Alpine bindings on Telemark skis?

VtSkier wrote:
Ron - NY wrote:
......
Yep , I've heard of those . I always ski midweek so I guess another
fringe
benefit is closer parking . Even though I love my boots I might
consider
replacing them by the time those heel pieces wear out , but then
again maybe
not . But this leads me to thinking about something else , what the
longest
( or maybe I should say oldest ) you kept a pair of boots ? I don't
mean in
the closet , I mean still using ?
Ron

Heh, I skied a lot in the 60's. New boots every year, sometimes
more often and I had a line on warranty returns that the warehouse
just threw out for want of a buckle, etc. so it was easy. Then I
got married. Then I had kids. Then I was poor. My last pair of
boots from that era was a pair of Hanson Riva Softs with the waxed
liner. I skied those from about 1972, one to 5 times a year until
1991. The liner had rotted in the meantime which I replaced with
liners from a pair of Raichle rear entry boots. That's my record.

And I thought duct-taped rear entry boots was a fashion statement in
those good old days.


In 1990 I got back into skiing by getting a PT job at a local area.
Got a job at Killington the next year and for three years after
and then went to my volunteer job which I've had for 10 years with
LOTS more skiing. This past winter was a year for experiment. I
bought and sold 4 pair of boots along with my alpine boots and
AT boots which I've had for a couple of years. At present I have
my Salomon XWave 10's as stiff alpine boots (2yo), My Lowa
AT boots (1yo) and a pair of Rossignol Soft (new this year but
previous season model) and I have a pair of light tele boots for
the back yard. The back yard btw is several thousand acres of
the Chateauguay/No Town Conservation area. Trouble was there
wasn't much snow out there last year.

Quite a bit of stuff you leave on the racks/shelves when you go skiing,
eh? Do you have difficulty deciding which set of equipment you going to
use for that day?

Even though I have only one set of functional equipment for different
disciplines, most the time, but a lot of time I still have hard time to
decide, in the old days, whether I do tele, or downhill, or nowadays,
between downhill or snowboarding.

Well, eventually, the downhill wins out. (Snowboarding is ok, it
capable of does anything and everything, or equivalence, that skiing
can do, but it is kind of clumsy to move around in resorts.)

My current ski, Salomon Xscream 1080, is 7 yo; marker binding 5.1, with
replaced marker 2.9 and a racing toe pieces is about 10 yo; and my
boots Technica ti6, one size too small (the salesman talked me into it,
and later I had to cut a hole in my inner boot so my little toe can
"breathe"), and the soles' outside edge are worn out; guess to you guys
these are all antiques/garbages now, but I have no fund to replace
them. so they bit on. And I have skied average 120 days for the past
7yrs, mostly on this set of equipment.

Guess one cannot be a real good skier if one is depended on one's
equipments.


IS


VtSkier

Bill Tuthill wrote:

So exactly why, can anyone tell me, are downhill skis so heavy?

See Walt's post for a discussion - I'll cut to the quick:
So they will track better in all conditions. Like driving a sport car
instead of a Ford Fiesta. Light wuss skis deflect all over the place.

BTW, Downhill race skis feel like driving a fully loaded tractor trailer
truck; once you've got them arcing their path it feels like NOTHING is
going to deflect them, which is a great feeling when you're truckin'


It's almost impossible to get information about ski and binding weight,
indicating the industry doesn't want us to think about it.

Not so - a few years ago the industry spent their ad fortune pushing
"light" skis - I suppose they quit pushing light when they discovered
that nobody with reasonable skills actually wanted light skis - at least
I hope that's why they dropped that sillyness.

yunlong wrote:
VtSkier wrote:

Ron - NY wrote:

.....

Yep , I've heard of those . I always ski midweek so I guess another
fringe benefit is closer parking . Even though I love my boots
I might consider replacing them by the time those heel pieces wear
out , but then again maybe not . But this leads me to thinking about
something else , what the longest ( or maybe I should say oldest )
you kept a pair of boots ? I don't mean in the closet , I mean
still using ?
Ron

Heh, I skied a lot in the 60's. New boots every year, sometimes
more often and I had a line on warranty returns that the warehouse
just threw out for want of a buckle, etc. so it was easy. Then I
got married. Then I had kids. Then I was poor. My last pair of
boots from that era was a pair of Hanson Riva Softs with the waxed
liner. I skied those from about 1972, one to 5 times a year until
1991. The liner had rotted in the meantime which I replaced with
liners from a pair of Raichle rear entry boots. That's my record.

