Topic

Backcountry skiing. NNNBC bindings on wider skis? What would you do?

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
Rusty Beaver BPL Member
PostedJan 5, 2017 at 9:23 pm

I know very little about skiing and actually ski less well than that!

To the point: I have the three sets of skis in the photo. The bottom Fischer is the ski I’ve been using coupled with the Alpina boot and NNN BC bindings. These skis are not working for what I need them for which is to travel from point A to point B and back. Round trip is 5 miles. The terrain is largely flat except one hill which goes up 300′ in 1/3 of a mile. I can not get up this hill with the Fischers (they have scales). I can not herringbone up due to the brush and trees. Furthermore, the Fischers don’t float me well in the powdery conditions I often see.

At this point in time, my only concern/requirement is to get to where I’m going and back. No down hill turns. I don’t care if I have a goofy set-up, as long as it works for my needs. I just need transportation. I have snowshoes but skiing seems so much more efficient and fun.

Also, though I’m fine with spending money later after experimenting a bit, right now, I do not want to put much money in to this endeavor. And preferably, I would like to make do with some combination of what I have in the photo.

Tonight, someone gave me the Atomic tele skis as well as the Rossignols. The Atomics also came with the skins seen at top. As can be seen, the Atomics have bindings. I don’t have boots to fit those bindings though.

I know it would not be ideal and maybe even foolish. However, given my criteria, would it be ok to mount the NNNBC bindings on the Atomics, using my Alpina boots? Could I use those bindings and boots on the wider Rossignol? It looks like I could make the skins fit the Rossignols without too much effort. My first thought was to put the skins on the Fischers. The skin tip is too wide and the skin itself too short.

I need to figure something out before tomorrow eve (Friday) as I’m leaving first thing Sat morning. As long as I get up the hill and I can move faster than post holing with snowshoes, I’d be happy.
<p id=”yui_3_10_0_1_1483676126003_718″>Thanks for any insight/help that can be given.</p>

Ed Tyanich BPL Member
PostedJan 6, 2017 at 8:14 am

Rusty,

You should be fine with the NNN BC bindings on the wider ski for what you intend. I use and have used SNS BC bindings (very similar) on quite wide skis.

Not The best edge control for turning, but fine for touring.

Rusty Beaver BPL Member
PostedJan 6, 2017 at 8:40 am

Thanks, Ed. As far as which skis to put the NNN BC bindings on: Those old Atomic teles or the Rossignols? The Atomics have such a side cut (for turning, I presume). I’m not sure if that would be a detriment for my application or not. Thoughts?

The Rossignols have more surface area so I believe they’d float me better in the powder. But then the skins are cut for the Atomics. Maybe it doesn’t matter that much. Maybe I’m overthinking as my wife would say….

Would love to hear more of your thoughts and those of others.

Thanks.

David Chenault BPL Member
PostedJan 6, 2017 at 9:20 am

Either ski would work for your purposes.  Slap the bindings on one, and if you don’t like it try the other.

You can use the skinny skins on wider skis.  The lack of edge to edge coverage isn’t an issue in soft snow so long as you keep the skis flat to the snow.

Ed Tyanich BPL Member
PostedJan 6, 2017 at 1:29 pm

As Dave said, either ski will work. I have found that a ski wit a lot of side cut will be somewhat squirrelly when touring on hardpack. Soft snow no issues.

Good luck!

Ross Bleakney BPL Member
PostedJan 6, 2017 at 2:39 pm

OK, a few basics. Skis have sidecut, and sidecut allows them to turn without much work. Just lean and they curve. The opposite is true. The less sidecut, the easier it is to just keep going straight. Skis also very in weight. Generally speaking, the bigger the ski, the heavier it is. The heavier a ski is, and the more sidecut it has, the harder it is to control.

Bindings and boots provide control. Regular (non BC) cross country ski bindings have the least amount. BC are a step up from there. 3 pin (with cable) are a step up from there. But the big step occurs when you have plastic boots. Plastic boots, whether on a Telemark or A. T. (AKA Randonee) setup gives you the most control.

