Looking for a new touring ski- Zero G 105, BD Helio Recon 105 and what else?

[Kevo]

Thanks again, everyone. I'm trying my best to make informed decisions about gear for local conditions (I'm new to Teton Valley).

Teton Canyon! You'll be touring for pow

I grab my smaller lighter skis when I'm going for speed on flat glacier approaches. At that point its more about diatance. But let's say a biggish day would be 20+kms and 2000m+.

Also the lighter skis are more about letting me put out less effort so I can tour multiple "big" days in a row. Like when in a hut for a week or more at a time

Thanks, Lee. Yep, everyone here locally is telling me about the importance of flotation for mid-winter pow. It's a bit of a departure from what I'm used to in my previous touring experience (just moved here from CO), so I was initially hesitant about the idea of skiing a 110mm+ ski for longer tours.

There are plenty of flat approaches around here for spring mountaineering, but I think I've come to the conclusion that I'll need more narrow and light skis for that purpose specifically.

Well, if your partners are all on fat skis and your fitness level is similar, I'd think in terms of maybe Armada JJ Ultralite, Black Crows Anima Freebird, or Bent Chetler 120 (all in the mid-1800 gram range) with an R14 . . . for me, that would be a very specialized ski that would probably only go on a trip to Hokkaido.

Gotcha. Wow, those are all bigger skis than I've toured on previously except for the year I had CRJs with FT12s (so many prereleases that year from floppy ski + dynafit combo and the CRJs were too heavy to tour well). I'll start reading...

Also, why the R14 and not something lighter like a Salomon MTN Pure? Is the beefier binding all that important for soft snow?

[Backward_Banana]

Even though it seems like you're going bigger, just wanted to chime in and say that the Helio 105 is not a fun ski in pow (at least the old version). If it were me, I'd look really hard at a Deathwish tour or something with a more fun shape.

MTN is a U-spring that relies on the 5mm gap, which I think is great for spring touring, but if you're going to be skiing harder/might release, having something with more adjustable settings and "active" length compensation would probably make more sense.

[Benneke10]

Also, why the R14 and not something lighter like a Salomon MTN Pure? Is the beefier binding all that important for soft snow?

The R14 weighs about the same as the MTN Pure if you pull off the brake and the freeride spacer

[gregL]

MTN is a U-spring that relies on the 5mm gap, which I think is great for spring touring, but if you're going to be skiing harder/might release, having something with more adjustable settings and "active" length compensation would probably make more sense.

Gap is 4mm, but yeah, this is my thinking as well. This is from a guy who owns 4 pairs of MTN/Backland Tours.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

My ski usage the last 4 season in CO has looked like this:

From Oct until the (deep) persistent slabs aren't an obvious concern I'm mostly on UL GPO's (4lbs/ski) with SSL 2.0's lapping low angle trees. The width makes sub 30º terrain much more fun. Skinnier skis are just too slow. Even when there is an opportunity to safely ski something steeper in winter it's usually pretty confined with lots of trees and I appreciate the GPO's ability to change direction quickly and scrub speed in 3D snow. This year I even added some beat old Protests (with the same bindings) for deep, high danger days when I'm sticking to 25º slopes. I do a lot of solo meadow skipping like this with my dog. On 95 waisted skis I'd be bored as fuck. On some fatties it's pretty damn fun. Here's a vid of me and Sadie when she was old and full of cancer:



Here's the new dog, Clancy, enjoying similar terrain:


Not rad, but super fun. I'd have been poling down these spots at times hill on 95mm waisted skis.

I do occasional longer winter days above treeline on relatively safe terrain when I'll take out my 105ish skis. Once the threat of avalanches ripping down to the ground subsides, and I can safely ski up higher on steeper slopes, I mostly put the GPO's away. I'm covering more distance, often racing against the sun's effects on the snow, and a 105 waist is plenty wide for steep, open powder.

My skinnier skis (Hannibal 94's then Zero G 85's) came out when doing 10+ miles with a good bit of vert or I expected some challenge like bushwacking or a bunch of side hilling- when overland or uphill travel would be the crux rather than skiing down. Then, a couple years back I took the 85's to ski the Silver Couloir (which requires some fairly steep skinning through tight trees and an irritating exit through rolling terrain) and despite the advantages of the skinnier, lighter ski for moving up, I knew I would have been happier on a 105ish ski because the snow in the couloir was sloppier than we expected and the 85's couldn't get untracked. It still would have been a fun descent on a wider ski. The most tiring thing about that day ended up being the descent, not the stupid exit.

Now, I'd probably have something close to a full on rando set up in the quiver if money was no object, and I very much appreciate lighter skis, boots, bindings, but they days on which I want something under 100 have become pretty rare.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

if you're going to be skiing harder/might release, having something with more adjustable settings and "active" length compensation would probably make more sense.

I'm skeptical about how often that length compensation is useful unless you are on very soft skis. I did have a ski come off in this way during a pretty steep downhill bushwack in the Adirondacks when my ski bent into a nice "U" shape. But I've also skied my 3 pairs of SSL 2.0's for 100+ days without losing a ski once. Sometimes I even ski fast and jump off stuff! And I DID have prerelease issues with some older Dynafit models. I've skied with a few guys who really know how to bend a ski and I can see how they could benefit from the sliding heel piece, but mostly I think it's an extra complication that adds weight and a part that can fail.

If someone is going ski close enough to their limit they're likely to fall frequently, I'd push them toward Tectons, Vipecs or something that designed and certified to release more reliably in general.

[Backward_Banana]

I think that's probably true. FWIW, I split my time equally between light skis with MTNs and heavier skis with Ion LTs with all the fancy gadgets/upgrades. In both cases, the skis stay attached to my boot almost all the time, and I've released from both bindings when I should have. I think there's probably a strong argument to be made that most people touring can ski a U-spring binding on almost any ski and, so long as they spend more time skiing than obsessing over ski gear, never think twice.

But that's not what we're here for, right?

[Kevo]

My ski usage the last 4 season in CO has looked like this:

From Oct until the (deep) persistent slabs aren't an obvious concern I'm mostly on UL GPO's (4lbs/ski) with SSL 2.0's lapping low angle trees. The width makes sub 30º terrain much more fun. Skinnier skis are just too slow. Even when there is an opportunity to safely ski something steeper in winter it's usually pretty confined with lots of trees and I appreciate the GPO's ability to change direction quickly and scrub speed in 3D snow. This year I even added some beat old Protests (with the same bindings) for deep, high danger days when I'm sticking to 25º slopes. I do a lot of solo meadow skipping like this with my dog. On 95 waisted skis I'd be bored as fuck. On some fatties it's pretty damn fun. Here's a vid of me and Sadie when she was old and full of cancer:



Here's the new dog, Clancy, enjoying similar terrain:


Not rad, but super fun. I'd have been poling down these spots at times hill on 95mm waisted skis.

I do occasional longer winter days above treeline on relatively safe terrain when I'll take out my 105ish skis. Once the threat of avalanches ripping down to the ground subsides, and I can safely ski up higher on steeper slopes, I mostly put the GPO's away. I'm covering more distance, often racing against the sun's effects on the snow, and a 105 waist is plenty wide for steep, open powder.

My skinnier skis (Hannibal 94's then Zero G 85's) came out when doing 10+ miles with a good bit of vert or I expected some challenge like bushwacking or a bunch of side hilling- when overland or uphill travel would be the crux rather than skiing down. Then, a couple years back I took the 85's to ski the Silver Couloir (which requires some fairly steep skinning through tight trees and an irritating exit through rolling terrain) and despite the advantages of the skinnier, lighter ski for moving up, I knew I would have been happier on a 105ish ski because the snow in the couloir was sloppier than we expected and the 85's couldn't get untracked. It still would have been a fun descent on a wider ski. The most tiring thing about that day ended up being the descent, not the stupid exit.

Now, I'd probably have something close to a full on rando set up in the quiver if money was no object, and I very much appreciate lighter skis, boots, bindings, but they days on which I want something under 100 have become pretty rare.

Super cute pup vids. Thanks again for your info!

[smooth operator]

nespresso?

[Kevo]

Even though it seems like you're going bigger, just wanted to chime in and say that the Helio 105 is not a fun ski in pow (at least the old version). If it were me, I'd look really hard at a Deathwish tour or something with a more fun shape.

MTN is a U-spring that relies on the 5mm gap, which I think is great for spring touring, but if you're going to be skiing harder/might release, having something with more adjustable settings and "active" length compensation would probably make more sense.

Thanks. Have been researching different options in the wider range. Looked into ON3P BG Tours but they are sold out.

Very intrigued by Wildcat Tour, Deathwish Tour and possibly Wildcat Tour 108. I'm trying to understand the difference between the Wildcat Tour and Deathwish Tour. Seems like the WCT is more traditional and the DWT is more fun, but perhaps with better edge grip?

[Backward_Banana]

Hah, all good choices. I tour on the old BG tour (Steeple 116) and love them for this use case, but they're a bit heavy and wouldn't be my choice for skiing super consequential terrain on days I know the snow will be firm. So if you're looking for 1 ski to do it all, there might be better options. But I love the BG shape, and mid-winter I never really think about bringing a different ski out. You might try calling/emailing the ON3P guys, last I heard the tour skis were a good chunk of the volume, but I wasn't aware stuff was selling out.

I've only had a day on DWTs, but I'm super impressed with them. They're a fun shape that carves well and is super versatile. I only skiied them on firm snow, but my buddy uses them for 100% of his touring and loves them. Not as stiff as goats, but you probably don't need the stiffness for your use case.

Can't comment on the WCT or WCT 108. My low tide resort ski is a PBJ, which skis pretty firm and more "locked in" than the DWT, but I think at this point the skis are so different I'm just guessing.

Hope that helps.

[Kevo]

Welp, I just pulled the trigger on a pair of 190 Death Wish Tours with Moment/ATK Voyager bindings. Stoked to ski them.

Thanks for all of the help and feedback!

[I've seen black diamonds!]

Welp, I just pulled the trigger on a pair of 190 Death Wish Tours with Moment/ATK Voyager bindings. Stoked to ski them.

Thanks for all of the help and feedback!

Sick. Enjoy.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using TGR Forums mobile app

[Fred Pabst]

Check out the Head Kore series of skis. Pick your width. I use the 105 with a Look HM 12. It is not in the featherweight class, but is certainly light enough. Pretty awesome downhill performance, coming from someone who also owns/skis a R11.

[Fred Pabst]

Oops. Sorry. Late to the party. Enjoy the new skis.