• Women skiers, this is the place for you -- an online community without the male-orientation you'll find in conventional ski magazines and internet ski forums. At TheSkiDiva.com, you can connect with other women to talk about skiing in a way that you can relate to, about things that you find of interest. Be sure to join our community to participate (women only, please!). Registration is fast and simple. Just be sure to add [email protected] to your address book so your registration activation emails won't be routed as spam. And please give careful consideration to your user name -- it will not be changed once your registration is confirmed.

Seeking advice on AT gear

just jane

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Hey friends!

I am going on a backcountry hut trip in February, and started looking at renting an AT setup. It’s about a third of the cost of just buying everything, and we are contemplating going all in and investing in the full package. I *might* have one additional hut trip invite next spring as well, and if I went out 2 or 3 more days, it would make most sense to just buy. So - given all the supply chain challenges and shortages, I need to decide NOW if I want to buy.

My question - what boots and skis do the divas recommend? My downhill skis are 2015 Black Pearls (159), and we’re thinking the Sheeva 156 might be a good AT ski?

My downhill boots are Fischer Ranger One. We’re asking my DH’s backcountry partner for some advice (DH is a splitboarder, partner is a skier), but he’s a hard-charging ambitious late-20s early 30s dude, and I’m a 50yo backcountry beginner who will probably stick to pretty mellow backcountry terrain.

DH has extra beacon/shovel/probe, so I won’t need those. I need skis, bindings, boots and skins.

TIA for any tips!
 

just jane

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Ooh, we found the identical boots, just the touring model, at a discount, and I already know they fit my difficult-to-fit feet and calves, so we’re just going to pull the trigger on those.
 

Analisa

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I've helped a lot of women find touring gear, and the first place I always start is figuring out high level what their goals are and what the best fit is going to be between weight and downhill performance. (If you haven't toured before, there's definitely a trade off). Some women prioritize light weight so they can get to bigger objectives and keep pace with faster group members. Some want a heavier setup that feels more akin to our inbound gear.

I wrote a piece on the 4 major weight classes of touring gear, and a setup works best when the 3 components are from the same category, or at least tangential ones (like a freetour boot with a hybrid binding). Things get a little wonky when they're from drastically different ends of the spectrum.

The Ranger Free's a great hybrid boot and tends to fall a little more towards the light side for that product class. If you're committed to the boot, there are lots of good options in the Freetour and Hybrid classes that will pair well:

- Sheeva 10: Touring-capable, but definitely one of the heaviest skis I see women tour on regularly. If you're in a 159 BP, I'd bump up to the 164. The Sheeva skis much shorter than the BP, and the 156 is the opening size. I'd say that matches back to a BP skier on a 147 or 153 size. The Sheeva's heavy, but it's really versatile and handles both good and terrible conditions pretty well. It's super maneuverable, so if you're in unfamiliar terrain or have dense trees where you tour, it makes quick tight turns incredibly well.

-Maiden 101 Lite: Similar DNA to the Sheeva 10 (maneuverable and surfy), but in a poppier and lighter package.

-Pandora 94/104, Trace 98/108 (pre 2022), and Blaze 94/106: Popular 50/50 skis with broad appeal for their versatility. Works for progressing intermediates through experts and in a broad range of conditions

-2022 Trace series and Backland 98/107: Most popular freetour skis that come in a solid range of women's sizes.

Happy to dive deeper on any of the models. I'd also confirm the weight class you're targeting before diving into bindings. They're the most complex part of your setup and every ounce comes with safety considerations.
 

Attachments

  • touring-setups-classification.png
    touring-setups-classification.png
    576 KB · Views: 3

just jane

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Oh wow, this is soooo helpful! Thank you!

I was thinking of going a bit shorter than my downhill skis, because where I struggle most inbounds is turning in trees. (Well, anything in trees. But anything in trees is pretty much turning.) So I want something easy to turn.

And I don’t know about the newer BPs, but when I got mine everyone said they ski short. Can you say more about length? I'm 5’4”, uh, running 145-150 lbs at the moment (I was lighter when I got the skis thanks no thanks COVID). Granted, last season I felt like my increased weight was maybe a bit much for those skis but I digress - new downhill skis are not in the budget right now.

I saw the Sheevas on sale and I had demoed some several years ago inbounds which is why we looked at them, but I don’t like the idea of extra weight. I have no commitment there. I’m much more committed to the boots.
 

