Touring/Bc Skis

Line Vision 108:Quality isn’t that great but they ski really god.if they ever stop making them I’m gonna buy like 10 pairs

Atomic BC 120: only have a few days on them but they feel promising

Lmao K2 being made in China doesn’t mean anything, Black Crows were made in Bulgaria for like 10 years, and as soon as they moved production to Austria the quality went down the shitter. I’ve had a guy come in to my shop 3 times this season with the entire top sheet of his Camox completely delaminated from the core.

so imma go ahead and recommend some atomic bentchetler 120s, super light ski and they ski quite well. binding wise mabe look at marker kingpins, never used them myself but sound pretty solid.

im not sure about the kings.. worried about pre releases or acl bc of no horizontal release

7bmichaelmanso imma go ahead and recommend some atomic bentchetler 120s, super light ski and they ski quite well. binding wise mabe look at marker kingpins, never used them myself but sound pretty solid.

blyatfulim not sure about the kings.. worried about pre releases or acl bc of no horizontal release

ok. id look into fritchi vipetecs then if you are more concerned about safety.

Depending on how much touring you plan on doing you should look into daymakers. You can use all the alpine gear you already have to no worries about pin bindings or anything. Obviously not the lightest option but great for getting started in the backcountry or if you want to prioritize downhill performance.

I second the adapter option because it is cheap. Also a jj ul is roughly 1700g, the pivots are about 1100g and the adapters are 740g. All added up it'd be 3540g which is not that light but this would be cheaper than a new setup. That being said, since you mention that budget is no issue this might not be what you are looking for. Here are a few ideas: Moment Wildcat Tour 108 (shipping might be a lot though), Volkl revolt 104s (2kg per ski at 188 is not light but also not heavy), Line SFBs (not totally sold on Lines durability)

yeah you're right, i want another setup. i thought about the moment wildcat since i read only good things about those and not to mention they look awesome but what about on3p? they have some pretty light touring skis too? ye shipping might be too expensive.. :( i literally bought the Sfb because they were on a 30% sale but i don't like them to much..

LazylightningI second the adapter option because it is cheap. Also a jj ul is roughly 1700g, the pivots are about 1100g and the adapters are 740g. All added up it'd be 3540g which is not that light but this would be cheaper than a new setup. That being said, since you mention that budget is no issue this might not be what you are looking for. Here are a few ideas: Moment Wildcat Tour 108 (shipping might be a lot though), Volkl revolt 104s (2kg per ski at 188 is not light but also not heavy), Line SFBs (not totally sold on Lines durability)

blyatfulyeah you're right, i want another setup. i thought about the moment wildcat since i read only good things about those and not to mention they look awesome but what about on3p? they have some pretty light touring skis too? ye shipping might be too expensive.. :( i literally bought the Sfb because they were on a 30% sale but i don't like them to much..

I didn't mention ON3P because I figured shipping would be a literal killing but I think the kartel 108 tour or the kartel 108 with a 50/50 layup would be amazing. I have the normal 108s with a cast (each ski + binding weighs 3200g going up) and they aren't bad for shorter tours. They are poppy but still damp and stable so they sort of ride everything well (except firm conditions). If you got the 50/50 it says on their website it saves 150-250 per ski and I think that'd be a good way to save weight without losing too much stability

**This post was edited on Feb 28th 2021 at 12:45:37pm

ye thats kinda sad.. i already sent a message to ON3P bc i'd like to know in what kind of range these costs are. They seem to be a nice company and the skis look insane amd they're pretty light too. Thought about getting a 102 width and make it a 50/50 or so but yeah it'll be so expensive all together. Do you have any experiences with shift binding? Its hard to decide between shift, duke pt and cast but i guess in the end cast pull trough.

LazylightningI didn't mention ON3P because I figured shipping would be a literal killing but I think the kartel 108 tour or the kartel 108 with a 50/50 layup would be amazing. I have the normal 108s with a cast (each ski + binding weighs 3200g going up) and they aren't bad for shorter tours. They are poppy but still damp and stable so they sort of ride everything well (except firm conditions). If you got the 50/50 it says on their website it saves 150-250 per ski and I think that'd be a good way to save weight without losing too much stability

**This post was edited on Feb 28th 2021 at 12:45:37pm

blyatfulye thats kinda sad.. i already sent a message to ON3P bc i'd like to know in what kind of range these costs are. They seem to be a nice company and the skis look insane amd they're pretty light too. Thought about getting a 102 width and make it a 50/50 or so but yeah it'll be so expensive all together. Do you have any experiences with shift binding? Its hard to decide between shift, duke pt and cast but i guess in the end cast pull trough.

