EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › New Skier - AT setup out of the question?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Skier - AT setup out of the question? - Page 2

post #31 of 53

PS

 

As an addendum to the above, if you can find a ski similar to the above that is a little wider, up to say mid 70s, that would be a little more versatile, but I was looking for something cheap and flat, and most of the skis of that type seem to have bindings or a plate (eg all the skis at level 9 that say "railflex" have a plate that would get in the way of your putting on an AT binding).

post #32 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters View Post

I don't think it's nuts at all to think that you could learn to ski pretty well after 90 days of dedicated effort.  If you're moderately athletic and in good physical condition, you should learn very quickly.  By the end of that 90 days, I believe you could be a relatively competent off-piste skier.  Take a few lessons along the way to help build good movement habits and stop bad ones from forming.  Ski all the time and you'll start to learn to handle your skis in more difficult conditions.  Ski in places where you can venture off the groomed runs by just a few feet and then ski back out onto the groomer if you're having trouble off-piste.

 

Most important of all - give us some progress reports, video and photos and everything.  I truly believe you could become a pretty darned good skier in that amount of time if you put in the effort.

 

As to equipment, the Barons would be a good choice initially since you'll be spending most of your time (this winter, anyway) riding lifts and skiing inbounds.  Eventually, if you become serious about backcountry skiing you're going to gravitate to Dynafit bindings, but we'll save that discussion for later.  Find yourself excellent boots that fit well and get custom insoles.  Your boots are more important than your skis.

 

Of the skis you mentioned, I've only skied the Rossi S3.  I think it would make a very good ski for your purposes and would also make a pretty good backcountry ski when the time comes.

 

So, go do it.  I expect that we'll be seeing weekly reports starting the first of November.  I would be very interested in hearing your progress. Just make sure you don't go out-of-bounds skiing without the proper  gear and training and friend(s).

 

Good luck!



sounds like a fun winter!

I think this post is MONEY! nice work (as expected), Bob.

 

The one thing I would add to this long thread full of good advise? boots. I don't think a boot like the method is a good idea. I'd go with something like the new Salomon that is basically a resort boot, but with some tread and a maybe a walk funtion.

as others ahvfe said, BOOTS are most important. you need the big gun, not some light AT thing designed as a compromise. We know you'll be able to climb, you were a climber and roadie, so having a little extra weight on your feet going up is nothing, but, having a full control SKI boot will make a big difference on the way back down. I've skied alpine and AT for years, and I still hate the compromise of AT boots (since most of them suck). I do short tours (up to 1.5hr climbs in my tecnica race boots...)

 

Also, soft, wide, short flexy ski, don't know most of your choices, but these are general parameters i'd look at.

 

So, Baron, yes, real ski boot, yes, soft wide flexy ski... yes.

 

Also, i agree w/ bob that this isn't nuts. you have a few things going for you, even though I haven't met you. fit from cycling, you've spent quality time in the vertical environment from your alpine climbing and rock climbing. I think this huge, as AT skiing is using a different tool to get around, but your often just getting around. AT skiing is often nuts and bolts, go here, go there, not flow carve air.. and because of that, climbers are often quick to pick it up.

 

Good luck

and if you want a tour guide in tahoe, drop me a line.

 

cheers,

holiday

post #33 of 53

Substitute Baron for Marker Tour 12.  Same functionality, just lighter.

post #34 of 53

A Baron/Duke/Tour 12 binding works as well inbounds as any other alpine binding.  If the price is good get the skis with the Barons and use the money you would spend on a pair of "learner" skis to pay for skins and an Avy 1 class.  You will also need a probe, shovel, pack, and beacon.  You might find some back country buddies in the class.  90 days is a lot of skiing.  I'd bet that a lot of pretty vocal bears barely get that much in 10 years.  Most skiers won't get 90 days in 5 years.  You can be a pretty good skier if you take a few lessons here and there.  Like I said in my other post....  Not every back country run is extreme.  There is a lot of terrain that almost anyone can do.  I learned by doing and you can to.  Take it easy and stay safe out there.

 

BTW you don't "need" to learn to carve at slow speeds.  You need to learn to skill blend.  Learn to make parallel skidded turns and work on carving when you get comfortable with speed and the forces that will make carving easier and more rewarding.  The real deal is turn turn shape.  You will want to be able to make a variety of turns at will and use a blend of carving and shmeared attics for the situation at hand.  

