Dustin_B Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 I'm looking into getting a backcountry ski setup and I'm pretty sure I want to go the AT route. Mainly because I'm a decent downhill skier and I'm not interested in learning the free-heel way. I'd guess skiing on AT skis is pretty similar to downhill skiing (besides the obvious loss of precision) so I think my learning curve would be smaller. So my question is what advantages/disadvantages are there to the AT boots over Tele boots. I know that Tele boots bend at the ball of your foot so I can see that as an advantage in more flexiblity. Is it a 'huge'; advantage or just a slight advantage? I'm interested in how well AT boots "hike"; both on the approach when there is no snow on the ground (and the skis are on you back) and also on a steep/icy summit push when your not in your skis (thinking along the lines of the south side of Hood where you leave your skis 800 ft below the summit). Would AT boots be similar to mountaineering plastics (like the Koflach)? I assume both AT and Tele are crampon compatible? How is it kicking steps, rock scrambling, etc (same as platics)? I know walking/hiking in downhill ski boots really sucks so if AT is anything like that I may go with Tele!!. How much easier, if any, is it to hike in AT boots? I haven't even tried on any AT or Tele boots yet so if that is the first step, let me know. Maybe I'll go and rent a setup and go try them out while I'm not a climb. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 I have rock climbed in Scarpa Denalis when doing some ski traversing in Canada and it was bloody awful. They just don't have the feel and your lower leg is essentially locked down, even w/all buckles released. Downclimbing steep ice is a real pain because french technique is almost totally out. I use them for easy climbs like Leutholds and South side on hood but not much else. I have put in some practice with mountaineering boots in skis, so I prefer to sacrifice skiing speed for good climbing. The plastics in AT boots tends to be much stiffer than that of plastic mountaineering boots. Maybe there are better AT climbing boots out there. Denalis are definitely geared for the skier. The Scarpa F1 intrigues me, but I wonder if it is any better than my Invernos. I have climbed with many people who climb w/ tele boots successfully, but I've also heard a lot of bitching about them too. Both AT and tele boots take crampons, but obviously model compat. should be confirmed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 AT boots hike much better than alpine ski boots, w/o question. Even the beefiest AT boot does not compare to the stiffness and support of an alpine boot. AT boots have a rockered, Vibram-style sole for hiking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 I ski/climb in tourlite techs, and they actually climb very decently. I think the lack of a "giant toe" helps them in technical climbing more than a tele boot. The flexibility of tele boots is nice for walking as you mention, but my AT boots really aren't *that* bad. I have discovered, however that there are many tours where tele is superior and many where AT is better. I find AT can be easier for many people on sketchy terrain or shitty conditions. On an opposite note, tele is often better on more rolling terrain, where you'd be forced to click and unclick on AT gear. Everyone is going to have different opinions, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 On an opposite note, tele is often better on more rolling terrain, where you'd be forced to click and unclick on AT gear. Everyone is going to have different opinions, however. It pays to practice skiing AT w/ heels released, otherwise this gets old real fast for both you and your tele partners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 On an opposite note, tele is often better on more rolling terrain, where you'd be forced to click and unclick on AT gear. Everyone is going to have different opinions, however. It pays to practice skiing AT w/ heels released, otherwise this gets old real fast for both you and your tele partners. Good point...and this is definitely what I do, but tele is still optimal for that type of terrain, IMHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 I've hiked/climbed 20 mi round trip in T2s without a problem. The thing I don't like about tele boots is how you have to jerry-rig the crampons. They stay on well enough but you gotta go Frenchie 'cause that toe tap kinda limits the front points on harder snow/ice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbw1966 Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 I've probably posted this a thousand times. My apologies to those who are tired of the reptition. I use T-2's and Sabretooth crampons. I've climbed everything from mixed snow and rock to WI3 in them with no problems whatsoever that I could attribute specifically to the boots or crampons. That is, any problems was due to poor technique. Obviously, any plastic boot is going to suck for technical rock climbing but for climbs where I am approaching with skis I will always use tele boots and sabretooths. I'm not experienced with AT gear so will defer to others for that input. Furthermore, I have had partners who had problems with their crampons popping off at inopportune times. I've never once had my sabretooths pop off. The sabretooths are fitted with an extra notch so you can extend the frontpoints out to accomodate the duckbill on the tele boots. Like any other potential boot purchase, make sure you mate your crampons to your boots before purchasing to make sure they are compatible. Hope this helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted February 14, 2003 Share Posted February 14, 2003 Huh. Well thanks Rob, this does help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin_B Posted February 25, 2003 Author Share Posted February 25, 2003 Okay, so say you planned on climbing Rainier via some route out of Muir and you wanted to skin up to Muir, summit (without skis), then ski down from Muir. Would you wear your AT (or Tele) boots the whole time, bring both your AT and mountaineering boots, or use your mountaineering boots the whole time (and endure a sloppy ski descent down from Muir)? How are AT skis/bindings with mountianeering boots? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbw1966 Posted February 25, 2003 Share Posted February 25, 2003 First recommendation: do a search of this site. This topics been beaten to death. Also do a search of google.groups for rec.climbing and rec.skiing.backcountry for more insight. Personally, I'd wear my tele boots the entire time. Have fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryland_moore Posted February 26, 2003 Share Posted February 26, 2003 Check out this thread from a few weeks ago. Very helpful info. Also, telemarktips has good info on this as well. Bottom line, it is not easy to ski hard stuff in mountaineering boots with an AT set-up b/c there is no cuff support. Enjoy trying. I just made modifactions to my skis by attaching electrical clamps to the front of my skis and then running cordelette and straps behind my calves so I can ski on my tails. I think the best thing for the cascade volcanoes is just to attach your crampons to your AT or tele boots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dustin_B Posted March 3, 2003 Author Share Posted March 3, 2003 Just making this thread current in case anyone else cares to chime in. Thanks, Dustin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted March 3, 2003 Share Posted March 3, 2003 Jim- It sounds as if you are using crampons that are incompatible with your telemark boots. My old Chouinard rigid crampons and my Grivel Rambo's fit my Scarpa t-2's just fine so that the front points are fully available without any messing around. I'd probably break the Couinards if I used them with flexible boots, though, and it may be an extra strain on the Grivel's. My flexible crampons have the front posts wider apart, and hence they slide a little further back on the toe but they still leave adequate front points for mountain climbing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted March 3, 2003 Share Posted March 3, 2003 A couple random points: I agree that the flexible ball of the foot on a telemark boot is an advantage when hiking, but if there is a long trail hike to get to a ski run I often wear my sneakers and carry my boots anyway. Both telemark boots and AT boots kick steps well. Neither telemark boots or AT boots rock climb all that well, but at least the AT boots don't have that toe extension on them. For water ice climbing, you gotta use rigid crampons to get much performance from telemark boots though for general glacier climbing and most mountaineering routes they are fine with flexible crampons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.