All purpose backcountry/bushwack ski

[lowangle al]

Thats what I thought too, I'd rather drive a jeep than a rocket in the woods.

I took the vectors out with leather boots yesterday, and although I had done it before just to try it out this was a longer tour. I skied about 3.5 miles in on a trail with a gentle grade. The trail was packed but soft on top and the skis tracked well and were not too heavy for the boots.(merril ultras)The binding was a 3-pin hw with the heel throws removed. When I hit the 3 mile marker on the trail I was about an hour into it, which is a normal pace for me going uphill. I doubt it would have taken much longer in my t-2s.

At the 3.5 mile point the trail leveled out for quite way and I figured my best oportunity for turns was in the meadows I could see across the creek. The meadows were about 15 -20 degrees with firm wind and sun affected powder, not quite a crust. It took a couple dozen turns to loose the jerkiness and get dialed in but when I did the skis worked great. I felt like I had plenty of boot and was able to turn when and where I wanted. I was happy to stay upright in the variable snow and flat light. The snow was probably skiable for me with a longer skinnier ski but I doubt I would have hit every turn.

Origionally I thought this ski - boot combo was something that I would only use on rare occations but now I could see that it would work for most of the skiing that I do. I'm not giving up on the plastic boots though, they still let me ski faster and more aggresively and safer than the leathers without a cable.

[Teleman]

Telewheels would agree with everything you wrote!!!!!..We do harass him when possible....Uh...like all the time and he deserves everything we throw at him....They work well (vectors), just not the kind of ski for some of us....TM

[CIMA]

[video][/video]

[Teleman]

Jeeps are good in the BC...should see mud season.....Porsches are good on "Real" roads....But in our kind of skiing it has to be a combo....We like heading them down it's a style....A Porsche ski will turn real good...but that isn't the ticket..(Vectors)....with an e99 you can head them down (speed) and turn ok......but turning is a speed bleeder... and the e99 will get going way to fast....so we need something more refined....Still looking.....TM

[lilcliffy]

Hey Teleman,

I understand where you are coming from...

IME, you are correct- there are many, many conditions where narrow skis break trail more efficiently than wide skis. This is the primary reason why backcountry tourers in the Nordic countries go to longer lengths before moving to wider- if they need more flotation. Backcountry touring skis (even in powder) in Fennoscandia are very rarely wider than 90mm- typically narrower than 80mm. However- traditionally, backcountry tourers in Scandanavia and Finland do not use short skis.

I am afraid I must disagree with you when it comes to climbing performance. Every single-cambered ski I have ever tested in the last 30 years will out-climb a double-cambered ski. IME- once the slope gets steep enough, it becomes extremely difficult to flatten out the wax pocket of a double-cambered ski (of course this would depend on ski length and weight).

IME- when K&G touring- I also find that traditional-length double-cambered skis suck in deep, soft snow. IME- if the snow is deep and soft enough, I cannot effectively compress the wax pocket with a traditional-length double-cambered ski. My long single-cambered XC skis outperform double-cambered skis, in deep soft snow.

Again this all depends on ski length and skier weight. If you are using relatively short double-cambered skis for your weight- I have no doubt that they offer effective downhill performance- and reasonable climbing performance.

[ddg]

UPDATE: Found a used pair of T4s size 29. First time out today on the BC125s with the T4s. And first time trying telemark. I must say I have a strong tendency to use the alpine stance. Putting that downhill foot in front does not come naturally! However, those boots definitely give confidence. Unfortunately I think the T4 boots simply do not work for my feet. Got significant shin pain after being out for 3 hours or so, about 10 km. Actually removed a bit of skin on one shin. This can be a sign of oversize and I think this is true in my case. Most likely the larger volume excursions are the way to go for me for this ski. I may have a a very slightly used pair of T4 size 29 for sale.

Second point is that I am discovering that my skiing is most likely going to consist of XCd, rather than xcD. I know what you are probably thinking - "I told you so". I'll probably end up investing in a pair of narrower (59-90),longer (180-215) skis with NNN/SNS bindings, and a boot like Sol XAdv8. Still working through it though.

[lilcliffy]

Just came in from another great spring snow afternoon tour myself!

