New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Two ski quiver and AT set-up

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
I just replaced some worn out, 3 year-old Rossi B3s that were my only ski with '09 watea 84s (they were cheap!).  I'm a lighter guy, and I'm sure these will work great as my everyday ski in northern new mexico and colorado.  

I'd still like to get a wider ski with a slight rocker /tip rise for when I can catch some fresh snow.  I think a little more float would make maneuvering tight and steep spots in fresh snow a lot easier.

The thing is, I also need an AT setup.  Some friends of mine do laps several days a week at our local ski hill (which is ten minutes away) after they close for the season.  So this will a way to extend the season and get a few backcountry day trips a year in too. Since I plan to tour a fair amount I want to keep things reasonably light while still having good downhill performance.  So I'm thinking of going with dynafit bindings and an overlap boot (radium, zzeus or factor).  For skis, I am thinking of two options:

1) Buy a wide-ish AT ski for the dynafits, something like the K2 coomback.  This would be light enough for touring (?), a decent all around ski, and my fat ski for deep resort skiing.

2) just mount the dynafits on the old b3's and get a third set of powder skis with alpine bindings.

Any thoughts?  Cost should be about the same either way.  I'd say I'm an aggressive skiier, and I ski all over the mountain at all sorts of speeds depending on who I'm with that day.  Will the dynafits be too fiddly and soft for resort skiing a day or two after a big snow?  Is a 100mm ski too wide to run laps with all the time?  Sorry for the huge post.  Thanks!
post #2 of 14
Thread Starter 
Nobody?  You can't all be too busy skiing?!
:)
post #3 of 14

I don't think you will find too many people who will recommend using Dynafit bindings for area skiing, except on a powder day.

I ski alpine, and I have a Dynafit AT setup, and I have tried various other AT options.  If you go with option 1 you are going to have problems keeping up with your buddies on powder days at the resort unless you get very heavy AT boots.  If you do go that route, look for last year's Antipiste, it is virtually the same ski as the new Koomback, and will be alot cheaper.

How about Option 3, get some 105mm waisted skis that are on the lighter side and mount them with Fritschi Freerides, and the light AT boots you describe.  The bindings are lighter than Dukes, but heavier than Dynafits, but you can use AT boots for skinning, and your alpine boots for deep days at the area with those bindings.  That way you get to use your fat ski both ways, and also use the best  boot for the situation.

post #4 of 14
Thread Starter 
Mudfoot,
   The antipistes are a good suggestion and I think your option 3 is also good.  But from what I've read, dynafits ski as well as or better than Fritschi's - you still think the beefier overlap AT boots still give up a lot on the downhill?

I'm also realizing I live in the desert now...  Anybody living in New Mexico have opinions about whether or not a powder ski is necassary?  I do hope to get out to wolf creek, crested butte, maybe silverton...  
post #5 of 14
I am sure you can get some different opinions, but my take on your situation is that you are looking for an area powder ski to replace the B3, and an AT setup.  Dynafit bindings are about half the weight of Fritschi Freerides, but they only work with Dynafit boots.  AT boots are starting to approach alpine boot performance, but only those models that weigh about as much as an alpine boot.  I have skied the Fritchis with my alpine boots and they work great.

You need to make a choice as to whether you want a light AT setup (Dynafit bindings and light AT boots), which will not work very well for pushing it for area powder skiing; or

A good area powder skiing setup that is heavy for AT skiing.  Although heavier, the Freerides are less hassle and more versatile to use AT than Dynafits, and can also convert to alpine boot use with a few twists of the toe piece screws.  You can travel with one pair of skis and two pair of boots, and are ready for area or AT.

Your last post is advocting heavy AT boots for area powder skiing, but why not have light AT boots for the bc, and alpine boots for area pow?

Dynafit = light bindings with no alpine boot compatibility, so you will need heavy AT boots that IMO will still leave you wanting when chasing your friends on a powder day at the area.

Your Option 1 above has you skiing Silverton Mt. on AT boots.  If you have light boots they will not ski well, and if you have heavy AT boots they will not be good for climbing when AT skiing.

AT is always a compromise between performance and weight, but if you throw in area skiing it gets even more complicated. There are several ways to skin your cat, but IMO Freerides are the only reasonable option if you are looking for and AT/alpine boot compatible  binding.  If you do not go that route then you are area powder skiing on Dynafit bindings and AT boots, which is a compromise I will not make on a powder day, although many people do.
post #6 of 14
Thread Starter 
Thanks for your input - I wanted to try to kill two birds with one stone but I think you're right - I would just end up with a pretty compromised setup either way.  I should probably just get some powder/crud skis (anitpistes?) with alpine bindings or freerides for charging and having fun in the resort and go for a lighter, midfat AT setup for doing morning laps. 