 

You can learn on the Rossi or the Line just fine.  I don't think I believe in beginner skis.  Maybe for renting, but not for buying.  I also am not sure why people bash on twin tips.  I don't think it makes much difference while you are skiing.  I would prefer a ski with a straight tail so I can jab them in the snow, but beyond that, there is no difference.  Kick turning and skating work just fine on twins.  The skin attachment can be problematic for twin tips, but is not insurmountable.  You can always grind a notch in the tail if you need one.  You can even cut the twin tip off, if it bothers you, like I did on one pair.

 

You might be looking for a lighter set-up next year.  The Dynafit is the logical choice for someone who wants to do longer tours.  You might consider the Dynafit fitting as a buying criteria for an AT boot purchase.  I use my Nordica 130 Speedmachine boots with my Sumo/Duke set up because my AT boot is too wimpy for that set-up.  My AT boot does well with my Yanak/Frirtzi set-up.  I don't mind the heavy boot, heavy binding, heavy ski set up for short tours with maximum downhill pay off, but would want something lighter if I was touring longer and more seriously.  For you I would recommend the stiffest tallest AT boot you can find that fits you well.  Go to a good shop with an experienced boot fitter and spend the money it takes to get the right boot. 

post #35 of 53

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxman View Post

Substitute Baron for Marker Tour 12.  Same functionality, just lighter.


That reads like you're saying the Baron is lighter than the F12, which would be backwards - the F12 is ~1800g and the Baron is ~2500g.  

post #36 of 53

I skied back Midwestern back country for nearly 3 years before touching a ski lift or rope tow of any kind.  But, that was because my folks wouldn't auntie up to pay for me to ski, or buy me real ski gear.  I took the skills I learned from playing pee wee hockey and transformed that in to ski turns.  And using chopped down vintage gear I got a garage sales using allowance money I fish-boned up little 150-200 foot vert all around the fields and river valleys for several winters because that was my only option.  So, it can be done.  But, I progressed more in two weeks of lift served skiing with lessons than I had in the previous three years and enjoyed it more.  Having the lodge to go warm up in was a pretty dandy thing during a Minnesota January.

 

 

 

 

 

post #37 of 53

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanoT View Post

I just think it might take the OP longer to get comfortable off piste than he would like. He already mentioned that he struggled with a snow board more than he liked so we can figure he is not a gifted athlete--no surprise as most people aren't. When he is ready to no longer resort ski then he can sell his carving skis and boots and by then will have a much better idea of what AT gear to get. Also in an accelerated ski learning scenario there will probably be lots of crashes and binding releases so wouldn't a beefy downhill binding be better than an AT binding under those circumstances?


I don't think he needs to learn on carving skis - I've never owned carving skis and I can get down most hills...but what do I know?  

 

Most all AT bindings are durable enough to withstand beginners' crashes.  

post #38 of 53



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Lee View Post

 


That reads like you're saying the Baron is lighter than the F12, which would be backwards - the F12 is ~1800g and the Baron is ~2500g.  



Must be the result of being Downunder   (Or as Mr Cleese would say - Mr Gates, there is no such thing as American English). Agreed, other posters had been saying Duke/Baron, but I would suggest the Tour 12 as it is significantly lighter.

post #39 of 53
Thread Starter 

What is the trade off with the F12s vs Dukes?  Durability, responsiveness?

post #40 of 53

The Dukes wre over-engineered to buggery, I think the specs were written on TGR, as they were heavy and had a 15 DIN (My amp goes to 11 !!!).  Marker have been making these things for 4 years now so I guess they have learned where they can save weight (better materials, lighter springs etc).  Functionally it is identical to the Duke/Baron, so it won't loose a thing with responsiveness (i.e. tightest AT-frame binding). It won't suit the TGR crowd, but for mere mortals the Tour 12 should be fine.

post #41 of 53

I'm very interested in checking out the Tour 12.  I'm 5'10" 170lbs and ski on a DIN of 9.  The Tour 12 should be plenty of binding for me.  If all other things are equal...  Lighter is better.  I don't know anyone who is using the Tour 12 yet and don't know how it will hold up.  I'm pretty hard on my equipment, but don't break things all the time like some of my friends do.

post #42 of 53

The dukes are not over engineered, people still break them.

 

I have issues with the switch metal rod myself.

post #43 of 53

^^^^ Agree, I've heard they (as well as most other AT bindings) still have a pet weakness. But the over-engineered argument holds, I think, for people who actually use AT bindings mainly to walk places. If you spend a lot of your time in the air, or at serious speed, or pinballing down pillows, any AT rig will look bad compared to an alpine setup. Surprise, surprise, the closer the AT rig gets to alpine in terms of performance (not lab torsion resistance, but actual wear and tear of landings, impacts, etc.) the closer it gets in weight...

post #44 of 53

all the size small/medium weight

 

Baron = 2450g

Duke = 2600g

Tour 10 = 1690g

Tour 12 = 1750g

 

basically its only 300 grams a foot to haul around the barons over the tour 12s. Looking at the tour 12s and getting to ski them last year I would say that even average skiers will start to have problem with that binding skiing inbounds extensively quicker than the barons/dukes have them. For a true touring binding they are pretty solid but then on a pair of touring only skis if someone has the cash why wouldnt they go dynafit?