My buddy actually has the shift and it tours well/is lighter than the cast system. That said, if your forward pressure isn't perfect it can fuck the binding up. My friend got his forward pressure messed up and it resulted in him pre-releasing and warrantying the binding. I went cast because this ski will see fewer tours whereas my buddy rides his shifts in the backcountry relatively often. I know the pts are heavy and burlier than the shifts (Ross Tester wore them on the FWT) so those are also a good option. If you can get a good deal on pivots cast is probably the most solid but heaviest (duke might be similar in weight)

duke PT/CAST if you want something solid for resort part and its your only ski


Atris are quite nice.

yee heard about this problem from the shift thats why im more into cast eventho it would be nice to get the loghter shift system. any good tech binding would be cool but to have the safety etc from the normal pivot is just to nice.. hard to decide tbh

LazylightningMy buddy actually has the shift and it tours well/is lighter than the cast system. That said, if your forward pressure isn't perfect it can fuck the binding up. My friend got his forward pressure messed up and it resulted in him pre-releasing and warrantying the binding. I went cast because this ski will see fewer tours whereas my buddy rides his shifts in the backcountry relatively often. I know the pts are heavy and burlier than the shifts (Ross Tester wore them on the FWT) so those are also a good option. If you can get a good deal on pivots cast is probably the most solid but heaviest (duke might be similar in weight)

it's not like that it'll be my only ski, it's more about safety and trust.
ye i wanted the atris so bad but in the end i talked to people who told me that they're not tooo nice for landing switch in pow which i can imagine.. but it would be nice to try these out

anders_aduke PT/CAST if you want something solid for resort part and its your only ski


Atris are quite nice.

blyatfulit's not like that it'll be my only ski, it's more about safety and trust.
ye i wanted the atris so bad but in the end i talked to people who told me that they're not tooo nice for landing switch in pow which i can imagine.. but it would be nice to try these out

yeah but would you ski it for that when you have a 116JJ? which is great for it

look at M-free 108 btw and reckoner 112 (if we are looking at 100mm to low 110mm stuff, maybe even the new CT 3.0

true.. thought about just putting a touring binding on the jj but 116 underfoot. might be a little bit wide but with its low weight. . gotta think about that. Those are all cool skis, such a hard decision. new ct3 coming in pretty light if im not mistaken?

anders_ayeah but would you ski it for that when you have a 116JJ? which is great for it

look at M-free 108 btw and reckoner 112 (if we are looking at 100mm to low 110mm stuff, maybe even the new CT 3.0

blyatfultrue.. thought about just putting a touring binding on the jj but 116 underfoot. might be a little bit wide but with its low weight. . gotta think about that. Those are all cool skis, such a hard decision. new ct3 coming in pretty light if im not mistaken?

noop! new 3.0 2021 are a heavier stiffer version of the 2020, which was fattend up from the 2019

They are CHARGY and holds an edge on firmstuff/ice prett darn good, IE I can carve hard on them! Its like not ski the mountain, but KILL the mountain.

Dont worry about skis made in china... Volkl, Line, and K2 build decent products over there

nice skis but i saw that theyre pretty heavy and for touring it might be to heavy :/

anders_anoop! new 3.0 2021 are a heavier stiffer version of the 2020, which was fattend up from the 2019

They are CHARGY and holds an edge on firmstuff/ice prett darn good, IE I can carve hard on them! Its like not ski the mountain, but KILL the mountain.

i didn't even know that volkl produces in china.. so which ski would you recomend?

DingoSeanDont worry about skis made in china... Volkl, Line, and K2 build decent products over there

blyatfulnice skis but i saw that theyre pretty heavy and for touring it might be to heavy :/

an easier question is, what weight are you aiming at, and what width?

under 1900 would be nice and not over 110 width. bc 120s are light af but who goes touring with this..?

anders_aan easier question is, what weight are you aiming at, and what width?

tough weight, but your kinda stuck with BC100 or revolt 104 (to be able to land switch)

maybe fischer ranger 102 Fr, but maybe 50-grams too heavy

not sure the exact weight in grams, but maybe moment wildcat 108 tours? I've never skied them but I've heard good things.

yee i see that point.. BC100 are not bad and they're light af. hard decision right there.

