A Snow and ski forum. SkiBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SkiBanter forum » Skiing Newsgroups » Backcountry Skiing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Best binding for the new Karhu Mountain XCD with Garmont Excursion boot



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 15th 06, 01:26 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Best binding for the new Karhu Mountain XCD with Garmont Excursion boot

Howdy folks. Having some trouble trying to find the binding I dream
of to complete this setup.

I have a pair of Karhu Mountain XCD's in a 185cm and a pair of
Excursion's (Padlock) on the way. I got a decent deal on the padlock
version, I am hoping I will find them close to the comfort of g-fit
liner. Anybody tried both yet?

I am thinking the Voile 3-pin Cable binding is the way to go since you
can take off the cable for extended touring. Are there any lighter
weight bindings out there that might be a good fit inbetween these new
backcountry skis and the Garmont Excursion (that claims it has been
made for these types of skis). I am wonderin' if they plan to design a
lighterweight cable binding now..

-Geoff

Ads
  #2  
Old March 15th 06, 02:16 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

geoff wrote:

I am thinking the Voile 3-pin Cable binding is the way to go since you
can take off the cable for extended touring.


On the other hand, you /can't/ take out the pins when you want the cable
on for downhill, which means that in the sort of snow conditions that
clog up your bindings they are an utter, utter PITA to get on, so while
they sometimes really do give the best of both worlds, sometimes you get
the worst as well...

I am wonderin' if they plan to design a lighterweight cable binding now..


For what values of "lightweight"? Riva 3s aren't exactly what you'd
call incredibly heavy, it's easy to loosen the cables off a bit for kick
'n stick and they're much, much easier than any flavour of rat-traps to
get in and out.

Having said that, on my "classic tourers" (my old XCDs have been
replaced by Dynastar Montagne Plus), which I use with original brown T3s
(broadly similar to the Excursion in most respects) I use Rotafella
Super Telemark 3 pins, which of course have the same entry/exit problems
as the Voiles, but I'm not paying for and carting about a cable that's
pretty much surplus to requirements for the sort of downhill I'll do on
those skis, and the extra downhill power of the plastic boots more than
makes up for the cable IME if you're comparing them to a similar setup
powered with leather touring boots.

For more serious downhill escapades I'll use a wider ski with a Riva 3
to keep me on-board. Having to use pins even when I don't want them is
a deal-breaker for me on the Voiles, though as a one size fits all
solution it /is/ a good bit of kit.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
  #3  
Old March 15th 06, 05:10 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Maybe I will just go with the Voile Heavy Duty 3-Pin. Is that a
possible option?

  #4  
Old March 15th 06, 06:33 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

geoff wrote:
Maybe I will just go with the Voile Heavy Duty 3-Pin. Is that a
possible option?


Certainly, that's what I had on my old XCDs and they did a fine job
over many years. Reason I switched to Rotafella Super Teles was
purely availability in the UK.

Looking at Karhu's site I see that the new XCD Mountain is a fair
bit wider than my old XCDs, which are nearer the current "Pinnacle"
model, so it's a ski that would reasonably take Riva 3s as a
general binding IMHO. A very experienced pal has R3s on Fischer
E109s for some touring (with Excursion boots) which are a little
narrower than your skis, which also suggests it's a fair combination.

But the Voile pin/cable *is* a viable binding, as long as you don't
mind the awkwardness of the pins on those days it's mainly about
downhill. Another thing about the Voile is if they do wind you up
you can always just file the pins off, though that does seem a bit
of a waste...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
  #5  
Old March 15th 06, 09:58 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

This setup is turning into more of a lightweight Tele setup, but
that's cool. I am seriously thinking a cable binding might be the way
to go now considering I can buy a "Pinnacle" couple them with a more
Tour oriented boot and have an almost completely different sport. Or
at the very least have two different setups based on snow conditions.
I wanted more of a tour oriented setup, but it seems the Mountain's
are a fair bit wider and more cut which demands a more aggressive
setup. I think the R3's might be the way to go, they weigh about
700grams as I understand. Which would be acceptable.

Still dream about a SNS setup. Now all I need to do is decide if I
want to lose my metal edges!

Who says getting old isn't fun!!

  #6  
Old March 16th 06, 01:22 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"geoff" wrote in message
oups.com...
This setup is turning into more of a lightweight Tele setup, but
that's cool. I am seriously thinking a cable binding might be the way
to go now considering I can buy a "Pinnacle" couple them with a more
Tour oriented boot and have an almost completely different sport. Or
at the very least have two different setups based on snow conditions.
I wanted more of a tour oriented setup, but it seems the Mountain's
are a fair bit wider and more cut which demands a more aggressive
setup. I think the R3's might be the way to go, they weigh about
700grams as I understand. Which would be acceptable.

Still dream about a SNS setup. Now all I need to do is decide if I
want to lose my metal edges!

Who says getting old isn't fun!!


Karhu re-did their skis and names so you have to be careful when reading
reviews or asking for input. THere used to be an XCD model, now it's a
prefix to their line of 3 skis, all targeting "XC Downhill", i.e. touring
for a little downhill action. The Pinnacle is totally new, with moderate
(for a XC ski at least) sidecut, but an unusually 'straight' tail: 67-56-58.
I have a pair and they are a nice touring ski, which will still 'fit' a
track. I'm told by better skiers, that they are pretty 'turny' - relatively
speaking. The XCD-GT is supposed to be similar to the well-liked Pyxis,
which is around the limit of a 'real' touring XC ski, while starting to be
'real' fun on turny stuff. Best of both worlds according to some. It's
76-62-68 (in a 175) so it's starting to get fat for a Nordic center track,
but also starting to get fun in the backcountry. Either one could be driven
with a 3-pin, and I suppose they could also take a pin/cable with a
mid-weight boot.

The XCD Mountain appears to be the old Dorado. I've heard great things
about them, and I think they start to work in more powder conditions,
breaking trail, or generally in truer backcountry conditions. They start
from a 86-68-73 for a 175cm up into low 90's tip in the longest size. My
guess is that you could start looking at true tele boots and bindings and
unless you go overboard, you wouldn't overwhelm them?

I'm trying to learn to turn with the XCD-GT's and Karhu Traverse boots,
which are pretty stiff (more so than my old snowfield's anyway), and so far
I like them. Unfortunately the snow was pretty sad this year, so outings
were limited. I've heard it described as BC-lite. Clearly it's not the
same as striding in a track on my old 210 wax skinnies, but it's also not
hardcore telemark either.

yep, getting old is great fun!
a


  #7  
Old March 16th 06, 12:48 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.

  #8  
Old March 16th 06, 03:12 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"geoff" wrote in message
oups.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


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3-pin binding location Karhu Lookout a Backcountry Skiing 1 January 31st 06 06:22 PM
tHe wHitE roOm Dave Stallard Alpine Skiing 42 February 28th 05 03:10 PM
There goes the snow ... buh bye. J999w Nordic Skiing 12 December 30th 03 01:37 PM
Ski Mountaineering Clyde Backcountry Skiing 2 September 23rd 03 09:18 PM
Pilot binding system -- what's the point? Ken Roberts Nordic Skiing 1 August 14th 03 03:28 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 SkiBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.