And I thought duct-taped rear entry boots was a fashion statement in
those good old days.

Actually I've seen more duct tape these days, on the toes
of conventional 4 buckle boots, to keep water out than
I did back then on rear entry boots.

Duct tape worked well, but once you were in your boots,
they were difficult to take off again. The Hansons were
rear-entry, but the closure was a simple metal buckle and
cable. Rarely broke.

In 1990 I got back into skiing by getting a PT job at a local area.
Got a job at Killington the next year and for three years after
and then went to my volunteer job which I've had for 10 years with
LOTS more skiing. This past winter was a year for experiment. I
bought and sold 4 pair of boots along with my alpine boots and
AT boots which I've had for a couple of years. At present I have
my Salomon XWave 10's as stiff alpine boots (2yo), My Lowa
AT boots (1yo) and a pair of Rossignol Soft (new this year but
previous season model) and I have a pair of light tele boots for
the back yard. The back yard btw is several thousand acres of
the Chateauguay/No Town Conservation area. Trouble was there
wasn't much snow out there last year.

Quite a bit of stuff you leave on the racks/shelves when you go skiing,
eh? Do you have difficulty deciding which set of equipment you going to
use for that day?

I have two pair of "everyday" skis. Volkl 6 star and Fischer MountainX.
The Volkls I paid $450 for at the ski swap in October. The Fischer's
were $85 on Ebay as were the Tyrolia bindings, so $170 total. I keep
both pair in (not on) my car all winter. I usually use AT boots for
working and spring skiing and alpine boots for "fun". The Salomon
boots are comfortable and great performing, but if I use them for
more than three days running they irritate my achilles tendon (ant
are you listening?) and I can't ski for a week, so I only use them
for a day or so at a time. I have hopes for the Rossi softs, but they
aren't dialed in for my skiing yet although they are comfortable.

Salomon XWave boots $199 end of year. Rossi boots $179 end of year,
Lowa boots $149 Sierra Trading Post. Other boots from ebay, two
pair Raichle Flexon, since sent to LAL as I can't wear them.

Poles, Goode composite, about 10 years old. The original with the
lifetime warranty. Can't break 'em. Traded a pair of "found" Ultra-
light aluminum pole for them.

Even though I have only one set of functional equipment for different
disciplines, most the time, but a lot of time I still have hard time to
decide, in the old days, whether I do tele, or downhill, or nowadays,
between downhill or snowboarding.

Well, eventually, the downhill wins out. (Snowboarding is ok, it
capable of does anything and everything, or equivalence, that skiing
can do, but it is kind of clumsy to move around in resorts.)

I've heard the same from others who both ski and snowboard.
They say snowboarding is OK, but except for heavy wet snow
skiing is more satisfying.

My current ski, Salomon Xscream 1080, is 7 yo; marker binding 5.1, with
replaced marker 2.9 and a racing toe pieces is about 10 yo; and my
boots Technica ti6, one size too small (the salesman talked me into it,
and later I had to cut a hole in my inner boot so my little toe can
"breathe"), and the soles' outside edge are worn out; guess to you guys
these are all antiques/garbages now, but I have no fund to replace
them. so they bit on. And I have skied average 120 days for the past
7yrs, mostly on this set of equipment.

My rock skis are a pair of XScream 1080's. The yellow ones with
black writing/graphics with Fritchi Free Ride bindings. If I had
a choice of one pair of skis to do everything, these would probably
be it. Great skis. I hear the Salomon Street Racers come closest
in recent offerings.

If you had any inclinations to fall, you might get your boots looked
at/repaired/replaced. Holes cut in liners are a common thing, but
I always require my shop to stretch the shell since a cut liner
will break down quicker than an uncut one.

Are those worn edges of the boots inadvertently canting them?
You might rent a pair of boots some time and see if you are
catching edges because the rental boots will have flat soles.
It might be that canting is a good thing for you. At least as
far as skiing goes. I'd be a little concerned about release
function.

Guess one cannot be a real good skier if one is depended on one's
equipments.

A good skier is a good skier regardless of equipment.

