|
|
|
|
pico23
Jul 17, 2003, 7:04 PM
Post #1 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
Alright this is my situation. I was set to commit to Telemark for my skiing choice but in the last few months I've just been more convinced the tele is pretty much AT with tougher technique. I mean the gear is slowly merging and the newest most high tech tele bindings are almost as stout as AT bindings, just as heavy and just as complex. And of course almost as expensive. My time is limited and divided between climbing and learning to ski well so it seems that AT is a better choice.
My take is Tele really only shines for the approach where AT is still more clunky and awkard.
So I'm trying to figure out a good setup for AT for someone on a reasonable budget (I'd like to spend around $600). I expect initially to spend a good deal of time night skiing at the local groomed runs but my goal is to ski in and out of climbs, BC skiing, and ski mountaineering. I realize this already puts my gear at both extremes. I also would prefer a AT binding that I can use with my climbing boots although I intend to ski mostly in AT boots. It seems Silvretta is the only company making bindings that work well with climbing boots but I've heard that the bindings designed for climbing boots don't hold up well to heavy skiing usage.
Question #1:
So whats the beefiest (recommended) AT binding that is compatable with climbing boots?
What is a good all around ski for someone on a budget?
Whats a good AT boot?
Question #2:
As a side note I already have a pair of Ramer Universals without the heal lockdown that I could use for approach bindings with my climbing boots so I might be able to go with a binding that is not compatable with climbing boots. What would be a good size ski to throw the Ramer Universal Bindings on for approach purposes? I'm definitely gonna throw these on a used ski.
Question #3:
And finally has anyone used the Dynafit binding system? Have you used the Mountain Lite TL4 boot which is supposed to be designed for climbing as well as skiing?
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
csoles
Jul 17, 2003, 7:39 PM
Post #2 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2002
Posts: 329
|
In reply to: My take is Tele really only shines for the approach where AT is still more clunky and awkard. So I'm trying to figure out a good setup for AT for someone on a reasonable budget (I'd like to spend around $600). I expect initially to spend a good deal of time night skiing at the local groomed runs but my goal is to ski in and out of climbs, BC skiing, and ski mountaineering. I realize this already puts my gear at both extremes. I also would prefer a AT binding that I can use with my climbing boots although I intend to ski mostly in AT boots. It seems Silvretta is the only company making bindings that work well with climbing boots but I've heard that the bindings designed for climbing boots don't hold up well to heavy skiing usage. Question #1: So whats the beefiest (recommended) AT binding that is compatable with climbing boots? What is a good all around ski for someone on a budget? Whats a good AT boot? Question #2: As a side note I already have a pair of Ramer Universals without the heal lockdown that I could use for approach bindings with my climbing boots so I might be able to go with a binding that is not compatable with climbing boots. What would be a good size ski to throw the Ramer Universal Bindings on for approach purposes? I'm definitely gonna throw these on a used ski. Question #3: And finally has anyone used the Dynafit binding system? Have you used the Mountain Lite TL4 boot which is supposed to be designed for climbing as well as skiing? Thanks.
Well tele certainly outshines AT on the fun quotient, the latter is just more practical. $600 won't do it unless you already have skins, beacon, shovel and probe. Even if you do have all that you're talkin ebay or similar.
#1 Silvretta 404, any AT ski less than 3 seasons old, any AT boot that fits.
#2 Ah, the worst of all possible worlds. Enjoy the crash and burns. Nothing longer than 180 no matter how big you are.
#3 Nice set-up for the west butt. Mediocre for everything else.
|
|
|
|
|
rockprodigy
Jul 17, 2003, 8:02 PM
Post #3 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 1540
|
Here's a couple similar threads:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...&highlight=silvretta
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...34417&highlight=skis
Clyde is right about the 404's, they are probably the most bomber, but they are heavy. The 500's are lighter, but not quite as "time tested." That said, I have used the 500's for the past 3 winters including backcountry, climbing aproaches, and resort skiing and I haven't had a single problem....I love them.
