Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 247
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Alpental
    Posts
    5,736
    The weighting is the hardest part.
    Move upside and let the man go through...

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post

    Example 1:
    - DGamms weighs approximately 66kg with nothing on.
    - His total dynamic touring setup weight (hands and feet) for his light kit is approximately 3380gm
    - DGamms ratio: 3380/66 = 51.2

    Thoughts?? Is a golden ratio of 50 too low or too high? Perseverate and pontificate freely.

    Lord knows most of us don’t have anything else to do
    Isn't this just calculating what percentage dynamic weight is of total weight so the number should be expressed less of a ratio and more of a stated percentage.

    Based on the example above, the touring rig is 3380 g / 66000 g = 0.051 so his touring rig is essentially 5% of his weight. I'm sure that up to a certain point, there may be a linear relationship between touring rig weight and skier weight but after that point, the weight of the rig is too heavy regardless of skier weight. Having said that, I think keeping your rig at or below 5% of skier weight seems a reasonable starting point?
    The K-12 dude. You make a gnarly run like that and girls will get sterile just looking at you - Charles De Mar

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    13,063

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    141
    DGamms ratio: I’m 6’ 1” and 185 lbs/84 kg, so raven setup at 4700g gives 56. If I swapped the Shift for a Zed, it would be spot on 50.

    I was surprised my $25 poles (Black Crows Oxus) are only an ounce heavier then the überpole (BD Helios)


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    405
    MoFro: love the Tom Petty reference!

    TheK12: you are totally correct. I’m in a weird line of work where I think in grams per kg a lot. But maybe it’s better to think of this as a percentage.

    YaBoyBlue: yeah, those BC Oxus poles look great for touring, especially the handle wrap. I had a deal to get the Helio poles at 50-60% off, otherwise would have probably opted for something like the Oxus.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,315
    Quote Originally Posted by TheK12 View Post
    Having said that, I think keeping your rig at or below 5% of skier weight seems a reasonable starting point?
    Maybe I'm missing something, but, unless you're touring with a monoski, a rig is a pair of skis + bindings + boots + skins, so that would put your ideal threshold at 10% of body weight, no?

    My lightest touring ski + binding + boot + skin per foot is a wee over 3% of body weight, i.e., a bit over 6% for a pair of ski+binding+boot+skin combo -- and that's cuz I'm bigger than your average ski tourist.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    inpdx
    Posts
    12,915

    How heavy is your touring rig?

    Despite the weight of my gear not really being a significant factor in my skinning speed (more weight to be lost on my body first), you guys have me intrigued...gonna measure my gear here soon since it’s either that or put it away in deep storage

    (without starting a “covid weight loss” thread, I’ve actually dropped 10# since Feb, LOL)

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by GeezerSteve View Post
    Maybe I'm missing something, but, unless you're touring with a monoski, a rig is a pair of skis + bindings + boots + skins, so that would put your ideal threshold at 10% of body weight, no?

    My lightest touring ski + binding + boot + skin per foot is a wee over 3% of body weight, i.e., a bit over 6% for a pair of ski+binding+boot+skin combo -- and that's cuz I'm bigger than your average ski tourist.
    Hmmm.... good point.. But maybe the idea of dynamic weight was how much weight you are moving when skinning so it's reasonable to assume that since you only move 1 leg at a time when you step forward, that is the "dynamic weight".... But I'm just guessing here...

    But yeah, as far as calculating your touring setup as a percentage of your weight, then you'd have to consider both skis, boots, skins, and poles. I'm sure there's some Phd student somewhere who loves ski touring that is trying to figure out the effects of touring setup weight on a skier's metabolic and work rate.
    The K-12 dude. You make a gnarly run like that and girls will get sterile just looking at you - Charles De Mar

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    20,073
    the year i was training lots I quantifyed the difference between a pretty light Mercury/ dynafit stoke/ rad1/ pomoca setup and a pretty heavy JJ/ FR+/ 4 buckle alpine as taking about 12-15 % more time to go the 4.2 kms up to the chair
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    the year i was training lots I quantifyed the difference between a pretty light Mercury/ dynafit stoke/ rad1/ pomoca setup and a pretty heavy JJ/ FR+/ 4 buckle alpine as taking about 12-15 % more time to go the 4.2 kms up to the chair
    what's the difference in weight in your setups? that would be an interesting number to compare it to your effort/time data.
    The K-12 dude. You make a gnarly run like that and girls will get sterile just looking at you - Charles De Mar

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,315
    Ski + binding weight can matter quite a bit when they are on your pack, especially when booting steep or scrambling.

    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    the year i was training lots I quantifyed the difference between a pretty light Mercury/ dynafit stoke/ rad1/ pomoca setup and a pretty heavy JJ/ FR+/ 4 buckle alpine as taking about 12-15 % more time to go the 4.2 kms up to the chair
    Not surprised to hear that. Weight is not the only factor. Boot ROM and FR+ pivot point/clunkiness matter too.

