Alpine-Touring hybrid setup

[ScottB]

My foray into a "real" touring setup means buying new boots, skis, bindings, and skins. A major cash outlay will be required.

You got that right I spent $2K on my setup, but I got what I wanted, it worked as advertised, and I get triple duty out of it. The skis I use inbounds for certain conditions and they rock, the boots I use for race coaching, and they are great to stand around in on the hill, and it the setup tours and skis very well. I finally got deep in the woods on my setup, and my friends were struggling and I was leading the pack, which surprised me. Everything just works and is hassle free. I just have to remember to flip all the levers and buckles from one mode to the other. I finally got skins with less sticky glue so I don't have to peel them off my clothes as often, as well.

 

[ScottB]

Now my only doubt here would be whether the ski should be these or the Zero G/Backland 95.

This might help

Compare High-fat Skis

skimo.co

 

[James]

I was off on my Movement Session weight comment. I was looking at the Women’s.

Alp Tracks 95 , 177- 1220gms
Session 95, 177, 1450gms

Movement Shop - Conditions Générale de Vente

Outlet de skis Movement!

onlineshop.movementskis.ch

 

[Tony Storaro]

This might help

Compare High-fat Skis

skimo.co

It helps. In leaning more and more towards Backland 95.

I will wait a bit for more reviews on the new Zero G's. I hear they are different (and better) than current model.

 

[Noodler]

I was off on my Movement Session weight comment. I was looking at the Women’s.

Alp Tracks 95 , 177- 1220gms
Session 95, 177, 1450gms

Movement Shop - Conditions Générale de Vente

Outlet de skis Movement!

onlineshop.movementskis.ch

My mindset right now is that I will be good with a ski that's just under 1500g, but I don't need to get crazy.

 

[Rod9301]

Do you use brakes or leashes or both?
My goodness those things are tiny. With no experience in this, it’s difficult to imagine it driving a 95mm ski let alone a Katana.

That and Marker Alpinist get top marks-

The 5 Best Backcountry Ski Bindings of 2024

We've tested 40 of the best backcountry ski bindings over the past 8 seasons, and recently purchased 22 of today's top models to test side-by-side. We rely...

www.outdoorgearlab.com

Brakes.

The mtn are bomber, a lot more so than the shifts.

 

[Slim]

I know a lot of people like the Salomon/Atomic tech bindings, but do be aware, if you want brakes, they performed poorly for lateral release (and are not very light either anymore).
This from a test in the German Magazine “Alpin”. They were unable to get the lateral release low enoough, no matter what adjustments they did, when using the brakes. Their theory was that the binding was designed and engineered without brakes, with those added later.

 

[Slim]

It helps. In leaning more and more towards Backland 95.

I will wait a bit for more reviews on the new Zero G's. I hear they are different (and better) than current model.

And don’t forget the K2 Wayback series. Very lightweight, Affordable pricing, and consistent high marks in reviews for just working everywhere with no surprises. Not the “-est” in any single metric, but for normal touring, predictability and a lack of weaknesses is very valuable.

https://www.telemark-pyrenees.com/packages/k2-wayback-96-binding-packs




Edit: I just remembered this is called a resort/touring hybrid thread. In that case, I’d say Tecton or beefier binding, and >1500g skis.

 

[Tony Storaro]

And don’t forget the K2 Wayback series. Very lightweight, Affordable pricing, and consistent high marks in reviews for just working everywhere with no surprises. Not the “-est” in any single metric, but for normal touring, predictability and a lack of weaknesses is very valuable.

https://www.telemark-pyrenees.com/packages/k2-wayback-96-binding-packs




Edit: I just remembered this is called a resort/touring hybrid thread. In that case, I’d say Tecton or beefier binding, and >1500g skis.

Thanks!

I like very much the Tectons and will probably get them at a later point when I am hooked on touring.
Presently I have, or rather will have very soon when I remove them from the SR95s, a pair of Shifts I need to do something about. And I was just thinking ski around 1300 g with good floating abilities would be nice. Hence my leaning towards the Backlands. I will check the K2s as well tho.

 

[Slim]

@Tony Storaro , the Shift is the perfect 50/50 hybrid binding. Even better if you already have it! I just meant I wouldn’t pick a lightweight tech binding for a 50/50 set up.

Skis with good float, under 1300g, is going to be near impossible. Float means long and wide. That makes a ski heavier. I don’t know of any powder touring skis under 1300g (in lengths >180cm).

Even just to get a long and wide ski under under 1600g, it would need to be made with a very lightweight construction. Which means it probably won’t ski very well on hardpack and poor conditions, especially when judged as an inbounds ski.
That might be ok if it is a fat powder ski, but those won’t be under 1300g in even the lightest constructions. (Example: Voile HyperV8 1470 grams in 181cm).

