New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AT/Resort combo - Page 2

post #31 of 58
springcorn is dead on. Let's keep it in perspective too. If Oleh is a PNW skier and is doing the Spearhead traverse for example; well its a traverse from Blackcomb to Whistler - or the other way.

I've done the Spearhead in one day over 10 hours. The record is about 6 hours done on touring gear with skinny skis and light weight gear. I seem to always miss the window of doing it they typical way - over 3 days with bigger pack and camping.

If I was going for a speed run on the Spearhead I'd probably be going pretty light and in some conditions - the lightweight ski setup is great.

If I was going for a 3 day tour of the Spearhead and bagging peaks or skiing chutes I'd probably bring a heavier duty setup.

Mind you, if I was like most people and just wanted one bc setup - I'd pick something that would be reasonable for almost all conditions. That's why I thought the Havocs and Barons are decent for that situation. Sure they might not be the best for long flattish traverses or for high-consequence exposed chute skiing but they work in almost all other situations.

Just my 2 cents
post #32 of 58
I can't believe where this tread has gone. If you can't traverse it, how the heck can you ski it? Maybe you shouldn't be there. How a ski traverses would be my absolute last criteria. I use Ramer ice axe handled poles and before traverse gets hairy the uphill side is right next to the pick.

I have some short (170) skis with Dynafits I use for spring corn- peak bagging--Hood Shasta etc. I love the light short ski going up, on my pack, and they do fine in spring conditions. In powder I have longer skis with Naxo's and Freerides. A longer ski is better for me in kick turns...less chance of the dreaded sudden heel sink.
post #33 of 58

Good Discussion here.

There's no reason to disparage this thread. Although I agree whole-heartedly with MUDFOOT, the other opinions are worthy ones. Personally, I seldom ski with shaped skiis. Most of my experience skiing came both before they came along and once they came along, I didn't buy the hype. I will use a shaped ski in deep snow in the woods but without any expectation of traversing or climbing. Nevertheless, the advantage they have between trees due to a smaller turn radius isn't all that much, I have found. Nevertheless, if you find it different, that's the way it goes. On top of that, it is very hard to find DH skiis which aren't shaped these days. By the way, is a kick turn the same as a helicopter turn?
post #34 of 58
Kick turn - Reversing direction by lifting and turning one ski at a time. The skier is not gliding when doing this maneuver. Kick turn was part of the first beginner lesson when I started skiing. It's difficult because your skis are pointing in opposite directions at one point. This is why beginners are not taught this anymore. Skiers climbing with skins use an uphill kickturn to begin angling up the hill in the other direction, like sailboat tacking.
post #35 of 58

Why not call it walking on skiis?

Quote:
Originally Posted by telerod15
Kick turn - Reversing direction by lifting and turning one ski at a time. The skier is not gliding when doing this maneuver. Kick turn was part of the first beginner lesson when I started skiing. It's difficult because your skis are pointing in opposite directions at one point. This is why beginners are not taught this anymore. Skiers climbing with skins use an uphill kickturn to begin angling up the hill in the other direction, like sailboat tacking.
Seems to me like a stationary stem-christie. So in a helicopter turn, you jump and turn both skiis at the same time when gliding while in this so-called kick turn you raise one leg at a time when stopped. Of course I have done this often, but I never realized someone had coined a name for such a simple move. It's something we did in freestyle using the pole as a balance point in order to reverse direction.
post #36 of 58
Its nothing like a stem christy. To turn left uphill, kick the left ski forward to place the left tail next to the right tip, let the ski fall to the left, lift up and come around almost 180 degrees to the new line. Relatively difficult compared to a downhill kick turn.

A stem would suggest a series of tail extensions starting (for a left turn) with the right tail, progressing to the new direction....or perhaps I misunderstood. BTW, how do you stem with a free-heel?
post #37 of 58
We stem with free heels by moving our skis into a convergent relationship (wedge). Stem turn is usually initiated with a wedge and finished with skis parallel. The parallel part can be alpine style (stem christie) or telemark (I think it's called wedge telemark, but maybe stem telemark). Turning 'em both at the same time is preferred of course, but I sometimes stem telemark when my legs are really tired.

Sorry for the hijack, I would go for the 168s because I like short skis and the side cut radius will be tighter for easier turning, more carving. I don't ski very fast or the kind of terrain you do, so maybe you should demo before dropping down another ten cm. I agree that you should get the length that you will enjoy on the downhill, if the turns are the primary reason for the tour. Don't worry about the kick turns, you can always use a stem christie to turn around on the skin track.
post #38 of 58

Filling in the time before the season.

