Help Me Build XCD Kit
Posted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:48 am
Greetings All,
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, I was an avid TTipper. I spent many hours glued to the Mitch-era site, and made some very close friends here. Back then, I was TeleBear, and it seems that account is tied to an email address I don't control any more. So it goes.
Today, I want help dialing in my XCD setup. My history is as and alpine ski racer (high school / college), then an "extreme" skier and occasional competitor (20s). In my late 20s, I took up telemarking, but always on heavy plastic boots and long, wide skis, including Tua Crossrides, many pairs of Volkl Gotamas, then Skilogik Bombsquads, and now ON3p Wrenegades. I always skied the burliest bindings I could find, and have been on Hammerheads / Axls / Outlaws, and now Lynx (also some home made pintech tele bindings that preceded the Lynx).
Now I'm 48, and 6'4" and 205lbs naked. My girlfriend and I might finally be ready to settle into some lighter weight touring. I have a more-or-less destroyed left knee, and have been re-learning how to ski with looser boots (still in TX Pros), open walk mode, and a deep tai chi practice that has me skiing more centered and flowy, with the same energy, but less raw power. With lots of P/T, stretching and quarterly PRP treatments, I'm pain-free, if not somewhat stiff, most days.
We live in the Front Range of Colorado, with a place in Summit County, and a winterized van that lets us get out of town for 3-6 day trips a handful of times a winter. Our purpose for these skis is to tour lower angle terrain away from the most popular trail heads, with a mix of skiing up / down existing trails, but including lots of low-angle powder -- aka meadowskipping. Also, I live right up against the foothills, and want to be able to ski out the door for the 10-20 days a year that the skiing is good (like right now). In some cases, we might want to be able to ski something a bit steeper, like maybe terrain in the 20* to 25* range. But, most "touring for turns" will be on the heavier gear we already have in the quiver.
I've read a lot of what's relatively recent on the boards here, but it seems like most of you are more midwest / east coast focused (I grew up in NH), and seem to prefer more xc-oriented skis. I wonder if you think there's a different mix for me as a primarily heavy-gear skier in CO.
Here's what I think so far -- please help me correct any mistakes.
SKIS: It seems like the Fisher SBound 112 is about the most popular ski around, with a decent mix of XC and DH ability. I can see that the Annum is pretty close, and has a great pedigree. I was hoping to ski something wider, like the recent SBound 125, or the Rossi 120. I see that the Rossi is the ever popular shape of the 7 series alpine skis, which is intriguing to me. But I also read that these extra wide skis really give something up on the packed snow we'll find on most trails. I've always skied wide skis in my more gravity-focused skiing, largely due to my size, and liking the extra flotation, especially in the backcountry, where I believe it helps me stay "light" over obstacles. Am I thinking too wide with the Rossis? Is the SBound 112 really just the right ski? Is the 189 long enough? Can I even find a Fisher 125 anywhere in the first place?
BOOTS: I typically would think about a low plastic boot for more power, but I'm pretty sure that's NOT what I want. So, I'm leaning strongly toward the Alpina Alaska (75mm). Why NOT choose these? As near as I can tell, they're a real standard, and seem to be crafted extremely well, and could last me the rest of my remaining 3-4 decades of skiing. I like the idea of the Fisher / Rossi boots with plastic cuffs, but when I try them on, the boots themselves seem to be less well made. While they might have more lateral rigidity, they seem to have less forward resistance than the Alaska. I typically have a wide foot, but the Alaskas fit pretty well, even with a thicker sock on, at least in the store for 15-20m.
BINDINGS: I'm thinking 3pin, for the relative power advantage. I might do a 3pin hardwire, and carry the hardwires for the occasional steeper lines, but can the Alaska drive the hardwire, or is that a mismatch? Also, the hardwires looks to be mounted on a pretty substantial riser, and I'm not sure that's to my advantage -- what do you think? Can I mount them flat to the skis, since I won't need the climbing bails? What about the telebulldog / spike touring binding? They look like they're burlier, but is that really true?
