Calling all backcountry skiing experts

[TCD]

Y.L.,

For a little wider ski, look at the Fischer Boundless.



BOUNDLESS WAX s: 98 - 69 - 88 l: 169, 179, 189



BOUNDLESS CROWN s: 98 - 69 - 88 l: 169, 179, 189

 

[dave.m]

I
Any thought on these?

Wow, I'm thrilled that the Wasatch Soft is still being made and I suspect the market will come full circle and embrace that profile again. The slightly skinnier 80/60/70 profile made famous by the Tua Cirque has already come back into fashion. But, I wouldn't spend no stinkin' $500 on a slalom profile ski when there's so many old beginners skis sitting at ski swaps for next to nothing. Look for a soft tail and slap some pins on them.

As for the other skis, I think they will all be more or less like other skis within their profiles. My take on these different profiles can be found here.
http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/DirtbagPinner/bc-skis.html

 

[DougPaul]

I'm familiar with the details of the various equipment; I think what works best on descents has more to do with skiing skills. I've been on tele exclusively for about 12 years; I'm not sure I could as well anymore with my heels locked down. Even on ice, I'd rather have my tele gear. My lift served tele gear is fairly heavy duty (Scarpa T1, Rossi T4 or BD Nunyo).

Agreed--skills trump equipment. (But it is easier to buy fancy equipment than learn the skills... ) Didn't know how much you knew about equipment--even if you didn't need the additional detail, it will hopefully help someone else.

I've used full skins, but only the Voile rubber "snake skins." They don't glide very well, so they basically turn your skis into "long skinny snowshoes without a claw." For the trails I climb for skiing (ADK High Peak region hiking trails), snowshoes work better.

I have heard some negative comments about the snake skins from some very experienced people. Try a set of the "real thing" (glue-on are better than strap-on). They stick rather well for the uphill and have a draggy glide on the downhill. (They can be used to reduce the speed on a downhill, but it will be harder to turn with them on.) One can kick-and-glide on them in appropriate snow conditions--dynamite kick, the amount of glide will vary. Skin wax will help to keep them dry in wet conditions and may help the glide. Straight skins will do for most of us normal skiers (including me)--one can get a little more grip from shaped skins at greater cost and hassle. Just don't drop your skins glue-side down in the pine needles...

You may find that you can leave your snowshoes at home more often if you use skins.

I might try throwing some kick wax on my lift served teles for flat and gentle rolling approaches.

Works for me--I just view my range of skis (from light XC to heavy Tele, all but 2 pairs waxable) as points on a continium, and apply techniques up and down the line as suits my needs of the moment.

Does the wax wear off faster on a single camber ski?

Generally yes, but the actual rate of wear depends upon how abrasive the snow is and which wax you are using. I have certainly gotten by with one waxing for an entire day in non-abrasive conditions. Rarely more than 3 or 4 waxings in a day are required.

For BC skiing, I just use a single wax (the readily available Swix V line of HC waxes) over the entire ski--it both kicks and glides quite well. The reason for the single wax rather than separate kick and glide zones is that kick zones don't stick very well when you are going over a dip (don't know what wax to use for free air...) and it increases the grip on the uphills. (I save the kick-and-glide zone stuff for smooth set tracks.)

BTW, you can put glue-on skins over the harder waxes (up to purple or special red) without difficulty. (At most a light scraping to remove dirt and loose wax should be enough.) I wouldn't put the skins on softer (gooey) waxes or klister for fear of gumming up the skin glue. And I use my kicker skins (or waxless skis) in those conditions so the issue never comes up for me.

A nice example of most of the above is (one version of) a (Tele) ski trip up Mosilauke via Ravine Lodge. The first part is 1.5 mi over an unplowed dirt road. Waxes work very well here. At the base of the steep part, one puts on skins and climbs on a hiking/ski trail (Snapper) up to the (unplowed dirt, relatively steep) carriage road. One continues up to the ridge. A total climb of a bit over 3000 ft. One can pop the skins here and have a nice gravity-assisted trip back to the spot where the skins were put on. (The skis will generally glide perfectly well with the residual XC wax still on.) One might choose to refresh his XC wax here, or not, and it is a nice gentle, mostly downhill XC back to the car.

Mt Garfield (all except for the final 1/4 mi or so) is another skiable summit with a gentle approach (waxes) and a steeper trail (skins, but I have climbed all the way on waxes alone in good conditions).