Analisa

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Yea! I've heard that about the Black Pearl and I got similar comments about my old Pandora 95. (I skied that in a 162 and was so confused when the 164 Sheeva 10 felt like snowblades in comparison). I think those comments are inaccurate. Are they an accessible flex that heavier and hard charging skiers can overpower? Yes. Is a fix for that sizing up? Also yes. But how long a ski feels is impacted by 2 things:

-Mount Point: The closer the recommended mount point is to the true center of the boot, the shorter a ski feels.

-Effective edge: Some skis have a really long section of rocker at the tips and tails (termed "rocker depth"). The substantial rocker at the tips of a ski are part of the tip-to-tail measurement, but it almost serves a different purpose. It's not always in contact with the snow. And it mainly is there to plane up and out of soft or inconsistent snow.

Typical mount points for 80-something all mountain skis ranges from -6 to -11, and the current Black Pearl is at -10. (The pre-2021 version was more accessible, but the old Black Pearl 98 was also at -10, so I'm fairly confident your are still in that ballpark). The mount for the Sheeva 10 is -7. Then I pulled the profile view of both skis below and marked where the tips and tails of both skis touch.

length.PNG

The comments about the BP might hold up against other all-mountain/frontside peers, but Freeride and Powder skis will almost always ski shorter and come in longer lengths.
 

just jane

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Ok, that makes a lot of sense. (Also I love visuals.)

So, if you don’t mind if I keep asking questions because wow this is helpful, from your description of the weight classifications, I probably want a freetour ski.

In an ideal world, I’d try to do some demoing, but in our current supply chain fractured reality, I think I need to find a theoretically compatible ski and jump on it, or everything will be out of stock by the time I can demo 3 or 4 skis and choose something.

Is it reasonable to pull the trigger on the Trace or Backland and assume they will most likely serve me well for a few years at least? And if my inbounds ski is 88 mm, is it more prudent to go with a mid-high 90 mm or go into the 100+ range? I would love to think I’ll be skiing all the powder and should go wide, but based on DH’s experience, I’ll get powder maybe 1/3 to 1/2 of our backcountry days.

Thank you again!
 

MissySki

Angel Diva
I have the Sheeva 9 as my AT ski with Shift bindings. Then I have a hybrid boot with walk mode. Atomic I'm still a beginner in backcountry skiing but did use my setup for an AIARE 1 class on Mount Washington last season and it did well. Certainly not the lightest thing out there, but it doesn't sound like you are trying to go ultralight either.
 

santacruz skier

Angel Diva
I have the Sheeva 9 as my AT ski with Shift bindings. Then I have a hybrid boot with walk mode. Atomic I'm still a beginner in backcountry skiing but did use my setup for an AIARE 1 class on Mount Washington last season and it did well. Certainly not the lightest thing out there, but it doesn't sound like you are trying to go ultralight either.
You have two pairs of Sheeva 9's? I'm kind of looking for the Sheeva 10's too.
Oops thread drift.....
 

WaterGirl

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
@just jane where is your hut trip and where do you usually ski? you may also want to check out this thread for what other Diva's have been using.....
 

just jane

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Thanks, Water Girl! I knew I’d seen threads on AT gear but trying to search “AT” - well, it’s kind of pointless.

The hut is Margy’s hut, near Aspen. It’s about 6 miles in, 2,500 ft elevation gain I think. We’ll be there for a couple of days and it looks like there’s a lot of mellow terrain in the area.

In the meantime, DH will probably take me on day trips on the easier runs on Berthoud Pass and other front range-adjacent safe areas.
 

tjm235

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I'd highly recommend doing a couple tours, or skin up your local resort a few times in advance of the trip to break in your boots and identify hot spots... 6 miles/2500' with an overnight pack would be a long approach for your first time skinning (at least sounds like this would be your first time??)... you don't want to develop blisters or hot spots in your boots right off the bat.
 

just jane

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Oh yes! I plan to do some day trips and/or resort skinning before the hut trip! It’s not until February so I’ll have plenty of time.
 

Analisa

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
@just jane Perfect.

So first - misspoke a bit on the Traces. They didn't change, Powder7 just had inaccurate info. They're still around 1400g per ski, not 1250.

In terms of width, I'm assuming you're in CO based on your trip info. I think that mid-90s to mid-100s is a really well rounded touring ski for that zone. (I'm in WA, and tend to recommend 98+ around here, but our snow is cement-y-er and terrain is a lot of steep trees. It's hard to get a ton of speed, so we need all the help we can get to get our skis to plane).

Also, in terms of demoing, I'm a huge fan of Evo's 365+1 return policy. You can always snatch something up and wait to mount it til you see if you get the chance to test it out.

You mentioned your inbound skis being 88, so the other consideration is whether you want this ski to come out on any resort powder days.

