Thread Starter
TS
-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
The Skinny on Skinning
I know there is a store in Lincoln NH, next to Loon, that specializes in AT gear. They have lots of used gear (full set ups) for sale as well as new gear. There must be similar shops near you in Vt, and that should be a good source. I also think they rent gear at some of these shops and sell it off at at the end of the season. Something to keep in mind for next spring. I paid big bucks for my setup, even though I looked for stuff on sale. It seems the latest and greatest commands close to full price and you have to wait for something to go out of favor for the prices to drop. Used is a different game altogether. The new stuff is really improving in the direction I needed, light and good downhill performance, so I ponied up the $$. Skis and bindings must certainly be available used for a good deal. I will say the bindings are a lot more $$ than alpine bindings. I don't think the volume of sales is enough to have "leftover" gear to unload cheap. Boots are personal, so you know what you have to do for your feet.
I’m also in the process of putting together an AT setup and trying to learn as much as possible. (See my boot thread here, with some good info: https://www.pugski.com/threads/at-boot-fit-compared-to-existing-lange-alpine-boot.12242/) (Thanks, @Analisa and others!)
I have cross country skied for many years on various iterations of xcd gear (basically beefy XC gear with metal edges), and added BD skins last season. I love touring in the backcountry, such as classic Adirondack tours like Avalanche Lake, but this is more rolling than vertical. I took a tele lesson last year at Plattekill, but have come to the realization that I will never be a good enough tele skier to have fun on descents, so have started looking at AT gear. (I’m also a pretty good alpine skier.) I think what makes the most sense for me is a lighter boot that still is skiable downhill. There are no at shops near me (NYC), is have been mail ordering to see fit and size.
I tried a Scarpa Maestrale in a 28.5, which was too big (my downhill boots are 26.5 Langes and tele/xcd boot is a Scarpa T4 in 28.5; street shoe men’s 11). I now have at home a Scarpa F1 and Dynafit TLT7 in 27.5, both of which fit. Scarpa seems more comfy and more supportive higher up on my shin than the Dynafit. Also awaiting a La Sportiva Spectre in 27.5. I get discounts on those brands through work.
I’ll buy a tech binding, probably a Dynafit, G3, or Fritschi, something on the safer side of light.
Instead of buying new skis now, what do you think about using my Salomon Q98 in a 200, I think? Not the lightest ski, but not the heaviest either. Kind of long, though. I’m 5’11” and around 177 lbs.
I have cross country skied for many years on various iterations of xcd gear (basically beefy XC gear with metal edges), and added BD skins last season. I love touring in the backcountry, such as classic Adirondack tours like Avalanche Lake, but this is more rolling than vertical. I took a tele lesson last year at Plattekill, but have come to the realization that I will never be a good enough tele skier to have fun on descents, so have started looking at AT gear. (I’m also a pretty good alpine skier.) I think what makes the most sense for me is a lighter boot that still is skiable downhill. There are no at shops near me (NYC), is have been mail ordering to see fit and size.
I tried a Scarpa Maestrale in a 28.5, which was too big (my downhill boots are 26.5 Langes and tele/xcd boot is a Scarpa T4 in 28.5; street shoe men’s 11). I now have at home a Scarpa F1 and Dynafit TLT7 in 27.5, both of which fit. Scarpa seems more comfy and more supportive higher up on my shin than the Dynafit. Also awaiting a La Sportiva Spectre in 27.5. I get discounts on those brands through work.
I’ll buy a tech binding, probably a Dynafit, G3, or Fritschi, something on the safer side of light.
Instead of buying new skis now, what do you think about using my Salomon Q98 in a 200, I think? Not the lightest ski, but not the heaviest either. Kind of long, though. I’m 5’11” and around 177 lbs.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2017
- Posts
- 982
@Mister Mann If they feel long to be a struggle in the resort, they'll only be more challenging for touring. I didn't realize they went longer than 188. Most people I know stick to their inbound length or size down if they feel like they're inbetween sizes. Weight savings is part of the motivation, but kick turns and the awkward shimmy spots through some features easier. Otherwise, I think the Q98 makes a solid choice. I know two friends who have/had them. One found them a tad narrow for the PNW, but I'd say it's a really versatile width if you're traveling to a variety of locations.
As @Analisa surmised, I was mistaken about the length. I was thinking about my XC skis. The Q98s are 180 or 180-something. They're a little longer than what I usually ski on for alpine, but not much. My XC and XCD skis are longer, and I kick turn on them.
