Mountaineering boots on nordic skis

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article . com,
xcwhite wrote:
I think you underestimate how light ski gear can be. An ice climber
uses plastic boots so that there is no weight advantage with foot wear.
There is randonee ski gear out there that rivals the weight of a set of
snow shoes needed to carry a large amount of gear.

_ The lightest binding that fits a mountaineering boot is
just under 3lbs, "light" skis are at best 4lbs a pair. Other than
old wooden snowshoes, I can't find a modern pair that weighs
7lbs. And breaking trail with those 4lbs skis is not going
to be much fun....


Ultimately, it depends on how well you ski. So for a typical Randonee
Race with 5,000 ft. of elevation gain and loss, you would choose snow
shoes over randonee gear? Top level rando racers complete these races
in under two hours on skis and you are saying they would be faster on
snowshoes?

_ I think it's probably a wash, but why are snowshoes illegal?
However, I'm not talking about a rando race, but going up/down
a mountain in the winter.

At best a rando setup is going to be in the 5-7 lbs
range and that's with bindings that don't work with mountain
boots and doesn't include the weight of the skins. Wnen you're
going uphill weight matters, glide does not. HEAVY snowshoes
weigh 4 lbs.

_ Here's another example Echo to Kirkwood. This is a race with
a steep 2k vert climb in the beginning, a long groomed traverse
and a not quite as steep descent at the end. Snowshoers regularly
finish in the top 10 and that's with most of it groomed for skating.


The problem with snowshoes is not on the ups but on the downs. A human
cannot run downhill at 30 to 40 mph.

_ You're not going to be doing 30 or 40 mph on Mountain boots
either. Even the lightest rando boots offer much more control
than mountain boots. Being faster on the down hills is far less
advantageous than being faster on the uphills. Traveling in the
mountains you spend roughly 90% of your time going uphill on
skis.

If the up is an ungroomed trail
and very steep, skis can still be faster since the skier can z up the
slope where as the snow shoes must post hole straight up (much slower
on 30 to 40 degree slopes).

_ Why? My experience in using VERT's snowshoes convinces me of
the exact opposite conclusion. If your lungs are up to it,
straight uphill is always the fastest. Also, I don't understand
why a snowshoer can't traverse, I certainly see lot's of
traversing snowshoe tracks in the mountains.


The slim weight advantage gained from snow shoes does not make up for
their speed going down even including the time it takes to remove skins
from skis (if needed).


_ It's not slim, it's generally more than 50%. Racing snowshoes
are under 2lbs a pair, cost less than a pair of AT bindings and
will probably work just fine for a ice climb approach. Having
said all that I would still use skis because they are more fun,
but the are 3-4x expensive, 2x heavier and at best only offer a
marginal performance advantage.

_ Booker C. Bense



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBRBtASWTWTAjn5N/lAQEYqQP/aCcg4pJS9e4QXQTx8NiFHkYKGVt2llJN
ctZHc/xHhPg3LeRJ2BhBdWzq3/r2E6T6o+0nI3/1+o8RuI+gZXYaqUoyTRaMn33B
E3ZgMiT/EogZF14ENHRNabW/2rm1HPWOk4rjdpMzENk89oZXG8efnY+zMvyaemAa
D08rXgxoX0M=
=BuJE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

You spend 90% of your time traveling uphill if you are on skis. On
snow shoes you spend 70% to 80% of your time traveling uphill thus the
greater speed advantage of skis in any rando race or traveling across
snow. I agree that weight makes a huge difference when traveling
uphill, but the difference between a show shoe and ski is not enough to
make up for the amount of time it takes to go downhill on snow shoes.
It takes me about 20 minutes maybe a little more to descend 2000 to
2500 hundred feet on groomed ski trails using racing show shoes. I
descend the same route on racing classic skis in about 5 minutes
definitely no more than 10 minutes. I make it up the same route in
well under an hour on full on rando gear (at race pace). I have never
timed myself on snow shoes but I am sure I would be faster on my snow
shoes than on my randonee gear and about the same amount of time if I
was to skin up on light weight cross country gear. So using myself as
a test subject ( I am a descent skier/athlete nothing great, I did bust
the top 30 at the Birkie last year), there is no uestion that skiis are
faster than snowshoes overall. I and any other competitor with a shot
at winning would choose ski equipment over snow shoes for a winter
race. The only decision to make would be how heavy a ski to choose
depending on the snow conditions.
..
Skis are illegal in snow shoe races the same snow shoes are illegal in
ski races.

