Xplore on Ice?

[Manney]

A lot of folks want others to use the same gear they do. Skiing is an individual thing though. Those with the musculature, ankle strength etc. can ski the same slopes with leathers boots that others wouldn’t do without a plastic boot. Not talking GS… LOL… but recreational tele, backcountry.

Anyone under 40 doing a fair amount of running, hiking or rock climbing off season will have lots of ankle strength come ski season. Not talking the odd weekend with friends bs… but 2-3 times a week every week. Might get there doing a balance board or bosu ball 5x a week. Swimming, boating, e biking… nope.

Active ppl keep what they earned when younger… if you started serious physical activity in 40s or 50s, you might never get to where you need to be. If you started in 20s and kept it up, the odds are much better. Depends on the skier… not the boot or binding.

[lowangle al]

After seeing the terrain in the OPs avatar, and reading that he skis shutes on Mt Washington I recommended the T4s. Because that will allow him to enjoy those same slopes that he skis with his Evo's in a smilar style. He may want to be more "sporting" and do it on light gear, but if fun is his goal, he will have more fun more of the time with the T4s. I've skied telemark in the BC on everything from xc gear to four buckle boots for over forty years and I know I'd take my T4s to Mt Washington. I've been there.

[Manney]

Ppl define fun in different ways. Some believe in easy, playful… others prefer difficult, challenging. Depends on the athlete’s level of commitment to sport… also varies by context. Heavy days, light days, days with friends of varying skill, days alone challenging self. Ppl will decide on their own what’s fun and seek out gear and slopes that meet their needs. Let them work it out on their own.

[connyro]

After seeing the terrain in the OPs avatar, and reading that he skis shutes on Mt Washington I recommended the T4s. Because that will allow him to enjoy those same slopes that he skis with his Evo's in a smilar style. He may want to be more "sporting" and do it on light gear, but if fun is his goal, he will have more fun more of the time with the T4s. I've skied telemark in the BC on everything from xc gear to four buckle boots for over forty years and I know I'd take my T4s to Mt Washington. I've been there.

I've only skied on mt Washington a million years ago and only on alpine gear but from what I remember about the terrain and conditions is that t4s would be the absolute lightest boot I would consider. Conditions up that way vary a great deal and I don't remember ever having great snow in Tuckermans or the sherburne trail so I would likely grab heavier gear. Skiing is recreation so these days I tend to grab whatever tele gear I feel will allow for the most fun over the widest variety of conditions, which for me excludes xc oriented gear (like xplore system) in the context of skiing Mt washington. YMMV.

[Manney]

Agree with YMMV. It was ever thus.

It’s always easy to spot the skiers who don’t climb… or climb any more… always go heavy because they don’t have to lug weight up slopes. The skimo guys obsess endlessly about weight… and who can blame them. In the middle lies backcountry skiers, tele or AT. This is the niche where independent choices must be made based on fitness and skill.

[lowangle al]

Ppl define fun in different ways. Some believe in easy, playful… others prefer difficult, challenging. Depends on the athlete’s level of commitment to sport… also varies by context. Heavy days, light days, days with friends of varying skill, days alone challenging self. Ppl will decide on their own what’s fun and seek out gear and slopes that meet their needs. Let them work it out on their own.

Judging by the OPs current gear and the terrain he skis I think we can assume he enjoys making turns on challenging terrain. He never said he wants to change anything about his skiing except wanting lighter boots. The T4 will let him do this with far less disappointments (due to conditions) than an Xplore system will. I also wanted to express my opinion that modern xcd gear is probably less dh oriented than his old set up was with leather boots. Another big advantage of the T4 is they will handle wider skis and more dh oriented bindings.

I'm just giving opinions based on my experience skiing similar gear on similar terrain. His decision is his own, but being better informed will hopefully lead to making a better decision. jyw5, gave his opinion on skiing similar terrain on light gear. It involved skiing down with skins on, which probably won't work for someone who's goal is to have fun on the dh.

If I was in the OPs situation I would certainly look at the T4 and compare to an Xplore system before making a purchase. The T4 tours like a heavy leather telemark boot, yet it gives control (not power) like a bigger plastic boot. Best of both worlds, and probably for about the same cost.

[Manney]

It also plays the other way… experienced skier, can navigate difficult terrain, knows where he wants to take his skiing, likes challenges, climbs so weight is an issue, asks a specific question about Xplore.

What you would do in the OP’s situation may not apply. None of this is about you. It’s about the OP’s Q.

[CwmRaider]

@Manney I think Al's comments and experience are relevant.

As an Xplore user with Alfa Free who has tried and owned the T4, I must agree that the T4 is a higher performance DH system - when your feet are ok with the boot, and provided you ski with cables or hardwire. The downside is obviously that, the T4 + cable binding system weighs between 800g - 1 kg more per leg.
The Xplore is undoubtedly an excellent binding system but the boots are still designed for XC and lightweight touring. The Alfa Free are more torsionally rigid than any other "soft" (IE non plastic) boot but fall short of the T4.

I use only Xplore on two different skis depending on intended tour profile, or track XC gear. Situations come up when I have to zigzag and step turn down. That's OK for me. YMMV.

[Manney]

They’re only relevant if he and the OP are coming at this from a similar age, conditioning, and ability perspective. The OP hasn’t posted anything on this. Simple Q. Indication of enough experience to know where he’s at. Specific mention of things like weight, feel, etc.

OP’s specifically asked about a boot and binding setup relative to icy sections. Not the place for Al to lecture OP on what he should do to be just like him. Not my place either. Should give OP what he asked for.

Surprised you can’t relate to being lectured on same issue… posted this not too long ago:

https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic. ... +kg#p32088

Over 2 lbs per foot adds up on a big climb… pita on an off camber traverse too. Unless riding the lifts or magic carpet… LOL… extra weight takes away from the experience. Limits the climb… limits the descent… limits the turn.

[connyro]

They’re only relevant if he and the OP are coming at this from a similar age, conditioning, and ability perspective. The OP hasn’t posted anything on this. Simple Q. Indication of enough experience to know where he’s at. Specific mention of things like weight, feel, etc.

OP’s specifically asked about a boot and binding setup relative to icy sections. Not the place for Al to lecture OP on what he should do to be just like him. Not my place either. Should give OP what he asked for.

Surprised you can’t relate to being lectured on same issue… posted this not too long ago:

https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic. ... +kg#p32088

As for the boot comment…

I sure would give the Free 10/10 for "downhill"

ah so johnnys opinion is a-ok by you but if al shares his opinion its old man bullshit that he should keep to himself. Got it. Manney, what do you imagine that you offer this forum that's of actual use? You mansplain (manneysplain?), lecture, deceive, derail, and ridicule yet offer no useful advice or any experience that allows users to weigh against when reading your posts. Why should anyone listen to you in this context?