- Armada Trace 98: Is it a freeride ski or a 50/50 ski? The Trace really skirts the line. Blister called this model the best place to start for beginner tourers with absolutely no clue what they want. They're intuitive to get used to, and also fairly forgiving. Heavy enough that there's no adjustment process coming from a resort ski. Deep rocker lines make it float well for its width. Holds an edge well. If you want a ski that can do resort duties on powder days, this is a great ski to narrow in on.

- Atomic Backland 98 / 100 (same ski, skis get wider with each length): These have an incredible reputation for stability at their weight. I've heard from several sources that they're not the most compliant when you're shifted into the backseat, but as long as you're leaned forward, they're easy to bend into carves or slide into surfy, pivot-y turns. They have a cap-wall hybrid construction, where there's some sidewall underfoot to help with torsional stability and edge hold, but the cap portion keeps weight reasonable. Atomic launched these last year and seems to have overforecasted. (Their old women's 102 was a mega hot seller, but also had a $499 MSRP). There's a lot of last year's units on the market on sale, and the new 2022 topsheet seems to be in healthy stock most places. (They delivered pretty early in late summer).

- Faction Agent 2.0X: Fairly similar story to the Backland, but ~100-150g heavier. Most of the Agent line gets a pretty burly reputation, but Faction scales the Agent pretty dramatically. (A 180 Agent is going to be a lot stiffer, more rearwardly mounted, and have a longer turn radius than a similar sizes Line Pandora/Sick Day. But at a 155, they're fairly similar). These are mounted a smidgen further back than its peers, so I imagine it's similar to the Backland where it's not the easiest to steer from the backseat, but otherwise pretty compliant.

- K2 TalkBack 96: Similar weight to the Backland, but easier to ski, and more intuitive and forgiving like the Trace. Semi cap construction.

- Moment Sierra Tour: In that 1400g ballpark like the Trace. Mounted closer to center (-5cm) and full twin tip and deep rocker lines, so these are going to be very surfy and pivot-y. I'd consider them the closest thing to a touring-specific Sheeva. If you want to feel confident in trees, these things turn on a dime. Also really nice for feeling in control on challenging and unfamiliar terrain, knowing that you've got top notch maneuverability.

- Santa Ana 93 Unlimited: Around 1300g, so if you're not sure if you want something that's the Trace/Agent weight or something the Backland/Talkback weight, this splits the difference. Middle of the road mount point, middle of the road rocker depth.

- DPS Pagoda Tour 100: Caveat, these are mad expensive. But they're extremely light and very stable for how little they weigh. Insane amount of rocker and a very tight sidecut, which means the ski is super maneuverable. I have a heavier (50/50 ski sort of weight), older version from Craigslist, and I'm very impressed how easy they are to ski, but unlike a lot of approachable skis, I've never found their top end when I ski them aggressively.

There are a few others from Volkl, Black Diamond, Voile, and G3, but some of them are full cap construction and a number of them lack any good comprehensive reviews or stats. But I'm happy to dig into more if something here isn't jumping out or if one of those has been recommended.
 

just jane

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
This is amazingly helpful!!

I’ve been googling all these skis all afternoon. From your descriptions, I’m really drawn to the Moment Sierra, but the K2 Talkback 96 looks like more reasonable price point.

The Atomic Backland 98 has the best prices, but I’m torn. I try hard to stay out of the backseat, but I tend to go there more in really challenging terrain. So maybe it would be good in that it would force me forward more (also better for my arthritic cranky knees), but I sort of want something more forgiving to start for when I do go back? I’m not sure what the best strategy is for a reasonably experienced inbounds, noob backcountry skier.

At this particular moment I’m leaning K2 for the combo of slightly easier to ski than the Backland, but a substantially lower price point than the Moment.
 

Analisa

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
@just jane I'd definitely err on the side of a comfortable ski for backcountry and make any stretch ski an inbounds setup. Inbounds terrain is maintained (trees are gladed, cliffs are signed). Terrain's familiar. My "stretch" ski that forces me to ski better is an inbound pair, and my touring skis are definitely more nimble than anything in my inbound quiver. Plus, inbounds, you're skiing on fresh legs. The more vert I put in on the uphill, the less oomph I have in the tank on the way down. I hauled my DPSs up 7000ft for Mt Adams this summer and felt like a baby deer on the way down.

I think the Talkback's a really good call. It's known for being an easy ski to get along with, and I know a few guys who got the men's Wayback just after learning to ski and have been pretty happy with it throughout their progression. It's not the floatiest or the most stable in chunder-y conditions, but it gets the job done.