Racing snow shoes are useless in ungroomed terrain. You would be post
holing up to your hips if snow is anywhere near fresh.

Take a pair of heavy duty snow shoes and try to traverse a steep route.
Especially one that is set up. Not much fun, if even possible.

For ice climbing approaches around here I would choose snow shoes only
because they are short and steep, but I would not use racing snow
shoes. I will give you that.


xcwhite

Oh, I forgot one thing. I talked to one my snow shoe racing buddies
(one of the best in the country, I think at the US championships a year
or so ago he won or was top three), that it has been proven skis are
faster than snow shoes. Some of the elite snow shoe racers in the
country were about 9 minutes slower up and down imperial bowl in
Breckenridge compared to well above average regional athletes on skis
on the same course. If you are not familiar with Imperial Bowl, it is
a pretty steep up and a technical off piste down even on alpine gear.

xcwhite

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article .com,
xcwhite wrote:
Oh, I forgot one thing. I talked to one my snow shoe racing buddies
(one of the best in the country, I think at the US championships a year
or so ago he won or was top three), that it has been proven skis are
faster than snow shoes. Some of the elite snow shoe racers in the
country were about 9 minutes slower up and down imperial bowl in
Breckenridge compared to well above average regional athletes on skis
on the same course. If you are not familiar with Imperial Bowl, it is
a pretty steep up and a technical off piste down even on alpine gear.


_ 9 minutes is meaningless in a full days travel in the
mountains. Even 9 minutes per hour of travel is not that
significant. However, you seem convinced of your point,
so I'll concede it. If you want to spend 3-4x the money
and carry 2x the weight, skis will gain you 9 minutes per
hour... If you want to argue this further, please show me
any AT setup that works with mountaineering boots, has a
release, lockable heel and weighs less than 2x reasonable
snowshoes. ( 7lbs) I would really love to be wrong about this.

_ Also, the slower you climb, the more the % advantage matters.
What may be an advantage to elite athletes, might be a
significant handicap to your average weekend warrior.

Personally, I love skiing and for me winter ascents without
skis would be a kind of slow torture, but I think snowshoes
will bag more peaks in the long run if you're only interested
in bagging peaks.

_ Booker C. Bense




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBRBuaM2TWTAjn5N/lAQGuwAQAtOVmaAli7Awd5F8obStSriF0uy1tuvoK
ayHVowKJTHuvgyaZu8oFXadeEUxDAzwWPfR0HBcQ04dTyiMhS1 T9U64CrX4FDu+/
3GrXjXEmwJlaqwP/ousedjOcSu9PQy6CJt96mOexWkjoZb8tZ77ydUtZdDeXGuVG
jhJyKUL7Jzk=
=oREV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"Booker C. Bense"
. stanford.edu wrote in
message ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
If you want to argue this further, please show me
any AT setup that works with mountaineering boots, has a
release, lockable heel and weighs less than 2x reasonable
snowshoes. ( 7lbs) I would really love to be wrong about this.

If I might just get back to my original subject for a moment. I have
reasonably light AT setup using my existing Dynafit TLT bindings, BUT, I
really would like to be able to wear "proper" climbing boots AND keep the
weight down. Hence my query about mountaineering boots on NORDIC skis (i.e.
free heel and with no particular interest in high speed descents). I'm sure
in the good old days before everything got so specialised there used to be
cable bindings that would do the job.

Roy.

Roy,
if yu want to use your mountaineering boots have you thought about
ski-boards? A friend of mine bought some few years back which fitted
his mountaineering boots had an AT style releasable heel and came with
skins. I'm sorry but I can't remember the brand or model, freelandia?
(I think that might be a car).
I don't think mountaineering boots would fit into the front part of any
modern cable binding ( except possiblely the ones used in the arctic)
they all seem to be designed to fit snugly around a telemark boot with
a 3 pin lug at the toe. Perhaps you could make one fit and add straps
etc but I expect it would come off at all the wrong moments and I don't
think your heel would lift enough for easy climbing.
Booker and "xchwhite"
I was interested in your debate could one or both of you tell me more
about up and down races?
andyb buxton derbyshire

wrote in message
oups.com...
Roy,
if yu want to use your mountaineering boots have you thought about
ski-boards? A friend of mine bought some few years back which fitted
his mountaineering boots had an AT style releasable heel and came with
skins. I'm sorry but I can't remember the brand or model, freelandia?
(I think that might be a car).

If you're talking about short skis ("figles"), I have looked at them and
they are a possibility, though I still fancy the Nordic route if I can
figure out a way of doing it.

Roy.