Backland 100's vs Locator 104's

[edepow]

Looking to see if anyone has experience with any of these skis! I know the Backlands are super popular and probably for good reason, but I'm hoping to compare them against the Armada Locator for a daily-driver touring ski.

I'm in the PNW so mainly ski soft but heavy snow. I'm looking for a ski around 100-110mm underfoot. I come from a directional skiing/racing background more-so than newschool but lately have been enjoying a more centred stance and more playful, poppy, smeary skis. I'm about 155lbs, 5'11, usually ski around 175-180cm for backcountry and will be mounting them with a lighter tech binding.

I'm an advanced/expert skier. I'm not a charger and don't go into the backcountry to do huge GS turns on open faces. I prefer more playful terrain, popping off stuff, making short-radius turns. The ability to do a bigger turn followed by slashing or smearing into a few quicker turns is nice. I also find myself often in tight trees – especially during ski-outs and on icy tracks so the ability to make quick turns is essential. Come spring, I transition to doing bigger days and more technical lines (couliors, steep faces, PNW volcanoes) and traverses and I would want this ski to be useful in that regard too. I'm not a huge weight weeny but lighter helps, mostly concerned about edge hold in firm conditions.

Top picks are Backland 100 or Locator 104 for a all-around touring ski and weight around 1400-1500g.

I have skied in the past:

- Zero G 95's - felt too traditional, hooky in variable or deep snow and uninspiring overall. Good edge grip though on hard pack. Needed me to really be driving them to get the most out of them.

- ZAG UBAC 95's - like the ZG95's, but a little more playful and less traditional.

- G3 Tonic - super stiff, but nicely damped (though these were a 2000g ski...). Also very directional.

- DPS Wailer 112's - liked these, thought they felt a little squirrely at speed but I did get too short a length for me (178s...). Did not like them on hardpack the very few days I skied icier conditions.

- Black Diamond Covert Carbon 105s - can't really remember too much about these, but they felt nice and lively, maybe a touch too stiff in the tails and directional.

- Praxis Backcountry 100's - it's been a good 6-7 years since I skied these but I remember really liking them, they felt like a good mix of dampness, playful but still stiff in the ways I wanted. I think a ski like this but around 1400-1500g would be just about perfect, but I can't quite remember how these skied. I don't remember skiing them much on hardpack, though.

[skis_the_trees]

...
- Praxis Backcountry 100's - it's been a good 6-7 years since I skied these but I remember really liking them, they felt like a good mix of dampness, playful but still stiff in the ways I wanted. I think a ski like this but around 1400-1500g would be just about perfect, but I can't quite remember how these skied. I don't remember skiing them much on hardpack, though.

I think part of the problem with finding that huckleberry is that the weight is part of the reason those skis ski so well. Most 1800-1900g touring skis will perform better on the down than a 1400-1500g ski. People do seem to like the Backlands though and they are well reviewed on this forum. You might consider the Dynastar M-Tour 99. I have the older version (Mythic) and I think they are amazing for the ~1400g weight, and my uses and skiing style sound similar to yours.

[edepow]

I think part of the problem with finding that huckleberry is that the weight is part of the reason those skis ski so well. Most 1800-1900g touring skis will perform better on the down than a 1400-1500g ski. People do seem to like the Backlands though and they are well reviewed on this forum. You might consider the Dynastar M-Tour 99. I have the older version (Mythic) and I think they are amazing for the ~1400g weight, and my uses and skiing style sound similar to yours.

Totally, thanks! Since I hadn't skied them for a number of years I sort of wondered if ski-building advancements (new tech, materials, knowledge, etc) could make up for that weight, and a modern 1400-1500g ski would feel more like a 1700-1800g ski. At least, some reviews say that and speak towards the Backlands feeling pretty damp for how light they are. It kind of surprises me people mount and even recommend putting shifts on them to ski as a resort ski.

[Benneke10]

Backland 100s are super stiff in the tails, otherwise they are pretty good skis. If you're on the front of your boots all the time you might like them, but I found them pretty difficult to manage compared to some other skis in the category. Haven't skied the Locators. If you're on a budget I recommend looking at the Dynafit Free 97 and 107, I have the older Beast 108 which are very similar and they are great skis. If you have more to spend, check out the Heritage Lab C105 and Volkl BMT 109.

[edepow]

Backland 100s are super stiff in the tails, otherwise they are pretty good skis. If you're on the front of your boots all the time you might like them, but I found them pretty difficult to manage compared to some other skis in the category. Haven't skied the Locators. If you're on a budget I recommend looking at the Dynafit Free 97 and 107, I have the older Beast 108 which are very similar and they are great skis. If you have more to spend, check out the Heritage Lab C105 and Volkl BMT 109.

Thanks, yea the Dynafit free 97 and 107 have also crossed my mind, I'll look into thoughs.

In what sorts of circumstances did the Backland 100's feel difficult to manage? I'm admittedly not driving my tips all the time, especially on bigger days when I get a bit lazy and tired.

