Ski's?

[Kane]

So I am looking for some ski's and know nothing about them. Basically I need some idea's of what to look for. I will be using them for descents and ascents mountaineering. So stuff like coming down baker, glacier peak, silverstar, muir. ext. I would like something as light as possible, that will still work without sinking. In Extreme Alpinism they recomend 130-140 cm skis? Second what bindings? They have to work with a mountaineering boot...does anyone else use a system like this. I mean it seams like it would be easier to just skin up.

[AlpineK]

130-140 What are you 5'2"??? I bought short skis and they're 190s. My cool skis are 207s.

 

I have no advice for modern skis.

 

I'd be a little more picky about bindings to go with mountaineering boots. I believe Silvretta has some old model bindings that would go best for a set up to approach climbs.

 

Getting used to skiing on mountaineering boots takes some practice. Be prepared to suck at first.

[Kane]

Well, I guess in the book they go short so the ski's are lighter. I am like 5,10 and 135 though, but I guess with a full pack a gear I d be closwer to 160-170. They also reccomend the silveretta 300 bindings in the book, because they are the lightest. Basically I am looking for the lightest combo I can get that will alow me to skin up and ski down using mountaineering boots.

[wfinley]

In Extreme Alpinism they recomend 130-140 cm skis? Second what bindings? They have to work with a mountaineering boot...does anyone else use a system like this. I mean it seams like it would be easier to just skin up.

That's the Euro method - I've seen a few of these. They're essentially used for harder ascents where skis would get in the way but where you also want to ski down. Pretty specialty stuff and most often used with dynafits and those funky cool boots that dynafit used to make that were half mountaineering boot half ski boot. Unfortunately Dynafit doesn't make those boots anymore so if you want the superlight dynafit set up you have to go with more of a ski boot.

 

It sounds like you're more interested in a basic mountaineering setup; consider some of the fatter scaled skis like the Karhu Guides, Atomic Chugach or Fishcher Outtabounds for skis. Get them just slightly shorter than your normal skis. For bindings the Silvretta 500s are great if you have cash. If you're poor get some 404s or 300s.

 

I am like 5,10 and 135 though, but I guess with a full pack a gear I d be closwer to 160-170.

170 would be a good size. Any shorter and you'll have a tough time in deeper snow.

 

Also check out the super light Atomics. My wife has a pair of Atomics mounted with 500s and they are super light. You can usually find the older models on closeout somewhere.

 

Skiing in mountaineering boots sucks most of the time... but it can be done and at times can be fun.

Edited October 8, 2007 by wfinley

[archenemy]

If you don't know anything about skiing or about skis, you may want to take the shotgun approach first. You can try a bunch of different stuff by renting and by buying anything that is cheap and in your size range off craigslist. That way, you get to try out a smattering of stuff and you aren't out much money.

[Kane]

What would "lightweight" be considered when talking about fatter skis? Would something like this Atomic Janac be good? Size 163? They are 99 wide and from the little looking IO have done thats FAATT.

 

Btw not saying I would get those, they are definately on the expensive side.

Edited October 8, 2007 by Kane

[Kane]

Btw those why in at 7.8 lb

[AlpineK]

I've got an old pair of Silvretta 404s. I've done a ton of bc skiing on them. I think if I was approaching a climb I would try and find a 300 model if you can.

 

Definitely worry more about the bindings. Try some cheap old skis. If you don't like em you can ditch the skis and try something else

[archenemy]

I worry about bindings less than boots. Uncomfortable feet will make any day of skiing suck.

[AlpineK]

True, but if your using the skis for the approach and exit from a climb it's more important to have good boots for the climbing than the skiing.

[wfinley]

What would "lightweight" be considered when talking about fatter skis? Would something like this Atomic Janac be good? Size 163? They are 99 wide and from the little looking IO have done thats FAATT.

 

Btw not saying I would get those, they are definately on the expensive side.

 

Sorry - when I said fat I meant in comparison to most scaled skis. A shovel tip around 90-100 will work well enough. Some good skis to consider that are made for access climbing include:

- atomic tourcap guides

- atomic MX 20

- atomic chugach (or fisher outtabounds since they are the same ski)

- karhu guides

 

Basically you want something in the 90-70-80 range.

