Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 33 of 33
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    2,570
    Quote Originally Posted by 1000-oaks View Post
    ... I'd rather have a so-so day on hardpack instead of a so-so day in pow.
    Sig worthy.
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    755
    Can anyone give me a straight pull measurement on the 182? I have the 186 Backland 117 that I'm really digging, but just a little wide. I am looking into this, the Bent 100, and the old Backland 109. I'm real interested in the length since I feel that the 186 Backland 117 (184 straight pull) is just about perfect. The 109 comes in 182/189 too, and the Bent 100 is 180 or 188. Ugh.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    4,891
    71-3/8"

    FYI: the "100mm" Tecton brake fits the Backland 107 great, just needs a tiny grind off the inside tip of the brake ends. (Doesn't really need a grind, but a little bevel helps the brake slide down the ski sidewalls.)
    Last edited by 1000-oaks; 01-04-2019 at 12:13 PM.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    28
    So I've had some days on these. Using them as a touring ski. Couple thoughts...

    1. They float really well even in the deep deep where I thought they would be under-gunned.

    2. I do not like the HRZN tech on a touring ski as snow easily works it's way between the base and skin due to the raised edges on the tip

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Simi Valley, CA
    Posts
    4,891
    ^ Could probably cut away the skin there, the tip isn't providing traction.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by 1000-oaks View Post
    ^ Could probably cut away the skin there, the tip isn't providing traction.
    For sure, I've thought about it will probably do so. I think because of the fairly wide tip loop design on the skins I'm using (Voile) I would still have the same issue, though maybe less so if I cut some material away. Even the Atomic skins that they recommend look like they would have the issue with the Backland 107 (also they retail for $250?? wtf).

    It looks like they've addressed the issue on the rest of the Backland series with a rando/race style tip attachment and then pre-cut the tip of the skin to match the ski -

    https://shop.atomic.com/en-us/produc...95-al0033.html

    I think maybe G3's tip attachment might work best for this ski (and others with HRZN tech such as the new Bent Chetlers) -

    https://us-store.genuineguidegear.co...climbing-skins

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    89
    I have the Atomic skins for the Backland 107s - I believe they are made by Contour and have a plastic section from the tip loop to about 8Ē back. I get virtually zero snow build up under the tip of the skin which is amazing. This has been a problem with almost every other skin Iíve used. Not sure if it has to do with the plastic tip section or the Contour glue, but even with the skin over the beveled HRZN tip, snow still doesnít creep in. Iíve used this set up about 30 days and so far they are the best skins Iíve ever used. Iíll reserve full judgement until around day 75.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    4,611
    I'm considering 107s for my next bc ski. I'd ski the 182 length, (I weight 182 lbs and am 5' 11") mount them with very lightweight tech bindings, and ski them with Hawx 130 XTD boots. My bc ski for the last 5 years has been original BD Converts which are light, float very well for a 105 waist ski and are easy to turn, but extremely soft/reactive and not great in anything but good, untracked snow. Intended use is winter touring in the PNW and BC, mostly powder with some other soft snow (crust, wind hammered, etc.) I generally prefer easier turning, floaty skis.

    I have a few pairs of Atomics that I love, including the 182 Backland FR 109 mounted alpine (which to me feels extremely light and easy to ski with alpine boots) so this seems like the no-brainer touring ski. My only hangup is that looking at them in the shop, the rocker seems relatively moderate for a powder ski - yet everyone seems to say they ski deep snow and make short turns very well. I just want to make sure I don't end up over-gunned at all since my touring often involves tight tree skiing and fast turns.

    The other ski I'm considering is the G3 Seekr 110, which appears stiffer and more rockered, kind of a similar by different animal. Ideally I'd get out and just try them all, but it's pretty tough to arrange especially when talking about touring specific skis with tech bindings. Thanks to all who posted great reviews in this thread already.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •