Squid Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 I am looking for recommendations for approach skis for those trips where the skiing is not the point- (colchuck lake approach, for example). I have a randonee setup that I enjoy when I'm heading to places with decent skiing, but I'm getting sick of the weight of the skis (because I am weak). I was looking at backcountry x-country gear, or even silvretta's mounted on light x-country skis. Anyone have any recommendations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kioti Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 Karhu Mountain is a great ski for this. Has full edges, waxless base and will hold down a silvretta/dynafit binding with no problem. If you want to wait until next year, Karhu has another ski coming out called the Guide. Sickness... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wfinley Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 I picked up a pair of Fisher Outtabounds this winter and mounted them with some old Silvretta 300s. They're pretty slick until you (a) encounter deep snow and have to break trail, (b) encounter crusty snow, © encounter ice, or (d) have to turn. Come to think of it they're not much fun at all on anything but hard packed XC ski trails. My personal philosophy is to get a decent pair of skis that will work in all conditions and suck up the extra weight. The Fishers are super light but when I'm on my face every 5 minutes due to their instability I start wondering why I bother. Currently I use either my GF's She's Piste mounted with Silvretta 500s (short and light) or my Tua Crossrides mounted with Dynafits. Both of these skis rock in all conditions. The bummer is I can't make excuses when it's my turn to break trail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luwayo Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 tx for spelling that out! i've been going through these permutations too. i think i'll go with: re-uniting my scarpa vegas with the silveretta set up (now that i've learned to stay upright); and finding a bargain on dynafits for my skiboots; i do keep light wt. hand-me-down leather, 3pin tele gear around incase of a fantasy, long flat approach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 Snowblades with skins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luwayo Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 was checking out $199 skis at lunch. mostly 140 to 145cm; one or two 150cm. what's the shortest you'd go with for bc? don't care about speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 I use 120cm Hagans. 130/90/120 with twin tips and Silvretta 500s. The modern version of the ski is only available in a 130cm. Skiing with climbing boots sucks, but it sucks less with these. Best suited for denser, coastal snow. Less suited for weak wind slab covering bottomless powder. Very good as skis go when they need to be packed through bush. I would strongly recomend a binding that has a 90+ mm crampon (not the 500s) because the skis have so much sidecut per length. This is problematic crossing steep, icy slopes. They aren't that light however... GB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luwayo Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 fishstick, 120cm? wow! do you have to really work it for tight turns? i'm ruminating on 140. dru, that set up sounds like those sucky yellow snowshoes - grivel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 They have a natural turning radius of I think 7.8m. They turn VERY tight turns with ease. Problems start with jump turns because the tails are very short (and have twin tips) so you need to land in a very balanced or slightly forward position. They're pretty cool at times because you can ski steep trees lines on the north shore that make little sense with big skis. They're also a good training tool in the sense that they force you to think more about fore/aft balance. They don't replace big skis, but are a positive addition to the quiver. GB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra_Commander Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 Atomic always has some superlight cheap touring ski each year. In the past it has been the TG:10/TourGuide Superlight. No idea what it's called this year. They are solid skis for skiing, and quite light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luwayo Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 that's great info fishstick. lots to mull over. can't wait to apply! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plexus Posted February 22, 2006 Share Posted February 22, 2006 Atomic always has some superlight cheap touring ski each year. In the past it has been the TG:10/TourGuide Superlight. No idea what it's called this year. They are solid skis for skiing, and quite light. I know my friend picked up some MX7s for touring, they are lighter than my planks and he picked them up for $40. I'm on 190s, and going to get some 176s at the end of the year so I can really aim for that spiral fracture going down shiite that is over my head. But I'm skiing Rocky Mtn pow-pow so I need the extra floatation to carry around my -belly 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.