[kootenayskier]

I’ve seen great deals on Dynafit Beast 98s recently.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[dub_xion]

Curious what boots OP is using?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[edepow]

Curious what boots OP is using?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Will be driving them with S/LAB Summits for backcountry, but also have a pair of S/LAB MTN for resort and bigger skis.

[BeefSupreme]

I haven’t been on either, but you mentioned that you’re looking for a more centered ride so I’ll just note that the locators have a recommended mount point of like -10.

I just got the 112s and that was something that I was a little nervous about, curious to see how it pans out.

[Island Bay]

Praxis BC in 190 is 8 pounds a pair, so 1800gr per ski. 180 is 1700gr. 106mm waist.

I had the 190 and foolishly sold them. They were very good in powder for their width, and had a high speed limit unless conditions were very hard. Good on soft groomers too. With a light modern binding you're only a hair above 2000gr pr ski.

[Benneke10]

In what sorts of circumstances did the Backland 100's feel difficult to manage? I'm admittedly not driving my tips all the time, especially on bigger days when I get a bit lazy and tired.

They are just very difficult to control from the backseat, and you kind of have to wrench them around in weird snow sometimes. This is with a -2cm mount that a lot of people recommend and says helps alleviate the problem. There are a lot of reviews out there about the ski that recognize these issues in the ski but couldn't quite diagnose the problem. I loaned my pair to a much more knowledgable friend and he was able to pinpoint the issue. Its frustrating because they are such good skis on paper! And I have friends who are better skiers than me who seem to get along fine with the Backland 100.

[Benneke10]

I’ve seen great deals on Dynafit Beast 98s recently.

Where at?

[edepow]

They are just very difficult to control from the backseat, and you kind of have to wrench them around in weird snow sometimes. This is with a -2cm mount that a lot of people recommend and says helps alleviate the problem. There are a lot of reviews out there about the ski that recognize these issues in the ski but couldn't quite diagnose the problem. I loaned my pair to a much more knowledgable friend and he was able to pinpoint the issue. Its frustrating because they are such good skis on paper! And I have friends who are better skiers than me who seem to get along fine with the Backland 100.

Huh ok, good context! It’s super hard to sift through reviews and decipher what’s what, so many opinions and it’s all very subjective. So the stiff tails make them hard to ski and grabby in variable snow.

I’m a strong skier but definitely don’t always or want to drive from the tips all the time

[kootenayskier]

Where at?

CAN$399
https://shop.trackntrail.ca/dynafit-beast-98.html


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[hick]

I’ll chime in on the Backland 100. I’m on the opposite end of the spectrum from Benneke10, I think the backland 100 is a pretty easy ski in most conditions I use them for. Mounted 1.5 behind recommended. I’m on 188 (180#)with F1 lts on these most of the time. I think the 100 is a good all rounder, medium radius turns feel most natural on them and what I like about them most is that I feel I can break them loose and slarve on them easier than most light touring oriented skis. I’m mostly using them for go far days 6-10 mile approaches and firmer or shitty snow. Depends on conditions whether I drive them or ski them without any cuff pressure from the middle of the boot. I’ve been drawn to the specs of the Locater also, would love to hear more experiences with that ski…


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Benneke10]

Didn't mean to say that the Backland 100 is a difficult ski, but it isn't as effortless as some others when paired with very light boots, having tried pretty much all the options on the market. My favorites are the Volkl BMT, Dynafit Beast, and Heritage Lab, but if those options didn't exist I would probably still own the Backland 100s (although I am curious about the Faction La Machine series, which I have not tried yet). I also like the Voile Hyper skis but they are very much powder-specific, as they are pretty awful on firm and breakable crust, while the Backland 100 is much more versatile. The majority of lightweight touring skis are more difficult to ski.

[hick]

^^ah, gotcha.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[edepow]

I’ll chime in on the Backland 100. I’m on the opposite end of the spectrum from Benneke10, I think the backland 100 is a pretty easy ski in most conditions I use them for. Mounted 1.5 behind recommended. I’m on 188 (180#)with F1 lts on these most of the time. I think the 100 is a good all rounder, medium radius turns feel most natural on them and what I like about them most is that I feel I can break them loose and slarve on them easier than most light touring oriented skis. I’m mostly using them for go far days 6-10 mile approaches and firmer or shitty snow. Depends on conditions whether I drive them or ski them without any cuff pressure from the middle of the boot. I’ve been drawn to the specs of the Locater also, would love to hear more experiences with that ski…


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Thanks for sharing! Where do you ski? And how do they handle in firmer conditions would you say? Things like refrozen spring corn, a large part of my ski year is in the spring doing bigger days and with more variable snow.

[Tjaardbreeuwer]

Thanks for sharing! Where do you ski? And how do they handle in firmer conditions would you say? Things like refrozen spring corn, a large part of my ski year is in the spring doing bigger days and with more variable snow.