Anyway, let me have it. I'm stoked for this next evolution.
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, I was an avid TTipper. I spent many hours glued to the Mitch-era site, and made some very close friends here. Back then, I was TeleBear, and it seems that account is tied to an email address I don't control any more. So it goes.
Today, I want help dialing in my XCD setup. My history is as and alpine ski racer (high school / college), then an "extreme" skier and occasional competitor (20s). In my late 20s, I took up telemarking, but always on heavy plastic boots and long, wide skis, including Tua Crossrides, many pairs of Volkl Gotamas, then Skilogik Bombsquads, and now ON3p Wrenegades. I always skied the burliest bindings I could find, and have been on Hammerheads / Axls / Outlaws, and now Lynx (also some home made pintech tele bindings that preceded the Lynx).
Now I'm 48, and 6'4" and 205lbs naked. My girlfriend and I might finally be ready to settle into some lighter weight touring. I have a more-or-less destroyed left knee, and have been re-learning how to ski with looser boots (still in TX Pros), open walk mode, and a deep tai chi practice that has me skiing more centered and flowy, with the same energy, but less raw power. With lots of P/T, stretching and quarterly PRP treatments, I'm pain-free, if not somewhat stiff, most days.
We live in the Front Range of Colorado, with a place in Summit County, and a winterized van that lets us get out of town for 3-6 day trips a handful of times a winter. Our purpose for these skis is to tour lower angle terrain away from the most popular trail heads, with a mix of skiing up / down existing trails, but including lots of low-angle powder -- aka meadowskipping. Also, I live right up against the foothills, and want to be able to ski out the door for the 10-20 days a year that the skiing is good (like right now). In some cases, we might want to be able to ski something a bit steeper, like maybe terrain in the 20* to 25* range. But, most "touring for turns" will be on the heavier gear we already have in the quiver.
I've read a lot of what's relatively recent on the boards here, but it seems like most of you are more midwest / east coast focused (I grew up in NH), and seem to prefer more xc-oriented skis. I wonder if you think there's a different mix for me as a primarily heavy-gear skier in CO.
Here's what I think so far -- please help me correct any mistakes.
SKIS: It seems like the Fisher SBound 112 is about the most popular ski around, with a decent mix of XC and DH ability. I can see that the Annum is pretty close, and has a great pedigree. I was hoping to ski something wider, like the recent SBound 125, or the Rossi 120. I see that the Rossi is the ever popular shape of the 7 series alpine skis, which is intriguing to me. But I also read that these extra wide skis really give something up on the packed snow we'll find on most trails. I've always skied wide skis in my more gravity-focused skiing, largely due to my size, and liking the extra flotation, especially in the backcountry, where I believe it helps me stay "light" over obstacles. Am I thinking too wide with the Rossis? Is the SBound 112 really just the right ski? Is the 189 long enough? Can I even find a Fisher 125 anywhere in the first place?
BOOTS: I typically would think about a low plastic boot for more power, but I'm pretty sure that's NOT what I want. So, I'm leaning strongly toward the Alpina Alaska (75mm). Why NOT choose these? As near as I can tell, they're a real standard, and seem to be crafted extremely well, and could last me the rest of my remaining 3-4 decades of skiing. I like the idea of the Fisher / Rossi boots with plastic cuffs, but when I try them on, the boots themselves seem to be less well made. While they might have more lateral rigidity, they seem to have less forward resistance than the Alaska. I typically have a wide foot, but the Alaskas fit pretty well, even with a thicker sock on, at least in the store for 15-20m.
BINDINGS: I'm thinking 3pin, for the relative power advantage. I might do a 3pin hardwire, and carry the hardwires for the occasional steeper lines, but can the Alaska drive the hardwire, or is that a mismatch? Also, the hardwires looks to be mounted on a pretty substantial riser, and I'm not sure that's to my advantage -- what do you think? Can I mount them flat to the skis, since I won't need the climbing bails? What about the telebulldog / spike touring binding? They look like they're burlier, but is that really true?
Anyway, let me have it. I'm stoked for this next evolution.