 

If all you're doing is mounting old-school bindings on them then get something used and cheap. No use buying good skis if they are solely being used for access and not for turns.

 

 

 

[Blake]

First of all, you are looking to buy skis, not "ski's". You just want more than one "ski" so add an "s" and you have multiple skis. You'd only say "ski's" if there was some object owned by a ski, to which you were referring.

 

Second, I have some 187cm Tua Mitos, Silvretta 555 bindings (fit mountaineering boots and ski boots) and scarpa lasers. This setup is rather basic, but I think it'd be perfect for what you want.

 

P.S. sorry if the first comment sounds rude, just cranky today.

Thank's! :-)

[sobo]

Grumpy, eh? Back in court again, Blake? sorry man, couldn't resist it... But good catch on the punctuation!

 

Kane,

Seriously, Billy finley had some good general recs for you. I have an old set of Fisher Air Tours that meet those length and sidecut ratios, and they're reasonably light. IIRC, they are 180s. I don't thinik they make them anymore, tho, not that you would want that particular ski. I fitted them with Fritschi touring bindings, but that was before the advent of the Fritschi Diamir FreeRide binding, which looked pretty sweet to me at the time (but at over $400 shekels was outta my price range).

 

And Kurt was right about being prepared to suck at first. You're going ot be doing alot of face-planting, even if you're an ExtremoMtnDude on the groomeds. Mountaineering boots, no matter how adapted to ski mountaineering they are advertised to be, are going to be "squishy" by nature in the ankle, so you can walk/climb in them without turning into a ER patient. So you're going to be going down a lot early on. Shit, I still crash and burn pretty regularly when I break out that gear.

[AlpineK]

I have no idea how you could find this, but there are these things that used to be popular back in the 70s. In the 70s stiff ski boots were the hot new thing. Many people at that time had old ski boots and couldn't spring for a brand new set. As a consequence you could buy a product called a, "jet stick," which was a plastic toe and ankle piece that you could strap on to the front of your boot and give you the feel of a nice stiff boot.

 

If you could find or make something like this you would have a light weight stiffener to strap on your climbing boot. It might give you more control for skiing yet be removable for climbing.

Edited October 9, 2007 by Feck

[spicoli11]

Grammerz skoolz up in here

[JayB]

Might be a good place for folks to chime in with the mods they've used to make skiing in mountaineering boots suck less.

 

I've heard of folks:

 

-Using ski-boot liners in their mountaineering boots.

-Using powerstraps with their mountaineering boots.

-Sticking plastic calf-support thingies in their mountain boots.

-inserting an eye-bolt into the front of their skis and attaching a calf-strap to the said eye-bolt.

-Using some combination of the above.

 

I've never done any of these mods, and if I was going to ski down a volcano, I'd just use AT-Boots on the way up, but I'd be interested in hearing which, if any of these mods folks have found to be effective.

[mccallboater]

I use the first three items on my Lowa mountaineering boots. Intuition liners, a power strap, and plastic shin supports taken from my old alpine race boots. It all helps to lever my Silretta 500's and K2's into respectable turns, enough to get down the slopes you mentioned, but that is after 45 years of practice. Regular AT boots with Dynafits are way better for skiing, but the boots are harder to climb in. I would love to see a Dynafit compatable mountaineering boot with an upper cuff that converts for the ski down. What I have now reminds me of the "Stein comps" we used to rivet together to make a decent tele boot back around 1980.

[wfinley]

I would love to see a Dynafit compatable mountaineering boot with an upper cuff that converts for the ski down.

 

 

Unfortunately Dynafit doesn't make them anymore. I've only seen them in action once; a pilot was wearing them - he had touched down his plane and skied a couple laps before picking us up and they were still comfy enough for him to wear while flying. I was green with envy!

 

I've never made any mods to my climbing skis. When I'm climbing I want the lightest possible setup and just assume that I'm going to be hating life if I encounter anything less then hero snow on the way down. Currently I choose between Outtabounds with Silvretta 300s or some old She's Piste with 404s depending on the amount of vertical gain I'm facing. If I'm skiing I want fat skis and heavy boots... and Dynafits!

