Approach skis for the mediocre

[Matt Kidd]

I am looking to get a touring setup mostly for climbing approaches. I want a light setup most of all, and something that will turn easily. I am not knowledgable enough to balance the factors and would appreciate some input. Wider shorter ski? Somewhat longer? More/less shaped? Being a larger guy (200lbs), what can I get away with before I will be wallowing in misery?

Any advise would be great - thanks.

[mccallboater]

I'd recommend Silvretta 500's as bindings so you can use just about any boot with a welt. Then check out the local thrift shops for a pair of easy-turning skis about 165cm or so. You won't be able to ski steep slopes with perfect style, but once you get a friend to show you how to make a bullitproof stem cristie, you can ascend and descend just about any mountain you need to quickly and effectively. I use a pair of K2 8255's that I bought off this list for $75.

 

Me on Lowa mountaineering boots and the K2's:

[plexus]

Being 200 lbs, I'd go longer than 165s. The more width under foot means more stability as well. Do a search for some previous threads on the same topic, there is some good advice given.

[Matt Kidd]

I checked out some Dynafit Seven Summit skis. Super light, seemed good. Anyone skiing them and/or have an opinion of them? Thanks...

[Matt Kidd]

"I'd recommend Silvretta 500's as bindings so you can use just about any boot with a welt. Then check out the local thrift shops for a pair of easy-turning skis about 165cm or so. You won't be able to ski steep slopes with perfect style, but once you get a friend to show you how to make a bullitproof stem cristie, you can ascend and descend just about any mountain you need to quickly and effectively. I use a pair of K2 8255's that I bought off this list for $75."

 

 

Do you happen to know if the Silvretta "Pure Performance" bindings are mountain boot compatible?

[plexus]

They are not.

[trumpetsailor]

As a long-time practitioner of the stem-christie, I tend to find that longer-radius sidecut skis work better. The ski's less interested in doing its own thing (carving). I also seem to prefer longer radius sidecut skis for sideslipping unpleasantly steep stuff. (For perspective, I ski lighter boots on dynafits on full length skis - significantly stiffer than a leather boot. Skiing, not approaching, tends to be my priority.)

 

Width-wise, wider will float better on trap crust, narrower will yield better edge hold on firm/hard snow. You'll encounter both.

 

Cheap and light are good for starters - bindings can easily be moved from ski to ski as you figure out what suits you. In addition to cc.com, turns-all-year.com and craigslist can turn up good deals on cheap skis. A quick look at craigslist suggests that there are a number of possibly appropriate pairs of skis for less than $50.

 

At 180 lbs + pack, I happily toured all of last spring/summer on 173 cm x 75 mm waist park skis picked up off craigslist for $75 (new in plastic). Found skins for ~$30. Never felt like flotation was lacking (in consolidated spring snow). At that size, they're probably superior to my snowshoes in basically all conditions, though longer, fatter skis certainly make trailbreaking through deep snow easier.

[russ]

Here's another way to go for an approach ski - solves the "which boots" issues.

http://us.st11.yimg.com/us.st.yimg.com/I/yhst-56160431387474_2003_2349038

 

I bought a pair for my non-skiing girlfriend. They worked fine for tramping around in the snow, then she decided she wanted to ski. I'll sell them for $200.

 

- Russ