Both routes are described in Goodman's guidebook.

Doug

 

[el-bagr]

Holy cow. Look what I've missed! I generally agree with Dave.M, DougPaul and Dave Metsky, but I'll have to read this thread more carefully to see what it's all about.

On the highest level, here's my take: get out and ski. Equipment isn't everything; time is.

 

[David Metsky]

Just back from 2 weeks in Wyoming, got some boot skiing on old snow and drove through a pretty good snowstorm on the way back to the airport. It's definately time to talk about skiing.

BTW, the standard response to "Randonee is French for Can't Tele" is that "Telemark is Norwegian for Wait for me at the bottom".

I have E99s and waxless Outtabounds, and dave.m is right, they are like night and day. I learned to ski on Karhu XCD GTs and E99s, and they feel like planks compared to the the shaped touring skis of today. I went with the Volie 3-pins with removable cables for all the reasons suggested.

-dave-

 

[yardsale]

Welcome back Dave! Can't wait for the details. Ragged Mountain Equipment has last years' S-Bound Rebound (My vote for best ski in this class. Faster, turns better than Outta Bounds IMO) for $147. Have several 169 cm and single 179cm as of yesterday.

 

[Y.L.]

I think I am going to get Outtabounds Wax from the US by mail order. The S-Bound series has not been imported to Canada this year and the Rebound Wax doesn’t exist. Lengths available are 159, 169, 179 and 189. I am 5’10’’ and weight 180 pounds. Which length should I pick?

 

[spencer]

I think I am going to get Outtabounds Wax

that's what I ski. Congratulations on making the right choice after all this discussion I poo-pood wax for quite a while, but once I got a little practice I swore I wouldn't go back. Now my older waxless touring skis seem downright sluggish with the scales.

The 189s are just right for me at 6'3" and 250 (See picture to left). Remember, having short skis is a real benefit when you are potentially thrashing between trees on your way to the next stash, or when you're trying to snowplow down a steep, narrow trail.

spencer

 

[David Metsky]

I agree, it's a fine ski. I'd go with 179s for you, or possibly 169s if you don't expect to ski with a pack much. I'm between you and Spencer for weight and I have the 179s.

-dave-

 

[yardsale]

Probably the 179's but can you get to a pair locally to do a *paper test* ? Do you know how to do one?

 

[dave.m]

I'm 6'2" and weigh 175. I ski a flat cambered 90/70/80 ski in a 180 length and love, love, love it for the tight trees. It is just enough floatation under foot in most snow conditions (not too much but enough to ski at slow speeds). I also have a pair of Rebounds in the 189 length. I've had no problem flattening that ski out to get the waxless pattern engaged, so I wouldn't be concerned about you being able to get the pattern engaged with either the 179 or the 189. I think (not sure but I think) the Rebound has more camber than the Outta.

Note, I wouldn't worry about the paper test. In general, the patterns are going to drag a bit. It's not like any of these skis are like high cambered track skis. The only bc ski I can recall where a paper test would have been helpful was the (skinnier) Karhu Lookouts from several years ago. Karhu really jacked up the camber for a season or two and several folks ended up on skis that wouldn't grip. A paper test would have avoided that. But I've not heard anybody make this complaint about the S-Bound skis.

I would choose between the 179 and 189 based on your primary skis goals. If it is turns in the tight trees, go with the 179. If it is for racking up miles or faster, more open turns the 189. Without knowing the answer, I would suggest the 179 but that's my bias.

 

[Y.L.]

The Outtabounds Wax is not available around here so I can’t do the paper test anyway. I was planning on buying the 179 and what has been said just confirmed that it is the length that I need. Now the difficult part is buying a pair online. I checked Skirack in Burlington and they have only the 159 and 169 . Do you have any other online dealers to suggest? They need to be able to ship to Canada and also have the right length (179) available. Many thanks.

 

[David Metsky]

STP has a good deal on the waxless version at 179cm. I'd still hold out for waxable if you can.

-dave-

 

[Y.L.]

It looks like they don’t carry the waxable version at Sierra Trading Post

 

[David Metsky]

It looks like they don’t carry the waxable version at Sierra Trading Post

That's where I bought my waxables last year. But no, not this year.

-dave-

 

[DougPaul]

It looks like they don’t carry the waxable version at Sierra Trading Post

I think the stores are just getting organized for skiing. More models/sizes will hopefully show up in the near future.

Doug