For inspiration: a true viking breaks a record

Ken,

Fischer stopped making the Revolutions many years ago. The original
model came only in one size (147 cm.), and was either waxable or
waxless. Nobody bought either, really. They didn't really work well
for the targeted consumer. HOWEVER, I personally don't think that
there is a better ski out there for the purpose of backcountry skating
than the WAXABLE REVOLUTION. I've tried similar Rossi models, newer
Fischers, Madshus, but nothing compares to the Revo's for me. But
they're not for everybody, and I realize that. A lot of people believe
they're too short, and to be honest, they take a few hours of getting
used to before you can handle the length properly. If you're
interested in getting some, check old rental sales or garage sales,
because there were quite a few out there for a while, and I'm sure
they're collecting dust in many garages.

Fischer also made another Revolution ski called the Adventure
Revolution, which I think you would probably like the best for your
type of touring. It was a little longer than the original Revolution,
at 157 cm., wider, and heavier. It also has full metal edges. It also
came in waxable or waxless. The waxless ski was basically worthless,
but for high mountain skate cruising, the metal edges, extra width and
bulk of the Adventure has its place. We use the original Revo for
cruising around Tahoe and Yosemite, where the terrain is a little less
steep. When we go a little farther south, such as out of Bishop or Big
Pine, I find that the better turnability and metal edges of the
Adventures make up for the fact that it's heavier and slower.

As Nathan mentioned, the new PACER SKATE might make for a good
alternative, but I haven't had a chance to really try them much.
There's also the new POWERLIGHT waxable, which has metal edges, which
might also work, but again, I haven't had a chance to work with them.
Your Pellestova's are definitely worth a try, but my opinion is that
they're a little too heavy and slow for real enjoyable skating unless
you're in some very steep terrain, which, imho, isn't that suitable
for skating anyway.

I agree that Rock Creek to Mammoth is probably better South to North
because of the terrain, but in general I like to stick to skiing down
the softer side, and booting up the steep slopes (often with the
crutch of an ice tool - it's amazing how well Salomon skate boots
front point!). And yes, those bullet-proof days are great when you're
trying to cover as many miles as possible, but sometimes you end up
hitting one of those icy slopes you THINK is going to soften up, and
then the sphincter gets REALLY tight, and, well, you know...

happy skiing,

Mark

"Ken Roberts" wrote in message ...
Thanks for all the ideas, Mark.

now using only Revolutions (or sometimes
Fischer Adventures for the really steep and icy tours).

I can't find the Revolutions on the Fischer website any more. I never owned
a pair, and it seems that Fischer also used the "Revolution" label for some
of its alpine skis. So let me make sure I understand what you're using:
-- short ski
-- metal edge (?)
-- waxable base for skating (?) (even though it also came in no-wax
versions)

I wonder if my Madshus Pellestova skis are close enough to the Revolutions,
of if I should consider getting something more specific for Sierra high
tours. The Pellestovas are 178 cm, pair-weight around 2 kg, full metal
edge, waxable base, enough sidecut for better downhill turning than I would
have guessed -- and I use them with my Salomon Combi Race boots.

Yes, carrying a heavy pack has taken me to some great places, but "fun"
doesn't usually come to mind until I take it off. And "going for it" on a
point-to-point backcountry traverse in a single day adds a dimension of
seriousness and commitment that I don't find in racing. Much of my race
training looks beyond to April and May, preparing to be fast enough when the
"right" day comes there on the Sierra Eastside. (But I do try to bring
enough clothing with me so I feel like I'd have a good chance of surviving
if I were still out after the sun goes down.)

Now I'm learning to apply that to some of my planning. But when I did Rock
Creek to Mammoth in two days, I came away convinced that South-to-North was
clearly the way to go for that one section of the Sierra Crest. Because
most of the steep slopes are on the south side. So I found I could just
take my skis off and boot up those, then get a long cruise down the
less-steep slopes on the other side. And something Marty Hornick told me
made me think pretty definitely that he did his under-8-hour achievement in
the South-to-North direction, and was happy with that plan.
=
My experience skating across Humpheys Basin in April a couple of years ago
was completely different. It had been hot and mushy the day _before_, while
I was preparing. Then it froze real hard, and like crossing Desolation
Lake -- never mind skating, even with metal edges -- I could barely get my
pole tips to dig in.