anders_atough weight, but your kinda stuck with BC100 or revolt 104 (to be able to land switch)

maybe fischer ranger 102 Fr, but maybe 50-grams too heavy

I ride BC atris and don’t find the partial twin to be that much of an issue, blows trying switch in powder tho. I’d check out the revolt 104 for touring. I’m looking at that to try out

blyatfulHey NS, i'm Nick 27yo and around 74kg (i guess thats around 170lbs?) and sking mostly in Switzerland (sometimes in austria), i've been skiing my whole life and i'm comfortable with everything on the slope also with 180/360. I do really enjoy sking the powder and trying to jump some smaller cliffs and stuff like that but i never had a touring setup which i'd like to change now.
I'd like to have a ski which is not to heavy but also can do jumps (building some bc jumps to try 540/720) and it should also drive well on some slashy snow.
It should of course be a twin tip and i think it wouldn't make any sense to go with more than 110 underfoot.
Thought about getting the BC Atris but it has a to low tail raise in my opinion and skis from k2 look nice but i don't really wanna spend money in a concern who builds their skis in china.
I don't really have a budget so feel free to write down your best thoughts. And i'd appreciate some good advices for binding choice, i'm kinda scared getting a tech binding since i heard alot about injuries etc.
So yeah thank you guys anyway and. have a good day.
Oh and not to forget, i'm currently riding the jj ul 116 with a pivot 14 for the big days.

**This thread was edited on Feb 27th 2021 at 5:40:36am

Deathwish tour?

blyatfuli didn't even know that volkl produces in china.. so which ski would you recomend?

Here's my list of touring skis that I've owned/own and feel happy with in the field...

Fischer Watea 88
White Dots Carbonline R.108
Armada TST
Dynastar Cham 97 HM
Icelantic Vanguard 97
Black Diamond Warrant
Fischer Ranger 108ti
Dynafit Manaslu
Black Diamond Havoc

almost all of them besides the TST (and the havoc ironically) were built with touring in mind, being that they are constructed to be lighter weight, or at least have a tail-slit or flat bumper for touring skins.

Yeah. I mostly omit the twin tip in the backcountry. flat tails are more useful when you're touring, and unless you plan to build a backcountry booter or you just looove to land switch in pow, then it's more of a pain in the ass than anything. You'll need to get a specific tail for your skins to make sure they don't shift around or anything, and that's not the most fun thing.

And that's the thing, you need to assess what your goals are for the backcountry and what the terrain youre most likely going to be skiing will require. If you want to summit 4000m peaks, then lighter and more efficient is usually better. If just you want to access that sidecountry mini golf zone just out of bounds at your local, and tour back to the lift, then you don't need too much different than what you're already using inbounds.

I generally tend to suggest something light, but not TOO light. You don't want a straight up ski-mo ski unless you're really wanting to peak-out on stuff. If your goal is to enjoy your skiing more than your type 2 journey, get something perhaps a bit more solid. For example, my Vanguard 97's and my White Dots are pretty damn lightweight, and ski a bit soft due to it. the Vanguard has a really soft squishy washy tail.. which can be annoying if the conditions ask for a stronger ski, but if you're used to a washy twintip, then it fits alright. They dont make that ski anymore, but if you wanted to have something similar, just try to find a ski with a softer tail.

If you want something more solid, it might be worth trying a ski that's a full wood-core throughout the whole construction - meaning no PU tips, or other ultra lightweight faff. When the conditions warrant going with something stronger, longer, and more bold, I generally pull out my Armada TST's because, though they aren't the lightest, or the most touring oriented, they're absolutely the strongest ski I have in my touring quiver, and theyve taken just about anything i've thrown at them.

In any case, I like a lot of the touring oriented skis with lightweight cores that are out there these days... and there's a lot of good options.

Armada Tracer. Atomic Backland. Line Vision. Icelantic Natural. Black Diamond Helio. Volkl Blaze. K2 Wayback. Dynastar Vertical, Head Kore, Blizzard Zero G, Black Crows Freebird, shit just about everyone is making a decent touring ski these days.

You're going to get a ton of different recommendations from people. Do your own research and think critically before you dump your cash.

That said... If I had to pick a quiver of 3 from the list above, I'd probably go with the Black Diamond Helio 88 for spring days or longer tours in old, average, variable snow, the Icelantic Natural 111 for deep japowder days, and probably the Armada Tracer 98 as my every-day touring ski that I'd take out at least 50% of the time that can handle absolutely whatever you throw at it..

The Helio 88 is super lightweight, reactive, and has the right construction for spring days. They also make a 95, 104, and 115 width in this ski, and if weight savings sounds good to you, you could swap this out for any of those as well.

