (I hope they’re still in business – their web site doesn’t appear to be working but it seems the Axl can still be ordered from REI and others). The Axl is a very cool binding. It has a hinge allowing the boot to rotate freely up and down while climbing, kicking and gliding, but can be locked down for carving. (http://www.earnyourturns.com/5222/review-22designs-axl-2011/) Yeah, I know, it’s a heavy set up, but it does what I want it to do.

If I weren't a telemarker I'd go with an AT/randonee set up, but as we “pinheads” are fond of saying once you “free your heels and free your mind” it’s hard to go back. If your experience with downhill skiing is with alpine gear at resorts, AT/randonee is definitely the way to go for these types of terrain and conditions and for the powder, groomed slopes and heavy spring snow described in the OP.