Mountaineering and skis?

[steverino]

Hi,

 

Getting back into alpine climbing after a 25 year break. My alpine experience back in the day was to walk in, climb up, walk/glissade down, and walk back to the car. My one pair of mountaineering boots did all that for me.

 

My climbing partner these days is my adult son, who wants to add skiing as part of the climbing experience. I'm game -- I can telemark okay. But this brings up a boot/binding question. Surely we aren't the only ones thinking we ought to ski in/out, and maybe include the skis in our descent.

 

Can someone educate me on boots for this? From my research, seems like folks use AT or tele boots, but then it also seems they keep the skis on nearly all the time...approach, climb, and descent. I don't want to entirely give up the walk mode of peak climbing, but I can't imagine alpine climbing in AT or tele boots. The forward lean is so much more than traditional alpine boots. I know they have a "walk" mode, but my tele boot walk mode is still too awkward for anything mroe than a walk across the resort parking lot.

 

I know about ramers and silvretta bindings for mountaineering boots. Seems like they'd be okay on the approach/exit, but not so much on a descent. Am I wrong in that?

 

Am I trying to mix too many activities?

 

Should I just carry a second pair of boots along with the skis?

 

Answers appreciated. Sorry for the length.

 

Can't matter too much, but I do most of my climbing in the CA Sierra.

 

Steve

 

Edited January 30, 2011 by steverino

[lazyalpinist]

I'm not exactly an expert, but I wanted to give you a response before your post got lost. So a little bump won't hurt you.

 

I can't speak for tele boots, but I find modern AT boots fine to walk in, especially on snow. I have booted at least 6000' in a day with them and was comfortable. However, due to lack of lateral ankle flex, I don't feel they crampon well unless you are front pointing.

 

As far as leaving the skis on all the time? Well, depends on the objective. If there is rock climbing, I'll take the skis off. Steep couloir? Skis are on the pack on the way up, on the feet on the way down. Certain ice sections and awkward ridge tops I'll take the skis off as well, depending on what I think will be faster/safer. But in general, if the skinning/skiing is going well and is fun, why take them off?

 

Skiing in climbing boots? Plenty of people do it. IMO this is where the objective comes into play. Going out to climb something like ice or rock and don't want to climb in ski boots? The skiing isn't the objective and perhaps is fairly level? Then I may go with a mountain boot setup to increase fun on the ice/rock/mixed and the skis are just a travel tool at that point. If ski fun is the objective and you may never take them off, then you'd probably want a ski boot setup.

 

As far as carrying a second pair of footwear, depends on the objective and comfort level. I am not too comfortable climbing 5th class rock in AT boots. (I would imagine that the duck toe on tele boots makes them more awkward on rock.) So if I have more than one pitch of 5th class rock to climb after a ski in, I prefer to bring footwear appropriate to the climbing. I also find low angle 2nd/3rd class rock fairly clumsy with AT boots on. (For me they work better on steeper rock.) So I may also bring different footwear to speed things up if there is a lot of that terrain as well.

 

I think in general it will depend on you and what you feel comfortable with. If rock climbing in mountain boots or rock shoes is more comfortable/fun, and you don't mind the weight in your pack on the ski in/out then why not pack them? But if you want to go light and don't want extra weight in your pack, leave the mountain boots at home.

[steverino]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Really!

 

> Skiing in climbing boots? Plenty of people do it.

 

Do you know what kind of binding system they use? Are ramers and silvrettas the only option?

 

Steve

 

[AlpineK]

There are a few companies that now make gear for backcountry skiing.

 

Tele gear is an option, but the duckbill toe can make crampons less functional.

 

Silveretta is an option, but to reduce weight I'd go with a Dynafit binding. They are light, but they do require boots compatible with the bindings.

 

Bindings

[img:center]http://www.cascadeclimbers.com/assets/images/ski-board/dynafit-tlt-classic.jpeg[/img]

 

Dynafit has a new boot system that sheds quite a bit of weight. In the hike mode you get substantially more ankle flexibility than older AT boots.

 

I bought a low end TLT boot this year and love em. Each boot is a pound lighter than one of my Garmont boots.

[img:center]http://www.randoskier.com/images/products/detail/dynafit_tlt5_mtn.jpg[/img]

 

These boots make climbing and scrambling quite a bit easier. Since I haven't had them for an entire season I can't speak for durability. So far they're great. You can get a carbon fiber versions of this boot if you have the $$

 

There's some gear to check out.

 

[mattp]

Steve,

 

A few random thoughts:

 

In my opinion, ski boots hike "OK" in walk mode but on dry ground, at least, it is well worth the extra weight to hike in sneakers or some kind of light hiker and carry your ski boots.

 

If they are somewhat flexible in the sole, telemark boots may offer a more natural and more comfortable walking boot than an AT boot but many of the modern boots are so stiff they don't much bend in the ball of the foot anyway. The AT boots do not allow the foot to flex but some have a sole with a "rocker" which is a concave shape that is at least a little more natural than a straight footbed.

 

The duckbill on a telemark boot really impairs any kind of rock climbing. If you add a pair of rigid crampons they will perform OK on ice, though, and telemark boots do just find for step kicking.

[steverino]

Thanks for the replies!

 

As my dad would say, "Money doesn't grow on trees", so I have a major choice to make...

 

Invest in mountaineering boots and compatible bindings, or invest in telemark boots and bindings. Using lazyalpinist's objective theme, the first setup is biased towards the foot climb and the latter is biased towards the skiing.

 

I wish someone in northern Ca rented the former. :-(

 

Steve

 

[Alex]

Its a hard choice. In my experience, though, you can do more climbing and approaching AND ski with a pack better with AT gear than with tele gear.

 

What I do (I have both) is use the tele for fun backcountry turns and skiing lift served, and use the AT for mountain experiences where skiing is just part of the thing, not the objective.

 

If you had to do only 1, I would go AT.

[max]

If you had to do only 1, I would go AT.

 

[steverino]

...you can do more climbing and approaching AND ski with a pack better with AT gear than with tele gear.

 

If you had to do only 1, I would go AT.

But that wasn't one of my options. :-)

I'm starting to feel like an old fogey...prefering tele.

 

Joking aside, when it comes time to rope up, swap skis for crampons, and pull out the ice axe, you folks are happy in your AT boots? Would you still be if you did a lot of old style rope team foot work? Or do you just not do a lot of that?

 

Steve

 

[max]

before I owned AT boots, I skiied in my (heavy duty) leather mountaineering boots. Not ideal (by a long shot).

[steverino]

before I owned AT boots, I skiied in my (heavy duty) leather mountaineering boots. Not ideal (by a long shot).

Ah, perfect -- and it sounds like you don't miss your mountaineering boots. Even when you're not in skis. Is this right?

[counterfeitfake]

It really depends on what you're doing. AT boots are great for snow slogging. If it gets icy or rocky, they're a compromise.

 

I will say that skiing in with mountaineering boots on my pack, then sitting down and changing shoes, makes me feel like an idiot. Life is tough.