Well, the stem-c wouldn't be done with a free heel. When they first started to fix the heels, it was the turn of choice for instruction. It isn't a skidded turn because you lift the downhill ski and stem it. It's a natural improvement on snowplowing. However, with a free-heel one can lift the downhill heel while weighting that ski. Thus you can unweight the uphill ski and lift it to complete the turn by bringing your skiis together. I'm going to consult my old Skiing magazines about this, but wouldn't the fixed heel mean you must keep wieght on the back ski and thus you can't lift it? Thus you make a stem and then skid the uphill ski. I do all these things without thinking about them. It's compares to my recent experiences ice skating. One doesn't think about how to put one foot in front of the other while walking. The same goes for any other activity which you learned as a young child. However, I recently tried figure skates. All of a sudden I had to think about my skating style. You can't drag your toes with these skates. You must get in the habit of lifting your skates more, performing cleaner motions. Your speed must be much more controlled or (as I did) you catch the tip in the ice and have a nasty fall. Anyway, with a kick turn you must be stationary as your heel is fixed. Then you kick or stem your ski, put your weight on it and bring the other ski around. Yes, difficult when climbing.
post #39 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATskier
Geez, you do like to type, don't you? In-track cross country isn't serious climbing or descending.
What do you mean by "serious", ATskier? Nordic centers frequently have expert trails that cross ravines with terrifying pitches.
post #40 of 58
Google kick turn or consult the first chapter of any book on ski technique written before 1970. I'm not sure you know what a kick turn is although Cirquerider described it well. It's the third skill explained in the oldest book on skiing that I own after walking and herringbone. Modern Ski Systems by Hans Georg, 1954. They don't teach it anymore to beginners because they hurt themself falling over when skis are facing opposite directions.
post #41 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by telerod15
. It's the third skill explained in the oldest book on skiing that I own after walking and herringbone. Modern Ski Systems by Hans Georg, 1954. They don't teach it anymore to beginners because they hurt themself falling over when skis are facing opposite directions.
My father used to have us all practice kick turns on the living room carpet, back before there were other pre-season activities, such as this board. More recently, a lot of skiers flunked out of ski patrol tryouts because they couldn't do one.
post #42 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfydog
My father used to have us all practice kick turns on the living room carpet, back before there were other pre-season activities, such as this board. More recently, a lot of skiers flunked out of ski patrol tryouts because they couldn't do one.
That's great! Does anybody remember The Lucy Show (Lucille Ball sitcom post I Love Lucy) when Lucy tries to teach herself to ski on the living room carpet after accepting a ski date with a hot skier? She used kick turns as part of her hilarious entanglement. That woman could act! I think she also built a jump in the backyard, but that action happened off camera. How did it end? I just remember the kick turns on the carpet and when the guy offered to pick her up at 4am and she goes "4am!?" (well, it's in the delivery) and he says "Oh sorry, 3am" because they were driving from LA to Mammoth and she already told him she was hardcore!
post #43 of 58

Great Reply.

That ranks up there with the episode when she and her gal friend took the job in the Chocolate factory. Look, let me clue you in on some personal background. I have extensive skiing, back country, winter survival, etc. experience. I wonder how many posting here and claiming knowledge of AT have ever skied or climbed in the Alps. Don't think that I'm claiming I have any expertise or have more experience than anyone else, however. By the way, I hunted up an article in the Dec. '68 Skiing Mag which was a lesson by Stein Ericson discussing Parallel technique. Now, many don't realize it, but carving your turns wasn't such a buzz word back then because everyone wanted to be parallel skiers. They write about the Christie which was the way they termed skiding your turn. Terminology has a history. It is also used differently where ever you are. Take Randonnee. The French use the word to describe any backcountry skiing, expecially overnight excursions. All of a sudden, I'm being told on a chair lift what it is in relation to Telemark skiing by some weekend warrior wearing the latest high-tech equipment at Magic Mtn. Obviously, he bought it hook, line and sinker.
post #44 of 58
You skied and you were in the back country, but did you ski in the backcountry? I'm confused because I can't imagine anyone who has skied uphill doesn't know a kick turn.

I think a christie is any turn that ends with skis parallel, such as stem christie or Stein's parallel christie. I'm not sure if skidding is required to be a christie. Maybe, but I would call a carved parallel turn a christie too.

Randonnee means ramble or long journey in french. It can be a long bike ride or a brevet (organized randonnee with checkpoints) such as Paris-Brest-Paris or Boston-Montreal-Boston, a well couple well known brevets.

