Lightweight touring ski advice

[DGamms]

Another vote for the Line Vision 98 if you are looking for a progressive mount point and 1430ish grams in a 179cm.

I’m obviously biased because I own it, but I am really impressed with how easy it was to ski and how damp it felt at speed for such a light, soft ski.

https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...Line+vision+98

For the Wasatch, I would argue you should own a 115-120mm underfoot option too. That class of ski is awesome for mid winter pow touring, and gives you more options for low angle schnoodling on higher risk avy days.

[Benneke10]

I can't say I didn't expect to get flamed for being honest about my abilities and interest in light gear... I didn't mean to say that I can't link turns together, I've skied a lot of challenging terrain on my current setup. I just wanted suggestions on skis best suited to low-moderate speeds in tight terrain and I appreciate all the input. I agree that I would probably have a better time in the ZGTPs but I tried them on and they don't clamp down enough on my skinny legs, maybe I should give them another shot and try drilling holes to move the buckles and a booster strap (anybody selling in 27.5?). I am also keeping an eye out for the new Hawx XTD boots to come in, anybody know when they're arriving? Even if I get beefier boots I will probably stick with the Roxas most of the time because I like to go fast uphill.

[Benneke10]

Another vote for the Line Vision 98 if you are looking for a progressive mount point and 1430ish grams in a 179cm.

I’m obviously biased because I own it, but I am really impressed with how easy it was to ski and how damp it felt at speed for such a light, soft ski.

https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...Line+vision+98

For the Wasatch, I would argue you should own a 115-120mm underfoot option too. That class of ski is awesome for mid winter pow touring, and gives you more options for low angle schnoodling on higher risk avy days.

Thanks for sharing this thread, I'm taking a hard look at the Visions, they look pretty damn close to ideal.

[tang]

Yeah, gotta 3rd or 4th the vision 98 - light, mid width, progressive, playful. Lots of great skis out there, but for described need, this seems pretty spot on

[Tjaardbreeuwer]

I certainly believe the people who say that heavier ski’s ski better. However, I think it sounds like they are missing the OP’s point a bit.
Every ski is a compromise. He was simply saying he wanted to maximize weight savings, low speed maneuverability and forgiveness.

Those are not things that weight is going to help with. A heavier ski can be more damp and stable, especially when it is also stiff. So I can see recommending a heavier ski if someone asks for more stability at speed or such.
But the top priorities @Benneke10 mentioned: low speed maneuverability, and forgiveness if you get backseat, don’t improve with weight.
Resort skis are heavy, and you can get backseat on those too.

As far as skills go, I have been a predominantly resort based skier, since I started skiing 7 years ago, yet I still end up in the backseat fairly often, even with my resort boots and skis. So more resort skiing, doesn’t necessarily improve technique to the point of never screwing up.
Perhaps some serious lesson/coaching work would. But in the meantime, we should buy the skis for the style we ski now. If that changes, buy new skis at that time, with different priorities.

[doebedoe]

I certainly believe the people who say that heavier ski’s ski better. However, I think it sounds like they are missing the OP’s point a bit.
Every ski is a compromise. He was simply saying he wanted to maximize weight savings, low speed maneuverability and forgiveness.

Those are not things that weight is going to help with. ...

I get where you're going, but the statement that weight doesn't help with forgiveness is wrong. Weight above a certain level doesn't help. But some weight -- probably something in the 1600-1900g category is going to be more forgiving to errors in technique than a 1300g weight weenie of the same shape. We're not talking about putting OP on a 2011 On3p Wrenegade that weighs 2500g. Weight provides suspension and smoothness which can massively improve ones ability to focus on other things.

[mall walker]

^ this

[gregL]

I can't say I didn't expect to get flamed for being honest about my abilities and interest in light gear... I didn't mean to say that I can't link turns together, I've skied a lot of challenging terrain on my current setup. I just wanted suggestions on skis best suited to low-moderate speeds in tight terrain and I appreciate all the input. I agree that I would probably have a better time in the ZGTPs but I tried them on and they don't clamp down enough on my skinny legs, maybe I should give them another shot and try drilling holes to move the buckles and a booster strap (anybody selling in 27.5?). I am also keeping an eye out for the new Hawx XTD boots to come in, anybody know when they're arriving? Even if I get beefier boots I will probably stick with the Roxas most of the time because I like to go fast uphill.