A good "budget" AT ski is the Atomic Tourguide Superlight. They go for about 60% of the cost of the comparable Black Diamond, or K2 version...and they're just about the same weight...I don't know about performance, as I am a total hack on skis.
I use scarpa invernos if I'm climbing and I have Scarpa Titan AT boots...which I don't think they make anymore. You're going to have tradeoffs on boots. By definition, any good climbing boot will suck for skiing and vice versa because a climbing boot should be flexible, while a ski boot should be stiff.
PS, you're wise to forget about tele...it's fun for skiing but is of little value for climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Jul 17, 2003, 8:09 PM
Post #4 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
I did a lot of research on this last winter . . .
>Question #1:
>So whats the beefiest (recommended) AT binding that is compatable >with climbing boots?
>What is a good all around ski for someone on a budget?
>Whats a good AT boot?
I went BD Arc Ascents. They are discontinued, but very fine, fine skis. My roommate was an obsessive ski-flexer and most people looked at them with admiration. I paid $200 brand new. I got cheapy Rando boots that were Scarpa somethings but they were terribly uncomfortable. I just droped $240 at a demo sale for women's Scarpa Magics. They are designed for climbing as well. You're probably a guy, though so ignore that beta. Don't waste your time on tele boots, and with that said, your limited to rando set ups, Scarpa is the way to go by every AT person I know.
I got the Frischi Diamir 3's. I don't remember what the difference is, but a guy who had the 2's noted the improvement on mine. They take a good beating.
>Question #2:
Depends on your size. I'd opt for shorter skis if approach is your main concern. Kickturns are a bitch with long skis.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Jul 17, 2003, 8:16 PM
Post #5 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: Well tele certainly outshines AT on the fun quotient, the latter is just more practical. $600 won't do it unless you already have skins, beacon, shovel and probe. Even if you do have all that you're talkin ebay or similar. #1 Silvretta 404, any AT ski less than 3 seasons old, any AT boot that fits. #2 Ah, the worst of all possible worlds. Enjoy the crash and burns. Nothing longer than 180 no matter how big you are. #3 Nice set-up for the west butt. Mediocre for everything else.
I'm not expecting to need a beacon in the first year. Actually most people don't use one in the east which means I probably won't get one unless I am going to a avy area like Mt. Washington in which case I'd probably just rent one (although I have used beacons before). I have a shovel and probes (virtually worthless in any sizable avalanche but they look good). I have skins but they were used to begin with and I probably need another pair. I know even the best case I'm gonna spend $700 regardless of deals I get. But I am primarily expecting to do resort runs for most of next winter and then the following winter hopefully have the skills to do some mundane off piste stuff but I'm not in a rush.
I'm probably gonna by this stuff either from europe or with a discount a friend of mine gets (it's not a big discount so I'm not expecting to use it). It looks like I can get any AT binding for about $200 and any boot for about $225. So it's just a matter of finding skis for about $200 to slide into that $700 price range.
The ramers are clunky but they'll be perfect for what are essentially trailed and fairly tame XC ski type approaches. The benefit is I don't need to carry a big pack with a second set of boots. I would not be inclined to use the Ramer Universals for harder stuff as I've heard the release was not that great. On the flip side they were/are supposed to be the most bomber binding made, even allowing for free heel turns. I may rig up a lock down mechanism for the heel but for what I want them for they are fine as a free heel climbing boot binding.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Jul 17, 2003, 8:18 PM
Post #6 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: I did a lot of research on this last winter . . . >Question #2: Depends on your size. I'd opt for shorter skis if approach is your main concern. Kickturns are a bitch with long skis.
I'm 5'10", 180lbs. But a concern is also getting a ski thin enough to just barely fit in tracks. Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
vulgarian
Jul 17, 2003, 8:20 PM
Post #7 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 381
|
www.telemark-pyrenees.com has the best prices on AT gear. Got mine there They are great. I paid a little over 50% for one of my set-ups with boots and it came in 3 days from France. Bindings mounted and all.