So I would pick something much heavier, and give up some float. That way you can have a ski that warrants the 50/50 use of a Shift.

 

[Tony Storaro]

Skis with good float, under 1300g, is going to be near impossible. Float means long and wide. That makes a ski heavier. I don’t know of any powder touring skis under 1300g (in lengths >180cm).

I perhaps did not explain that correctly. I do realize that at my size, skis with good float will mean something 110+ .
What I imagine is a ski that would be easy to navigate through say 30cm of powder without constantly searching for the hard pack beneath it to bite into it as the SRs do.
Nothing too crazy. Anything else like on piste performance is an added bonus as the time spent going down will be negligible in comparison to the time spent going up.

Or so I imagine.

 

[ScottB]

I read a Outdoor Gear review on touring skis that ranked the Kastle TX 98 touring model as their top ski due to reasonable light weight and as good as an alpine ski downhill performance. It weighs 1400 grams. Like all Kastle's its pricey. Personally you seem to like the Atomic Backland so don't overthink it, any of the skis suggested will work well.

 

[Tony Storaro]

I read a Outdoor Gear review on touring skis that ranked the Kästle TX 98 touring model

Will I need new brakes for the Shifts if I go wider than 95mm? I think they are now 100mm, what is the margin there?

 

[tomahawkins]

A couple of links suggesting that the weight-in-pack to weight-on-legs ratio is 5:1.

G3 University

Visit G3's online store for the full range of backcountry skis, bindings, splitboards, climbing skins, poles, & more. Shipping to Canada, United States, UK, Europe, & worldwide!

www.genuineguidegear.com

https://journals.physiology.org/doi/abs/10.1152/jappl.1969.27.5.687

Also came across these skis from Back Diamond:

Glidelite 127 Trek Skis With Bindings

<ul> <li>Integrated Glidelite skins</li> <li>Compression resistant elastic foam core</li> <li>Patented Unicoat ski base</li> <li>Weight: 1000g w/o binding </li> <li>width 135-120-132mm</li> </ul>

www.blackdiamondequipment.com

 

[ScottB]

You can bend brakes to get a little more width. You are probably good for a 105mm ski.

 

[Noodler]

A couple of links suggesting that the weight-in-pack to weight-on-legs ratio is 5:1.

G3 University

Visit G3's online store for the full range of backcountry skis, bindings, splitboards, climbing skins, poles, & more. Shipping to Canada, United States, UK, Europe, & worldwide!

www.genuineguidegear.com

https://journals.physiology.org/doi/abs/10.1152/jappl.1969.27.5.687

Also came across these skis from Back Diamond:

Glidelite 127 Trek Skis With Bindings

<ul> <li>Integrated Glidelite skins</li> <li>Compression resistant elastic foam core</li> <li>Patented Unicoat ski base</li> <li>Weight: 1000g w/o binding </li> <li>width 135-120-132mm</li> </ul>

www.blackdiamondequipment.com

The problem is that I've seen that same 5:1 ratio published as kilograms and pounds. So which is it? There's a big difference between the two.

 

[pais alto]

The problem is that I've seen that same 5:1 ratio published as kilograms and pounds. So which is it? There's a big difference between the two.

Doesn’t the ratio remain the same whether it’s 5 lbs to 1 lb or 5 kg to 1 kg? It’s 5:1, no matter the size of units. 1 kilo on your feet tires you as much as 5 kg on your back. Or if you prefer, 1/2 kilo on your feet is equivalent (in terms of effort) as 2.5 kg on your back.

 

[ScottB]

Pais, you win the math gold ribbon today

 

[James]

1 Stone on your feet is 5 Stone on your back.
That’s a lotta weight. Avoid Stones...

Also came across these skis from Back Diamond:

Glidelite 127 Trek Skis With Bindings

<ul> <li>Integrated Glidelite skins</li> <li>Compression resistant elastic foam core</li> <li>Patented Unicoat ski base</li> <li>Weight: 1000g w/o binding </li> <li>width 135-120-132mm</li> </ul>

www.blackdiamondequipment.com

Keep in car with skins on to make a run for it?

 

[Noodler]

Doesn’t the ratio remain the same whether it’s 5 lbs to 1 lb or 5 kg to 1 kg? It’s 5:1, no matter the size of units. 1 kilo on your feet tires you as much as 5 kg on your back. Or if you prefer, 1/2 kilo on your feet is equivalent (in terms of effort) as 2.5 kg on your back.

Where's that dunce cap emoji I should be wearing? I clearly need more sleep...