Sierra Spring Touring Ski - Recs Needed

[riggs]

This spring I started doing corn skiing trips and single overnights off Tioga, Shasta, Rock Creek/Morgan Pass area. Fun times. Hoping to get out 10-15 days each spring from here on out.

Me:
- 32, 195lbs, 6', pretty fit, though I sit at a desk to pay the bills - relatively aggressive skier blah blah blah, but for corn it don't really matter.

Current touring setup:
- 181 Coomba + Dynafits + Factors.
Love the Coombas for day tours during the winter season, but for the spring stuff they are too wide. Length is right though.

Looking for a ski that is:
- 85ish under foot
- flat tail
- not "noodle". Similar to Coombas, Gotamas, or slightly stiffer like a Mantra would be fine.
- Don't really want something with much tip rocker given the intended use.
- Slightly shorter in running length vs the 181 Coomba would be great (Coombas ski long imo) since these will get used in tighter spots.

Boots:
- Getting a pair of used ZZero4s handed down to me when my brother upgrades. Will use those with this setup for all but the shortest approaches.

Also, need something sufficiently different from the Coombas to justify the purchase for a 10-day/year rig (and to justify said skis to Mrs. Riggs)

Will be mounting up dynafits on these.

Would rather pick up something used, so definitely not only looking for advice on current models - though by spring new stuff obviously gets pretty cheap too. As awesome as I'm sure the DPS Cassiar is, there's no way I can afford that.

Sorry this is a bit long, but the more specific the questions the better the advice around here, it seems.

Ran the google site specific search and didn't really find much, but if I missed a similar thread, jong me and I'll delete this one.

Suggestions from the collective?


Edit: further search brought up this thread http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...=147388&page=1
Should have mentioned at the beginning - Not a fan of the Atomic R:EX the other similar skis Atomic made. Soft 179 Bros out of range price-wise unless very used I would think

[Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer]

Interesting on your take on ski size for Sierra corn. I use 180 Verdicts (102 waist) with Dynafits and love them for touring (winter and spring). Did a 7 day tour in May on virtually all corn (Pear-Lake area) and they rocked.

If you do want to go that size, look into some of the Karhu bc-specific skis. They tend to be a little stiffer than say the K2 Mt. Baker, Baker-light, etc..

[harpo-the-skier]

I have a pair of K2 Mt. Baker Superlights in a 174 (more like a 178/180) for sale that will fit your needs. I am replacing them with a pair of Trab Stelvio Superlight XLs that should be better than the Baker SLs in every aspect except price. I used/plan to use both skis in the Sierra in the spring.

Drop me a line if you are interested in the Baker SLs. They are currently mounted with Comforts at about 297. I don't really want to part with the Comforts, but could be convinced to include them. Got skins too.

[Bullet]

Watea 94. Sierra Corn also = Sierra hard-pack and Sierra Cement all in the same line. The Watea's have that I-Beam construction thing they got going on to make the 94 and 101 very torsionally stiff; meaning they hold on hard-pack really well. But they are wide enough and soft enough in the tip to give you a nice float up and over the junk.






-Fischer should hire me

[riggs]

Interesting on your take on ski size for Sierra corn. I use 180 Verdicts (102 waist) with Dynafits and love them for touring (winter and spring). Did a 7 day tour in May on virtually all corn (Pear-Lake area) and they rocked.

You stay at the ski hut up there? I wanted to get up there last season but couldn't make it happen. How tough is the lottery?

You're not the first to say something like this and it's making me reconsider, especially since the Verdicts and Coombas are pretty similar skis (Coombas a little lighter, I think?). Maybe it's the weight of the Factors that's really behind wanting something skinnier.

Watea 94. Sierra Corn also = Sierra hard-pack and Sierra Cement all in the same line.
-Fischer should hire me

Never skied the Fishers, will have to try them out this winter. Wateas were not on my radar screen at all.


Harpo - not in a position to pull the trigger in the short-term, thanks for the offer though.

[LightRanger]

You stay at the ski hut up there? I wanted to get up there last season but couldn't make it happen. How tough is the lottery?

You're not the first to say something like this and it's making me reconsider, especially since the Verdicts and Coombas are pretty similar skis (Coombas a little lighter, I think?). Maybe it's the weight of the Factors that's really behind wanting something skinnier.



Never skied the Fishers, will have to try them out this winter. Wateas were not on my radar screen at all.


Harpo - not in a position to pull the trigger in the short-term, thanks for the offer though.

I have a pair of foam core Verdicts (i.e. lighter than the wood core) sitting around that I'll let go for cheap. I was thinking of keeping them and using them for exactly what you just mentioned, but I don't have the scratch for lighter boots (and probably won't for a while).