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2015
- Posts
- 24,843
You go to Killington sometimes, right?Ha ha. I'm only in Connecticut M-F afternoon. I'm in vermont almost every weekend for about 6 months out of the year so I'll get my taste somewhere, sometime up there
Base Camp Outfitters
At the base of the access road and rte 4. (If you take the shortcut at Aspen East you'll miss it)
The owner has been involved with that stuff for decades. Odd store. Go right it's chotskis, glass, and smelly things, left is the ski stuff. Great products and always a bargain basement. They rent gear.
Last I talked in ther couple years ago, the owner said he's part of a local group that skins up Killington at night. Once a week I think.
https://basecampvt.com/ski-rentals
Haven't read the whole thread so don't know if it's been mentined.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2017
- Posts
- 982
@Mister Mann Ah - those should be fine. My boyfriend's the same height and is on the 182 backlands and sometimes questions if he should've gone with a 189. You'll probably be at an advantage having kicked turned in your XCD skis, but slope angle definitely complicates it!
I use 185cm long Black Crows Navis (102mm wide) and I have not wanted a longer ski even in powder with a heavy pack on. I however at times have wanted shorter skis, specially in steeper, more technical (icier or deep powder) ascents in tightish terrain. That said I think the Navis is a stiffer ski than the backlands but its close.
Thread Starter
TS
I'm going up take magics intro to uphill clinic. They rent at equipment there plus sell it off at the end of the season. Doesn't get any more convenient. Plan to talk to the killington dude too.
Thread Starter
TS
What about something like this.
https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https://www.ebay.com/ulk/itm/282174902115
It's a little narrower than i was looking but it's a best offer scenario so the price could be right.
Just an idea
https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https://www.ebay.com/ulk/itm/282174902115
It's a little narrower than i was looking but it's a best offer scenario so the price could be right.
Just an idea
Thread Starter
TS
Thanks why is this ski so good. The tip looks funny. I still need bindings.
Are the jesters good? Cause i could always give monsters to michael and put jesters on my meier wild bills!!!
Our condo is on magic mountain in vermont and EVERYONE skins so getting excited.
We are talking about a ski to go skinning with right? If so, this ski is good because it is:
1. Light. Which makes a huge difference on the up.
2. Has a nice rocker profile which makes up for the width a bit.
3. Price is right. Really right. If you don't enjoy skinning, you can resell for basically what you paid.
4. Its a decent, relatively easy going all mountain ski.
Tip looks funky because it is designed to worth with Dynafit speed skins. You can use other skins fine though.
Not sure what reference to Jesters is. Sorry if I missed that -- good binding, but if you're a small person they can be a pain to step into.
Thread Starter
TS
Thanks. Not trying to give you a hard time just trying to learn.
Jesters seem to be an AT binding so was thinking of giving monsters to SO, repurposing jesters and putting them on one of my skis between 90-100 underfoot. I'm not a small person so i'm thinking stepping into them will be fine.
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2015
- Posts
- 4,123
Jesters are not an AT binding.
Thread Starter
TS
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2015
- Posts
- 4,123
https://www.backcountry.com/marker-...0Equ2Xvro6rQL3-C29rPdJe7QHrKNAVBoCun4QAvD_BwE
are you sure they are nt barons or dukes?
are you sure they are nt barons or dukes?
Thread Starter
TS
Can't be sure. You might be right. I do remember what i read referred to them as freeride bindings and suitable for Alpine or AT boots. Let me try and find what i was reading.
Freeride yes. Touring no.
Some Jesters are "Jester Sole IDs". Those can adjust to accept an AT boot or alpine (or Gripwalk).
Do you have pin boots? If so, get a tech binding. If not, you'll need a frame binding. Frame bindings are dirt cheap used these days because most everyone who tours often is on tech bindings.
Sponsor
Members online
- tball
- BLiP
- S.H.
- Yepow
- Tricia
- David
- Marker
- Even_Stevens
- Kite Pilot
- RTsucks
- wiread
- Peak203f
- mikes781
- LewyM
- skibob
- Uncle-A
- Scruffy
- dan ross
- Don't Skip Leg Day
- Philpug
- Sibhusky
- VickieH
- Don in Morrison
- jyl
- DebbieSue
- raisingarizona
- Snookit
- RNZ
- Yo Momma
- Chuck danache
- Phelmut
- jpops5
- Posaune
- peterm
- Andy Mink
- Chris V.
- BigSlick
- charlier
- Drahtguy Kevin
- PlainsSkier
- The Retired Skier
- nnowak
- Roman
- Alexzn
- bbinder
- Mothertucker
- GregK
- mdf
- Rod MacDonald
- aveski