Nathan -

The Fischer-ski.com website is not clear on this either -- if the Pacer
Skate model in their Nordic Cruise line has metal edges or not.

Judging by how heavy they are, I do _hope_ they have metal edges.

If so, then it looks like Fischer's Pacer Skate in the short 151 cm size
would be the closest thing to the old Revolution.

But the only model in the Nordic Cruiser line that Fischer-ski.com actually
_says_ has metal edges is the "Explorer". The shortest Explorers are 164
cm, which at 1.790 kg per meter comes to an estimated total weight of 2.9
kg -- which is heavier than I weighed my current pair of Madshus
Pellestovas.

Ken

Mark -

Sounds like if I really want to find an improvement on my current
light-backcountry setup, I better look for an old pair of Revolutions, like
you suggest.

the new PACER SKATE

Near as I can tell, the Pacer Skates are only 15% lighter than my Madshus
Pellestovas -- and that's only because the 151 cm length is 15% _shorter_
than my Pellestovas. I wonder if it has very much sidecut for turning --
since the Fischer-ski.com website as I viewed it today does not give any
width numbers, just says "SkateCut". And it does not mention any metal
edges.

There's also the new POWERLIGHT waxable

Using the numbers I found today on the Fischer-ski.com website, the shortest
PowerLights are 161 cm, and at 1.390 kg per meter, that comes to a total
weight of 2.24 kg -- just about the same as my current Pellestovas.

I bought my Madshus Pellestovas a few years ago because I thought they were
the lightest full-metal-edge skis I could find back then. And they had been
warmly recommended by Steve Barnett, a high-country nordic skier.

I've measured them as 178 cm long, pair-weight about 2.2 kg, width and
sidecut 62 / 52 / 57 mm. Seems to me they would deliver more surface area
per kg -- for surviving those slushy afternoons you've been warning about.

The only problem with the Pellestovas is that the camber might be a bit
_soft_ for optimal skating -- because they're designed for downhill turning
and classic wax -- a problem which might also hold for the Fischer
Powerlight and Explorer models.

Which brings me back to the old Revolution: If the ski is short enough,
softness and sidecut are less important for downhill turning performance.
Also edge-grip could be better, since the edging-force per length ratio is
higher.

it's amazing how well Salomon skate boots front point

I've noticed that you more experienced mountain travelers are much more
comfortable than I am wandering around without crampons in springtime in the
Sierras.

I still wish somebody would make a "toe-bar protector" for SNS boots, for
climbing over steep passes. The idea of field-repairing a broken toe-bar 13
miles out in the backcountry is daunting.

Ken

Ken,

A couple of comments, and then I'll let this thing go...

From what I've seen, the Pacer Skate doesn't seem anything like the
old Revolutions, so I doubt that it will ski similarly. It doesn't
have a metal edge, but to me that's an advantage, since I use the
Revolution without metal edges about 20 to 1 over the Adventures. The
fact that the Revo's don't have much sidecut isn't much of a
consideration, since, when the conditions are right, they turn
beautifully. But note the caveat in the previous sentence: when the
conditions aren't optimal, they're "survival" skis. The Adventures are
a little better in less-than-optimal conditions because of their extra
length and width. But it's a true double-edge sword -- Adventures
don't skate nearly as well as the Revo's. The Powerlight sounds too
heavy for my tastes - you might as well be touring out there, not
skating quick and fast.

We don't "wander" in the Sierra in the springtime. The trips are
pretty well calculated for timing and conditions. If the conditions
don't warrant it, we don't go, or abort pretty quickly. For instance,
this spring we had a lot of late spring snows, so we had to wait until
the conditions "set-up." On Sunday, the lows got into the teens, and
we did a local Tahoe skate that was incredible. By Thursday, when we
attempted a new route near Tioga Pass, the nighttime temps didn't get
below 32 degrees - even at 10,000 feet! I ended up falling into a tarn
in Dana Meadows at 5:00 in the morning. We tried to keep going at
least to call it a "tour," but ended up turning around and were back
to the car by 6:30 am. So you have to be VERY flexible with your
timing on those routes, and be willing to bail.

