I got my copy of brlp. vol 3 the other day and found it interesting Paul uses skis instead of snowshoes. I have been thinking for a while that skis would be better. My question is what kind of skis, how long (200lb guy and skis must fit in a 170), what bindings,and were can I find some cheep/used?
They must fit on mountaineering boots or better yet any boots as im not going to haul a extra pair of boots with me. Are bindings available that will go on mountaineering boots that work like crosscountry skis but can lock the heals down for downhills?

Wow that is a big can of worms.....Questions include what kind of terrain will you go to, what kind of distances/gradient will you cover....For the most part you will need different boots, the only bindings that take a mountaineering boot are the silvretta s500 and s450....not cheap around 375 new and used pairs don't loose value that quickly. Also on these bindings you would want b/c ski , karhu xcd's are a nice choice. If you want to stick with a lighter ski a compact xc ski (such as rossignol evo's) would be a good choice they are good for covering large areas light and don't take up a ton of room also a lot cheaper, thought I might try a b/c xc ski such as the rossignol bc series with a nnn bc binding (little more expensive)..In the ski i sell you'd be an large or xl which might be able to fit in the back of your 170. Another good place is wing struts, they can be fitted up easily and the camber makes them fit nicely around wing struts.(not that I'd know anything about that because it's not legal to carry external loads) . The other ski choice you asked about with a locking heel for skiing down is call A/T dynafit makes the nicest lightest stuff.....and it is out of this world expesive (i carry it and can barely afford it at my cost) . It will allow you to skin up in freeheel mode and lock down for the gnar. It is getting very popular, but it really is astonishingly expensive and this is coming from a guy with two airplane. Skis are a nice choice for covering larger areas, snowshoes are more compact. I have done trips with both in my stinson and they both have their strengths and weakness. If you have any other questions about specifics pm me.

Backcountry Ski Business Owner

Mike

Mike, you got skis in your Stinson?? I'm encouraged to hear it it but tell me how? I think my G3 Revs are ~180 - I've never even tried to get them in the cabin.

thanks the snow conditions would mostly be 2ft or less of crusty snow the nasty kind to walk through that will almost support your weight. the problem is I dont want to spend alott of money on something I will only use if I screw up. on the other hand I could use them for work also so mabe I shouldn't be so cheep.

Are you asking because you want to land somewhere and do some serious skiing, or just because you want a contingency when you become stuck?

If it's the former, electricsnail sounds like the man to talk to. If it's the latter, here's my 2 cents: No reason you can't fly in nordic ski boots, especially if you're on straight skis and have no toe brakes anyway. Alternately, a number of people in my area have plastic free-heel bindings that accept any style of winter boot. You won't see these in Warren Miller movies, but friends of mine have done winter circumnavigations of Denali using them. Try your local Army-Navy store. Screw them to a pair of yard sale skis and you're there.

With due respect to Paul and his considerable experience and judgement, the Talkeetna pilots I know (Jay Hudson, in particular) favor snowshoes for packing runways, because of more effective compaction. I have packed runways using both skis and snowshoes, and I agree that for packing runways, snowshoes are far more effective in deep powder. In terms of travel and covering miles to get back to civilization, skis are often going to be more efficient, assuming you have the skill to navigate the terrain, and not hurt yourself in the process.

If you don't have extended baggage, and don't want to do anything dodgy with respect to aircraft loading, then look for wider, shorter skis. The net area of the base is what gives you floatation.

FWIW, -DP

p.s. Skis are like airplanes- One setup that does everything you want optimally is pretty much of a myth. If you could, how many different airplanes would you want to have access to? At last count I had about 14 pairs of skis, but unfortunately, still just one airplane...

No I am not a serious skier the most I would use them (baring an emergency) is 1/2 a mile from the smoothest part of the lake to the cabin. the bindings you are talking about should do me fine. do you have a brand you would recomend?

Something like this:

http://www.sierratradingpost.com/p/0,87 ... -Skis.html

It has a waxless base, meaning it doesn't require nordic wax (sticky) because it has fish-scale-like texture.

You can get boots and bindings for dirt cheap too, but this is a "travel 50 miles efficiently" setup. Electricsnail pretty much covered it regarding Alpine Touring (AT) bindings: You pay for them, but then you can also ski them for real.

There's another option that might appeal to you: Karhu Meta "approach skis." They're these super short 120cm skis with a waxless base that have snowboard-like bindings that can accept a non-ski boot. I don't know what the downhill performance on them would be, in fact it might be scary, but hey....they're short and wide.



I'm a Karhu fan as you can see from my avatar. Electricsnal might be able to find you some as he is a Karhu dealer.

Dang Zane! are you sure those are skis not snow shoes? Guess I'm too used to my light touring skis, 210cm x 50mm. Not much good breaking trail in deep powder, but great if there's even one snowmachine track.

Course, I cheat and use a power assist system Woof!

Phil

Bear_Builder wrote:Dang Zane! are you sure those are skis not snow shoes?

That's the whole point! They're kind of a hybrid, made for "the approach." You're right, very snowshoe-like. I'm not sure if they have metal edges or not. Would be lethal on ice if they don't.

Now, if you're talking about the skis on my feet...those are 186cm They look like a short tip because they're mounted forward a little, it's kind of a freestyle powder ski. Excellent for breaking through deep pow, and muy excellente for flying though (on?) it on the way down.

Zane, you get some tele bindings set up yet?

I got first turns of the season a few weeks ago at the Mall of the Emirates (www.skidubai.com) , looking forward to getting home to the real stuff...

Hey, how about picking up a couple of used snowboards and use them for skis! they can be bought pretty cheaply from college kids.
Not meaning to change the subject too much but since this will be my first year doing any ski-flying and I have read about carrying snowshoes also. What are the best type of snowshoes to use? The wood style or will the newer metal framed ones work well. Also, how does the sizing go for snowshoes? I'm 5'6" and 160 lbs., and wouldn't think I need bigfoot sized shoes. I'm in a Champ so there is no possible way to get a set of skis inside the cabin. Lash them onto the struts maybe.
WW

The skis above (karhu sweepers) were designed as an approach ski that you can kinda ski down on. They have a metal edge and a skin that was built into the ski, we had a few thought the shop, didn't really ever catch on. Seemed like a good idea but in practical use fell short.....
As far as fitting skis in my stinson......they don't fit in the cabin sorry, refer to my first post about other places to put them.....

WWhunter actually I have seen a number of people use snowboards for just what you're talking about....They take a sawzall and cut them in half mount a tele binding on them, they use them as rock skis. As far as your snowshoes go. I recommend the MSR shoes, I love my lightning ascents best shoe for all conditions but crazy expensive. I also like the denali series as they have expandable flotation for differing conditions by adding a plate to the shoe it makes them longer and therefore have more surface area which = flotation. Shoe size is not of huge concern as the bindings are extremely adjustable.

All the products listed in this whole post are good just need to know what you wanna do with them.....Also I carry them all and there is a good BCP discount


Mike[/url]

I haven't used those Karhu Sweeper/Metas so I can't comment on their usability, I just though it might be a good solution since they're short.

The snowboard thing might be a good idea. The backcountry versions are called "splitboards," and can be purchased already split, or you can rip one on a tablesaw yourself. Voile sells a kit that includes the bindings and connections. In split mode, they basically climb like skis with skins, then you reassembled the board and rotate and lock the bindings into place for the decent.

Vick, as for tele....

ccurrie wrote:I got my copy of brlp. vol 3 the other day and found it interesting Paul uses skis instead of snowshoes. I have been thinking for a while that skis would be better. My question is what kind of skis, how long (200lb guy and skis must fit in a 170), what bindings,and were can I find some cheep/used?
They must fit on mountaineering boots or better yet any boots as im not going to haul a extra pair of boots with me. Are bindings available that will go on mountaineering boots that work like crosscountry skis but can lock the heals down for downhills?

Don't know if you found a solution or had a chance to try mountaineering boots for skiing. I've tried it and had poor success. The boots just didn't give enough support and control for the skis.

Best solution I've found is a Randonee setup. The boots are fairly comfortable for hiking. I've hiked several miles in mine then strapped crampons on for ice climbing. The boots have flex when hiking and can lock down for ski mode.

The bindings, such as dynafit, are light, allow the heal to be free for travel, then lock down when it's time to get some serious downhill.

If you want to use a plastic mountaineering boot (or crampon compatable one), you can check out Silvretta bindings. I currently have those and they work well with many boots (though I use my randonee boots as the mountaineering boots were awful). They're heavier than dynafit bindings.

Thanks guys lots of good leads for educating myself. The berwin backcountry bindings are probably all I need but they wont work with mountaineering boots silvrettas are the ultimate but heavy. Im going to check out the dynafits and karhus now. thanks

Ok those karhu metas are what I need, K2 apparently made something similar. but now that I decided that is what I need I find out they are bolth discontinued. any suggestions?

Karhu=K2 ....same thing big conglomerate, they discontinued them pretty quickly....I'd look on ebay for a used set, one thing to look out for is the skins delaminating (they weren't very high quality as i recall)

Mike

electricsnail wrote:Karhu=K2 ....same thing big conglomerate

That was kind of a disappointment when they were acquired. For years Karhu was this prolific smaller company that originated in Finland, and made all sorts of sporting goods. Before K2, their skis were made in NE Canada I believe, and were really high quality. I've seen the totem-era JAKs take a serious beating.

Now they're made in China.

1SeventyZ wrote:The snowboard thing might be a good idea. The backcountry versions are called "splitboards," and can be purchased already split, or you can rip one on a tablesaw yourself. Voile sells a kit that includes the bindings and connections. In split mode, they basically climb like skis with skins, then you reassembled the board and rotate and lock the bindings into place for the decent. [/img]

Yeah... splitboards. I dunno. If they've upgrade them they might be okay. A friend of mine had one. It was beautiful to watch him board down a slope but the board itself was a pain in the A$$. It took forever to get it to snap together as it kept cramming full of ice. I don't recall he could use it for the approach, probably I just don't recall. He eventually switched to randonee for backcountry.

^^ Looks like you made quick work of the free heels Zane - nice job!