Wanted: Randonee ski's

[Dave_Schuldt]

Check seccond Acent in Balard, I have seen some nice stuff in there. they would be willing to trade.

[thelawgoddess]

second ascent kicks ass.

[Coondog]

Looking for used but decent condition randonee boards, preferably with the 'crampon compatible' type bindings that'll fit my Koflachs.

 

Umm, would be willing to trade K2 SLC9.0 200cm slalom boards w/ Marker M51 bindings, and have pair of Raichle slalom race boots size9.5 too...

 

And soon... there's snow in them thar' hills. I hope.

 

I'll check this thread or PM me.

 

Thx-

--cd.

[Coondog]

Second Ascent does indeed kick some very serious ass, but they don't seem interested in my non-shape slalom boards for trade...

 

I'll have to swing by and see what they've for rand gear since I haven't been by in a while...

 

thx-

--cd.

[Greg_W]

Okay, anyone care to educate this ski-moron? I understand telemark, but what's the difference between "randonnee" and "AT/backcountry"? I look in the Black Diamond ski catalog and see boots for Tele (example: Scarpa T3) and boots for AT (example: Scarpa Denali XT). I see skis; what defines Tele skis and randonnee and/or AT? Flex? Dimensions?

[iain]

There used to be considerable differences between AT skis (synonymous with randonee), telemark skis, and alpine skis. These days there is little difference between skis on the market, and many can be used for all three disciplines. Alpine skis generally need a big boot to drive them and favor performance over weight. For those moving from the resort to the backcountry, this might be a good option with some AT bindings. If you've never learned to ski before, perhaps telemark would be a better option.

 

Tele and AT specific skis tend to be much lighter and really pay off on long approaches or tours. The difference between Tele and AT skis is really quite blurry now though, but skis which are marketed for AT tend to have a beefy construction to handle the stress of hard cuts that parallel turns can produce.

[iain]

If you are deciding between Telemark and AT, that's a pretty tough call. There is nothing more beautiful than a skilled telemarker in action. However, I tend to ski AT since I had some downhill background, I like to be able to ski in climbing boots, AT gear gets lighter every year, and some would argue it requires less comparable skill to handle really steep stuff. Enjoy.

 

-Iain

[Greg_W]

Thanks. I guess I should have said "backcountry ski moron," as I do have a downhill skiing background. Now, anybody have a pair of old AT skis they want to get rid of?

[mattp]

I think Ian is probably right that the distinctions between telemark gear and AT gear have blurred, and that more touring oriented gear tends to be lighter. However, there is a bewildering selection out there, and ski snobs or salesmen will tell you that there are subtle disctinctions in the flex pattern or shape that turn out to be very significant. They are right, perhaps, but the fact is that any ski will get you up and down the mountain and it is all a matter of trade offs: more highly shaped skis and soft skis will turn easier and generally perform better in soft snow; skis with more parallel edges will tour and climb better; longer skis will perform better at higher speeds; shorter ones will be more maneuverable and easier to control with climbing boots that are not made for ski control; lighter skis are easier to drag around all day but will generally be pushed around more by crappy snow.

 

Choose the ski you want based on what you intend to focus on, and choose your binding type based on what you want to focus on and what your friends will be using.

[Poseur]

Just a side note, tele specific skis usually have a beefed binding mounting area designed to keep your binding from ripping out (tele bindings allow more torque on the binding).

 

There's a pretty good AT rig for sale on the Couloir website.

 

http://www.telemarkvision.tv/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi