zeke
Trail Wise!
Peekaboo slot 2023
Posts: 9,886
|
Post by zeke on Jan 24, 2016 13:05:42 GMT -8
Nope. If you can fit snow baskets to your trekking poles, go for it. Otherwise, ski poles for XC are pretty cheap. Oh, and don't get 3 pin bindings. Most XC boots today are not 3 pin. Look at what you might upgrade to, and see what binding they use. XC packages usually come with decent skis, cheap poles, and so-so shoes.
|
|
|
Post by hikerjer on Jan 24, 2016 13:08:45 GMT -8
I agree whole hardily with Zeke. If you've got trekking poles and can get snow baskets for them, then that's the way to go. In fact, that's exactly what I do. I just change baskets according to the season.
|
|
johnnyray
Trail Wise!
Argle-Bargle, Jiggery-Pokery, and Applesauce
Posts: 2,050
|
Post by johnnyray on Jan 24, 2016 14:22:25 GMT -8
is there any good reason why a newbie like me couldn't use trekking poles (with snow baskets) instead of dedicated ski poles? I XC on groomed and non groomed trails using classical technique and poles are an important part of the kick and glide they are 150cm and a clenched fist fits between the pole and my chin, not sure about BC touring.
|
|
|
Post by hikerjer on Jan 24, 2016 15:39:07 GMT -8
One of the nice things about trekking poles is that they are usually adjustable which means the length can be set for whatever the conditions, terrain and style requires.
|
|
joe
Trail Wise!
Posts: 39
|
Post by joe on Jan 24, 2016 20:19:31 GMT -8
Hey HikerJerry, or anyone else too, What's your take on these? I'm used to the old long&skinny XC skis useful mostly on groomed tracks, which kind of don't really do it for me. Of course if I spend money on these it'll never snow again. us-store.altaiskis.com/Joe
|
|
|
Post by hikerjer on Jan 25, 2016 7:39:32 GMT -8
Hey HikerJerry, or anyone else too, I'm not at all familiar with the ski but it looks like more of a novelty item than a serious backcountry ski. And although I love the aesthetic value of a wood ski, they simply are not as reliable as the modern synthetic ones. Just break a tip six miles out and you'll know what I mean. I wouldn't get them if I was serious about skiing anywhere but in very friedly terrain close to my vehicle. JMO.
|
|
Westy
Trail Wise!
Diagnosed w/Post-Trail Transition Syndrome
Posts: 1,960
|
Post by Westy on Jan 25, 2016 8:31:46 GMT -8
Has potential as a snowshoe alternative. I prefer the energy efficiencies (diagonal stride, double poling) afforded by the modern, metal-edge, double camber, waxless ski manufactured with proper process, quality control procedures and supplier validations, ala: Fischer, Rossignol.
|
|
reuben
Trail Wise!
Gonna need more Camels at the next refugio...
Posts: 11,164
|
Post by reuben on Jan 25, 2016 9:11:41 GMT -8
I'm thinking about the Rossignol 90 or maybe 110. Boots and bindings are another quagmire of competing standards (and, in some cases, substandards), all with their various plus and minuses.
I read good things about SNS but they don't seem to be as popular or prevalent as NNN/NIS (maybe NNN BC?) and 3-pin. Manual seems to be preferred over automatic for BC skiing. I'm starting to think that it'd be better to pick a boot that fits and just use whatever binding is compatible.
|
|
|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Jan 25, 2016 11:14:15 GMT -8
The central issue is for untracked use and perhaps with a pack for snow camping(?) you'd also want to look at skis with more flotation than the usual track skies. Though if the majority of your miles are on popular trails (and thus usually either set or user made tracks)the lighter weight of a track ski will be a joy. For Ex. a track ski can be 720 gm while a "lightweight" off track ski is a 1000 gm. Plus heavier (1800 gms versus 920) boots etc. The real bottom line isn't chasing specs but matching the skis to what you'll actually ski: where and what conditions? Day trips or backpacking? That's where a local shop can be a big help as you won't get saddled with gear that's just right for French Alp avalanche chutes (like what you were originally looking at...) when you're going cruising through a mid elevation forest and meadow route with a lunch stop..... Waxless has advantages for changing conditions such as in and out of forest cover, though in general in my experience the optimal performance (when conditions cooperate, a big if.. lol) are waxable varieties. Metal edges are useful on crust and very hard pack, just extra weight the rest of the time....
|
|
walkswithblackflies
Trail Wise!
Resident terrorist-supporting eco-freak bootlicker
Posts: 6,934
|
Post by walkswithblackflies on Jan 25, 2016 12:15:04 GMT -8
The length of pole used for XC skiing tends to be bit longer than poles for hiking. But if your hiking pole expands, then you're all set.
ETA - Sorry, I didn't realize this had been answered. Three times.
|
|
walkswithblackflies
Trail Wise!
Resident terrorist-supporting eco-freak bootlicker
Posts: 6,934
|
Post by walkswithblackflies on Jan 25, 2016 12:24:56 GMT -8
HSF's advice above is spot on. Determine what/how you want to ski, then ask a shop to provide options.
In my case, I wanted boots that I could hike in and that would accept crampons/snowshoes, so I got a pair of robust leather boots with 3-pin "binding". I got a pair of Fischer S-Bound skis with metal edges based on size (shorter for navigating in woods), flotation, price, and the fact that I often ski in icy conditions. I found that the metal edges are a must for the type of skiing I do.
|
|
Westy
Trail Wise!
Diagnosed w/Post-Trail Transition Syndrome
Posts: 1,960
|
Post by Westy on Jan 25, 2016 12:38:09 GMT -8
Good all-rounder ski. I have a pair of 98's. The width has a few advantages, floats better and you can shorten ski length a bit, has a radius which means its can do tele turns easier. The disadvantage on more flat or moderate terrain is the radius. It makes the ski want to turn when you are schussing and/or double poling. For poles I have a variety but mostly use and adjustable ski pole that can extend to 145mm for aggressive double poling.
|
|
joe
Trail Wise!
Posts: 39
|
Post by joe on Jan 25, 2016 14:04:01 GMT -8
Jer and Westy,
Thanks for the advice. In the meantime, I've got the snowshoes. And the snow....
|
|
|
Post by ecocentric on Jan 30, 2016 20:42:12 GMT -8
Ski poles should be long enough to reach your arm pits. The ones designed for skiing have more flex then trekiing poles, which translates into longer glides. The adjustable length is useful in mountaineering for traversing steep slopes where a long pole and a short pole is advantageous. For basic ski touring, the mechanism for adjusting length has potential to fail out on the trail somewhere.
If you think that you will ski in the backcountry in icy conditions or packing camping gear, the metal edges will add security when making your own tracks, but tend to climb up out of the tracks on groomed cross country trails. Single camber skis will give you better control characteristics when skiing downhill, while double cambered skis are more efficient gliding across flat ground. Double cambered skis require better technique to use, so they having a steeper learning curve.
I'm a big fan of ski swaps. A lot of downhill skiers get cross country skis, use them a couple of times, then sell them. If I still lived in snow country I would buy a pair of waxable skis for best performance in any snow conditions. Waxless skis eliminate the need to learn all about applying wax and get you out skiing faster. Buy some cheap beaters (rock skis) and get out and ski the pTex off of the bottom of em.
|
|
walkswithblackflies
Trail Wise!
Resident terrorist-supporting eco-freak bootlicker
Posts: 6,934
|
Post by walkswithblackflies on Feb 1, 2016 12:43:30 GMT -8
This guy crams a lot of good info in an 8-minute video:
|
|