Generally in the US, backcountry skiing is called randonnee if the descents are done with fixed heel to distinguish it from telemark, but you make an good point. Alpine touring and randonnee skiing can be done on telemark gear. If these terms are used to describe a type of ski equipment, we know what they mean, but they have broader meanings also.
post #45 of 58
This thread contains a wealth of knowldege for AT novices - like me. I'm a decent in-bounds skier who's considering gearing-up for AT. I live close to Mt. Baker and not taking advantage of the vast BC seems like a sin (especially in light of this snow year).

But, before go out and spend a wad on Freerides (are all AT bindings this expensive?), skis to put them on, and AT boots, I'd like to stick my toe in the water.

I guessing a pair of skins and alpine trekkers will give me a taste, at marginal cost?

I've bought a new pair of Sugar Daddy's - 183 cm. Would these be suitable as AT skis? If so, perhaps I should wait until I determine how gung-ho I become at AT before committing them to bindings (alpine or AT). These 2006 SD's seem extremely light, now that they've dropped the annoying mounting plate.

If I decide to purchase another set of skis to dedicate exclusively to AT, what about last year's Rossi B3's, or Pocket Rockets? I presume lightness is a key factor.

Thanks in advance for the suggestions.
post #46 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Strato
This thread contains a wealth of knowldege for AT novices - like me. I'm a decent in-bounds skier who's considering gearing-up for AT. I live close to Mt. Baker and not taking advantage of the vast BC seems like a sin (especially in light of this snow year).

But, before go out and spend a wad on Freerides (are all AT bindings this expensive?), skis to put them on, and AT boots, I'd like to stick my toe in the water.

I guessing a pair of skins and alpine trekkers will give me a taste, at marginal cost?

I've bought a new pair of Sugar Daddy's - 183 cm. Would these be suitable as AT skis? If so, perhaps I should wait until I determine how gung-ho I become at AT before committing them to bindings (alpine or AT). These 2006 SD's seem extremely light, now that they've dropped the annoying mounting plate.

If I decide to purchase another set of skis to dedicate exclusively to AT, what about last year's Rossi B3's, or Pocket Rockets? I presume lightness is a key factor.

Thanks in advance for the suggestions.
Sugar Daddys would be a nice bc setup. A little heavy but not too bad. PRs and B3s ski quite differently so that's personal preference.

As far as Mt baker - yah its backcountry paradise. I'd skip the Trekkers and go right to an AT binding. Read the Freeride vs Naxo NX21 for some opinions. Lots of threads here and in TGR about using those as resort bindings too if that helps.

Try it with an alpine boot first too just to get your feet wet.
post #47 of 58

What Non-sense.

Telerod or Hard-on, does a rose by any other name smell the same? Don't think for a minute that I am reading much more than the first lines of your posts. In fact from now on I think I may skip them altogether.
post #48 of 58

sorry

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATskier
Telerod or Hard-on, does a rose by any other name smell the same? Don't think for a minute that I am reading much more than the first lines of your posts. In fact from now on I think I may skip them altogether.
If you are suggesting that you have been doing kick turns, christies and randonneés all your life but just didn't know the names for them, good for you! Nonsense isn't hyphenated by the way, and there's two ns in randonneé. Hey, just trying to help! !

Sorry if I offended or bored if that's why you don't want to read my posts. It you don't want to read them because I'm off-topic and have no BC experience, I'm sorry about that too! Do you know about the ignore function?
post #49 of 58
Capt. Strato, I've never done BC skiing but I think LeeLau's suggestion makes sense, the bindings he suggested can be used with your alpine boots. Look at it this way: You will use the trekkers a limited time. Either you decide you prefer lift-served and quit using the trekkers or you decide to get the freeride/naxo and quit using the trekkers. If you tour on the AT bindings and decide you prefer lift-served, you can sell them as easy as you can sell the trekkers (most likely as a greater loss, but you aren't going to prefer lift-served!). Or you could keep them and ski AT binding inbounds and pretend you are a BC skier, like me on my teles at Ski Liberty! Get out there and enjoy the mountains and be safe!
post #50 of 58
Capt. Strato:

(This is off-topic, but your handle brings back fond memories of the best ski purchase I ever made - Rossi Strato's, 207cm, brand new in the plastic for $19.00. Now there was a ski. )

Anyway, back to your question.

I think the Sugar Daddy's would make fine backcountry skis. I would discourage you from buying Trekkers because the alpine binding purchase plus the Trekker purchase is most likely going to cost you more than just putting Freerides or Naxo's on in the first place.

Trekkers simply are not a very good solution if you end up doing much skinning at all. They're clunky, heavy, and clumsy and I've seen at least two pairs essentially come apart after a moderate day of skinning.

