Backcountry xc-ski in n-east

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I started with 3-pin in the mid-70's (it was the standard binding back then...) and have never felt the need to switch to anything else. I currently use several sets of skis for BC: waxable* and non-waxable (depending on the snow conditions) metal edged, camber-and-a-half, approx 66-55-59 mm profile skis.

* Wax significantly outperforms waxless in good snow conditions. I often put kick waxes on my waxless skis to improve their performance. (This is in addition to the glide wax that has been applied at home.)

The above skis are good kick-and-glide skis on both groomed and BC trails. I have other skis which are more turn oriented (eg Tele).

I have several pairs of 3-pin boots--light (and super comfortable) leather (Asolo Snowfield II), as well as plastic Scarpa T3 (a light weight Tele boot which works well for kick and glide with more edge control). And heavier Tele boots.

IMO, for BC you want:
* wider skis than for groomed: typ 55-70 mm underfoot.
* ~10-15 mm of sidecut for kick and glide, more for turns
* perhaps 10 cm shorter than for groomed for better control
* Softer camber than for groomed. You cannot flatten the camber of a hard ski unless you have hard (ie groomed) snow under ski. Camber-and-a-half (kick and glide) or single camber (turns) is better than double camber (also known as a full wax pocket).
* Wax whenever snow conditions are favorable (for waxing--ie colder drier consistent snow). Wax also enables one to "tune" one's skis--sticky for the hills, slippery for the groomers.
* Metal edges help on crusty or icy trails.
* Reliable bindings that give you a chance of field repair (ie 3-pin).
* Leather boots are comfortable for kick and glide, light plastic boots can give you more edge control

BTW: goomed tracks are typically ~70mm wide. Any ski with a narrower shovel will also fit in groomed tracks.

Notes:
* A ski feels your weight not your height, so size the ski by your weight (including clothing and pack).
* On long BC tours, one shuffles rather than hops (during the kick)--another reason for avoiding a hard camber.

FWIW:
* Recreational waxing is easy--don't be intimidated. (Racing waxing is hard because of the effort required to get that last 1% of speed.) Learn to wax and you will reap the rewards.

Doug
 
Last edited:
Are the NNN-BC setups suitable for tele?
No, it's pretty much impossible for mere mortals to tele with NNN or SNS setups. Even if you had enough control the boot flexes at the toe, not the ball of the foot. People with a lot of skill can tele on anything, but starting with NNN or SNS is the absolute wrong way to go.
 
Do you think that the Rossignol BC X-6 75mm boots would be a good choice ?
It looks like they come in 3-pin or NNN-BC versions. It looks like a fine boot, a little soft for any real turning but OK for tours with some fun terrain. I'd pair them with 3-pin cable bindings if you want more adventurous skiing.
 
Life was so much easier when all I have to do was clink into my Bandits, get off the lift, and head downhill. It looks like I’m in for a slow learning curve, though I am a tad tire of the crowds and would rather enjoy the solitude of BC skiing. I just need to get better at it. Thanks for all the information.
 
One surprise from My Karhus long ago was the lack of 'solitude' of backcountry skiing, when going down hill at a pace that even I can handle (pretty darn flat to most), my waxless Karhus definitely were not silent with distinct zipping noise. When I set them up long ago, AMC was preaching that 3 pins were obsolete to be replaced with 3N-BC (so much for the recommendation). I did find that spraying the binding every time prior to a trip with silicone helped with freezeups. I have both the push button and manual bindings and found the manual bindings somewhat more reliable. I also have leather boots as most bootmakers do not make size 13 4e so I bought what I could. At best I can probably pull a sled up and down a tote road but much more than that and I am out of skill.
 
What would be the main difference with a similar, but heavier boot (X-12) : http://www.rossignol.com/US/US/bc-x-12_RI2WA91_product_nordic-men-boots.html ?
The higher plastic cuff and two-buckle system will give you more stiffness, especially laterally which you need for turning. This boot comes up higher on the calf taking some of the stress off your ankle and allowing you to apply more power though the ski to the snow. It's still not really a boot designed for turning, but it gives you a better tool to work with. It's also a bit warmer I think.

This comes at the cost of more weight, more effort required to kick and glide, and being a bit more removed from the feel of the snow, besides being more expensive.

Different ski boots fit feet very differently, so I'd try them on before buying. Some brands and/or models simply don't work for some people. I can't wear Scarpa boots, for example, without causing great pain in my arches. Try some on before you buy.
 
I'm by no means an expert on gear but I do get out on XC skis every year a dozen or more times. Be realistic on what your primary use will be. Get a ski and boot appropriate to what you will likely be skiing, not to what maybe one day you might ski.
I considered a beefy more turning oriented BC ski but realistically I would hardly if ever need that set up. I ended up with a Madshus Glittertind which was a great choice for 90% of the terrain I tackle. I ski a lot on AMC 100 mile wilderness trails which are groomed periodically but not tracked, hilly at places, narrow at places, and prone to ice. I also ski on snowmobile trails around my town which tend to be narrow with very variable snow and tend to get icy. 25% of the time I am on non groomed snow. My ski is long and with noodly tips that plow through ungroomed snow, the metal edges are very helpful on icy terrain. I am also more distance oriented which these skis seem to work well on.
I looked into the fatter more shapely Madshus Skis as well as other makes 83-99 in the middle. I think they would have been made my long outings not so fun.
I use BC NNN bindings and have had a couple of minor icings but they work really well for what I ski. Because I usually ski more distance I also use a less rigid boot.

My first XC skis were a disaster, I lived in Eastern PA which is a joke for XC skiing because it warms up too much for decent snow. The downhill oriented shop had no clue and steered me the wrong way (pre internet days so I couldn't really research) Be honest on the terrain you are going to ski regularly and get the appropriate set up. I know some bigger shops rent, if you have a decent Nordic shop close by, maybe try a couple of set ups if that's possible.
 
Just out of curiosity, did Karhu become part of Madshus? I know the 10th mtn was/is a popular ski but thought I heard one of the Madshus skis replaced it. I could be wrong on this.
 
Karhu was bought by K2 in 2006 and eventually the brand was dropped, I think around 2010. Although the Madshus factory was bought by K2 as well, I don't think there's any direct connection between the two.
 
Karhu was bought by K2 in 2006 and eventually the brand was dropped, I think around 2010. Although the Madshus factory was bought by K2 as well, I don't think there's any direct connection between the two.

If I remember correctly , K2 used the Madshus factory to build K2 alpine skis that were built using cap construction. K2 continued to build models using sandwich construction techniques.

K2 eventually acquired Madshus , and then Line skis. Some Line skis were built in the Karhu factory in Quebec, hence the K2 / Karhu connection.

After K2 discontinued the Karhu brand, the Karhu Guide, 10th Mountain, and XCD reappeared as Madshus models

I hope this helps
 
The Madshus Epoch is basically a carbon copy of the Karhu 10th Mountain. I think the base of the Epoch is more absorbant to wax.
 
pinnah? pinnah? OK, I guess I'll have to stand in for him.

Almost every question referenced above has been discussed in expert detail on his DAVE'S NORDIC BACKCOUNTRY SKIING PAGE.

Scoff not when you see it was last updated five years ago. Fools rush away from this resource whereas even the experts delve in to their benefit.

BTW, the boots make a whole lot more difference for control than the bindings do when it comes to nordic skis. And a backcountry ski without edges in icy New England is not merely like a day without sunshine: It is the apocalypse at times. Edgeless skis certainly have their place – that's why two of the five pair I own are edgeless.

We now return this thread to your control.
 
Last edited:
I'm also looking to try out xc for the first time this winter, and I'm looking at some Alpina Discovery skis - waxless, metal edge, 68-60-65. Anyone have any experience or thoughts on these? I'd pair them with three pin bindings.
I'm looking to ski mostly out of track, hoping to be able to access hiking trails, roads, general back country. I'm not especially looking for downhill performance, but would like to be able to handle moderate slopes on occasion. My main interest is in using them for day long and over night hikes over moderate terrain - in a sense I'm looking for faster snow shoes. I would like to build a pulk eventually and do some winter tent camping/ski adventures.
Does this seem like the right set up for my goals? I'd prefer a versatile set up that does several things well.
 
pinnah? pinnah? OK, I guess I'll have to stand in for him.

Almost every question referenced above has been discussed in expert detail on his DAVE'S NORDIC BACKCOUNTRY SKIING PAGE.

Scoff not when you see it was last updated five years ago. Fools rush away from this resource whereas even the experts delve in to their benefit.
I'll second the motion. A very good resource.

BTW, Pinnah is known as dave.m here.

BTW, the boots make a whole lot more difference for control than the bindings do when it comes to nordic skis. And a backcountry ski without edges in icy New England is not merely like a day without sunshine: It is the apocalypse at times. Edgeless skis certainly have their place – that's why two of the five pair I own are edgeless.
Boots certainly do make a big difference--I did some of my early lift served Tele skiing using my plastic (light Tele) T3 boots on a 65/54/60 mm metal-edged BC (waxable) skis with 3-pin bindings. Far better control than when using the same outfit with my leather (non-Tele) Asolo Snofield II boots. However, a heavy Tele boot might tear 3-pin bindings out of the ski. (The bindings and their screw placements just aren't designed to take the forces that can be generated by such a boot.)

All* of my BC skis have metal edges... To me, the cost of having edges and not needing them is far less than the cost of not having them when I need them. (I don't race...)

* Well, I do have a pair of wooden Bonna 2000's with lignostone (compressed impregnated wood) edges, but they are firmly retired.

Doug
 
I'm also looking to try out xc for the first time this winter, and I'm looking at some Alpina Discovery skis - waxless, metal edge, 68-60-65. Anyone have any experience or thoughts on these? I'd pair them with three pin bindings.
They look ok on paper, but I've never used them myself.

I suggest that you consider Rottefella Super Tele 3-pin bindings. Sturdy, and easy to get in and out. http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/DirtbagPinner/bc-bindings.html#pins

Doug
 
They look ok on paper, but I've never used them myself.

I suggest that you consider Rottefella Super Tele 3-pin bindings. Sturdy, and easy to get in and out. http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/DirtbagPinner/bc-bindings.html#pins

Doug

Yeah, what he said about the Super Tele. Friends don't let friends ski on French three-pin bindings. (I can hear the howling in Arlington from here …) But he's just tormenting me with the fact he still has a pair of apparently serviceable 2000s. :p

You have a great set up in mind for your needs. You will find the ski's profile and the "waxless" aspect a boon for what you're talking about. (You should still put some glide wax on the tips and tails to improve glide and preserve the bottom.)
 
Top