As for me, I'm a gear-head and I can finally afford to
satisfy my inclinations. It's taken a while and a couple of
personal make-overs, but I'm finally comfortable and happy.
Not rich, by any means, but well enough off so that I can
ski your mountains once in a while (twice this year) and
ski as much as I want here.

I'm part of the most visible program on the mountain
at Killington and ski manufacturer's and shops are very good
to us should I want to take advantage of such. I also like to
hunt down a good bargain when I can.

If I were poor and couldn't afford much in the way of gear,
I would still ski on what I had and it would be OK, but,
truth to tell I'd still jones about the nice stuff that's
out there.

VtSkier wrote:
yunlong wrote:

VtSkier wrote:

Ron - NY wrote:


.....

Yep , I've heard of those . I always ski midweek so I guess another
fringe benefit is closer parking . Even though I love my boots

I might consider replacing them by the time those heel pieces wear
out , but then again maybe not . But this leads me to thinking about
something else , what the longest ( or maybe I should say oldest )
you kept a pair of boots ? I don't mean in the closet , I mean
still using ?

Ron


Heh, I skied a lot in the 60's. New boots every year, sometimes
more often and I had a line on warranty returns that the warehouse
just threw out for want of a buckle, etc. so it was easy. Then I
got married. Then I had kids. Then I was poor. My last pair of
boots from that era was a pair of Hanson Riva Softs with the waxed
liner. I skied those from about 1972, one to 5 times a year until
1991. The liner had rotted in the meantime which I replaced with
liners from a pair of Raichle rear entry boots. That's my record.


And I thought duct-taped rear entry boots was a fashion statement in
those good old days.


Actually I've seen more duct tape these days, on the toes
of conventional 4 buckle boots, to keep water out than
I did back then on rear entry boots.

Duct tape worked well, but once you were in your boots,
they were difficult to take off again. The Hansons were
rear-entry, but the closure was a simple metal buckle and
cable. Rarely broke.

Darth Fader wore Hanson boots in the first (fourth?) movie - made him
walk funny, but looked all moderne and such. I wonder if Lucas digitized
them out of recent releases, like alot of other stuff?

Only boot from that era that (still) intrigues me was the Scott
Superlights. Losers in the popularity wars, but some folks swore by them.


In 1990 I got back into skiing by getting a PT job at a local area.
Got a job at Killington the next year and for three years after
and then went to my volunteer job which I've had for 10 years with
LOTS more skiing. This past winter was a year for experiment. I
bought and sold 4 pair of boots along with my alpine boots and
AT boots which I've had for a couple of years. At present I have
my Salomon XWave 10's as stiff alpine boots (2yo), My Lowa
AT boots (1yo) and a pair of Rossignol Soft (new this year but
previous season model) and I have a pair of light tele boots for
the back yard. The back yard btw is several thousand acres of
the Chateauguay/No Town Conservation area. Trouble was there
wasn't much snow out there last year.


Quite a bit of stuff you leave on the racks/shelves when you go skiing,
eh? Do you have difficulty deciding which set of equipment you going to
use for that day?


I have two pair of "everyday" skis. Volkl 6 star and Fischer MountainX.
The Volkls I paid $450 for at the ski swap in October. The Fischer's
were $85 on Ebay as were the Tyrolia bindings, so $170 total. I keep
both pair in (not on) my car all winter. I usually use AT boots for
working and spring skiing and alpine boots for "fun". The Salomon
boots are comfortable and great performing, but if I use them for
more than three days running they irritate my achilles tendon (ant
are you listening?) and I can't ski for a week, so I only use them
for a day or so at a time. I have hopes for the Rossi softs, but they
aren't dialed in for my skiing yet although they are comfortable.

Salomon XWave boots $199 end of year. Rossi boots $179 end of year,
Lowa boots $149 Sierra Trading Post. Other boots from ebay, two
pair Raichle Flexon, since sent to LAL as I can't wear them.

Poles, Goode composite, about 10 years old. The original with the
lifetime warranty. Can't break 'em. Traded a pair of "found" Ultra-
light aluminum pole for them.

Even though I have only one set of functional equipment for different
disciplines, most the time, but a lot of time I still have hard time to
decide, in the old days, whether I do tele, or downhill, or nowadays,
between downhill or snowboarding.

