Ditching 75mm plasticboots for XPlore only - valid thought, idea?

This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web. We have fun here, come on in and be a part of it.
User avatar
Rodbelan
Posts: 892
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 8:53 am
Location: à la journée
Ski style: Very stylish
Favorite Skis: Splitkein
Favorite boots: Alpina Blaze and my beloved Alpina Sports Jr
Occupation: Tea drinker

Re: Ditching 75mm plasticboots for XPlore only - valid thought, idea?

Post by Rodbelan » Tue Feb 07, 2023 9:22 am

Non, «boot out», ça veut dire que quand tu mets tes skis à carres, avec angulation, le bord de la fix accroche au sol et fait décoller ton carre de la neige; le résultat, c'est que tu tombes sur le côté à la fin de ton virage...
É y fa ty fret? On é ty ben dun ti cotton waté?
célèbre et ancien chant celtique

User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 4112
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger

Re: Ditching 75mm plasticboots for XPlore only - valid thought, idea?

Post by lilcliffy » Tue Feb 07, 2023 10:59 am

fledersau wrote:
Sun Feb 05, 2023 8:12 pm
Has anybody tried East Coast touring with skintracks and forest powder descents on a setups that compares to mine? Somebody has experience on a "modern" Tele hardboot setup and on a oldschool leatherboot setup in similar downhill conditions? What are your thoughts on differences in downhill performance with a Rabb/Falketind with XPlore vs 22AXl, T2Eco and Salomon MTN explore
I LIVE for
touring with skintracks and forest powder descents on a setups that compares to
yours mon ami!
- E109/Ingstad + NNNBC/XP→ my most effective choice because I often have to XC ski significant distance to get to the good dowhill skiing and my wider, less cambered skis (e.g. Annum/Kom) are absolutely terrible XC skis on consolidated snow- especially if I want to jump onto a snowmobile track to crush some distance (which is unfortunately more than I would like!)

I too do not like touring in plastic boots- unless the tour is focused on climbing up hill/mountain and skiing down.
If I was backcountry touring in truly mountainous terrain- I would use a modern heavy plastic telemark setup for that purpose.

In my local backcountry context (interior New Brunswick hills)- the landscape is very densely forested and the hills are steeply cut. Personally- I do not point my skis straight down steep forested terrain unless the snow conditions are ideal-
what is ideal?
- deep consolidated base
- with ample soft snow on top
(I am very fortunate to often have ideal conditions)

And when the conditions are ideal- I personally have found that I do not need the support of a plastic telemark boot- as long as I am not trying to drive too wide a ski-
the widest skis I have comfortably driven on steep ideal snow are ~80mm underfoot-
though, I am thinking that a ski like the Voile Objective (~90mm) would work as well-
For reference, I personally cannot do any serious downhill skiing on my Altai Kom (~100mm) without a plastic telemark boot, and appropriate binding (this is likely both a funciton of weight as well as width).
However- when my conditions are ideal- I do not need my Kom- my Ingstad/E109- or Annum/Rabb 68 are ideal.
And again- I often need/want to XC ski significant distances on trails/woods roads- and the Kom is terriblly inefficient, and I pesonally hate XC skiing in plastic boots.

So for me- it is not only about what boot I want/need- it is also about the ski I want/need-
- when the local conditions are ideal for BC downhill skiing- I do not need a plastic boot-
- I would prefer not to XC ski significant distances in a plastic boot
- when the snow is ideal, I do not need a ski as wide and heavy as the Kom
- I do not want to XC ski significant distances on a ski as wide and heavy as the Kom

My point is that- yes- choosing the boot first is a best practice-
however, if I wanted to use my Kom- I need the plastic boot- so the ski one wants to use can determine the appropriate boot and binding- forcung one into a more rigid plastic boot.

On the subject of skiing at my local groomed ski hill- Crabbe Mtn- only has a 260m vertical drop- on a busy day I can easily spend more time waiting in line than actually skiing. I personally get way more out of that hill on BC-XC/XCD boots and bindings than I do on a big-mtn telemark setup. For me, I want two different Nordic-downhill ("xcD") skis for my local hill:
1) shortish, ~70-90mm wide on ideal snow (e.g. Rabb 68/S98/Annum/S112/perhaps Objective)
2) shortish, narrow BC-XCd ski on hardpack and icy conditions

On #2, I am planning on testing both a 185 Nansen and a 185 Ingstad on icy hardpack at my local hill this winter. (I also have 165 and 175 Tonje/Ingstad in my family fleet for a test)-
I have taken my 205 Ingstad and 205 Nansen to my local hill- and, while I can easily drive them on icy hardpack- the turn radius is too long for that little vertical. My prediction is that the Nansen might even be better in this context than the significantly rockered Ingstad- a 175 Nansen has a longer effective edge than a 185 Ingstad/E109.

Enough rambling- hope I am being helpful!
Gareth
i'm 5'10 and 190lbs
You and I are of a similar height and weight and are skiing in very similar conditions (and also share a distaste for local touring in plastic boots).
I do have plastic telemark boots, and appreciate them when I want/need them- but I don't use them much in my local touring.
Last edited by lilcliffy on Tue Feb 07, 2023 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.