[AlpineK]

If I'm skiing I want fat skis and heavy boots... and Dynafits!

 

Exactly

 

Those boots in the picture look cool!

[MarkMcJizzy]

I have no idea how you could find this, but there are these things that used to be popular back in the 70s. In the 70s stiff ski boots were the hot new thing. Many people at that time had old ski boots and couldn't spring for a brand new set. As a consequence you could buy a product called a, "jet stick," which was a plastic toe and ankle piece that you could strap on to the front of your boot and give you the feel of a nice stiff boot.

 

If you could find or make something like this you would have a light weight stiffener to strap on your climbing boot. It might give you more control for skiing yet be removable for climbing.

 

Negatory there.

 

The Jet Stick was a simple "spoiler" - like dealey, which went on the back of your boot. I don't know if they really accomplished anything, but they sure looked cool to kids. I guess you could have put them in front of your ankle. If I remember right, the common "Jet Sticks" never attached to the toe.

 

Paul Ramer made all sorts of cool stuff, which could be what you are thinking of. At one time I also owned a European contraption that encased the entire ankle

[fear_and_greed]

Bro, do yourself and your knee cartilage a favour and don't try to ski using mountaineering boots. You'll get blisters on the way up from your heel lifting inside the boot and you have virtually no control on the way down. Get a proper set up with Dynafits. I use these short skis, Shamans for powder, Nomads all mountain and these boots are awesomely comfortable for climbing and blow away the advertising hype that you need a heavy boot to drive a fat ski. It isn't true. http://icelanticboards.com/at-boards.htm

http://www.marmotmountain.com/MMWmain.asp?Option=Detail&StyleID=10007694

[hefeweizen]

So I am looking for some ski's and know nothing about them. Basically I need some idea's of what to look for. I will be using them for descents and ascents mountaineering. So stuff like coming down baker, glacier peak, silverstar, muir. ext. I would like something as light as possible, that will still work without sinking. In Extreme Alpinism they recomend 130-140 cm skis? Second what bindings? They have to work with a mountaineering boot...does anyone else use a system like this. I mean it seams like it would be easier to just skin up.

 

You should clarify what it is that you are trying to do. Are you talking about ski mountaineering where the emphasis is on the descent? Or are you talking about approaching more difficult alpine routes, where you will take your skis off and climb semi technical terrain? In the latter case you probably only need a slippery stick to cartwheel your way back down in the afternoon glop.

 

If you actually want to enjoy the descent, and your emphasis will be on long vertical drops with (hopefully) good skiing conditions, you will be much happier if you get a good pair of AT boots and some mid-fat (80-90 mm at the waist) skis with some dynafit bindings. Your AT boots will be fine for climbing most of the glacier routes in the PNW, but if you want to get busy on some mixed terrain and/or real steep glacial ice, you may want more of a ice climbing/mountaineering boot. Read Sky's article under the "Articles and Resources" tab entitled "Backcountry ski gear primer". He talks about different methods and gear that suit different aspirations.

[plexus]

I started by using some Tuas with 404s. Half way through that first season I got some AT boots. And having done both, I would use AT boots every single time! They are rather stiff and uncomfortable for anything less steep than kicking steps into slopes. But what you mountains you hihglight, you can easily get an ascent in AT boots and don't need the mountaineering boots.

 

Also the difference between a binding like the 404s and something like the Pures or Naxos is HUGE!!! In the 404s I felt I sometimes had control. In the Pures, I DO have control.

 

Here's a Silvretta Pures pic of my setup

Edited October 9, 2007 by plexus

[Mal_Con]

Jet Stix were used so you could sit back on downhill skies as "Avalmont" or butt sitting technique was popular with racers then. Folks used to tape a bunch of tongue depressors together and stick them in the back of the boot. Later they made boots real high in the back. People were sitting back so far that they lost control and could not turn, while racers only did it while ending a turn and did not mind losing control. With your weight back the front of your skies would jet our like passing a finish line, if you were not experienced you would land on your ass. The fad lasted a year or so in the 70's.

Edited October 9, 2007 by Mal_Con