Well, eventually, the downhill wins out. (Snowboarding is ok, it
capable of does anything and everything, or equivalence, that skiing
can do, but it is kind of clumsy to move around in resorts.)


I've heard the same from others who both ski and snowboard.
They say snowboarding is OK, but except for heavy wet snow
skiing is more satisfying.

Skied heavy wet (untracked) snow today - a thrill and a wonder and very
satisfying.

The boarder contingent were largely falling all over the place - most of
them were too weak on their chosen snow-tool to cope.

I think it's a matter of failure to learn the tool; if the skier is
competent the ski is superior to the board in ALL conditions. The board
may be superior for incompetent tail riders of both species in some
conditions.


My current ski, Salomon Xscream 1080, is 7 yo; marker binding 5.1, with
replaced marker 2.9 and a racing toe pieces is about 10 yo; and my
boots Technica ti6, one size too small (the salesman talked me into it,
and later I had to cut a hole in my inner boot so my little toe can
"breathe"), and the soles' outside edge are worn out; guess to you guys
these are all antiques/garbages now, but I have no fund to replace
them. so they bit on. And I have skied average 120 days for the past
7yrs, mostly on this set of equipment.


My rock skis are a pair of XScream 1080's. The yellow ones with
black writing/graphics with Fritchi Free Ride bindings. If I had
a choice of one pair of skis to do everything, these would probably
be it. Great skis. I hear the Salomon Street Racers come closest
in recent offerings.

If you had any inclinations to fall, you might get your boots looked
at/repaired/replaced. Holes cut in liners are a common thing, but
I always require my shop to stretch the shell since a cut liner
will break down quicker than an uncut one.

Are those worn edges of the boots inadvertently canting them?
You might rent a pair of boots some time and see if you are
catching edges because the rental boots will have flat soles.
It might be that canting is a good thing for you. At least as
far as skiing goes. I'd be a little concerned about release
function.

Guess one cannot be a real good skier if one is depended on one's
equipments.


A good skier is a good skier regardless of equipment.

Patently true. Have you spoken with ski testers during those on-slope
tests the magazines hold at various resorts? Takes them about half a run
to learn a ski's idiocyncracies; then they're back to their normal
super-skier quality skiing, regardless of the equipment.


As for me, I'm a gear-head and I can finally afford to
satisfy my inclinations. It's taken a while and a couple of
personal make-overs, but I'm finally comfortable and happy.
Not rich, by any means, but well enough off so that I can
ski your mountains once in a while (twice this year) and
ski as much as I want here.

I'm part of the most visible program on the mountain
at Killington and ski manufacturer's and shops are very good
to us should I want to take advantage of such. I also like to
hunt down a good bargain when I can.

If I were poor and couldn't afford much in the way of gear,
I would still ski on what I had and it would be OK, but,
truth to tell I'd still jones about the nice stuff that's
out there.

lal_truckee wrote:
VtSkier wrote:

yunlong wrote:

VtSkier wrote:

Ron - NY wrote:

Yep , I've heard of those . I always ski midweek so I guess another
fringe benefit is closer parking . Even though I love my boots

I might consider replacing them by the time those heel pieces wear
out , but then again maybe not . But this leads me to thinking about
something else , what the longest ( or maybe I should say oldest )
you kept a pair of boots ? I don't mean in the closet , I mean
still using ?

Ron

Heh, I skied a lot in the 60's. New boots every year, sometimes
more often and I had a line on warranty returns that the warehouse
just threw out for want of a buckle, etc. so it was easy. Then I
got married. Then I had kids. Then I was poor. My last pair of
boots from that era was a pair of Hanson Riva Softs with the waxed
liner. I skied those from about 1972, one to 5 times a year until
1991. The liner had rotted in the meantime which I replaced with
liners from a pair of Raichle rear entry boots. That's my record.

And I thought duct-taped rear entry boots was a fashion statement in
those good old days.

Actually I've seen more duct tape these days, on the toes
of conventional 4 buckle boots, to keep water out than
I did back then on rear entry boots.

Duct tape worked well, but once you were in your boots,
they were difficult to take off again. The Hansons were
rear-entry, but the closure was a simple metal buckle and
cable. Rarely broke.

