Backcountry Skiing

 

Re: strap-ons

On Dec 18, 4:28 pm, eug...@cse.ucsc.edu (Eugene Miya) wrote:
> >>I can't believe I'm the only one that gets sore feet from ski boots. So, I'm
> >>serious. Looking for serious responses.
>
> That's lots of people.
>
> Will Steger, the guys who did ski circuses to both Poles and lives in
> MN made some sort of plastic binding for use with his mukluks, but don't
> expect much kick and glide. I tried them once years ago because they
> were around, but I preferred my 75 mm set up, and I didn't get blisters or
> cold feet.
>
Those bindings are called Berwin Backcountry Bindings. They were
originally made by Bill and Gene Prater's Sherpa snowshoe company, so
sometimes you'll hear (or see, if you have the old tan model) them
called Sherpa bindings. Now they are made and distributed by Akers
Cross-County Ski Shop in Andover, ME. (http://www.akers-ski.com/) The
new, blue ones are pretty bomb-proof. Avoid the late 1990's black
model. They had a well-deserved repuation for breaking under the ball
of the foot.

I use them with either mukluks or Sorel lace-up winter boots (NOT
pacs!) on a pair of Trak Bushwacker II skis. I have been using them
since they came out, and they are very comfortable. I don't have the
strongest ankles in the world, particularly on the left side, but I
never have any problems with mukluks and the Berwin/Bushwacker combo.
I can switch back and forth between skis and snowshoes and not change
footwear, which is a nice convenience.

All that being said, I agree with those who suggest trying a different
boot. I have a pair of Karhu Converts, which are a strong backcountry,
3-pin boot, which I actually wear the majority of the time I am
skiing. I find they help to keep the afore-mentioned left ankle and
fallen arches in place nicely when skiing for extended tours. To me,
that justifies the extra weight. I also have a pair of strictly
recreational 3-pin Alpha boots that I bought on a ski trip to the U.P.
of Michigan, when the toe broke off my old LL Bean ski boots. They are
warm and comfortable, but I can't use them for ski patrol or search
and rescue.

I have a pair of old Army skis with Ramer cable bindings on them.
Great, bomb-proof (literally, I think) binding, which also work with
my Converts. But I don't think your problem is the binding. Check out
some new boots, wear the socks you will wear when you ski. I am sure,
with the help of a knowlegable ski shop, you should be able to
eliminate the pain problem.

Ski safe,
Hans Erdman, WEMT
Backcountry Trail Patrol, MN
www.trailpatrol.org
www.wintersnowtrails.org
 

Article References :

strap-ons
Re: strap-ons
 

See Also : Re: Best binding for the new Karhu Mountain XCD with Garmont Excursion boot


"geoff" wrote in message
news:1142516896.659582.166560@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> and I think they start to work in more powder conditions,
> breaking trail, or generally in truer backcountry conditions.
>
> That is exactly why I went for the new Mountain design. I wanted a
> "true" backcountry ski, in my own definition at least. Which entailed
> not deciding where exactly you would be at any time *hey those few
> trees look cool* *oops, had to stop and deal with the dog in deep
> snow kind of thing*. Plus, the conditions here in Northern Colorado
> are changing all the time. We can go from piles of soft snow you shall
> not break trail in any ski I don't care if it's a boat -> down to a
> nice thaw cycle with a nice shiney surface. And mind you, this is all
> in motion and happens kinda fast here. I wanted to go with a true tour
> setup as well, but the Mountain XCD ski is demanding of a burlier
> setup just due to the width alone I imagine. Which is fine, because I
> would like to have a Backcountry setup with a boot where I do not have
> to worry about my feet becoming cold. I think the Garmont Excursion
> will fit this bill. I won't mind sacrificing a little more touring
> knowing I will be able to basically do whatever I want and not have to
> worry about my toes freezing off. This is probably even more of a
> consideration with true Backcountry skiing due to the fact you might go
> out on a day trip and possibly have to belay.
>
> I think the real question, once again, is what binding to throw on a
> "Cirque Class" ski like this. Ok, I am probably not going to take
> them to any Cirque, but I could, and I most likely would if I put a
> cable binding on them. However, that certainly is not my intent with
> these skis. I have two other AT setups for that sort of thing. I
> guess it would be fun to use them at the ski resort area on the more
> tame slopes and practice Tele turns and seeing how far I could push
> them, but that also does not sound very wise in terms of I value my
> equipment more than that. So we are once again, in the Backcountry
> for a nice day of strolling with your dog and possibly making a few
> turns that at least feel good! :)
>
> I had to throw in a little extra fun though since I was worried I would
> not float or glide as much as I had hoped with a pair of skis like
> these, got em' in a 185cm length. I weigh no more than 130lbs and I
> am short by european standards, so these skis should ride like a
> train, but a very very fun train! Got a pair of moderately heavy
> Alpina backcountry poles in a 145cm length as well, should prove to be
> a good workout nonetheless! Sometimes I rethink about a 175cm length
> for the Mountain ski but with a decent sized pack (which is typical for
> backcountry travel) and all my gear I can easily start to edge closer
> to the 150lb range.
>
> I still would like to find a glidier setup, but unfortunately I think
> I the Pinnacle would be the 'least' in terms of construction I would go
> for the type of terrain where I live and play. My backyard is over 30
> degree vertical in some spots! haha - sure wish it snowed at my
> house more.
>

I haven't had enough time on either ski this season, but my thoughts were
similar - but geared towards the conditions I can expect here in
mid-Atlantic (WV mostly...) which is hardpack or less than a foot of powder
after a 'big' dump. I'm right at 150lb *w/out a pack* and I went with the
175 XCD-GT's. Last time I was out in icy conditions, I was very glad I had
NOT gone longer. My technique is probably lacking, but I opted to ski them
a little shorter. Don't have far to sink anyway (LOL) and I figure with a
pack on I'd be better off with more control - snowshoeing really...

I agree that you're into a different scale, even if not an order of
magnitude. The excursions are said to tour very well and I'd want the
control out west on 'big' snow. Around here, any thinsulated boot actually
makes my feet sweat! I also found the new Karhu boots run on the large
side, so that I'm wearing more sock than usual.

Sadly, all ski gear is probably going in storage today. Winter I think, is
over. I may take skis with me later in month when I visit Montreal.
Haven't decided if it's worth the hassle for a day of skiing....
a