Re: something narrower... I'd look at the narrower skis in BD's lineup (Havoc, Voodoo, Stigma, Guru). They're relatively affordable at MSRP (made in China helps on that front), and I'd imagine if there still aren't some of last year's on sale out there, there will be some 09-10s on sale by the time corn season gets really rolling.

Edit: Older Dynastar Legend 8000s would be sweet too, but they're a bit heavier with the titanal in them.

[Bullet]

Never skied the Fishers, will have to try them out this winter. Wateas were not on my radar screen at all.

They seldom show up on the radar here because I'm not aware of any film skier riding them, which probably makes them 'uncool'.

[ame="http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85332"]My review of the 08 model[/ame] - it's basically unchanged for the next year. I think the only difference in the 09-10 model is that they added a 'prow' on the tip help with tip float (not that it needed it). Besides at about 70% off with free shipping, you can't be making too big of a gamble.

I came to the Watae 101s for these reasons:
1) rockered tip pin tail skis suck on Sierra Corn. They are great when it's new snow, but when cutting into a tight chute on ripening corn; the tail will wash out. If you like pivoty, slippitty skiing, then go for it. I like to ride an edge and want it to hold tip-to-tail. EHP 193 as a reference.

2) Skinnier skis are fine when the corn is perfect. But if it starts to mank-up, get a little heavy, then they tend to be more work than they are worth. Atomic Tm:X as a reference.

3) Fatter skis are fine when the corn is ripe and it manks-up, but are dreadful due to lateral instability for holding an edge when that same corn passes into shadow and become refrozen corn. K2 Pistols and K2 AK Enemy as a reference.

4) Bigger stiffer skis are pretty much great. Except when you want to make quick controlled turns down a chute that's 3-5 ski lengths wide. Then the 43m R becomes a liability and the 25m Radius makes things more fun. Older Atomic Big Daddy as a reference.

The other skis I've used are all too old now to even help in the comparison.

just my opinion and experience. Maybe it helps.

[bodywhomper]

Sierra Corn also = Sierra hard-pack and Sierra Cement all in the same line.

also can mean deep slush and rotten crap, where width is also nice.....

the inexpensive option: keep what you got.

the expensive option: call pete wagner.

lots of options in the middle.

[Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer]

You stay at the ski hut up there? I wanted to get up there last season but couldn't make it happen. How tough is the lottery?

You're not the first to say something like this and it's making me reconsider, especially since the Verdicts and Coombas are pretty similar skis (Coombas a little lighter, I think?). Maybe it's the weight of the Factors that's really behind wanting something skinnier

No, actually it was an aborted attempt at the Sierra High Route that led to basically 6 days in that area:

[ame="http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=160294"]Mega TR: 6 Days in the High Sierra - Teton Gravity Research Forums[/ame]

After skiing in that area, I definitely want to get back and stay in the hut. The amount of terrain (conditions permitting) in that immediate area is a goldmine.

AKBruin and Ottime can speak to the hut lottery - I believe they were in the hut last December.

To the ski question, I used to tour in Goats (105 waist) and now in Verdicts (102). I personally think the 102-105 waist is the sweet spot for touring in the Sierra if you want a single, dedicated, year-round touring ski. With that size, you get the float for pow, but it is also manageable on hard-pack, crust, ice, etc... I think if you go narrower, you loose the performance in pow, but also crud and corn. On corn-specific, I actually like the bigger waist as you get that surfy, pow feel if you time the corn right.

As far as weight, the new (wood core) Verdicts are somewhat "light", but with Dynafits and Radiums the setup is very light, but very strong. The wood-core ones are pretty stiff.

If you are looking even lighter, Scutski's offer above is pretty good - a lot of people swear by the old foam core verdicts. I haven't skied them, but assume they are not as stiff, but definitely ligher.

Other options in that 100-105 waist that are still light are:

1. Karhu Storm - never skied, but have heard pretty good things and would make a good all-around touring ski

2. Dynafit Manslu - ditto

3. K2 has a new line of lighter, narrower skis that are tour-specific. I think I saw something called the gotback (similar to the coomba) but only 5 lbs for the pair

Obviously none of the above remotely answers your question re: a 90 waisted spring touring ski...... sorry about that.

EDIT: Karhu Storm is a 96 waist and light, flat tail, etc... Seems to fit the bill you are looking for. Either Marmot in Berkley or Mike in Truckee (the backcountry) should have those to check out.

[keksie]

3. K2 has a new line of lighter, narrower skis that are tour-specific. I think I saw something called the gotback (similar to the coomba) but only 5 lbs for the pair

k2 gotback = women's specific k2 coomback,

k2 coomback = k2 coomba with tip rocker, weighs 1825g (4lbs) per ski

[I've seen black diamonds!]

G3 Ace or Spitfire

[Jonathan S.]

3. K2 has a new line of lighter, narrower skis that are tour-specific. I think I saw something called the gotback (similar to the coomba) but only 5 lbs for the pair

Other way around: K2 left the ultralight & narrow backcountry ski market a few years ago. (RIP Sahale, Chogori.)
For this year, the previously separate AT and telemark lines are now merged into the Backside lineup:
http://www.wildsnow.com/1528/new-k2-tele-at-skis/
http://www.wildsnow.com/images-blog/...-k2-models.jpg

The only lightweight model, the MBSL, returns as the WayBack: 6.7 lbs for a 88mm waist in the 174cm length.

[GeezerSteve]

MBSL is a good recommendation, but try before you buy cuz they might be too wimpy for a guy your size, especially if you plan to carry an overnight pack. I like some camber in a spring touring skis.

How about some Trabs?

I luv my AK King Salmons. Refuckingmarkable big guy spring touring ski. I hope they last for another 10+ springs.

Atomic Kailas skis very different than the REX. Kailas has softer tail, rounder flex and is a very popular spring touring ski around here. One of the Hummel brothers is on Kailas.

[Jonathan S.]

How about some Trabs?

Here's a review of some Trab and Dynafit skis (along with the MBSL/Wayback):
http://www.offpistemag.com/permalink.asp?id=350

The Backcountry magazine gear issue also reviewed a Trab, three Dynafit models, and the K2 MBSL/Wayback.

[dookeyXXX]

I, too, use the AK King Salmon. Granted my spring/summer "touring" consists primarily of dry approaches, but have found the ski to be plenty wide for schussing sun cups and corn. My spring/summer patch buddy, Vets, swears by the Lhasa Pows, btw.

I think you just need to find a ski that you are very comfortable on, regardless of length and width.

[AKbruin]

I'm your size and bought the 190 cm Praxis Backcountries for the same purpose--spring Sierra touring. They're wider (105mm) and heavier (~9 lbs.) than you're probably looking for, and have a bit of tip rocker. But, in my limited experience last season, they're perfect for my needs. I figure with dynafit bindings and AT boots (Spirit 4s), the extra weight really isn't a big deal unless you plan on doing 4-day slog fests. The tip rocker is ideal for variable conditions and the woodcore skis handle ice without issue. Overall, they're vastly superior to the Janaks that they replaced. Anyhow, just I thought I'd just throw that out there.

As for Pear Lake, the lottery is tough to win for popular weekends. That said, there's a lot of stuff available midweek and early and late season. Ottime and I were there the first week of January and it was a hoot. Our spots were available after the lottery.

[Vitamin I]

...181 Coomba + Dynafits + Factors...for the spring stuff they are too wide.

Do you mean too wide for edge control? Or what? You might find you like the fatter skis in spring if you can get a setup with better torsionally rigidity (Dukes?), and keep edges sharp.

...
- 85ish under foot
- flat tail
- not "noodle"
- minimal/no tip rocker
- shorter running length vs the 181 Coomba

Would rather pick up something used...

If you decide to stay in the 85mm range and want super-cheap, it's not such a bad idea to go oldskool in this category. You have until spring---lots of time to find an old pair for sale:

178 G41/G4/AX4 (pretty stiff)
176/184 Mantis 777
178 InspiredNobis/IntuitivBig/Legend8800 (stiff enough?)
Final 2 yrs of 181 AK Launchers/Axis AK (stiff enough?)
Original 180 AK Launchers (stiff enough?)
G3 182 Ticket, 184 Baron

K2's measure long, so your "181 Coombas" are likely about 183-184cm.

.

[Mr. Toad]

My Sierra spring skis are Bro stiffs with Dynafits and BD Verdic with Switchbacks. They work well on those areas you mentioned. I would suggest very stiff skis with waist around 100. Sometimes you get corn, but most times you get ice, crud, cement, sun cups, struguli, etc...

[bean]

I picked up some 175 kilowatts last year and put ft12s on them, and loved them for spring climbing and skiing. Not a totally flat tail but pretty close, reasonable stiffness, and 95 underfoot.

[Joey Bag O' Donuts]

if you can find them, I use 178 Dynastar Inspired's with Titanal III's. Very fun set up.

[Fishmonger]

just found this old thread, loooking for the same recommendation in 2013...

I currently have some aging Atomic Kailas (88mm waist, 184cm long), with Dynafit Comforts or whatever they are called. Boots are either TLT5 Moutains and Titan ULs (brand new, ever tried them yet, because my bindings are mounted too narrow for the longer sole length, but that's a different story - just move the heel piece?). Don't really enjoy the Kailas on anything but softer snow - heavy, lots of chatter and little edge control. Maybe that's the boots, which is why I got the Titans...

So I really want a new ski before I head to the Sierra in April. Recently I read a lot about the Nunataq being light and great all around and was thinking to combine those with some Speed Radical bindings. Would that be a choice combo for April into May Sierra skiing? Powder is not important, since April the only time I usually get out there and starting mid April the corn comes in. The ultimate goal for this set of ski is to hit the John Muir Trail next year around that same time and do the whole thing.

What would you use for that - April into early May Sierra, mostly easy terrain and endless miles of skinning?

I'm mostly concerned about easy travel on snow with a pretty heavy pack (still contemplating that pulk sled), and controlled downhill - nothing gonzo, as I can't ski that well due to living in a place where a black diamond run is 150 foot drop and lasts 15 seconds.

[skimaxpower]

Recently I read a lot about the Nunataq being light and great all around and was thinking to combine those with some Speed Radical bindings. Would that be a choice combo for April into May Sierra skiing?

If you can afford Nunataqs with Speed Radicals, it would be an awesome corn harvesting set up.

For other touring options, also look at G3 and Black Diamond lines.

[Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer]

Ha - great bump. Going back and reading this quote of mine is very interesting:

To the ski question, I used to tour in Goats (105 waist) and now in Verdicts (102). I personally think the 102-105 waist is the sweet spot for touring in the Sierra if you want a single, dedicated, year-round touring ski. With that size, you get the float for pow, but it is also manageable on hard-pack, crust, ice, etc... I think if you go narrower, you loose the performance in pow, but also crud and corn. On corn-specific, I actually like the bigger waist as you get that surfy, pow feel if you time the corn right.

A number of years ago I changed my tune big time and now ski 88 waisted Mustagh ATA SL in the Spring. I have found that I like a 85-90 waisted ski much better in the Sierra Spring than a 105 waisted ski for a number of reasons:

1. Weight - quite simply, spring skiing to me involves long approaches where keeping the weight down is key.

2. Frozen Corn Skiing/Skinning- I found if the corn was not timed properly or you are in a steep shaded couloir, having a more traditional camber/sidecut, skinner ski allows me to handle the hardpack well. Similarly, while skinning during early morning ascents before the corn has softened, the edgehold on a skinner, traditionally cambered/sidecut ski has made for much more confident steep skinning.

3. Corn Skiing - In my opinion, everything can ski corn well as it is easy to ski. I guess based on practice, I honestly think a skinner ski goes faster in corn than a big fat ski because less surface area to get slowed down by the melting water in the corn snow. I really don't have any backup for this, but it is just my feeling based on skiing a 88 waisted ski in the spring now for a couple of years.

Therefore, it is really funny to read my original post above. For the Sierra single quiver ski, I definitely still think 100-105 waisted is the way to go. However, if you are going with a dedicated spring ski, I think 80-90 waisted in the sweet spot.

I LOVE my Dynafit Mustagh ATA SLs for an EastSide corn ski.

[bbense]

What would you use for that - April into early May Sierra, mostly easy terrain and endless miles of skinning?

I'm mostly concerned about easy travel on snow with a pretty heavy pack (still contemplating that pulk sled), and controlled downhill - nothing gonzo, as I can't ski that well due to living in a place where a black diamond run is 150 foot drop and lasts 15 seconds.

For getting from A to B in Spring Sierra conditions, I really don't think you can beat a long skinny waxless ski. Madhus Annum would still be plenty of fun to turn as long as the corn less than ankle deep.

http://www.orscrosscountryskisdirect...ntry-skis.html

If you want to focus more on the skiing side and less on the making miles, I'd go with the Voile Vector BC. I spent a lot of Sierra time last spring on the Vector BC and I was very impressed with it's ability to handle junky conditions as the day warms up. For it's size it's pretty light, but there are faster skis for getting from A to B.

Both skis have speed limits, but both are very predictable and stable within those limits. Neither would be my first choice to ski the steepest thing you can find, but I'm guessing that's not what you're looking for.

http://www.orscrosscountryskisdirect...r-bc-skis.html

Note: you will still need skins with waxless skis, you'll just need them a lot less, especially in spring conditions. And you need to wax those skis with at least a good paste wax like swix F4.

[Wetdog]

I would agree with the above post. I have been looking at the new Dynafit Mustagh Ata with tip rocker or the regular camber Kastle TX 87 for spring touring. Another great option would be the Movement Logic, also reg camber. All of them are light cap construction and 87-88 mm waists.