Skis for a non-skier?

[willstrickland]

Alrighty, here's the deal:

I don't ski, I'm a Georgia hick. I board, but have only been on two-sticks a couple of times when I was a kid. Seems to me that I need to aquire some for approaches. So my question would be: What kind of set-up should I be looking for?

I figure I won't be skiing lift-served, but just skinning and the downhill back to trailheads. I need something I can find CHEAP/USED, and something that's a little forgiving for a chump non-skier like me. I don't know AT from Randonee from Slurpee...

[Country_Jake]

If your lookin' for cheap... buy somthin from a rental shop... I sure hoods got some thing used and in good shape for cheap...

[AlpineK]

Cheap skis with Silveretta bindings or Ramer bindings. I don't know sources in P towm, but any place that might have used AT stuff would be a good place to look.

[specialed]

A lot of my snowboard/mountaineer/climber buddies have split decisions. You can use this setup with mountaineering boots, and I've heard the performance isn't bad, and you can tour anywhere and you'll be ready to climb. You'll also have a board that works great for b/c snowboarding with regular snowboard boots. YOu can also buy a conversion kit, pretty cheap but I'm not sure of the actual cost, that allows you to turn a regular snowboard into a split decision. My buddy Solon did that and snowboards gnarly shit with it. And you won't have to learn how to ski!

[ 04-05-2002: Message edited by: specialed ]

[Brock_Landers]

I used to be a climber that skis to climb, these days I'm more of a skier that climbs to ski. Depending on your focus, the appropriate gear is very different. I agree with a lot of what Ibex says, but my view is slightly different.

If you are strictly looking for an approach ski setup, stay away from tele gear altogether. First of all, you likely want to ski and climb in the same boots. Climbing in tele boots is certainly not impossible, but sucks in comparison to either climbing or dedicated AT boots. The duckbill toe on tele boots can severely restrict kicking steps and front pointing, and some crampons do not fit tele boots.

Tele bindings are great for skiing downhill, but AT bindings are better for skiing flats and uphill/skinning because there is less resistance at the pivot point on your binding. The pivot point on an AT binding is hinged at the toe, on tele bindings the pivot point is at the ball of your foot, and requires the skier to flex the boot/foot in order to move the ski forward. AT bindings are easier for most folks.

There is also a serious control difference between free heel (tele) bindings and fixed heel (AT) bindings that may put you on your ass, at least more than you would like. Also, a lot of tele bindings (certain cable bindings) are prone to breakage.

So get AT bindings, preferably silvrettas that will accept virtually any welted boot. That way you can likely ski with the boots you presently have. If you had dedicated AT boots, I'd tell you to get Fritschi Diamirs, which are releaseable and ski great. But they are only compatible with dedicated AT/DIN boots -- i.e., not compatible with yer standard welted mountaineering boots. Dynafit also makes great touring (light) bindings, but again, not compatible with welted mountaineering boots.

Skis: for approach skis, use just about anything. The more beat up and ugly, the less likely they are to get ripped off. Short for better control, wide for better float and stability with a pack. Light is a bonus, and dedicated AT skis are the lightest, and really not that expensive (K2 shuksan, Atomic Tourlights, etc.)

Go forth and ski.

[willstrickland]

Rockin, thanks Brock. I'm looking at picking up some Silvretta 400s and whatever happens to be attched to them used for cheap. Sounds like the way to go for me.

[wdietsch]

Will ... you might consider checking at the Mountain Shoppe, now is a good time, they sell their old AT rentals

ps - Ramer Bindings, I would stay away from them. Ramer (Apline Research) offically went out of business 3 years ago. They have some spare parts but they are getting very hard to come by. Take it from a MT-2000 owner. Same goes for their adjustable poles. They only have the lower pole sections (I just ordered 2)

[willstrickland]

Ok so we're talking an AT set-up...that's alpine touring right? What about lengths and such? I'm compact 5'8", 140.