Darth Fader wore Hanson boots in the first (fourth?) movie - made him
walk funny, but looked all moderne and such. I wonder if Lucas digitized
them out of recent releases, like alot of other stuff?

Only boot from that era that (still) intrigues me was the Scott
Superlights. Losers in the popularity wars, but some folks swore by them.

They intrigued me too. One of the oddities was that they came
in various colors and parts broke on occasion and you needed
several pair for "parts" with the result looking a lot like
a rust belt pickup truck with all different color body panels.

(snip)

Even though I have only one set of functional equipment for different
disciplines, most the time, but a lot of time I still have hard time to
decide, in the old days, whether I do tele, or downhill, or nowadays,
between downhill or snowboarding.

Well, eventually, the downhill wins out. (Snowboarding is ok, it
capable of does anything and everything, or equivalence, that skiing
can do, but it is kind of clumsy to move around in resorts.)

I've heard the same from others who both ski and snowboard.
They say snowboarding is OK, but except for heavy wet snow
skiing is more satisfying.

Skied heavy wet (untracked) snow today - a thrill and a wonder and very
satisfying.

I was just beginning to get the knack that day with you when
I found the crust between the two trees and got launched.
Yes, I think the rib was actually broken since it took more
than a month to be pain-free and able to sleep on that side.

I can see where untracked wet could be most enjoyable. Back
here I really like heavily tracked wet snow (not the sticky
stuff which grabs your skis), slush powders. and other people
wonder at how I can ski so long and not get tired.

The boarder contingent were largely falling all over the place - most of
them were too weak on their chosen snow-tool to cope.

A good snowboarder is a good "snow-slider". Also regardless
of equipment. My "boss" at K is a hard-boot rider and can
make whole lots of other snowboarders look pretty green.
The wannabes are just that regardless of tool choice.

I think it's a matter of failure to learn the tool; if the skier is
competent the ski is superior to the board in ALL conditions. The board
may be superior for incompetent tail riders of both species in some
conditions.

(snip)

Guess one cannot be a real good skier if one is depended on one's
equipments.

A good skier is a good skier regardless of equipment.

Patently true. Have you spoken with ski testers during those on-slope
tests the magazines hold at various resorts? Takes them about half a run
to learn a ski's idiocyncracies; then they're back to their normal
super-skier quality skiing, regardless of the equipment.

I skied a part of a day with the local coach of coaches
who had brand new Fischer racing slalom skis on. He really
liked them and was doing carved turns across the hill at
insane speeds. I was barely keeping up to him OR his girl
friend on the same skis. Next day I saw him again, doing
exactly the same thing on a pair of two year old Salomon
whatevers.

(snip)

"VtSkier" wrote in message
...
Stephen B. wrote:
"VtSkier" wrote
SNIP

This suggests that boot sole *bottom* wear may not be
as critical as sometimes suggested. A release check will
determine the limits.

Now I wear AT boots with vibram soles a lot because I have
cause to get out of my skis and walk around a lot during
the course of a "working" ski day. The vibram sole may be
the worst thing to put between your leg and your binding.
Maybe even worse than a severely worn alpine boot sole.

To lessen this effect, I'm a FIRM believer in active AFD
devices. So far, only Marker and Tyrolia (and maybe Atomic)
have devices that I feel comfortable with. Every body else
cheaps out with teflon devices which can accumulate dirt
and not work as advertised, but plenty good enough for
newish alpine boots.

SNIP

VT,
Have you really seen Teflon strips collect dirt and grime so they stop
working? Wouldn't this same dirt and grime cause more havoc in the
active
AFD devices? I am sure you have heard of the KISS principle, the Teflon
sounds allot simpler to me. I admit I have not paid attention to active
AFD
devices so I would be very interested in your reasoning, and description
of
them.

Stephen B.


Actually I haven't seen the dirt/grime collect on any
AFD. What I have seen is the same dirt/grime collect
on the sole of the boot. The Marker active AFD is pretty
much a bullet-proof device and doesn't seem to be
affected by much of anything. The rolling rubber band
of the Tyrolia system could conceivably get grit in it
in a way that may affect its function.

And, btw, I didn't say "stop working". That's an exaggeration
of the situation. In fact, in a good old yard sale type of
a high-speed crash you probably wouldn't even know if
your AFD's were dirty or not. The situation where there
might be a problem would be in a slow-speed twisting fall
which might be complicated by your weight being forward
and putting extra weight on you AFD. This is a knee-
damaging type of fall.