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    20,073
    No idea, just comparing my heaviest touring setup vs my pretty light setup on a 1-1.5 hr skin track, so i tried to compare apples to apples, and the difference is real IME

    the heavy setup is something a newbie might use compared to what an experienced ski tourer uses, on the lighter end but not even superlight

    also consider the clothing, you see those same kind of folks also wearing the heavy gortex pants and jackets they bought for riding in-bounds usually soaked in sweat

    whereas for touring I'm wearing much lighter soft shells and not sweating ... much
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Access to Granlibakken
    Posts
    7,683
    Too lazy to calculate for the quiver, but for my 188 camox fab/Alpinists (1890 g) + Scarpa F1 (1444) + skins (290 g) and my 86 kg weight, that’s a ratio of 42 using the single ski metric.

    Re pole length...I’m 6’3” and have found 120 cm best for most ups and all descents. When breaking trail on a pow day I often lengthen just one pole to 135 cm.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by TheK12 View Post
    Having said that, I think keeping your rig at or below 5% of skier weight seems a reasonable starting point?
    Im guessing that's 10% with things being pairs and all, but yeah this is an interesting take.

    I nerd out and keep a spreadsheet on setup weights, and if I stuck to the formula, my rig should be around 7.6kg all up. Im pretty comfortable with that weight, and often use setups more in the 8.3kg range, but anything above that gets emotional.

    So maybe the 10% rule is a great starting point. If youre fitter/dumber/tougher you can always add, and if youre getting old and fat, subtract a bit.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    538
    It's an interesting discussion to nerd out to especially in the current situation where not much skiing is going on for those of us that don't live in the mountains.

    another interesting angle would be to "convert" your weight at foot to weight on back using the 1lb on foot to 5lbs on back "conversion" ratio. that would mean that setups in the 7Kg -10kg range would "equate" to 35kg-50kg on back, at least in terms of energy expenditure...

    damn... time to do some step ups with a 100lb pack. (god i'm bored....)
    The K-12 dude. You make a gnarly run like that and girls will get sterile just looking at you - Charles De Mar

  16. #166
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    141
    I like and appreciate the weight nerdery on display here, it’s all very illuminating for someone with no skimo background (but plenty of experience with cycling gram counting).

    Coming from the opposite end of the ski spectrum however, and seeing that the initial question in the thread is “how heavy is your touring rig,” I think the DGamms ratio should be calibrated at 50 as a floor, not a starting point. The premise as I see it is how much weight are you willing to haul up a hill in order to have a quality experience on the down, and inherent in the question is a big fat compromise from your “normal” touring gear and experience.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,315
    Quote Originally Posted by YaBoyBlue View Post
    The premise as I see it is how much weight are you willing to haul up a hill in order to have a quality experience on the down, and inherent in the question is a big fat compromise from your “normal” touring gear and experience.
    That equation has validity if the tour's sole objective is the descent. For some tourists, that's always the goal, but not for others, at least not all the time. Sometimes skiing is the best mode of transport to tag a summit or do a mountaineering route or to get from Point A to Point B (and usually back to Point A).

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    3,469
    Quote Originally Posted by GeezerSteve View Post
    That equation has validity if the tour's sole objective is the descent. For some tourists, that's always the goal, but not for others, at least not all the time. Sometimes skiing is the best mode of transport to tag a summit or do a mountaineering route or to get from Point A to Point B (and usually back to Point A).
    I know some highly skilled skiers who take it as a challenge to try to ski well on the lightest possible gear, too, even though they could rip on a heavier setup. Different agendas for different folks.

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    199
    Quote Originally Posted by GeezerSteve View Post
    That equation has validity if the tour's sole objective is the descent. For some tourists, that's always the goal, but not for others, at least not all the time. Sometimes skiing is the best mode of transport to tag a summit or do a mountaineering route or to get from Point A to Point B (and usually back to Point A).
    I know a guy who'll borrow his roommates touring setup strictly to go ice climbing. Damn fine ski tourer, just prefers to go climbing instead.

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    20,073
    IME there is a sweet spot as to how much weight I can haul up and if i go too light i will have no control on the down

    I seen this in a rando race where I was on lighter gear but the guy with more control beat me down

    and he gained more time on the down than I could have made on the up
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    2,502
    Quote Originally Posted by Mofro261 View Post
    The weighting is the hardest part.
    Yes.

  22. #172
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    3,736
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    IME there is a sweet spot as to how much weight I can haul up and if i go too light i will have no control on the down

    I seen this in a rando race where I was on lighter gear but the guy with more control beat me down

    and he gained more time on the down than I could have made on the up
    ^^^ +1 ^^^

    Ya, so if I were to drop say, 400 grams per ski below my sweet spot, my partners are still faster than me on the up. I'm still trashed, and am on skis that my shaky thighs can't handle. It makes for a bad day.

    There's definitely a sweet spot, and it's obviously an individual thing.

    ... Thom
    Last edited by galibier_numero_un; 04-12-2020 at 01:41 PM.
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  23. #173
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Kilpisjärvi, Finland
    Posts
    840
    Fast as lightning!

    Lähetetty minun LYA-L29 laitteesta Tapatalkilla

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    10,518
    Haa both sides of the spectrum for that waist width covered

    Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Swiss alps
    Posts
    568
    Quote Originally Posted by Ville View Post
    Fast as lightning!

    Lähetetty minun LYA-L29 laitteesta Tapatalkilla
    Fuck YEah! nice!

Posting Permissions

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