I think you got yourself an awesome deal on an awesome deep powder XCD ski! I wouldn't regret that one bit!

I waffled on that BC125 deal from Le Yeti for weeks (I would have a hard time justifying it- already having a pair of Annums! ).

If your next move is a XCd, then here is my next bit if "advice": take your time and find the right boot.

Now you could, and people do, use a boot like the Excursion (and the T4) as both a XC and a telemark boot.

Personally- I kinda hate touring in plastic boots. I have done so many, many times (and well may continue to do so)- but only when I really, really want the downhill performance. I have always been extremely reluctant to give up touring efficiency in favor of downhill performance.

I totally get your quest for a plastic touring boot to mate with the BC125.

But- you could start looking for a heavy-duty xcountry-backcountry boot (i.e. XCD "light"). If you are going to stick with 75mm-3-pin on the BC125- you could look for a lighter, leather, or composite 75mm boot. This would be the most versatile- could be used on both your skinnies and your fattie!

There are however very few light-duty 75mm boots on the market...and there seems to be some evidence of durability issues with some of them...

SNS-adv boots/bindings are excellent- but there are almost no boots to choose from (I have never found one that fit me)...and there is a disturbing rumour that Salomon is abandoning its XADV line...

NNNBC boots are widely available, with much variety to choose from...and are seasonally on clearance.

I am not saying avoid SNS-adv, or 75mm-3-pin...at all..I am just saying pick the boot first!

[MikeK]

That confidence in pushing the front foot forward will depend on the snow and the ski. If you had longer skis in deeper snow with less boot power you might find the telemark feels a bits more necessary.

My wish is that you would have bought a longer ski. The offer still stands for my 185cm Annums. You might get better use out of those doing some xcD with a pair of excursions and plain pin bindings. They'd be long enough for your weight and height to give you a decent glide, as good as you can get with that boot, plenty of turning power and will be your best choice after a fresh dump.

I think you should, in parallel, look for a pair of NNN BC skis for mellower terrain and/or consolidated snow. Ice will never be fun unless you have a rigid ski and boot combo - nothing great out there for XCD. Most of that gear is designed around fresh or softer snow.

My personal thought is the range of Madshus Eon, S Bound 78/88 or maybe even the Rossi BC90 are the range of ski that would be best for the NNN BC Magnum. You'll definitely have a challenge descending, but pick your line and terrain accordingly and you'll be fine. When you want to explore steeper terrain, take your plastic boots.

[lilcliffy]

Radical Edge in Fredericton carries the Salomon boots- you could at least try them on around the store for an hour. They also carry Fischer NNNBC. Could try them both on for a comparison.

MEC should have the Salomons them in Halifax as well.

MEC also carries Rossignol NNNBC boots. We have a few pairs here for my family and friends. I have skied a few hundred kilometres in the Rossi BCX6. Very decent light-duty off-trail K&G boot (much lighter-duty than the Alpina Alaska- probably similar to the Alpina 1550). It might well be enough for you to start- especially with Excursions when you want them.

The only 75mm-3-pin boots that MEC is continuing to stock appears to be plastic touring boots (e.g. T4, Excursion). The last pair of lighter 75mm boots I saw them selling was the Rossi BCX675 (a couple of seasons back).

Surely there is a Nordic ski shop in Moncton?

Backcountry has put these on clearance:
http://www.backcountry.com/alpina-bc-1600-touring-boot

[MikeK]

Derrick,

Just another thing to think about: I think I have the same size foot as you more or less and I have those 75mm Alaska for sale. If you were to get a narrower waisted ski, go with a set of Excursions and keep pins on both your skis you'd give up a little in touring efficiency with the 75mm but you'd be able to use your plastic boots on either ski.

I don't know for sure but I'm willing to bet a ski like the Eon would be fairly decent on hills in hard snow with the Excursion. It makes a great do-it-all ski for rolling tours with a boot like the Alaska. NNN BC would give you a bit more striding efficiency but without boot compatibility. I don't find a huge difference between the two boots. The 75mm gives a bit more leverage than the NNN, but the boot sole is softer on the 75mm, so it's almost a wash.

Also as much as I love the S Bounds, I'd say the Eon seems better on hard snow. It doesn't have as much or as stiff camber, which is typical of all the Madshus skis.