A three ski quiver isn't so ridiculous - but my girlfriend will think I'm crazy.
post #7 of 14
Not sure how much experience you've have skiing AT boots, but if you are used to alpine boots, they just do not drive the skis or provide the support you are used to.  The new AT boots like the BD Factors are virtually an alpine boot with a hinge.   They ski great, but you have to drag them up hill first.  I have tried several options, but my bottom line is that an on area powder day is the one place I do not want to be on a compromised setup (particularly my boots).  I don't mind giving up some skiing boot performance in the bc in exchange for dropping a couple of lbs. on the climbs.
post #8 of 14
Thread Starter 
No experience in AT boots yet.  Being used to alpine boots, I think I'm willing to have an extra pound or so for heavier boots and make most of that weight up with dynafits (versus freerides).  Seems like there's only a pound or so between the lightest and heaviest AT boots...
post #9 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by chemSki View Post

No experience in AT boots yet.  Being used to alpine boots, I think I'm willing to have an extra pound or so for heavier boots and make most of that weight up with dynafits (versus freerides).  Seems like there's only a pound or so between the lightest and heaviest AT boots...
 

The difference in top line boots between the lightest Dynafit Zzero 4 X-TF and the BD Factor is 1lb. 1oz per boot.  That doesn't seem like a lot, but when you multiply it by a few thousand vertical feet of climbing it adds up fast.
post #10 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by chemSki View Post

...I'm thinking of going with dynafit bindings and an overlap boot (radium, zzeus or factor).  For skis, I am thinking of two options:

1) Buy a wide-ish AT ski for the dynafits, something like the K2 coomback.  This would be light enough for touring (?), a decent all around ski, and my fat ski for deep resort skiing.

2) just mount the dynafits on the old b3's and get a third set of powder skis with alpine bindings.

Any thoughts?  Cost should be about the same either way.  I'd say I'm an aggressive skiier, and I ski all over the mountain at all sorts of speeds depending on who I'm with that day.  Will the dynafits be too fiddly and soft for resort skiing a day or two after a big snow?  Is a 100mm ski too wide to run laps with all the time?  Sorry for the huge post.  Thanks!

I like option 1.  I've skied Dynafits at resorts and if you keep them to (and on) soft snow you shouldn't have any problems.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by chemSki View Post

I'm also realizing I live in the desert now...  Anybody living in New Mexico have opinions about whether or not a powder ski is necassary?  I do hope to get out to wolf creek, crested butte, maybe silverton...  

Necessary, I suppose not.  But totally great to have, if only for those trips to Wolfie and Silverton, but I use them in NM often enough.  I live in Santa Fe, tour a lot, and have what some might consider to be too many skis, but I just skied my new BD Justices (115 mm waist, slight tip rise, tele bindings) on pow/windpack/crud and love them to death.  My AT skis are PM Gear Bros (99 mm waist).  

BTW I might be able to help you with your AT purchases.  PM if interested.  
post #11 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Lee View Post

I like option 1.  I've skied Dynafits at resorts and if you keep them to (and on) soft snow you shouldn't have any problems.  

 

Since the OP said," I'd say I'm an aggressive skier, and I ski all over the mountain at all sorts of speeds depending on who I'm with that day.  Will the dynafits be too fiddly and soft for resort skiing a day or two after a big snow?" I hesitated to go with your reccomendation.
Edited by mudfoot - 12/13/09 at 11:31am
post #12 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot View Post




The difference in top line boots between the lightest Dynafit Zzero 4 X-TF and the BD Factor is 1lb. 1oz per boot.  That doesn't seem like a lot, but when you multiply it by a few thousand vertical feet of climbing it adds up fast.

The other big difference is that the BD Factor's walk/tour mode doesn't even get the rear cuff up to vertical, whereas a Zzero series boot relaxes the upper cuff to past vertical (as does pretty much any AT boot).  
post #13 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot View Post

Since the OP said," I'd say I'm an aggressive skier, and I ski all over the mountain at all sorts of speeds depending on who I'm with that day.  Will the dynafits be too fiddly and soft for resort skiing a day or two after a big snow?" I hesitated to go with your reccomendation.

Yeah, good point.  Maybe I should have been a little stronger with my caveats?  It's always a tough thing to answer when some asks "is something too something?"  The answer is almost always "it depends."
post #14 of 14
Thread Starter 
 Thanks for the input everybody.  I skied Sante Fe today and was able to demo some K2 sidstashes (coomback bindings were broken).  They were pretty fun, and I think I would really like to have a fatter ski like that for fresh snow/day after days - but it was also kind of a wake up-call in that I'm not excited about hauling those uphill...

On the other hand, quite a few people were on dynafits today.   But I have the feeling they're not really up to me goofing around the way I like to sometimes - which I think is mudfoot's point.

Johnathan - that's good to know about the factor's walk mode, thanks.  Bob Lee - you're right my post is hard to answer, but this has all been helpful.  thanks again.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home