 

to be fair the duke/baron problems are because people are using them like Alpine binding with some touring, thats how I use mine at least. The tour 12 is not as torsionally rigid as the duke as well and I doubt it will be as reliable as the dukes are.

 

Lighter is better untill its starts to break, its the same thing with biking, I have seens dozen of carbon frame this year broken on MTB this year.

post #45 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post

The dukes are not over engineered, people still break them.

 

I have issues with the switch metal rod myself.


Old Mercedes cars were over engineered and peopel still broke them.

 

Agree that the switch is the weak point (and also the designs strength).
 

Quote:

all the size small/medium weight

 

Baron = 2450g

Duke = 2600g

Tour 10 = 1690g

Tour 12 = 1750g

 

basically its only 300 grams a foot to haul around the barons over the tour 12s. ............ For a true touring binding they are pretty solid but then on a pair of touring only skis if someone has the cash why wouldnt they go dynafit?

 

On the tour weight is everything and weight on the feet (boots, bindings, skis) is magnified.  The titanium spork was designed for serious BC types
 

Quote:

.................. Looking at the tour 12s and getting to ski them last year I would say that even average skiers will start to have problem with that binding skiing inbounds extensively quicker than the barons/dukes have them.

 

 Unsupported

 

Quote:

to be fair the duke/baron problems are because people are using them like Alpine binding with some touring, thats how I use mine at least. The tour 12 is not as torsionally rigid as the duke as well and I doubt it will be as reliable as the dukes are.

 

   

No reason why the Tour series shouldn't be as torsionally rigid as it uses the same locking interface design as the Duke/Baron.  The locking plate and centre switch is what gives the Duke/Baron/Tour its solid, locked to the ski rigidity.  Its also a PITA to switch modes when touring.

  

Quote:

Lighter is better untill its starts to break, its the same thing with biking, I have seens dozen of carbon frame this year broken on MTB this year.


Always the trade off; hence I don't have carbon fibre on my MTB.

 

In BC skiing you can have and two of the following cheap, light and strong.

post #46 of 53

I skied the tour 12 last year on a pair of mantra, there was slop, and it was a new setup. There is side to side to play on that binding. 

post #47 of 53

Opinion or quantifiable?  Lou Dawson in wildsnow.com has this, but it has not been updated for the Tour:

 

Marker Duke ——————– (19 units deflection from vertical*)

Dynafit ——————– (20 units deflection from vertical)

Fritschi Freeride Plus (2006 model with black toe wings and red support plate under binding) ————————– (26 units deflection…)

Fritschi Freeride (2004 model with white toe wings) ————————— (27 units deflection…)

Marker M1100 Titanium alpine binding —————————- (28 units deflection…)

Naxo Nx21 —————————– (29 units deflection…)

Silvretta Pure Freeride ———————————– (35 units deflection, measured virtually the same as other Pure models)

Silvretta Pure Performance ———————————— (36 units deflection, 07/08 model has solid carbon rails instead of hollow, should be slightly stiffer)

Naxo NX01 ——————————————- (45 units deflection…)

post #48 of 53

^^^^^Have gone over that article a bunch, while I have a lot of respect for the folks at Wildsnow, not impressed with a static test of deflection as a surrogate for on-snow pounding. Play, for instance, will get magnified over time each cycle of force/movement/rebound, but may not show up in a static test. Nylon/plastic will wear out or fail faster than magnesium or alu, but may not deform a lot more in a static test.

 

IMO a lot of this is really about intangibles; how much do you depend on your bindings for not hurtling down backcountry chutes vs. popping off small cliffs inbounds where a failure won't kill you,  whether you're a finesse vs. a power skier, whether you avoid junk under thin snow or go for it, whether you routinely test/inspect your bindings or just use them until they fail. BWPA is dead on about using AT setups for alpine skiing, and a bit of BC; that's what most users of Dukes and Barons do, for better or worse. I'd look seriously at a Tour 12 for extended walking, but not for typical mixed alpine/sidebounds use. 

post #49 of 53
Thread Starter 

Most likely I'm going to stick with Barons for this set up.  I really want to get something I can learn on at the resort, ski and abuse at the resort, and then, when its time, take into the B/C and do some light one day touring.  I like gear and I don't think I'm going to be a one ski quiver sort of guy.  If things go really well this winter I can see getting a dedicated ski/binding set up strictly for touring as early as spring.  Whether that is Dynafit or Fritschi or even the F12s depends a lot on what boot ends up fitting and what routes I hope to do.