User avatar
lowangle al
Posts: 2731
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 3:36 pm
Location: Pocono Mts / Chugach Mts
Ski style: BC with focus on downhill perfection
Favorite Skis: powder skis
Favorite boots: Scarpa T4
Occupation: Retired cement mason. Current job is to take my recreation as serious as I did my past employment.

Re: Ditching 75mm plasticboots for XPlore only - valid thought, idea?

Post by lowangle al » Tue Feb 07, 2023 11:16 am

I really like my T4s for touring. They are only a couple ounces heavier than my heavy leather boots, per boot. Their low cut ankle lets me have the same range of motion as with leather boots. This allows me to have the same stance as with leather boots. With a higher, stiffer boot you may need to adjust your stance to get weight on the rear ski, this takes some relearning. To sum it up, the T4 has the ROM of leather with the edge control of plastic.



User avatar
connyro
needs to take stock of his life
needs to take stock of his life
Posts: 1233
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 11:46 am

Re: Ditching 75mm plasticboots for XPlore only - valid thought, idea?

Post by connyro » Tue Feb 07, 2023 11:45 am

Agree with Al. I use Excursions instead of t4s though and they are slightly lower and softer than the t4s. Touring in them can be nearly as good as a stout leather like the asolo extremes. I found that fit is extremely important for these boots to work for extended tours.



mca80
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:24 pm
Location: Da UP eh
Ski style: Over the river and through the woods
Favorite Skis: Nansen, Finnmark, Kongsvold, Combat NATO, Fischer Superlite, RCS
Favorite boots: Crispi Bre, Hook, Alpina 1600, Alico Ski March, Crispi Mountain

Re: Ditching 75mm plasticboots for XPlore only - valid thought, idea?

Post by mca80 » Tue Feb 07, 2023 2:08 pm

@lilcliffy, what would you use for a trip 4 or 5 miles on snowmobile-tracked forestry road to get to an untouched hiking trail to get to hills for the purpose of descents, wherein the woods have deep soft snow? I did such an adventure Sunday in 190 Nansens. Snowmachine tracks ok albeit a little slow compared to a ski like Finnmark/Gamme, once on hiking trails I found I was skiing along a few inches under the surface then suddenly dropped a foot into the snow, mostly midsection and tail. Getting up the hills off the trails was ok, descents were ok although I would have preferred a shorter wider ski. My 180 Kongsvolds would have been a ton of fun once in the woods, but aren't terribly good for the 4 or 5 miles of snowmobile track to get there. Also, in addition to this pursuit, something that will also better handle limited-snow resort, although 190 Nansen is ok for that--that ski was a great recommendation for my first ski but while it is capable if mediocre in most every scenario, it doesn't really excel in any particular endeavor. Will have to wait for next years black friday sale unless some stellar deal appears end of season. 180 Ingstad good for this you think, or something else? Keep in mind I am 5'4", 140lbs, have only skied nnnbc but may consider a different binding system but only leather boots.



User avatar
fledersau
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2022 4:25 pm
Location: Québec, QC, CAN / Grindelwald, CH
Ski style: BC XC/D ex. Telemark 75mm, Snowboardcross and Alpine Skier
Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad Waxless 195cm, Asnes Rabb 188cm, Madshus Panorama M62
Favorite boots: Rossignol XP12 and BC X7

Re: Ditching 75mm plasticboots for XPlore only - valid thought, idea?

Post by fledersau » Tue Feb 07, 2023 3:12 pm

Yes, if comfort wasn't an issue, i think the excursions and t4 would be a great option to do lighter skiing duty than my t2 setup, but i found it more important to be really comfortable in my boot all day than to ski downhill a little bit faster.

@mca80 Sounds a lot like my skiing what you do! Even if i don't have much comparison, I like my Ingstads for these outings. Especially the rockered tip is great for floatation. Last year i had a madshus m62, ski with a quite similar sidecut, but way less rocker and i can clearly see the difference in deeper powder.

@lilcliffy Thanks again for your input! Sounds alot like my kind of skiing. And good to hear that you feel the Madshus Annum aren't effective in XC, i thought about them but the Rabb speaks more to me.
And i'm under the impression i often have ideal conditions around here.

I'm gonna give the Ingstads a try on a real backcountry day soon to get another impression in steeper powder... then i'll see if i'm game enough to change to softboots all the way, but right now i don't see a problem!

Thanks again for all your inputs, it's nice to have access to an active community where everybody has his own experiences and is generous to share them.



mca80
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:24 pm
Location: Da UP eh
Ski style: Over the river and through the woods
Favorite Skis: Nansen, Finnmark, Kongsvold, Combat NATO, Fischer Superlite, RCS
Favorite boots: Crispi Bre, Hook, Alpina 1600, Alico Ski March, Crispi Mountain

Re: Ditching 75mm plasticboots for XPlore only - valid thought, idea?