And YES, the thought of repairing a broken toe bar 12 miles into the
backcountry does scare the heck out of us. We have often carried a
spare ski (which, of course, made that we had a spare binding), and
usually carry a spare pole. But nobody has carried a spare boot, which
could be the weak link. And, like I said, when it gets REALLY steep, I
carry a self-arrest tool, which ends up quite often being much more an
emotional crutch than a physical one.

Mark

"Ken Roberts" wrote in message ...
Sounds like if I really want to find an improvement on my current
light-backcountry setup, I better look for an old pair of Revolutions, like
you suggest.

Near as I can tell, the Pacer Skates are only 15% lighter than my Madshus
Pellestovas -- and that's only because the 151 cm length is 15% _shorter_
than my Pellestovas. I wonder if it has very much sidecut for turning --
since the Fischer-ski.com website as I viewed it today does not give any
width numbers, just says "SkateCut". And it does not mention any metal
edges.

Using the numbers I found today on the Fischer-ski.com website, the shortest
PowerLights are 161 cm, and at 1.390 kg per meter, that comes to a total
weight of 2.24 kg -- just about the same as my current Pellestovas.

I bought my Madshus Pellestovas a few years ago because I thought they were
the lightest full-metal-edge skis I could find back then. And they had been
warmly recommended by Steve Barnett, a high-country nordic skier.

I've measured them as 178 cm long, pair-weight about 2.2 kg, width and
sidecut 62 / 52 / 57 mm. Seems to me they would deliver more surface area
per kg -- for surviving those slushy afternoons you've been warning about.

The only problem with the Pellestovas is that the camber might be a bit
_soft_ for optimal skating -- because they're designed for downhill turning
and classic wax -- a problem which might also hold for the Fischer
Powerlight and Explorer models.

Which brings me back to the old Revolution: If the ski is short enough,
softness and sidecut are less important for downhill turning performance.
Also edge-grip could be better, since the edging-force per length ratio is
higher.

I've noticed that you more experienced mountain travelers are much more
comfortable than I am wandering around without crampons in springtime in the
Sierras.

I still wish somebody would make a "toe-bar protector" for SNS boots, for
climbing over steep passes. The idea of field-repairing a broken toe-bar 13
miles out in the backcountry is daunting.

Ken

Thanks a lot Mark -- I think this set of posts sharing your experiences and
advice is the best lesson on high-country skating we're going to see in a
long time.

Ken

Yes, I've found that heavier gear can still be fun skating -- even in
surface layer of mush, if it's on a gentle downhill. Another technique I've
enjoyed on slightly steeper mushy-surface snow is _skate-assisted_ linked
downhill _turns_ (a technique also used by downhill racers).

Booker Bense wrote:
I suspect most people will find my setup incredibly
heavy and I didn't really get it for skating, but when
the snow's hard it skates surprisingly well

. . . it's actually fun to turn with.

That's right, there are other fun things to do on skis.

That's one thing that keeps me from more skating in the Sierra backcountry:
There's so many other wonderful things to do there. Like I _could_ access
East Fork sno-park at Rock Creek lots of days during the early spring and
skate the Little Lakes valley. But once I'm in there, I would want heavy
gear to enjoy skiing the many great peaks and steep slopes.

I'm starting to meet more backcountry skiers around the world (France,
Germany/Austria, Tahoe, Methow) who are starting to skate on groomed tracks.
They still prefer steep downhills on heavy gear in the backcountry. But
they also like the motion and speed of skating on tracks, with the quicker
reward of a little downhill after a little uphill. It gives us something
fun to do when avalanche or weather conditions keep them out of the
backcountry. I find that the muscles are different enough that I often can
do groomed skating on alternate days between steep backcountry tours.

Another problem in the Sierras with focusing a whole day's backcountry tour
on skating is lack of altitude acclimatization. Unless I've already been
there sleeping at like 2000m altitude for a few nights, it's easier to go
_slow_ enough to stay within my current acclimatization-capability if I have
gear to help me walk the uphills.

Ken