I have the Backland 100 in 188, mounted 1 cm back I think.
I’m 6’5”, 175lbs, plus a 15-20lbs pack. I use Backland Pro boots in them.
I am a mediocre skier at best, and often get defensive/backseat.

I only got them last season, so I don’t have a ton of time on them yet.
They have really good edge hold on firm, icy snow. (For a wider, tapered ski). More bite than my QST 98, when I switched mid day once last spring. Both had sharp edges.
10” fresh chop inbounds, they were fine and easy to ski, but got knocked around a fair bit (because they are super light).
On corn, or shallow inbounds slush, no issues releasing the tails.
In deep, light pow, and warmed up pow, not super loose and slarvy, but not hard either.

My inbounds skis this season are QST 98’s and before that I had K2 Marksman and Wayback 106, so definitely quite loose skis.


The only time I wondered if a different ski would have been easier, was some pretty soft, deep slush, over exposure.
Hard to say if my struggles, and defensive skiing was due to tough snow and scary consequences making me nervous, or if a different ski would have felt more confidence inspiring.

I suspect both.

I would also not call them grabby, more that it was harder to release the tails than I would like in those conditions.

[hick]

Thanks for sharing! Where do you ski? And how do they handle in firmer conditions would you say? Things like refrozen spring corn, a large part of my ski year is in the spring doing bigger days and with more variable snow.

SW MT primarily, Absaroka Beartooth and Crazy Mountains. I did take them to Eastern Sierra last spring and I like them in corn, unripe corn coral reef shit snow and were as good as one would expect a 100mm waist ski in mashed potatoes. I had Volkl BMT 94s before these as my go far ski. I prefer the backland 100 on hard pack due to the little bit of suspension the camber provides. That was my only complaint with the BMT 94, my knees got worked when it was firm. TLDNR: I like the backland 100 on firm snow as it’s typically not consistently firm here, but punchy or rotten at some point in the same run (think about the variables with 5-6k of vert from valley floor late winter/early spring).


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[edepow]

SW MT primarily, Absaroka Beartooth and Crazy Mountains. I did take them to Eastern Sierra last spring and I like them in corn, unripe corn coral reef shit snow and were as good as one would expect a 100mm waist ski in mashed potatoes. I had Volkl BMT 94s before these as my go far ski. I prefer the backland 100 on hard pack due to the little bit of suspension the camber provides. That was my only complaint with the BMT 94, my knees got worked when it was firm. TLDNR: I like the backland 100 on firm snow as it’s typically not consistently firm here, but punchy or rotten at some point in the same run (think about the variables with 5-6k of vert from valley floor late winter/early spring).


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Thanks yea, sounds like a lot of the skiing I do in early spring when there's huge temp fluctuations and less freshies.

[johnny ballgame]

I've got Locator 104's. New to touring, only managed a few short tours and 5 or 6 deep-ish resort days on them (shifts). I'm light at 135 lbs and not super aggressive, so figured they'd be fine for lifts on soft days.

Recommend these for your smeary, playful, popping, and also bigger GS powder turns. Easy to maneuver. I'm not too sure about edge grip on a steep face with variable snow, however. Inbounds they were fine on medium angle hard snow groomers, but grip wasn't great for me on steeper pitches. Not terrible, mind, but not aces.

[edepow]

I've got Locator 104's. New to touring, only managed a few short tours and 5 or 6 deep-ish resort days on them (shifts). I'm light at 135 lbs and not super aggressive, so figured they'd be fine for lifts on soft days.

Recommend these for your smeary, playful, popping, and also bigger GS powder turns. Easy to maneuver. I'm not too sure about edge grip on a steep face with variable snow, however. Inbounds they were fine on medium angle hard snow groomers, but grip wasn't great for me on steeper pitches. Not terrible, mind, but not aces.

Sweet thanks! We're you ripping the groomers and felt confident on them?

[johnny ballgame]

Sweet thanks! We're you ripping the groomers and felt confident on them?

They felt good on groomers, pleasantly surprised. Guessing the metal under the binding area helps. I wasn't really trying to find top end speed, and I'm advanced but not expert. Noticed a bit more chatter compared to resort skis, just not as much as anticipated.

I think Locator 104's will do most anything you ask of them in powder and soft snow. I hesitate to recommend them for situations in which you need excellent grip on steep hard snow, but that's really just a guess based on a limited amount of turns.

[edepow]

They felt good on groomers, pleasantly surprised. Guessing the metal under the binding area helps. I wasn't really trying to find top end speed, and I'm advanced but not expert. Noticed a bit more chatter compared to resort skis, just not as much as anticipated.

I think Locator 104's will do most anything you ask of them in powder and soft snow. I hesitate to recommend them for situations in which you need excellent grip on steep hard snow, but that's really just a guess based on a limited amount of turns.

Thanks! sounds rad and like it'll fit my needs. I don't aim to be in super consequential terrain but it happens, try to pick my days for when its at least a bit soft.