[Ibex]

quote:

---

Originally posted by willstrickland:

I figure I won't be skiing lift-served, but just skinning and the downhill back to trailheads. I need something I can find CHEAP/USED, and something that's a little forgiving for a chump non-skier like me. I don't know AT from Randonee from Slurpee...

---

Will,

I am going to make the assumption that you are looking at this mainly from a transportation standpoint, and not form a skier-performance-type standpoint. I think it depends completely on the type of boots you want to use.

1) Plastic/leather mtneering boots: You can use silveretta's with these (or damn near any welted boot). This lets you do the standard "downhill style" of turns. Beware though, you are giving up a lot in terms of control. I would buy some stubby 140-ish ski's from goodwill and you will only have to pay for the bindings. If you go this route do NOT buy their "easy go" bindings, they only work with (3) below, not mtneering boots. Note these are "releaseable", and silveretta's are the only major brand that will fit this genre of boots.

2) Telemark boots: look like downhill ski boots (for the most part) except for a big "wrinkle" in the plastic over the ball of your foot. tele boots need tele bindings, and you can use most any ski. The downside here is that tele turns are a completely different skill set than DH. If you find the stuff on sale/used it might be worth it to buy, but as just a means of transportation to a climb, I think this set up is at a small disadvantage b/c you are still wearing your ski boots when you want to climb, plus you have to learn to tele. Also note, the vast majority of tele bindings are NOT releasable.

3) AT/Randonee boots: Look almost identical to plain ole DH stuff. Expensive, ski's well, walk's ok. Uses the same bindings as number 1, but ski's a LOT better. Here the problem of having ski boots on your feet when you want to climb is even worse. Also by this time you have paid for the expensive boots AND bindings.

One other curiosity is a "tele-conversion" somebody on this site did to make their mtneering boots work with tele bindings. Search around and you will find it. The cool thing there is the "handyman factor", low cost and you still only need mtneering boots. the downside is that you still have to learn to tele in order to use the things.

If I were you (and I was in your shoes a year ago) i would go route (1). Then advantage there is that you can get your skis/bindings set up and then use your mtneering boots for climbs, and if you want, buy a crappy pair of used DH boots to play on liftserve with your buds. All for the low, low price of $200-ish.

If you want ski's for the sake of backcountry skiing, I would honestly recommend a full tele setup. It is an EXTREMELY versatile system, with the ability to ski equally well uphill and down. As you said before, you are more into snowboarding, so you probably would not be happy with this route.

Cheers!

Shawn

[willstrickland]

Thanks Shawn, that's the info I was looking for.

[fleblebleb]

Cool thread.

I used to downhill ski as a kid, started skiing again this season on teles and it isn't so hard to pick up.

I tried using my climbing boots with the tele bindings for an approach to an ice climb. That was really funny and stupid. I got such awful muscle cramps in my feet because the boots lack support, I could barely stand. Not a way to go.

I'm saving up for a new pair of aggressive skis and I'm going to transfer my fancy tele bindings to those.

My current skis are really light and I'm going to get silvrettas to mount on them. Then I'll be able to do approaches on climbing trips in climbing boots and go skiing for turns on the tele gear. Net result, one pair of boots on each trip. Lugging an extra pair of boots around is super awful.

One thing I disagree with in a previous post is benefits of AT over tele for touring. Judging from trips with my randonnee ski-toting friends tele gear is cool for rolling terrain because you never have to mess with boots or bindings.

[ 04-10-2002: Message edited by: fleblebleb ]

[Bug]

I've never boarded but that is probably YOUR best bet with the split decision setup. Otherwise, AT is the way to go for the cross over to climbing. My favorite way to ski is tele but I ski AT for transportation to and from the climb. Definately start with very short wide skiis. 140 sounds right. You can pick up a pair for $10 or less. The spring rummage sales have just begun. I have skied for 35 years. Everything from wilderness touring to extreme skiing on cliffs. Re-read everything on these posts. It is all really good information. It just depends on your budget and your preference. Then get out there and crank.