Post by mca80 » Tue Feb 07, 2023 3:19 pm

@fledersau, plastic boots aren't my thing, but how do the Ingstads handle minimal snow vs deeper stuff? Both for kick and glide and for the descent?



User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 4112
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger

Re: Ditching 75mm plasticboots for XPlore only - valid thought, idea?

Post by lilcliffy » Tue Feb 07, 2023 4:50 pm

mca80 wrote:
Tue Feb 07, 2023 2:08 pm
what would you use for a trip 4 or 5 miles on snowmobile-tracked forestry road to get to an untouched hiking trail to get to hills for the purpose of descents, wherein the woods have deep soft snow? I did such an adventure Sunday in 190 Nansens. Snowmachine tracks ok albeit a little slow compared to a ski like Finnmark/Gamme, once on hiking trails I found I was skiing along a few inches under the surface then suddenly dropped a foot into the snow, mostly midsection and tail. Getting up the hills off the trails was ok, descents were ok although I would have preferred a shorter wider ski. My 180 Kongsvolds would have been a ton of fun once in the woods, but aren't terribly good for the 4 or 5 miles of snowmobile track to get there.
My current personal top pick for the context you describe is the Ingstad/E109 (I am currently testing a demo E109 with XP binding)-
while the significantly rockered Ingstad/E109 is not as directionally stable on a snowmobile track- I will put up with it to enjoy sweet downhill glade skiing. (I will jump off the sled track anywhere I can and break trail if the snow alongside is soft.) On a tour where XC efficiency is more important than dowhill performance- my Combat NATO is better than the Ingstad/E109- and the Combat is still great on steep terrain. If I had to have just one- it would have to be the Combat I'm afraid- too much snow, too much extreme weather fluctuations, and too much XC skiing for it not to be the Combat...

The local glade skiing is incredible at the moment- I am taking tomorrow off work and will definitely be taking Ingstad.

The Nansen is less cambered than the Combat- less efficient XC ski overall- but easier to pressure into turns- but the Nansen tracks better on hardpack/consolidated snow (eg. snowmobile track) than the Ingstad/E109. It's hard to argue against the Nansen being the most versatile traditional xcD ski available...

I am also kinda trying to make my Ingstad/E109 obsolete-
let me explain-
I am trying to force myself to push the Rabb 68 to its XC limits-
at the moment I am trying to convince myself that I can live with the even-less-XC-efficiency of the Rabb (vs Ingstad) so that I can enjoy the mesmerizing downhill performance of the Rabb on ideal snow...
If I can accept and enjoy the Rabb as a XC ski when the snow is ideal (and therefore the hills are ideal as well)- then my Ingstad will be obsolete...
Also, in addition to this pursuit, something that will also better handle limited-snow resort, although 190 Nansen is ok for that--that ski was a great recommendation for my first ski but while it is capable if mediocre in most every scenario, it doesn't really excel in any particular endeavor. Will have to wait for next years black friday sale unless some stellar deal appears end of season. 180 Ingstad good for this you think, or something else? Keep in mind I am 5'4", 140lbs, have only skied nnnbc but may consider a different binding system but only leather boots.
For icy, groomed hardpack- I am not convinced that the Ingstad is a better downhill ski than the Nansen...
I think a shortish Nansen- with perhaps a forward mount- might be better than the Ingstad in this context...
The rocker on the Ingstad won't offer anything on groomed hardpack, other than a forward mount on the edge-
I need to measure it some time- but I think that my 185 Nansen has at least the same length effective edge as my 205 Ingstad!
@Woodserson Woods is the only person I know that has used both the Ingstad and the Nansen on eastern groomed slopes- but perhaps only in traditional long touring lengths?

I am going to try 185 Nansen and 185 Ingstad at the local groomed hill later this winter.
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.



User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 4112
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger

Re: Ditching 75mm plasticboots for XPlore only - valid thought, idea?

Post by lilcliffy » Tue Feb 07, 2023 4:53 pm

fledersau wrote:
Tue Feb 07, 2023 3:12 pm
Thanks again for your input! Sounds alot like my kind of skiing. And good to hear that you feel the Madshus Annum aren't effective in XC, i thought about them but the Rabb speaks more to me.
Not sure yet whether the Rabb 68 is more directionally stable than the Annum/M78- will be able to tell you soon-
the Rabb is definitely a better performing downhill ski than the Annum/M78. My Annum is now completely obsolete (it kinda already was...)
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.



mca80
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2022 5:24 pm
Location: Da UP eh
Ski style: Over the river and through the woods
Favorite Skis: Nansen, Finnmark, Kongsvold, Combat NATO, Fischer Superlite, RCS
Favorite boots: Crispi Bre, Hook, Alpina 1600, Alico Ski March, Crispi Mountain

Re: Ditching 75mm plasticboots for XPlore only - valid thought, idea?

Post by mca80 » Tue Feb 07, 2023 4:59 pm

Hahah, great so back where I started from. I may end up with 3 skis trying to figure out whats best. Just kidding, really appreciate the advice. Would shortest ftx or rabb perform in the conditions I mentiones?



Post Reply