You can most certainly, as Telerod suggests, use the the Freerides/Naxos inside the resort with alpine boots all season long. The AT bindings wouldn't be my first choice for moguls or carving, but they'll work perfectly well for that and the Sugar Daddy's aren't exactly bumper/carver skis anyway. I've probably skied about 80 in-resort days on a pair of Freerides (with Tecnica alpine boots) and have never had the slightest complaint about the way they ski *or* the way they release.

You can also use your alpine boots in the AT bindings with no problem. Some people find alpine boots to be painful and heavy for a long day of skinning (I'm among those), but I know an awful lot of skiers who ski/skin all day in alpine boots.

So, my bottom line would be to put AT bindings on those Daddys and git at it.

(Obligatory lecture-mode: one assumes you're also going to get the rest of the avalanche gear and training. )
post #51 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters
Capt. Strato:

(This is off-topic, but your handle brings back fond memories of the best ski purchase I ever made - Rossi Strato's, 207cm, brand new in the plastic for $19.00. Now there was a ski. )

Anyway, back to your question.

I think the Sugar Daddy's would make fine backcountry skis. I would discourage you from buying Trekkers because the alpine binding purchase plus the Trekker purchase is most likely going to cost you more than just putting Freerides or Naxo's on in the first place.

Trekkers simply are not a very good solution if you end up doing much skinning at all. They're clunky, heavy, and clumsy and I've seen at least two pairs essentially come apart after a moderate day of skinning.)
Bob: Thanks for the "Lecture"; it's exactly what I was hoping for. Your suggestions sound excellent. I'll likely exchange the Neox 412's for a pair of Freerides and go with those, and my alpine boots for now.

The downside is limted. Freerides won't compromise Alpine soft snow performance on the Sugar Daddy's, and I'll still be able to use my Lange 120's.

If I get stoked by the experience, I'll move up to a pair of AT boots in the spring - when the BC touring around here really takes off.

Yes, the Rossi Strato's are the touchstone of every skier our age, hence my handle. When I lived at Whistler in the early 70's, the Strato's were THE ski (before the other THE SKI came along). 207 cm was the mandatory length for real men - even if we were boys.

They were a bit stiff, but you could wail on 'em - until they fell apart (didn't take too long).

The matt, deep burgandy color with bright blue bases are still one of the nicest graphic combos I've seen. $19 - the deal of the decade!
post #52 of 58

....

fwiw...
I've been using a mid-fat(Elan m666) & Freerides all the time with alpine boots..as any ascents have been short. The Freerides have, up till now, been great. The Naxos are IMO just as good. Most everything else around my area is much more flat(northcentral Maine), where a BC/X-C setup is terrific... :
post #53 of 58
This is exactly the thread I've been looking for.

I'm considering some 8800's with AT bindings and Alpine boots as a general purpose setup. I'll probably do a few BC hut trips this winter and a few tens of days of resort skiing. I'm wondering if this setup is going to be dispointing inbound in the bumps. Any comments would be much appreciated.
post #54 of 58
Woops, welcome to the board. The AT setup you describe should be fine. I use Volkl Mantra with freerides and acquired AT boots (Garmont Adrenalin) later. Add to your budget funds for skins, avalanche beacon, probe, shovel and a pack. Be aware that there are hazards out of bounds that normally do not exist within the ski area.
post #55 of 58
Woops: You should reconsider using alpine boots for a hut trip. They will fit in Freeride AT bindings, but I think you will be miserable carrying a pack with stiff boots that do not have a releasable hinge. If you do not get AT boots you should definitely take the alpine boot set up for a good test drive before the hut trip. Once you get blisters your trip is pretty much screwed.
post #56 of 58
Thanks for the comments, guys.
post #57 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woops
This is exactly the thread I've been looking for.

I'm considering some 8800's with AT bindings and Alpine boots as a general purpose setup. I'll probably do a few BC hut trips this winter and a few tens of days of resort skiing. I'm wondering if this setup is going to be dispointing inbound in the bumps. Any comments would be much appreciated.
I've said it before - The Dynastar Inspired/8800 would probably be my choice if I had one ski to do it all. Phenomenal ski.
post #58 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Strato
... before go out and spend a wad on Freerides (are all AT bindings this expensive?), skis to put them on, and AT boots, I'd like to stick my toe in the water. ..
What size boots are you skiing on? I have a pair of Atomic TMEX's with Naxo bindings that I don't use except as rock skis. You can borrow them for a few weeks to see if your carcasse can be used for backcountry skiing. Skins may be a problem, however. I cut my Atomic skins down for my wife's Jills.

I'll even throw in a few avi pointers and a kick-turn or two!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home