So now think about the combination. If you have a plastic boot with an A. T. binding, you can control skinny skis just fine. It would be overkill, perhaps, but they would go exactly where you want them to go. On the other hand, if you have flimsy boots and bindings, it becomes very difficult to control a big ski that has a lot of sidecut. It can be done, but it is just more difficult. Conditions matter a lot, as well as what you are actually trying to do. As Ed said, sometimes a combination can get squirrelly. By that I assume that he means that you lose control. You are trying to go straight, and the ski wobbles (this has happened to me). This is more likely to happen on harder snow, whether it is crusty, icy or even nice Spring corn snow. Softer, drier snow tends to be more forgiving. But even then it can be hard to push a heavy ski through snow.

I can’t tell from the picture how wide those Atomic skis are. They look don’t look like they are super wide or have a huge amount of sidecut. I have a pair of Atomic Rainiers which I pair with NNN BC boots, and they do really well. That may be similar. I think the Rossignol’s, on the other hand, would be pushing it.

I would go one of three ways. The first is to get another set of bindings and put them on the Atomics. It is quite common for people to have several different pair of skis which they use for particular conditions. A second would be to swap out the bindings. You may find that you really love the added flotation and sidecut of the Atomic skis, and find they really work for you. The third choice would be to simply stick with the skis you have, and cut the skins. There is nothing wrong with cutting skins — it is quite common to do so. In fact it is expected for a lot of skis, as it enables you to match the contours of the ski with the skin (as opposed to having gaps). Either way works, though, which is why kickers (which only cover part of the ski) would probably work just fine for your situation. The more surface area you cover the more gripping power you have, but you don’t need to cover the whole ski.

In terms of choices, I would say a lot depends on how much you like your current setup and whether you consider it much of a loss if you ended up selling them or giving them away. Like I said, it is quite common for folks to have several pairs of skis. I personally own several pairs of skis, but in most cases I have one pair of skis per boot type. So I only own one pair of skis that fit my BC boots and one pair that fit my A. T. boot. Yet I have a couple of pairs that fit my cross country (no BC) boots. Those are the most comfortable and lightest set of both skis and boots. One set is extremely light and skinny and I use that exclusively on the groomed tracks. The other is a bit wider and has some sidecut, but still light enough and straight enough to easily manage with my light flimsy boots. This is my go-to pair — what I use for most of my trips. It goes on logging roads, and mellow off trail terrain. I have kickers for them, to manage the steep areas.

That is a long story, but hopefully that helps. With more details on the skis themselves I would offer an opinion in more detail (which way I would recommend you go).

Rusty Beaver BPL Member
PostedJan 6, 2017 at 6:38 pm

Thank you all for the thoughtful replies!

Running out of time, I decided to mount the NNN BCs on the Rossignols with the thought I had nothing to lose. If I hate the set-up, I’ll mount the bindings on the Atomics (which do have a lot of sidecut). If that’s no better, I worry about that when the time comes…and I’ll have more personal experience by then.

The skins from the Atomics fit right on Rossignols.

It all looks goofy as heck…but if it ends up working, I’ll be smile’n!

Russ – My first thought was too simply put the skins on the Fischers and trim them. However, the metal loop end on the skins were too wide, allowing it to practically be under the ski where it would be dragging.  As for the side cut on the Atomics, I believe they are more than the skis you mentioned. Check out the pic. At any rate, I appreciate your lengthy and helpful reply.

Thanks again, everyone. Very helpful!

Ross Bleakney BPL Member
PostedJan 6, 2017 at 10:51 pm

@Rusty — Yeah, those look like they have a fair amount of sidecut. Do you happen to know the sidecut of the skis? Often these are printed on the skis themselves. If you know the model, then sometimes you can find it that way.

Rusty Beaver BPL Member
PostedJan 6, 2017 at 11:54 pm

No, sorry, I don’t know the sidecut. I will have to take a look.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
Loading...