introduction

[merak]

I only do one day tours: climb up to 2200m then descent. The snow starts usually from 1500m. I have to walk from 500m = 1000m up to the snow pack.

During April and May the snow conditions are the same as in your picture: stabilised pack with a few centimetres melted on the surface.

[CIMA]

During April and May the snow conditions are the same as in your picture: stabilised pack with a few centimetres melted on the surface.

Then you will have few problems with skiing on skinny skis with 3-pins and T4.
However, carrying crampons for T4 with you would be best bet.

[merak]

No problems. T4 is mega for me and I use them with fat skis. Spring snow is the easiest when temps are above freezing and they usually are during day time.
I'm definitely sure Alaska 75 will be the best choice, just that it will be not that easy to buy.

[Johnny]

Skiing in leather (or plastic) mountaineering boots is fucking hard.

Yeah...! That's why I was curious... I was once tempted by mountaineering gear before I tried tele... Last year I spent a day skiing with a pair of Koflach alpine leathers from the 50's, with old fixed-heel cable bindings... The vintage Rossi Alais Major must have been weighting 30 pounds... Wow, alpine leathers... Boy, that was fun...!!

Fucking hard = Freaking fun?

I personally like plastic boots a lot... For hard pack. It just a matter of taste... But if I had a playground like you guys, I would ski with leathers all the time and get rid of all my NTN gear... : )

I have to agree with you on the T4s, I didn't find them very comfy... But hey, to this day, I have yet to see a comfortable boot that fits my weird feet... I still preferred them over the Excursions though. What I did is putting the Excursion liners inside the T4... That was much better! (If you bought a pair of Excursions with T4 liners or vice-versa, they were mine...! : )

My favorite is the T2 Eco.

Oh, if I remember, it's also Ron's favorite boots...

[lowangle al]

They are my favorite boots too, and if you don't buckle the top buckle they ski just like excursions, up and down.

[dschane]

Clearly opinions vary. The T4 is 1490 grams; the T2 Eco is 1685. For me, the 200 grams savings isn't worth it. The T2s are more comfortable on the up and far better on the down. And when I want some light for mellow touring, I'll go with some leathers or even floppier stuff.

I know a very well accomplished mountaineer who's more of a climber than skier and having traveled over glaciers and up mountains on skis in plastic mountaineering boots, he's actually an impressive skier in those boots. For me, if there is going to be any decent decline, I'd take AT or tele boots before I attempt to make turns in mountaineering boots with a heavy pack on. And I'd probably shoot myself before I wear mountaineering boots, Silvretta bindings, and a 60 lb pack again -- that was pre-release hell. And besides, I have small kids now, so spending 18 days on a mountain, half of which is huddled in your tent waiting out the weather, is not in my foreseeable future.

Decent skis are so freakin' light these days (Countdown 102L from Down Skis, for example), I don't see the advantage that CIMA sees for taking skinny XCD skis up high in the mountains. Or maybe I misunderstood his post.

You can ski most anything in 3 pins and T4 (or T2 boots). It's just a matter of comfort and pleasure.

[Johnny]

Wow, those Down skis are pretty cool...! (A bit heavy for my taste though at 2800g...) Do you own a pair?

I think what CIMA means is that while most modern rando skis are indeed super-cool, they are a bit too fat to be skied with leathers or NNN on serious terrain... They require a sturdier boot to be controlled...

I know the T2 Ecos are cool, I was about to buy a pair a few years ago... Unfortunately, I then found a deal on T-Races... : )

Hey, did you buy some K'Booms for your kids yet?

[dschane]

Wow, those Down skis are pretty cool...! (A bit heavy for my taste though at 2800g...) Do you own a pair?

I think what CIMA means is that while most modern rando skis are indeed super-cool, they are a bit too fat to be skied with leathers or NNN on serious terrain... They require a sturdier boot to be controlled...

I know the T2 Ecos are cool, I was about to buy a pair a few years ago... Unfortunately, I then found a deal on T-Races... : )

Hey, did you buy some K'Booms for your kids yet?

Yes, I have a pair of the CD 102Ls. Excellent for touring. Any light ski brings compromises, but I'd say these are top of their class for fewest compromises. And great price for skis of this quality.

I have T Races too, which I picked up largely because as my kids have been growing, I've been spending more time skiing with them at the local ski hill. The increase in power and stability is addictive. I rarely hike with them, though I may try that to see how it feels.

My kids have all grown out of the K'boom skis. They were great for dinking around and getting an 18- to 30-month year old out and having fun on skis on snow, provided you have a near endless supply of hot chocolate. Between 30 and 40 months, they're ready for 70cm skis and bindings. My kids are now 6, 4, and 4, so they're on alpine and NNN. The oldest wants to learn telemarking next year, but we'll wait until he's not swimming in a size 23 boot. 1 or 2 years, probably.

[CIMA]

If efficiency and practicality are only the issues in skiing high up in big mountains, I'd choose cutting-edge radonnee skis, carbon boots, feather-light TLT bindings. However, I still like frail NNN/SNS BC gear because it doesn't interfere much in my feeling while walking and skiing. I like such "naked" style.

[dschane]

If efficiency and practicality are only the issues in skiing high up in big mountains,

And unless you're racing or going on a 2-month expedition, I don't know why one would whittle down the considerations to that. If you're having fun on your gear, you're doing it right.