One of the things Salomon has tried to do for this type of
fall is to make an AFD that when it senses extra weight,
the pressure needed to release the toe becomes less. Or
so we are told.

Thanks, that makes more sense to me now. Sounds like I should have looked
harder before buying my last skis.

Stephen B.

Stephen B. wrote:
"VtSkier" wrote in message
...

(snip)

Actually I haven't seen the dirt/grime collect on any
AFD. What I have seen is the same dirt/grime collect
on the sole of the boot. The Marker active AFD is pretty
much a bullet-proof device and doesn't seem to be
affected by much of anything. The rolling rubber band
of the Tyrolia system could conceivably get grit in it
in a way that may affect its function.

And, btw, I didn't say "stop working". That's an exaggeration
of the situation. In fact, in a good old yard sale type of
a high-speed crash you probably wouldn't even know if
your AFD's were dirty or not. The situation where there
might be a problem would be in a slow-speed twisting fall
which might be complicated by your weight being forward
and putting extra weight on you AFD. This is a knee-
damaging type of fall.

One of the things Salomon has tried to do for this type of
fall is to make an AFD that when it senses extra weight,
the pressure needed to release the toe becomes less. Or
so we are told.


Thanks, that makes more sense to me now. Sounds like I should have looked
harder before buying my last skis.

Stephen B.

Just for information, someone else mentioned that Look/Rossi
bindings have an active AFD. I went and looked at their
sites and it sure looks like they have active AFD's.

lal_truckee wrote:

See Walt's post for a discussion - I'll cut to the quick:
So they will track better in all conditions. Like driving a sport car
instead of a Ford Fiesta. Light wuss skis deflect all over the place.

Maybe that's why I don't ski well in crud -- I bought my current pair
of K2 skis because they were the lightest in my length on sale at REI.
I realize it's not a very sophisticated selection process. But I had
tried demo skis and didn't like any of them.

BTW, Downhill race skis feel like driving a fully loaded tractor trailer
truck; once you've got them arcing their path it feels like NOTHING is
going to deflect them, which is a great feeling when you're truckin'

That doesn't sound fun to me. I don't want to drive a tractor trailer
when I'm trying to recreate! But points for colorful analogy.

Here's a review of the Goode Carbon 74, though I probably want an 82.
Summarizing, I'd say "twitchy" is the operative word. Maybe a Shuksan
is in my future, especially considering the $890 versus $440 price.

Curiosity finally got the better of me and knowing how well
Goode water skis perform, I was eager to ski their Alpine
products. Impressive, is the perfect word to describe this ski.
No other ski feels like the Goode.

The first thing one notices is the weight, or lack thereof.
Pick them up and they weigh about as much as a pair of
bindings. The flex is surprisingly soft resulting in some
very sudden turns until one learns restraint.

They react to subtle input much like Dynastar's Omeglass
slalom ski. That is not to say that the Goode 74 is a Race
ski, but rather that the Goode does not respond to gross
movements or brute force.

Very easy to control and turn shapes are as diverse as the
skier can imagine. Think "turn" and it happens. No effort
and surprisingly stable. While they are pricey, the feel is so
unique that unless you ski a pair, there is no way you can
imagine how different they feel. Sorry, but I have to say it.
They actually feel Goode.

[ http://www.ski-review.com/content/view/141/30/ ]

Bill Tuthill wrote:

BTW, Downhill race skis feel like driving a fully loaded tractor trailer
truck; once you've got them arcing their path it feels like NOTHING is
going to deflect them, which is a great feeling when you're truckin'


That doesn't sound fun to me. I don't want to drive a tractor trailer
when I'm trying to recreate! But points for colorful analogy.

When you're truckin' above 70mph the last thing you want is a ski that
deflects at every little irregularity in the snow surface - you'll be
quite happy to have a big, meaty, beast underfoot that tracks as above.
Something about 224cm and the weight of a small battleship, say.

Recreate means different things to different folk.

lal_truckee wrote:

A good skier is a good skier regardless of equipment.

Patently true.

And then there are those of us who'll unashamedly take whatever
advantage we can get. I think we know who we are.

--
//-Walt
//
// TINW