Mount an NNN-BC binding on a AT ski?

[mca80]

@Manney, while I don't put much stock into what REI says I agree with you wholeheartedly. Related, the Crispi distributor in US says this about the Bre, which is not as stiff as the Alpina Alaska as far as I know: "They match well with a Rottefella 3 Pin or 3 Pin with Cable and easily put a ski on edge under 90mm in the waist, like the Madshus M78 or M68." Note: under 90mm! Up to but not including 90mm, so that's wide for a leather boot with no buckles or major plastic reinforcement components, i.e. OP's Alaska is worth trying on the skis he has, although I know nothing about the skis besides dimensions.

To the OP, one can theoretically do telemark turns on a 48mm track ski with floppy nnn shoes--if good enough. The question is just how much you want to practice, how difficult you can encounter it initially, what kinda learning curve you desire, etc. Certainly a more powerful boot makes it easier and "more fun" but I see no reason not to try with what you got. Another thing is, what skis are you using with your Alaska/nmnbc setup currently?

Lastly, there's an old thread I may try and find besides the one I already supplied, wherein Johnny asked just how wide a ski the nnnbc can handle. I am certain the ski you have would match, waist-wise, skis he has tried with nnnbc, if he hasn't tried even wider underfoot. I think that thread was something about the "XCD Knights" if you want to search for it, but I am not positive.

Edit: I think a narrower ski would be better on groomed, but if you have at least a little fresh ungroomed snow atop the groomed slopes then the ski you have will be just fine if you are patient and willing to learn, although I don't know the ski or your skill level.

[Manney]

Interesting about the Bre. Figured anything would be stiffer than the Alaska!

Agree on the ref to REI. Had originally quoted them… they sell lots of skis and are as much an authority on “vanilla ice cream” than anything else.

This got me thinking about things a bit… like the difference between a wide BC ski and slimmer AT ski. Dimensionally, there’s not going to be much difference. Maybe a difference in stiffness more than camber because most of the widest BC skis don’t have a lot of camber.

The stiffness angle is an interesting one as it can work both ways in the back country. A stiffer, low camber, ski will actually turn a bit better on firmer snow… would hold an edge better. My pref for this kind of stuff would be a modest AT over a BC100 because the latter just doesn’t have much torsional stiffness… will take an edge but has trouble holding it.

But flex is kind of nice in powder, if the goal is to carve nice wide easy turns. Too much flex bogs things down tho.

Ski weight factors into things too. Some BC skis (and even a few AT ones) are super light. Easier climbing bit less tolerant of surface irregularities. This isn’t just a groomer-crud thing… can also be disruptive over wind packed surfaces.

So it keeps coming back to conditions and level of ambition, Heck, any setup can work. Some just make us work harder than others. Not always bad thing to have to work for it when learning. Tough at the front end but forces concentration and discipline.

[Capercaillie]

Speaking of resort skiing, NNNBC, and the Madshus Panorama M68, just came across this excellent video discussion and demonstration of all those topics:

https://www.miyakosports.co.jp/bc%e3%82 ... -on-piste/

I do not speak Japanese but the whole thing was understandable.

They have NNNBC Magnums mounted with an adapter for the leash on the front-most screw (you can make something like that out of sheet metal or just pre-drilled metal strapping). Note the red flexors in the M68.

If you have manual NNNBC bindings already installed, you can retrofit a leash adapter by drilling hole(s) through the flip lever.

To keep it cheap, if you get an old pair of telemark or narrower light alpine skis off of a classifieds site, and then sell the Shuksans on the classifieds site, you will almost certainly end up with more money than you started with, and a more appropriate pair of skis. Or just try what you have now.

[Manney]

Leash plates.., haven’t seen those things in a while. Had a set on a used pair of Fischer E99s (pre Crown, waxable) about 10 years ago. The story att was they were popular on early NNN BC skis here in the states.. mandatory for getting onto groomed hills at resorts that allowed this kind of thing. Some kind of insurance requirement… which makes zero sense because it’s a non releasable binding***. Might as well put a leash around her leg in case that comes off too. LOL.

Could see them having some minor use with NNN BC autos. Have witnessed the odd rookie have a ski slide away after casually stepping out of their auto bindings at the top of a hill. That never gets old.

No lifties in the backcountry to care way or another.

[Edit] *** Non releaseable means that is is not designed to automatically release at a predetermined torque. It doesn’t mean that the binding cannot open as a result of deliberate or accidental action. Nor does it mean that the binding cannot fail by breaking or separating from the ski due to extreme force, poor mounting, or wear and tear.

[JB TELE]

I own a Bre and used it a couple of times.
It's very soft in the sole. Much softer and more flexible in the sole than the Alaska. The uppers might be a little more supportive than the Alaska. I think they would be great on a long skinny ski for putting in a lot of miles, or on a short skinny ski for downhill on consolidated powder if you enjoy the challenge of a really soft boot.
The duckbill is too thin for voile 3 pin bindings. It would work better with the rotafellas 3 pin bindings.
It's very wide and high volume boot.
My feet grew a half size and now my big toe on my left foot is pressing against the end. So I'm going to end up selling them. I probably won't buy the next size up because I really like the voile 3 pin cable traverse binding and it's not very compatible with that.

[turnfarmer]

That ski is probably a bit much for the setup you have in mind. But the eighties gear many of us started on offered less support and skis with way too much camber. So it’s doable, but how much are you willing to suffer to get proficient.
A pair of cheap T2s or the me too Garmont Veloce if you have a wide foot of ebay and a 3 pin or cable binding would greatly shorten the learning curve.

I did ski for a while a similar Research Dynamics ski with an Alpina BC2000 on good utah groomers and pow and it skied very well. Wi wish they would bring that boot back in both BC and Xplore. It was way better than anything currently on the market.

[Manney]

Here’s an article that touches on the ski design features discussed so far. It’s interesting because it’s from a custom ski maker. Companies like these don’t sell skis… they sell set-up better tailored to all the things we’ve talked about.

https://www.wagnerskis.com/blogs/journa ... untry-skis

As they allude to, there’s a certain amount of cross over between AT and BC ski design. Always comes back to conditions and skier ambition.

A full-on AT on knolls, groomed trails trying for speed and flow is a bad match. A hardcore BC on groomed slopes for carving turns is an equally poor match. Lots of overlap in the middle, where conditions are forgiving and proficiency can close the gap.

[bobbytooslow]

As others have said, It's all about conditions. Soft snow that's not steep or deep, you might be fine. But it will be an arduous learning process. Find some cheap used T2/T4/Veloce boots and 3-pin bindings, and develop a solid technique. Then if you're still inclined, work backwards to apply the technique to the NNN-BC kit.

One more data point. I tried doing resort fitness laps with a 90mm underfoot BD AT ski, BD O1 bindings, and Rossignol BCX12 duckbill boots. I could make it work on soft low angle stuff, but once it got steep and/or firm, it was just impossible to transmit power the the edge; the boot cuff would just mush over. Maybe those boots would have worked with a narrower ski, but in my opinion, the combination of fat ski and soft boot is a no-go if you think you'll encounter anything other than soft low angle snow.

[lemon]

I have some old k2 slalom skis with nnnbc bindings. Its really fun but my tele turns are not so good on them. Still fun though.

[Montana St Alum]

If you have never skied telemark before you may want to consider renting a basic set up to get started. You definitely want to try to set yourself up for success.