Touring/ powder skis..?

weight, mostly.

what art thou looking at?

a true touring ski is generally narrower and lighter (softer). if you look at AT racers they're all rocking 160 trabs that are like 70 underfoot. companies are starting to put notches in skis for skins and designing them for backcountry. if i were you i wouldn't pay attention to the company's label of the ski, just look at specs and reviews

no real difference. just look for something that isnt mega fat or mega rockered.

At first the Bent Chetler or Obsethed but then i realized how dope Moment and Surface are. Saw Surfaces touring skis and this question came up

K2 Pontoon.

pm gear lhasa pows are top o the list for touring skis

It depends weather you plan to actually use skins and walk along way on your skis. If you are on a fat rockered ski it will not be great for walking long distances. If it has lots of rocker then the skins will only really work in the cambered section of the ski where they contact the snow, so you will be slipping all the time. Obviously in a reverse camber ski they will not really work at all. If the ski is very fat it will weigh alot and not many skins will cover the whole base so again you will slip alot.

Remember there is a huge differnce between actually touring on skis and  hicking a small way to ride powder, so there is a differnce in the type of skis used and thats why there are diffent sections in catalouges.

Hope this helps

the fatter the ski, the more snow thatt gets on top of it while hiking, making it really heavy. as well, if they are fatter than the skin track, you will almost be breaking trail again.

soo would skins on fat skis or rockered or anything be alright just to hike up?

Personally if you are hicking to get fresh tracks and good powder runs, I would just get a back pack that can carry your skis. Skins take quite a bit of effort to get on and store so if your not looking at walking miles and miles just, boot pack with the skis on your.

Did not quite finish that right. I meant to say carry your skis on your backpack. Also consider that if you use skins and touring bindings you really will want a touring boot. Alpine boots will destroy your feet if you walk any distance in them, as they are designed so your toes hit the end when you stand up straight, which you will do every step. Its not as bad boot packing as you can keep foward better then you can using touring bindings.

Think carfully if you need touring kit or weather you can get away with a good powder ski and agood backpack, or just carry your skis.

first off, if you are wanting to get into the backcountry get educated, don't go out without knowledge of avalanches and avalanche terrain.
I recommend taking an avalanche one course.

For gear, it depends on what you're doing.
From what i can tell, i would recommend getting some pow skis that you like to ski, not worrying about weight, rocker, etc. except leaving out anything crazy rockered or crazy fat
for bindings i would go with dukes/barons, it seems like you want something you'll be able to ski inbounds and slackcountry stuff

I tour on 191 on3p wrenegades with dukes, not exactly light, but i did a 3 day hut trip on them a few weeks ago and had no problems. i'd get a ski you like to ski, and not worry about weight etc.

IMO bootpacking/post hole-ing up, sounds like a bad idea, if you're not ready to fully commit to an AT setup, maybe look at BCA trekkers

Depends whether you're going to be touring a lot or just on occasion.

Dukes are good because they have an adjustable toe height, which translates into them being compatible with touring boots and alpine boots. Alpine bindings add a bit much weight if you're going to be doing a lot of touring though.

Fritchi Freerides are pretty nice and seem to be the most favored among conventional touring bindings. The new ones have a movable pivot point so it gives you a more natural walking feeling. You're supposed to get touring boots for them, and it's highly recommended but you may be able to get away with a day or two on them. depends on whether you're going to be using them every time you ski or no

Dynafits are awesome because they're light and they mount into the side of your boot right at the ball of your foot. They will give you the most natural walking feeling and it will be the lightest. You absolutely need touring boots for these, and they have to be Dynafit compatible.

Alpine Trekkers are pretty frowned upon. They add a lot of unnecessary weight, and I'm not really sure of the other reasons.

Skins are a must if you're using touring binding.

Touring skis are generally lighter. Dimensions all depend on what you want to do with them and when you're going to use them. Best bet is to get a 1 ski quiver... something like a prophet 100. (Or Karhu Team 100, since they're the same EXACT ski)

With Surface's touring line, they're the same skis, just with a different graphic that is more simple and subtle. Look into the Live Life/Live Free (same), it'd be the most ideal for skinning conditions. The Walk Free is just the Watch Life, but with a different topsheet on it as well

Or I highly recommend the K2 Backside Adventure series. I've heard nothing but great reviews from those skis.
http://k2skis.com/skis/adventure


And like stated. Please know what you're doing.

Own these, I can testify to the sketchiness. Bendable metal where you dont need it most, heavy metal where you want light. Sidehill and traversing is terrifying, you're off the ski so far. Its a heavy ass setup compared to some of the other options, but whats 5 lbs here or there, honestly. It fucking rules to get to the top of something gnarly and be able to click into S916's or Pivots though, its confidence to huck shit on the way down, just make sure you dont backslap when those things are in your pack.

Trekkers are pretty ideal for mellow slack/side country skins. I bought a pair last summer, sadly, I never got a chance to go out and use them. All my friends that have them only use them for the short skins. They say anything longer, and it'd just be too much. They are heavy, so they'll add that extra weight in your backpack on the way down.

trekkers are good for 5 minute skins. anything longer and they become not worth it. i've had traumatizing experiences with them, especially, as rowen said, trying to traverse windblown ice

i have a pair of fat-ish rockered skis (billy goats) with dukes on them for short tours and sidecountry and then dps wailer 188's with dynafits for super long tours and multi-day trips. i love my bg's with dukes and use them most of the time. i don't really mind the weight going up, you only start to notice it about 3 hours into a climb and, if i'm using dukes, i'm just about done with the climb by then

i would recommend you slap dukes on something like 115-120 underfoot with decent rocker. that way you have an extremely versatile pow ski that can also tour. if you want these for solid long tours and very mellow backcountry descents, go with dynafits and some narrower, lighter skis, otherwise dukes ftw

In addition to the long tours vs short to get to the goods question, you should also consider whether you are willing to exert more energy and ski on something that you really enjoy, or exert less and not enjoy the actual skiing as much. From when I took a Avy 1/Intro to backcountry class where I rented randonee gear (K2 backlash with their precut skins, fritschis, and AT boots), it seemed like the downhill was very tough because the stuff was so sloppy. This may have been because it was rental stuff, but from what I've heard, a lot of it is like that. After that, I decided that it was worth to me to lug heavier gear up for the better reward of going down. My setup is 181 ON3P Wrenegades with Barons. I currently dont have AT boots, but am planning on getting some

haha! I second the backslap... happened to me when I forgot to buckle the waist strap on my pack. and yeah it is weird being so far off the ski if you're not skinning in pow, feeling like you're just bending shit. luckily when mine broke I live close-ish to the BCA store and they have plenty of used replacements to lend out.