I'm 5'9" and about 165lbs - well, I was last summer anyhow. My "old" setup is 180cm "Fischer Tour Extremes" - which are basically a straight ski about 70mm at the waist. Mounted with Silvretta 404's. For my new setup, I went down to a 167cm K2 Shuksan - 2007 model. They're soft enough (and I'm heavy enough) that they still carve well despite the shorter length. Refusing to join the cult of Fritschi, had them mounted with Silvretta Pure Freerides and I absolutely love them. Plenty of torsional rigidity. Got the Shuksan's new on ebay for $180, and the Silvrettas new on ebay for $220 with brakes. Not bad. FWIW; I ski the pre 2006 model Garmont Adrenalins. (I DO use them for alpine too) I hear they softened them up after that year, so I would go with the stiffer Endorphin for 2008. As far as your question goes, I've heard that the Mt Baker is rather unresponsive. The Shuksan was once the industry standard and even now balances weight and performance - but the jury is still out for me I guess. I've heard good things about the G3 Baron and the BD Kilowatt too. Also, don't rule out a soft/light pair of alpine skis. The old Volkl G2's were supposed to be a good A/T ski, and I've seen a few skiers out on Solomon Pocket Rockets. (?WTF?)
My 2 cent.
Here's a question for Feck: Is flotation purely a function a total ski surface area? ie: shorter/fatter floats as well as
longer/skinny surface contact area being equal? I call upon your experience and math/physics knowledge to settle this ongoing argument I'm having with my brother.