Hi ddg,
I live in Stanley, NB. We are a fair bit higher in elevation and further away from the Coast- so the climate and snow conditions (over the years) is really quite different compared to where you are skiing.
That being said- I lived and skied in and around Saint John (we used to have a camp on the Kingston Peninsula)- for 10 years. My experience with backcountry skiing in a maritime climate at low elevation is this:
1) the typical snow is old, hard, icy, crusty, and slippery
2) the fresh snow conditions don't last very long. (I used to live within walking distance of Rockwood Park in SJ. There were many days that I raced home after school and literally ran to Rockwood Park to take advantage of a few hours of fresh soft snow!) (I was born in Quebec and learned to xcountry ski in that winter wonderland- so I had "powder memory")
My experience with skiing in general- but especially backcountry skiing- is that there are "all purpose" setups available. These "jack-of-all-trades" ski/binding/boot combinations tend to be masters of none.
From the onset I should make it clear that I am first and foremost a backcountry tourer (regardless of the terrain)- my personal preferences always puts touring efficiency over ease of turning. This doesn't stop me from skiing on steep terrain- it just forces me to continuously work on my technique so that I can turn my touring skis.
My advice is to start with a backcountry setup that suits your typical snow/terrain/cover conditions.
Snow. My experience with your climate is that the typical winter you are going to be most commonly skiing on hard, dense, icy, crusty, slippery snow.
Terrain. I have read through this discussion,and I am still a bit unclear as to the terrain you want to ski on. Are you wanting to backcountry-xcountry tour- or are you wanting to simply search for downhill runs (i.e. you mentioned "steep farm fields")?
Cover. You going to be skiing in the open- through fields, on woods roads/trails, open glades? Or truly going to be bushwhacking through the woods? If you are going to be making downhill turns on open cover- you don't need a short ski.
First things first- I really doubt that you will need a powder ski too often. And using a powder ski on hard and/or dense snow is murderously inefficient and ineffective. You will also need a monstrous boot/binding to control a powder ski on hardpack. (to my knowledge I am not aware of a very rigid, wide XCD ski that is designed to offer downhill stability on steep, hardpack snow. Anything that big, wide and rigid is too heavy for xcountry skiing)
I would start with something relatively narrow (i.e. 90mm shovel at the very widest) that is going to perform, and be reasonable to control on dense snow. (Once you find an ideal "everyday" setup- you can always buy a powder skis at a later date to take advantage of fresh snow events (or strange deep snow winters like you have had this winter)).
IMO/IME- the Fischer S-Bound 112, the Madshus Annum, and the Rossi BC110 are all XCD skis designed for deep powder snow (despite that- all three of these skis have significantly different design/performance). IMO/IME- the Voile Vector BC and Charger BC are designed to be big mountain alpine touring/telemark skis (they are fat, torsionally rigid and have rocker in both the tip and tail). I have tested the Vector BC- definitely not a XC ski- but man do they ever climb and turn! I have no experience with the Rossi BC 125- but I suspect that their intent is similar to the Vector BC?
Next step lower on the "totem-pole" are the mid-fat XCD touring skis (e.g. Madshus Epoch, Fischer S-Bound 98, Fischer S-Bound 88, Rossi BC 90). IMO these are still designed to be powder XCD skis- but offer perhaps better touring performance than their wider big brothers (I say "perhaps" better touring performance because I personally feel strongly that their fatter big brothers out-tour them in truly deep, soft snow. For example, my Annums will out perform my Epochs as a xcountry ski in truly deep snow).
Back to "relatively narrow". I am assuming that you want a XCD ski- not a xcountry ski? This is an important question. If you want decent and efficient downhill performance then you want a dedicated hybrid xcountry-telemark (i.e. "XCD") ski. The prime examples in this mid-width group are the Madshus Eon and the S-Bound 78 (IMO/IME- the S-78 offer better climbing/turning performance than the Eon).
Many people- both currently and traditionally- are using xcountry skis (i.e. narrow, double-cambered) as XCD skis. Those that are using traditional, long lengths are using skis with smooth, soft flexes- such as the Madshus Glittertind and Voss. Those that are using stiffer skis (e.g. Rossi BC65, 68, 70; Fischer E-series) are going to short lengths. There is much evidence that short, stiff, double-cambered skis can offer great downhill performance (just ask CIMA!
)- but IMHO the short length is agonizingly inefficient as a touring ski.
So as far as the ski- I would stick to relatively narrow (i.e. the S-88 is on the fat side) for your snow and terrain. The length you want both depends on cover and whether you are going to be touring- or just climbing and turning.
Climbing. There is no question in my mind about these two facts:
1) double-cambered skis do not climb steep slopes efficiently
2) the wider the ski underfoot, the better the climbing performance
(there are also differences in camber, flex and traction patterns. For example: IME the S-Bounds climb more efficiently than the Madshus XCDs)
So if you are going to go relatively narrow, and you are going to climb steep slopes- make sure you get climbing skins!
Traction. If you are going to tour on hard and icy, crusty snow- kick and glide traction can be very challenging. Waxable skis can be grip-waxed and/or klistered for any snow temperature/condition- and will always outperform a waxless ski in a xcountry K&G context. Waxless skis can perform as good as klistered skis on warm wet snow.
Boots/bindings. I am still a bit unclear as to your skiing style/preference.
If you are going to be touring- then my advice is to go with reasonably light boots/bindings and continuously work on your xcountry and telemark technique.
If you are primarily going to be climbing and turning then you could easily go with heavier boots/bindings.
Many people don't seem to mind xcountry touring in heavy binding/boots.
I personally hate touring in heavy, rigid plastic (I particularly loved/hated my past experiences with AT). Just my personal preference.
I personally am a xcountry skier. My passion is backcountry xcountry touring over any terrain- including skiing in the mountains of NB and QC. My preference is for what I would call heavy-duty backcountry-xcountry boots/bindings (what 21st Century telemark skiers would call "light-duty" tele gear). I am currently on NNNBC on an everyday basis. I have used 75mm 3pc bindings in mountainous terrain.
Hope I am helping you!