The Hawx Ultra XTD is indeed the smallest circumference cuff in the business; the competition isn't even close. Do a heavy heat mold (~10 minutes) and buckle it up with the buckles moved all the way in to get the upper boot to conform to your leg. If that's not enough, swap to a higher volume liner i.e. Intuition Pro Tour HV.

No need to wait for the 2021 models to come in (some are here already); the only functional difference is the Mimic liners, which won't necessarily help your situation (especially if you swap out the liner).

[gregL]

I certainly believe the people who say that heavier ski’s ski better. However, I think it sounds like they are missing the OP’s point a bit.
Every ski is a compromise. He was simply saying he wanted to maximize weight savings, low speed maneuverability and forgiveness.

Even if he doesn't explicitly state it, I believe OP's end goal is to improve his skiing, rather than remain a slow and tentative skier indefinitely.

Plenty of expert skiers with decades of experience intentionally avoid the 1200-1300 gram ski options and go heavier because they are willing to compromise on weight to feel more confident on the downhill. Pretty sure a self-described 2nd year skier will also feel a bump in confidence, which in turn will allow him to progress technically.

FWIW, even most "difficult" to turn skis have a sweet spot where they turn easily. Finding it involves hitting the right speed, timing the loading of the ski, and unweighting it appropriately. Again, this is hard to figure out in one or two turns without years of experience, but testing out your new touring setup at the ski area can help a lot. It's been a while since I've lived in Utah, but I seem to remember it was fairly easy to find "backcountry-like" conditions using the lifts at Snowbird or Alta.

[Tjaardbreeuwer]

One thing that we also have to watch out for is considerIng the actual size of the ski.

1700g is super-ultralight in a 190cm 125mm Powder ski, but “beefy” in a 160cm 75mm wilde touring ski.

So what sounds like a super low weight to a person used to long sizes and wider skis, might actually be a fairly stout construction in something short and narrow.

So we should make sure that when we are talking about absolute weights (in grams), we are comparing similar size skis.

[Boissal]

I certainly believe the people who say that heavier ski’s ski better. However, I think it sounds like they are missing the OP’s point a bit.
Every ski is a compromise. He was simply saying he wanted to maximize weight savings, low speed maneuverability and forgiveness.

Those are not things that weight is going to help with. A heavier ski can be more damp and stable, especially when it is also stiff. So I can see recommending a heavier ski if someone asks for more stability at speed or such. But the top priorities @Benneke10 mentioned: low speed maneuverability, and forgiveness if you get backseat, don’t improve with weight.
Resort skis are heavy, and you can get backseat on those too.

Disagree on this. A heavier ski definitely can and most of the time will be more forgiving and more maneuverable, even at low speed.

Re: maneuverability, it's 80% about length if you're slow-poking around and weight isn't particularly relevant unless you have pencil legs. We're not talking weight in the context of all-metal resort skis here, we're comparing 1200g to 1600g skis (one being ballpark weight weenie and the other being standard mid-weight touring) and that extra pound is not going to prevent you from popping out of the snow and flicking a quick 180 or making tight turns in trees. The difference boils down to behavior in variable snow which is exacerbated at low speed when the ski can't float you to the top.

A light ski is going to deflect all over the place and, regardless of whether it does so in a predictable manner, toss your ass in the back seat or any other direction a piece of springy carbon decides to bounce. It's not fun, it's exhausting, and can be downright sketchy. A springy tail sounds great to get you out of the back seat but it also has a tendency to get you out of there a bit aggressively and throw you back to the front. If you're not moving fast that weight transfer is going to mean a quick tip dive and your face is the next thing to touch snow (or a tree).
As you pointed a heavier ski will be damper and minimize that behavior at low speed. It will feel less nervous and more predictable without being any harder to toss around if needed. I spend my life with my ass hanging out 6" behind the tail of big skis. They let me know I'm skiing poorly but they don't give me whiplash as punishment, they just push me back over my boots.
Damp is your stoned friend who never raises their voice but is dependable under any circumstance. Snappy is their annoying buddy who's doing lines of coke and randomly slaps you because you looked at them the wrong way.