I'm a Diamir and Denali fan. One set is K2 8611's which is a good all around ski. There are some better ones out this season. I would have to look up a review in Couloir Magazine if I can find one. Anything used a season or two would be a good investment too. Look around. You'll get some good stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
elvislegs
Jul 17, 2003, 8:21 PM
Post #8 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2002
Posts: 3148
|
Wanna buy a setup? Skins included? I am going Tele-only this season.
Diamir II's two years old, perfect shape- $90.00
Elan something or others 192 cm (lightweight, a little soft)- $free to good home
BD Ascension skins two years old cut to sidecut with extra tailfix modification (these do not come off until you yank em' off) -$50.00
Scarpa Titan boots size US 8.5 (if your foot is a 9 like mine, forget it, they hurt) nearly unused maybe three bc outings, and one major peak wearing crampons. -$150.00
Or the whole shootin match for $250.00
Shipping is whatever it is. let me know.
THE BOOTS
The Whole setup in ACTION!!
Failing that, the above suggestions are great. Have fun.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Jul 17, 2003, 8:36 PM
Post #9 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: #3 Nice set-up for the west butt. Mediocre for everything else.
When you say mediocre does that mean for a beginner or someone who's been skiing for a while. Also, mediocre for skiing or climbing or both? I guess as Rockprodigy pointed out (and really like anything) you can't have a single boot do everything so I'd assume the Mountain Light TL4 is probably mediocre for everything.
|
|
|
|
|
trbrts
Jul 17, 2003, 9:33 PM
Post #10 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2002
Posts: 94
|
you need a beacon if you are going in the backcountry. Don't be a skimp on the stuff that's going to save your life. It's like climbing without biners.
|
|
|
|
|
killclimbz
Jul 17, 2003, 9:44 PM
Post #11 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2000
Posts: 1964
|
Ditto on the Beacon. You and anyone you go with are fools to venture into the backcountry without them. Know how to use them. Just about everyone who gets buried without a beacon becomes a body recovery. Some of the least suspect slopes go from time to time. You just never know.
Check out climbaxe.com or call the Wilderness Exchange in Denver for cheap beacons. Currently the Wilderness Exchange has some Otrovox analog beacons for under $100.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Jul 18, 2003, 4:56 AM
Post #12 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: you need a beacon if you are going in the backcountry. Don't be a skimp on the stuff that's going to save your life. It's like climbing without biners.
People aren't per se cheap. Different terrain, different snowfalls, different type of snow, smaller backcoutry, ect. all lead to people in the east not using Avy beacons. It's not to say you can't get caught in a avy here but they are more rare and more predictable and more avoidable. If i was out west I'd definitely carry one and so would my partners. The problem with beacons is if no one else carries them you are essentially carrying $200 worth of nothing. I agree though, having taken Avy search and rescue I realize the futility of probe poles and random digging.
|
|
|
|
|
helmut
Aug 22, 2003, 5:25 PM
Post #13 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 14, 2002
Posts: 87
|
Good call going AT, the boots are much more versatile than tele boots. I use my setup for winter touring around Berthoud Pass,CO in the winter and also for skiing the bigger peaks in the springtime. My setup works extremely well in both situations.
For skis and bindings I use the salomon x-mountains and the diamir II's, this is a pretty lightweight and good all conditions ski set up. For boots I have the Dynafit TLT 700's, these hike really well and climb pretty well too. They aren't as stiff as the scarpa denalis of the lowa struktura, which at first I was a little concerned about, but now I like the softer boot, I feel like I get more feel.
The whole setup cost me $500, the gear was all slightly used but in great condition.
Of course the beacon was $300, probe $40, skins $70, and shovel $30. But all that for under $1,000 is pretty good and now I don't have to buy a season ski pass and make the mad dash for the powder hour at the resort.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 22, 2003, 5:45 PM
Post #14 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Pico,
$600 budget eh? This will be a lesson in compromise...
An old race car adage applies well to ski gear and computer equipment too:
"Speed costs money. How fast do you want to go?" Applies equally to tele or AT.
At 600 bucks beggars can't be choosers. You should just go out and find a deal, any deal... You can make refined selections on your next go around, when you know enough to be dangerous.
Did you contact the dude in this thread for a complete setup for 250??? If not, DO IT! You can spend the other 350 on gas, beer and getting out!
I've never bought a brand new pair of skis and the only times I've done it with boots and bindings was because a friend at BD got me a pro deal. Shiny new skis are great. But so are several tanks of gas, food, coffee, herbs, spices and all the other crap that goes into a great tour and descent. Ya kinda need em all...
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
braaaaaaaadley
Aug 22, 2003, 6:20 PM
Post #15 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 9, 2002
Posts: 576
|
If the question is why tele; the answer is why not? AT skis are NOT meant for the resorts. Tele does it all. The setups are lighter, they make it easier to get around, the turn is a lot more fun, they make backcounty travel a whole lot easier, and they make sand skiing possible :lol: . The only reason I would ever buy an at setup is if I were to ski REALLY steep stuff on spring corn all the time. Just get yourself some reasonably new skis mounted with the new and relesable 7tm and some boots that fit well. The key thing is boots... make sure that they fit b/c i bought some on sale and they are too big. This season I am going to pay for my mistake. The bottom line is no matter what mode of snow transportation you take, you will still have a blast. I chose tele and it is a choice that I will not regret.
EDIT: My first tele setup last year cost me less than 200 bills... 50 for skis, 50 for bindings, and 100 for boots. The deals are there, but its up to you to find them!
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 22, 2003, 7:11 PM
Post #16 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Ah, the give and take of the annual AT vs Tele threads! No offence intended in my rebuttal Brad...
In reply to: If the question is why tele; the answer is why not? AT skis are NOT meant for the resorts. Tele does it all.
NOT!!!
In reply to: The setups are lighter,
NOT!!!
In reply to: they make it easier to get around,
Depends. Not on steep climbs they don't. Not on boiler plate and death cookies they don't. Not on fall line descents they don't.
In reply to: the turn is a lot more fun,
That's just tele-zealotry at work. A turn "fun?" I don't find a tele turn to be fun in and of itself, though learning it was fun in a suffering sort of way. I find the fun to be in the lines, in the descents, in linking turns. In tele (for me), this means effortlessly going from drop knee to parallel and back again, sometimes turn to turn. I find a lot of fun in that I must admit. A lot more work too, than with fixed heel.
In reply to: they make backcounty travel a whole lot easier,
Again, that depends upon terrain and goals. Tele makes little sense for true ski mountaineering for example.
In reply to: The only reason I would ever buy an at setup is if I were to ski REALLY steep stuff on spring corn all the time.
I ski steep stuff a lot, and not just corn. The steeper it gets the greater the performance delta. Skiing tele in the company of snowboarders and fixed heel AT'ers showed me just how striking those limitations were. Switching to At for that type of touring garnered me a significant increase in downhill performance and more importantly, security. Huge security increase for me, where it counts, in "really shouldn't be falling here" terrain.
In reply to: The bottom line is no matter what mode of snow transportation you take, you will still have a blast. I chose tele and it is a choice that I will not regret.
There ya go bro. You're RIGHT AT LAST! 'Tude is everything, eh? Won't be long now...
Cheers,
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
braaaaaaaadley
Aug 22, 2003, 7:41 PM
Post #17 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 9, 2002
Posts: 576
|
Yea, I propably set myself up for that one, but the fact of the matter is that tele and at are where alpine skiing and cross country meet. There are advanteges and disadvantages to both. I like tele better b/c it looks cool, feels cool and is more challenging, but the choice is up to you. Its kinda like climbing... the alpine skiers could be compared to the topropers, the aters could be compared to the sport climbers and the tele skiers would be the trad climbers.
|
|
|
|
|
nobody
Aug 22, 2003, 8:57 PM
Post #18 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2002
Posts: 44
|
In reply to: Its kinda like climbing... the alpine skiers could be compared to the topropers, the aters could be compared to the sport climbers and the tele skiers would be the trad climbers.
Tele is too trendy to be like trad - more like sportclimbing. AT'd be like aid, cause it can get you through anything. But I think you're the toproper - you pro'lly just moved to Boulder a few years ago or something equally trendy, to match your tele passion. Chump. :shock:
|
|
|
|
|
braaaaaaaadley
Aug 22, 2003, 9:02 PM
Post #19 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 9, 2002
Posts: 576
|
Tele trendy? my a$$... in virginia you can count the number of telemark skiers on two hands, in fact I have only seen one other and he was from california. I am from norfolk virginia and that is where I live.
|
|
|
|
|
killclimbz
Aug 22, 2003, 9:21 PM
Post #20 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2000
Posts: 1964
|
In reply to: Tele trendy? my a$$... in virginia you can count the number of telemark skiers on two hands, in fact I have only seen one other and he was from california. I am from norfolk virginia and that is where I live.
I thought you could count all snowriders from Virginia on two hands...
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 22, 2003, 9:45 PM
Post #21 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
They have skiing in Virginia?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
kindredlion
Aug 22, 2003, 10:41 PM
Post #22 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2002
Posts: 146
|
In reply to: Wanna buy a setup? Skins included? I am going Tele-only this season. Diamir II's two years old, perfect shape- $90.00 Elan something or others 192 cm (lightweight, a little soft)- $free to good home BD Ascension skins two years old cut to sidecut with extra tailfix modification (these do not come off until you yank em' off) -$50.00 Scarpa Titan boots size US 8.5 (if your foot is a 9 like mine, forget it, they hurt) nearly unused maybe three bc outings, and one major peak wearing crampons. -$150.00 Or the whole shootin match for $250.00 Shipping is whatever it is. let me know. THE BOOTS The Whole setup in ACTION!! Failing that, the above suggestions are great. Have fun. |
|
|
|
|
beyond_gravity
Aug 23, 2003, 3:12 AM
Post #23 of 27
(3432 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2002
Posts: 5078
|
has anyone used that Alpine Trekker thing?
http://www.mec.ca/Products/product_detail.jsp?FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=589811&PRODUCT%3C%3Eprd_id=228543&bmUID=1061608286957
Speaking powder, this thing looks wild!
http://www.mec.ca/Products/product_detail.jsp?FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=590403&PRODUCT%3C%3Eprd_id=228863&bmUID=1061608391507
|
|
|
|
|
killclimbz
Aug 25, 2003, 9:16 PM
Post #24 of 27
(3422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2000
Posts: 1964
|
In reply to: has anyone used that Alpine Trekker thing?
I went out touring with a bunch of sicko's using Alpine Trekkers. They liked them because it let them use their alpine bindings. For the amount of air they were catching (50-80ft) they needed the burlyness. I use a split so I don't have any first hand experience. The trekkers seemed to work just fine, but it sounded like none of them would've wanted to use the trekkers on an extended tour. Good for a day outing with lots of descents, or quick laps to the car.
|
|
|
|
|
jeebs
Aug 25, 2003, 10:53 PM
Post #25 of 27
(3422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 28, 2003
Posts: 17
|
In reply to: has anyone used that Alpine Trekker thing?
Trekkers suck.
Unless you absolutely need alpine bindings, it's worth it to pony up for randonee bindings, even if you only use them a few times a season. Trekkers are clunky, difficult in variable terrain, and much heavier. Many of the randonee bindings out there today (esp the Diamir Freerides) are bomber enough for damn near anything, so there isn't much compromise with strength.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
