davel@zehntel.UUCP (David Longerbeam) (12/14/85)
OK folks, seeing that no one has yet to revive the annual
X-C ski equipment controversy, I have decided to take on the
burden.
I am considering buying some backcountry equipment.
Does anyone have experience with the Asolo Glissade 350 boot?
How about the Epoke 900, Fischer Touring Crown, or the new
Karhu Edge skiis (the ones with the partial metal edge)?
Also bindings -- I have heard various arguments against
some of the heavier touring bindings -- especially that they
can ruin the welts of your boots. Anyone have any experience
with this, or with the lighter (wire bail) Asolo 12-15mm binding?
My usage will be a lot of off trail, backcountry day-tripping,
including a lot of screwing around on hills trying [:-)] to
telemark. Also an occasional overnighter (perhaps 1-2 times / year).
Not sure about full-length edges -- hear they slow you down too much
for touring, and I'm not LOOKING for ice.
So let's get discussing! Eugene Miya, are you out there?
This should keep me going until I can actually get to the
mountains! :-)
- David Longerbeam @ Zehntel Automaiton Systems, Walnut Creek, CA
(415) 932-6900
(ihnp4 | ucbvax)!zehntel!davel
--
David Longerbeam @ Zehntel Automation Systems, Walnut Creek, CA
{ihnp4,ucbvax}!zehntel!davelpaul@hpfcla.UUCP (12/17/85)
I have heard good things about the Glissade boots from the powderheads in this area. It is really hard to go wrong with a Merrel (sp?) or Asolo boot. For the type of skiing you would be doing, the 350 sounds like an excellent choice. Around here, the ski of choice is the Fischer Europa 99. It has a GREAT wax pocket (much better than the Karhus), and turns really well in soft snow. However, it is not very stiff, so it does not do well in hard pack or crud. I heard that Fischer modified it slightly this year to make it more of an all around ski - that is, they made it stiffer and more like the Karhus. No feedback on the partial edges yet. Sounds like a gimmick to me. One of the best things you can buy are adjustable poles. There are many models out now, and they are worth every cent you pay for. It really helps having a short pole when trying to telemark, and most of the models can be put together to form an avalanche probe or for using to put air holes in your snow cave. Don't get caught up in tech-weeenie-itis. A few solid investments in boots, skiis, poles, and clothing is all that is necessary. Then start backcountry skiing with someone who can teach you all the essentials of mountain travel, telemarking, etc. and start enjoying the experience. paul beiser ft. collins, co
jans@mako.UUCP (Jan Steinman) (12/17/85)
In article <1937@zehntel.UUCP> davel@zehntel.UUCP (David Longerbeam) writes: >I am considering buying some backcountry equipment... I have heard >various arguments against some of the heavier touring bindings... > >My usage will be a lot of off trail, backcountry day-tripping, >including a lot of screwing around on hills trying [:-)] to >telemark... Not sure about full-length edges -- hear they slow you down >too much for touring, and I'm not LOOKING for ice. Edges are no substitute for edging. The narrower ski and more flexible binding demand better technique. Except for ice and hard-pack, plastic does just as well as metal. The important things to look for are flex and side-cut. Be sure to pick a ski with sufficient flex for a wax (or pattern) pocket. Many of the high-priced telemark skis are useless for going uphill! Look for generous side-cut; it will make up for needing the stiffer flex. For general back-country use, I think it is more important to save weight then to have iron-maiden boots. My Merrill/Saloman boots are torse enough for telemarking, yet light enough to still have fun in tracks. Generally speaking, you can get by with a lot of equipment and little technique, or a lot of technique and very little equipment. I hate to see people go the easy route, getting expensive, heavy telemark equipment, because the equipment covers a multitude of sins, and makes real learning more difficult by masking the mechanics of skiing with hardware. Sure, stick your feet in the high-tech plastic rear-entry quasi-downhill boots, clamp them on the super-wide, reverse cambered downhill-by-any-other- name boards, and you'll be able to telemark, but you won't know why, and you'll feel pretty silly the first time someone on parallel-cut double cambered racing skis passes you! (Down! Down! Get off that soapbox!) I've used the Karhus, they seem like a good compromise ski, useful for both up and down. -- :::::: Artificial Intelligence Machines --- Smalltalk Project :::::: :::::: Jan Steinman Box 1000, MS 60-405 (w)503/685-2956 :::::: :::::: tektronix!tekecs!jans Wilsonville, OR 97070 (h)503/657-7703 ::::::
tomp@amiga.UUCP (Tom Pohorsky) (12/22/85)