 

At this point I'm really leaning towards getting a narrower AT ski.  The resorts here have multi-day lesson packages with equipment rentals (for extra $ of course) and I'll likely spend the first few days on a beginner friendly rental.  The K2 Backlash is at the top of that list right now.  At 6'3" and 180lbs, K2 recommends the 174 for an intermediate.  They don't have total newb on their sizing chart.  Does that size sound right?  I hear a lot of 'K2 Skis longer than their length' but also that rockered skis shorter than its length.

post #50 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by maski View Post

 

At this point I'm really leaning towards getting a narrower AT ski.  The resorts here have multi-day lesson packages with equipment rentals (for extra $ of course) and I'll likely spend the first few days on a beginner friendly rental.  The K2 Backlash is at the top of that list right now.  At 6'3" and 180lbs, K2 recommends the 174 for an intermediate.  They don't have total newb on their sizing chart.  Does that size sound right?  I hear a lot of 'K2 Skis longer than their length' but also that rockered skis shorter than its length.


I don't know exactly why, but your statement above reminded me of my first "dedicated" backcountry skis.  I bought them in about 1997.  It's a pair of 190cm K2 Heli Stinx.  I put Dynafit bindings on them from a beat-up pair of alpine skis that I had been using.  What's so funny about this recollection is that the Heli Stinx can't be much more than about 68mm underfoot and I still remember VIVIDLY the first time I skied them in untracked powder. 

 

I had skinned up Twin Lakes Pass to the top of Patsy Marley just east of Alta early in the season with a couple of friends.  I won the coin toss and got first tracks - in light powder a little more than knee deep.  I remember by about the fourth turn thinking that these skis were so light and turny that it was just CHEATING. 

 

That was at least five or six generations ago as far as backcountry ski design is concerned, but the skis worked great and I still use them occasionally.  Matter of fact, that's them that I'm carrying in Grand Teton National Park in this trip report from two years ago:  http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/70935/tr-july-skiing-grand-teton-natl-park-7-13-08

 

All this is just a way of suggesting that you don't NEED to go super-wide - particularly as you're beginning the learning process. 

post #51 of 53

I didnt actually 'measure" it but I did ski it. I have also skied several(dynafit, Freeride plus, Naxo Nx21 and the crappy markers) on the list and will agree with what he found.

 

The BEST binding I have ever skied from a lateral stiffness stand point are Look P18, there might actually be more flex side to side in a boot than those binding. The Dukes are good but even P14, PX15-18 and Solly 9-16 and up are stiffer laterally. The thing is one of the biggest thing people over look with binding is that the lower end models flex more causing less edge grip on hard snow. This becomes especially true with wider skis. Even if you dont need the DIN range of a higher end metal binding its still worth it due to more precision afforded by the stiffer burlier binding. 

 

Its also funny how many people knock dynafits, but they are arguebly the second burliest AT bindings on the market. Id trust them more than anything else I have tried but the Dukes. Off course they weigh heaps less so its from a apples to apples comparison.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxman View Post

Opinion or quantifiable?  Lou Dawson in wildsnow.com has this, but it has not been updated for the Tour:

 

Marker Duke ——————– (19 units deflection from vertical*)

Dynafit ——————– (20 units deflection from vertical)

Fritschi Freeride Plus (2006 model with black toe wings and red support plate under binding) ————————– (26 units deflection…)

Fritschi Freeride (2004 model with white toe wings) ————————— (27 units deflection…)

Marker M1100 Titanium alpine binding —————————- (28 units deflection…)

Naxo Nx21 —————————– (29 units deflection…)

Silvretta Pure Freeride ———————————– (35 units deflection, measured virtually the same as other Pure models)

Silvretta Pure Performance ———————————— (36 units deflection, 07/08 model has solid carbon rails instead of hollow, should be slightly stiffer)

Naxo NX01 ——————————————- (45 units deflection…)

post #52 of 53

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post

Its also funny how many people knock dynafits, but they are arguebly the second burliest AT bindings on the market. 

 

Quoted for truth.  

post #53 of 53

Disactly. I also don't buy the "they won't hold up skiing them at the area" argument. Personally, I think it is just more how they look. How can anything that suspends your boot and 200+ pounds of guy between four metal points be burly? To this day I still look at the rear tower, see the prongs coming out and wonder how the hell it works so well. But somehow, it does and does it really well.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › New Skier - AT setup out of the question?