I also disagree that heavier means stiffer. A number of brands could make 1300g skis with their current layups but they choose to add a few 100g of material that dampens the ski without stiffening it (eg Down and rubber inserts). The result is reminiscent of a Legend Pro that went on a diet, damp and directional but if push into it a bit you'll feel the responsiveness and liveliness of the carbon. That's something that you'll never get out of something like a BD helio (or the old G3 Synapse, among others), those carbon sticks are super light and have all of the stiffness and snapiness of a loaded mouse trap but feel absolutely awful in variable conditions at any speed due to the lack of damping (at slow speed they're twitchy, at high speed they vibrate and deflect). Maybe a 200g layer of rubber would fix that but IMO the only way to redeem something that skis that way is to turn it into a bench. Or set it on fire.

Yes, every ski is a compromise. If you shift the balance purely in the direction of weight savings though you get garbage performance by any objective measure. Don't get me wrong, there are people out there who can and do make it work on sub-1kg skis. They're usually very good skiers who have big objectives and truly can't afford the extra weight.
For everyone else, regardless of their weight weenie envies and how much of the Kilian Jornet koolaid they drank, obsessing over grams for the skis is missing the point. It shows when they hack their way down in the most amusing manner while their ACLs just count the hours until their inevitable demise. Three months in a brace sucks more than dragging a bit more weight on the skinner and being 1 minute slower per 1000'.

And don't even get me started about boots.

[mall walker]

I also disagree that heavier means stiffer.

yeah... I have owned some ~1200g skis which are every bit as stiff as my 1800-1900g skis, it's just that the stiffness has no mass or damping to back it up, and so they end up twitchy at speed in bad snow. really light stiff skis only ski well in very consistent snow (pow, corn) and otherwise you're just sort of managing... which I did for a couple years.

to each his own, I loved skiing my light skis in great snow and I endured it otherwise but as I have said, I already knew how to ski. you're doing yourself a severe disservice trying to learn on that kinda gear. if you just care about going uphill and getting exercise you can lap the west ridge of grandeur in sneakers all season. learn how to properly ski, you'll never ski anything fun otherwise and you'll look like (and be) a giant beater which, even if you don't care, will become embarrassing at best, dangerous at worst, at some point.

[snowaddict91]

^very well said.

[Tjaardbreeuwer]

I also disagree that heavier means stiffer.

A number of brands could make 1300g skis with their current layups but they choose to add a few 100g of material that dampens the ski without stiffening it (eg Down and rubber inserts). The result is reminiscent of a Legend Pro that went on a diet, damp and directional but if push into it a bit you'll feel the responsiveness and liveliness of the carbon. That's something that you'll never get out of something like a BD helio (or the old G3 Synapse, among others), those carbon sticks are super light and have all of the stiffness and snapiness of a loaded mouse trap

Yeah I agree with the bold statement.. I didn't mean to say that heavier skis would (always) be stiffer.
What I meant was the same as (some of) what you wrote:
that skis which are both light and stiff are a bad combo (at least for forgiveness and control). So if you want a stiff ski, it'd better be (fairly) heavy.

[Benneke10]

And don't even get me started about boots.

Thanks @Boissal for some seriously helpful advice. I've only ever toured on the Synapse and kind of assumed that the twitchiness and deflection is just something all touring skis have and its good to know that there is another way. You guys have saved me from buying another pair of mousetrap skis and I appreciate it. I learned more in your post than I have from many many hours of online research so if you have any other insights to share or thoughts on boots I would love to hear them.

[Benneke10]

if you just care about going uphill and getting exercise you can lap the west ridge of grandeur in sneakers all season.