In article <1937@zehntel.UUCP> davel@zehntel.UUCP (David Longerbeam) writes: > >Does anyone have experience with the Asolo Glissade 350 boot? I'm not familiar w/Glissade model numbers (they refer to boot height, don't they ?). I use Asolo Snowfields for telemarking, for which they're great. I've skied the medium-height Glissades a few times and recommend them highly for what you're describing. The front half of the sole is very stiff, which turns what might otherwise be a decent TMing boot into a fairly good one. Obviously it's noticably easier for trail work than the Snowfield. In my limited equipment exposure, this would have to be the ideal general, non- "expedition" backcountry boot. >How about the Epoke 900, Fischer Touring Crown, or the new Skied Touring Crown's a couple of times, like most general purpose "wax- less" ski, they kinda suck. Or, in nicer terms, as good as most. Am I be- traying arrogance here :-? Personaly, I like my Bonna 2400's: meant to be a general-use mountaineering ski, they're semi-light (2400 grams) with a full metal edge, tough (well tough enough, I only weigh 155) and fast. the full metal edge has not been an encurberance, but they're wider than most track skis and often won't fit in a machine cut track (bummer, I guess I'll go back to the boonies :-). As an aside, out of impatience I've (un)developed a technique for waxing, particulary appropriate for California where conditions change fairly quickly: don't. Since I TM at the lifts alot, wax, esp klister can be a nuisance. By poling a little harder and/or a firmer step-down on the near-flat, and herringboning or whatever up the steep stuff one can get by fairly well. This would affect one's route selections away from the steady ascent approach. Obviously, this can't always work, and will be inappropriate for most, but it saves me waxing effort and keeps the skis (and my car,hands,hair,etc..) klister free. Just throw on some hard/glide wax at the start of the season, and off you go, especially downhill (real efficient there). You off-track hacks "stuck" with wax-oriented skis might try this someday if you're curious. (No I'm not kidding, I actually like this approach). Anyway, A friend w/good experience likes Epoke's. >Karhu Edge skiis (the ones with the partial metal edge)? I've liked both Kahru's and Kazama's. Sturdy, highperfomance. I've skied my girlfriend's partial metal edge, and am impressed with that design, too. >Also bindings -- I have heard various arguments against >some of the heavier touring bindings -- especially that they >can ruin the welts of your boots. Anyone have any experience Not much experience here, though I might add that the standard binding has put welts on my welts under heavy use. sorry, maybe I shouldn't have said that :-( Telemarkers note that there are now releasable 3-pin bin- dings, w/beefier springs now so the big guys won't release so easily. >Not sure about full-length edges -- hear they slow you down too much naw, they're fine... and macho, too! is that a plus ??? > >So let's get discussing! Eugene Miya, are you out there? > Eugene, any tips for the novice on use of skins ? If you've had the patience to read all this, you know how much I like wax, and waxless skis. Thanx. >This should keep me going until I can actually get to the >mountains! :-) see ya there :-), tomp.
lowell@fluke.UUCP (Lowell Skoog) (01/09/86)
> .... any tips for the novice on use of skins ?
In the Cascades, most people start using skins as soon as they get off
the beaten trails and out of the flat valleys. With the changeable
snow around here and the generally rough terrain, skins perform much
better than wax. On most backcountry trips, you are either going up a
big hill or coming down one, so the extra time needed to install and
remove the skins is paid off by their increased efficiency. If you
aren't climbing much, they aren't necessary.
For nordic skis, the best skins available seem to be the adhesive kind.
Since they don't shift around, and snow can't build up between the
skin and the ski, they offer the highest performance. This is especially
noticeable when you are traversing on firm snow. A strap-on skin can be
very tricky in these conditions. Unfortunately, you run the risk of
having the adhesive fail, so most skiers carry some adhesive tape as a
backup. There are some flexible plastic strap-on skins (Snake-Skin
brand?) which I think are much cheaper. You get what you pay for,
though, and they don't glide or climb as well.
For alpine skis, adhesive skins are not such a clear winner, because
there are good strap-ons available. These are the Vinersa type (European),
which use a system of metal and rubber clips to strap around the ski.
Unfortunately, they are probably the most expensive skins around, and
they are hard to find (in Seattle at least). The thing I like about them
is that they are absolutely reliable--the metal clip cannot be cut by
your edges and they always work, no matter how wet or grimy your ski
bases get. They also go on and off faster than the adhesives, an
advantage if you are yo-yoing up and down some hill to take ski runs.
They do shift a little, and can get snow build-up, but for me this is
outweighed by the advantages already mentioned.
Lowell Skoog
Seattle, Washington