The Sierra's a tad heavier and you might be able to consolidate purchases if you were ever considering a wider companion for a quiver. But at the same time, I think that the Talkback will be really nice for a hut trip. I took my Pandoras for a week in BC and I had never had issues with the weight, but on day 4, I was beyond sore and had a really hard time steering my skis. Lighter weight will keep you feeling fresh for longer.

Let me know if you have any other questions or if we should move on to bindings!
 

just jane

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Whew. Okay, yes, thanks, ready for the next step. DH already purchased the Dynafit Radical bindings on the advice of his backcountry buddy, but I think I saw in the other thread that you don’t like them? We can return them if I need to go a different direction.

I also need to jump on skins quickly, they seem to be scarce. It looks like they’re typically mohair, nylon and a hybrid. We can’t find any nylon ones available, just mohair and hybrid.
 

WaterGirl

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Here is a quick review of the types of skins/ uses - really a lot depends on your terrain / approach and what you value - grip or glide.


However, K2 specifically makes a skin for your ski - and that's what the holes are for on the tips of the skis.

Description - https://www.evo.com/outlet/climbing-skins/k2-wayback-96/talkback
According to Evo made by Pomoca and is a 70/30 blend.

I totally agree that you need to find the skins now. Last month I was finally able to pick up skins I ordered back in February.

Dynafit Radicals specifically or ? there are several different Dynafits. Every binding is going to have a trade off or features you may or may not want. That's really a personal choice.

You should also get a pair of crampons when you determine what bindings you are using ;)
 

Analisa

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
@just jane The Radical ST's spot on the market is to be an entry level price point. It's maximizing profit on old R&D. It was built for the 2011/2012 season, and hasn't really seen any changes since beyond some modernized colors. Meanwhile sales in touring have exploded since and brands have reinvested that in safer, lighter options. It weighs 550g. It has no elastic travel. Elastic travel accommodates micro-movements your boot makes and keeps you in the binding. Most inbound bindings have 10mm of heel/vertical elasticity and 20mm of toe/lateral elasticity. My friend skis a binding with only 4mm of toe elasticity, and it's reliable 99% of the time, but she did have it prerelease at the toe when we were side slipping an icy couloir that didn't soften up like we expected. Elasticity also has some safety implications for release. For bindings without travel, when you flex the ski, the back pins press deeper into the boot. (The Radical has a 5.5mm gap between the heel tower and the boot that looks like this so that you have room to flex a ski). However, if you're falling while the ski is flexed, the last thing you want is for your skis to be more firmly attached to your boot. There's a pattern of backwards twisting falls taking out some bones and ligaments since they're the forces that flex the ski and make it hard to release when you need to.

I got the ST 2.0 in 2015, which is basically the same as the Rotation on the market now. Dynafit added elastic travel and a spring loaded heel. The elastic travel helps keep the ski on when you need it. The spring loaded heel addressed the back pins. These heel pieces don't need the mounting gap. The spring keeps the forward pressure consistent when the ski bends as you flex and unflex it. Zero gap bindings also tend to dampen vibrations in bad snow. The G3 Ion and Fritschi Vipec work the same, and have ISO DIN Touring certification, which is almost as stringent as the safety and release requirements for an inbound binding. It also means that a 4 DIN is going to be the same as a 4 DIN inbounds. For a non-certified binding like the Radical, that DIN setting is just approximate. And they got this result without adding a ton of weight (those 3 bindings weigh 537-599g)

The Kingpin and Tecton both fixed the heel pin issue by just making it like an inbound binding where the heel clamps down on the heel welt. They both also have elastic travel and have DIN certs, and weigh around 660g.

At the same time, some brands are making bindings with the same features as the Radical, but in a much lighter package. The Marker Alpinist 10 has similar features. It's has some better features like being gapless and 4mm of elastic travel. Some are a little worse (the vertical release setting is set, while the lateral release can range from 4-10, the brakes are sold separately, the heel risers don't add a ton of height compared to peers). It's also $429 before brakes and $489 after. But it weighs 345g compared to 550g on the Radical. The G3 Zed and ATK Raider both compete in this "350-ish grams, has some safety and performance features, but not all the bells and whistles of a certified binding" class. These are more ultralight bindings than freetour. Essentially the Radical offers ultralight features at a freetour weight. The Rotation's on sale at Backcountry for an extra $30 and offers a major upgrade in safety and performance. Or the Alpinist could offer similar performance with almost a pound shaved off your setup.
 

Latest posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
26,993
Messages
514,146
Members
9,259
Latest member
LillianGilroy
Top