Ouch.. this hurts but I probably needed to hear it.

[Boissal]

Thanks @Boissal for some seriously helpful advice. I've only ever toured on the Synapse and kind of assumed that the twitchiness and deflection is just something all touring skis have and its good to know that there is another way. You guys have saved me from buying another pair of mousetrap skis and I appreciate it. I learned more in your post than I have from many many hours of online research so if you have any other insights to share or thoughts on boots I would love to hear them.

You're very welcome. Getting on the wrong ski can make skiing unfun and that is one horrible thing I just can't abide.

Advice on boots:
Step 1. Buy Tecnica ZeroG Tour Pro
Step 2. Become the Hermann Maier of BC skiing
Step. Experience boundless joy

All joking aside, weight-to-performance ratio is much more nuanced with boots than with skis and I have no experience at the sub-1300g end of the range. It sounds like your happy place is on the light end of the spectrum so I'll defer to people who have much more experience in that weight range for advice. Really light boots work incredibly well, there are people out there tearing it up on things that weigh as much as a running shoe. They're not hacks like me who need all kinds of support to ski fast and hard.

If you're interested in hearing my sing the virtues of the ZGTP though I'm happy to oblige

[Tjaardbreeuwer]

And note that if you are considering different boots,

the Zero G tour Pro is the gold standard of weight/skiabilty. But if they don’t fit that doesn’t help.
Atomic Hawx Ultra XTD, is only 30 grams heavier per boot shell. The fact that total difference weight is bigger, is due to the minimal liner in the Zero G and beefier one in the Hawx. Once you switch liners for a similar level of support and warmth, the weight will be near identical.

[mall walker]

If you're interested in hearing my sing the virtues of the ZGTP though I'm happy to oblige

Same. I switched halfway through last season from my daily driver being Fischer Carbon Travers and 1 or 3 ~1200g skis to Tecnica ZGTPs and 1 of 2 ~1900g skis. I tour 100ish days a year and don't really ski the resort. Lemme tell you, I could not possibly be happier with the change, ESPECIALLY the boots. I kept 1 pair of UL skis, and even those are night-and-day better with the beefy boots. Even if you wanna weight weenie the skis and bindings (I still use skimo race bindings exclusively, even 250g clamps is too much weight), you will be happy with a proper boot....

[kid-kapow]

The only other one I know of is the Volkl BMT90, But I have not seen much for reviews of that ski, and it might be a bit narrow for Utah. The one review on Alpin.de, though, does call them excellent, forgiving and able to be skied relaxed, but still with some power and great edge bite.

BMT90s are excellent skis. My pair - 177s w/Fritschi Vipec Blacks - completely blew me away last season and was one of the major suprises of the 2020 quiver consolidation project / season for me. They ski extremely well for their weight, and are very easy manipulate as long as you keep the weight a bit forward (aka do not lean superfar back). The middle of the ski is not punishing at all, and it is very, very easy to get skis to do what you want them to do - aka vary turn shape by how you weight / put pressure on the skis. Hell, I kinda wish Völkl made the same (same shape and flex pattern) ski in a 2000gr version for resort slaying - I would buy one for sure. The tails are not punishing at all, but they do let you know if you get too far in the back seat by just becoming a bit harder to ski. I much, much prefer BMT90s to Mantra V Werks so far (will remount MVWs at +2). Not to be too positive or anything, I just really, really like BMT90s.

There's a thread on the various Völkl touring skis that can be found here: https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...Works-or-BMT90

If you want sometihng a bit wider BMT109s are also very good skis.

BMTs can be found at 40-60% off over here in Euroland, at Sport Bittle and Sport Conrad amongst others, just use Google. So if you can find a shop that will ship over the pond then they might be pretty good value as well.

While I have not tried them, Zero G95s are a fair bit more stout compared to BMT90s perhaps suggesting that they are a bit more ski perhaps better suited for thhe more technically savvy rider. I dunno.

My concern with Line Visions as a dedicated touring ski for a person coming off fairly traditional touring skis (assumption) is their mounting point, or rather, the amount of ski behind the bindings. Unless you are used to a more centered mount point and can drive the ski from a centered stance (as well as drive them through the tips), the longer tails could prove a bit of a challenge, even if they have way more splay compared to say BMT90s. Kick turns will be a bit more diffucult too, though that is probably something on grows used to fairly quickly.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

I've toured a lot on all manner of boots and skis. I like skinny ultralight skis when I'm trying to cover a whole bunch of ground. I like heavy skis with burly bindings for lift assisted touring. The rest (most) of the time I prefer something that is 1600-1800g and about 105mm underfoot, unless I'm skiing low angle powder, then I like something fat that makes meadow skipping faster and more fun. I won't recommend specific skis since I like minimal sidecut and old school mounts, but a good ski in that weight range can be pretty damn stable without tiring you out.

The width matters too, but it's not about powder. In shitty snow (crusts, crud, slop...) a fatter ski doesn't get bogged down as much. But as you go fatter than 105 skinning performance declines pretty quickly. A bunch of side hilling on fat skis can wear you out. The same can be said for descending steep, firm snow. 105 feels good. 115 is pretty damn clunky.

As far as boots go, I'd say the lighter the boot, the better your technique needs to be. And the shittier the snow, the more you benefit from a heavier boot. I agree that the Zero G, Hawx XTD and similar boots are the sweet spot for most people. If you're an efficient skier, who stays centered, lighter boots are great, at least when when conditions are decent. Skinning in light, frictionless boots is fun. If you're a behemoth who crushes on heavy alpine gear most of the time, you might benefit something burlier so you don't have to completely change your skiing style. But it doesn't sound like you belong to either category.

[hafjell]

Same. I switched halfway through last season from my daily driver being Fischer Carbon Travers and 1 or 3 ~1200g skis to Tecnica ZGTPs and 1 of 2 ~1900g skis. I tour 100ish days a year and don't really ski the resort. Lemme tell you, I could not possibly be happier with the change, ESPECIALLY the boots. I kept 1 pair of UL skis, and even those are night-and-day better with the beefy boots. Even if you wanna weight weenie the skis and bindings (I still use skimo race bindings exclusively, even 250g clamps is too much weight), you will be happy with a proper boot....

What are those skis? Already own the ZGTP boots but thinking of swapping weight from bindings to skis this season.

[beeeom]

OP:

1. Buy Billy Goat 108 tours & Atomic Hawx Ultra's
2. Quit being a weight weenie
3. ???
3. Profit

/thread

[mall walker]

What are those skis? Already own the ZGTP boots but thinking of swapping weight from bindings to skis this season.

180cm Black Crows Solis and 181cm Down Countdown 104 (not the 104L, the regular)

they're super similar, and I love both, though I've promised the 104s to another mag since there's like 95% overlap. I skied the Solis a ton this past season, they fuckin rip, extremely fun/capable/confidence-inspiring skis, definitely the ski I've felt most comfortable going near-highway-speed in the bc on. I'll probably always have a quiver, but I could see that quiver being 2 pairs of Solis (the 173cm would be for skimo ).

eta: I have ATK Trofeo 145s w/plates (basically Helio 180s) with the RV10 spring on the Solis. the CD104s were drilled w/inserts for Vipecs, so that's what I used. I find no noticeable difference in performance even in rotgut shitfuck snow conditions between the two, and for me anyway, I see no reason to ever use a heavier binding than the 180 for touring. the ATKs feel incredibly bomber and I can ski them super hard even in refrozen chunder without the toes locked, which is awesome. everything about them just works, dialed, simple, nothing gimmicky or plastic or unnecessary. I liked the bindings so much I bought another pair just to have on hand, in case.

[bean]

While I have not tried them, Zero G95s are a fair bit more stout compared to BMT90s perhaps suggesting that they are a bit more ski perhaps better suited for thhe more technically savvy rider. I dunno.

I have no experience on the BMTs, but have a pair of last season's ZG95s and they are definitely a demanding ski. Very powerful but get thrown around as soon as it gets choppy or inconsistent.