The Armada Tracer 98 is durable, lightweight, damp because while it has a lightweight core, it also has a titanal laminate, and works both inbounds and out of bounds just fine. super fucking versitile. The 108 and 118 would also do great if you wanted them to be more powder oriented.

The Icelantic Natural is one of the more tough options of the list above -fairly lightweight without being flimsy or anything- and I'd also highly suggest the 101 width as an everyday touring ski.

**This post was edited on Mar 1st 2021 at 9:54:01pm

Holy shit! i didn't thought that i'll get a review like but but i'm really thanfull, it opened up my eyes in some kind of way and i have to say you're completely right in those points. i mean i'll never take these skis 50% on a backcountry booter but i wanna try some sort of jumps ans for that it would be cool to have at least some kind of tail raise but maybe i'll have to buy another ski for this. like having 1 setup for everything might be to much while having 2-3 is eypensive but as you mentioned, you'll always have the setup for what you're looking to to at the day. i'll go through your ski list soon and i'm happy to get some ofher skia recomens beside volkl 104 eventho they're great for sure.
i already did alot od research about almost everything for touring but here i got some new inputs which all make sense and for having another pov now i'm really grateful. thanks alot for this badass review!!

DingoSeanHere's my list of touring skis that I've owned/own and feel happy with in the field...

Fischer Watea 88
White Dots Carbonline R.108
Armada TST
Dynastar Cham 97 HM
Icelantic Vanguard 97
Black Diamond Warrant
Fischer Ranger 108ti
Dynafit Manaslu
Black Diamond Havoc

almost all of them besides the TST (and the havoc ironically) were built with touring in mind, being that they are constructed to be lighter weight, or at least have a tail-slit or flat bumper for touring skins.

Yeah. I mostly omit the twin tip in the backcountry. flat tails are more useful when you're touring, and unless you plan to build a backcountry booter or you just looove to land switch in pow, then it's more of a pain in the ass than anything. You'll need to get a specific tail for your skins to make sure they don't shift around or anything, and that's not the most fun thing.

And that's the thing, you need to assess what your goals are for the backcountry and what the terrain youre most likely going to be skiing will require. If you want to summit 4000m peaks, then lighter and more efficient is usually better. If just you want to access that sidecountry mini golf zone just out of bounds at your local, and tour back to the lift, then you don't need too much different than what you're already using inbounds.

I generally tend to suggest something light, but not TOO light. You don't want a straight up ski-mo ski unless you're really wanting to peak-out on stuff. If your goal is to enjoy your skiing more than your type 2 journey, get something perhaps a bit more solid. For example, my Vanguard 97's and my White Dots are pretty damn lightweight, and ski a bit soft due to it. the Vanguard has a really soft squishy washy tail.. which can be annoying if the conditions ask for a stronger ski, but if you're used to a washy twintip, then it fits alright. They dont make that ski anymore, but if you wanted to have something similar, just try to find a ski with a softer tail.

If you want something more solid, it might be worth trying a ski that's a full wood-core throughout the whole construction - meaning no PU tips, or other ultra lightweight faff. When the conditions warrant going with something stronger, longer, and more bold, I generally pull out my Armada TST's because, though they aren't the lightest, or the most touring oriented, they're absolutely the strongest ski I have in my touring quiver, and theyve taken just about anything i've thrown at them.

In any case, I like a lot of the touring oriented skis with lightweight cores that are out there these days... and there's a lot of good options.

Armada Tracer. Atomic Backland. Line Vision. Icelantic Natural. Black Diamond Helio. Volkl Blaze. K2 Wayback. Dynastar Vertical, Head Kore, Blizzard Zero G, Black Crows Freebird, shit just about everyone is making a decent touring ski these days.

You're going to get a ton of different recommendations from people. Do your own research and think critically before you dump your cash.

That said... If I had to pick a quiver of 3 from the list above, I'd probably go with the Black Diamond Helio 88 for spring days or longer tours in old, average, variable snow, the Icelantic Natural 111 for deep japowder days, and probably the Armada Tracer 98 as my every-day touring ski that I'd take out at least 50% of the time that can handle absolutely whatever you throw at it..

The Helio 88 is super lightweight, reactive, and has the right construction for spring days. They also make a 95, 104, and 115 width in this ski, and if weight savings sounds good to you, you could swap this out for any of those as well.

The Armada Tracer 98 is durable, lightweight, damp because while it has a lightweight core, it also has a titanal laminate, and works both inbounds and out of bounds just fine. super fucking versitile. The 108 and 118 would also do great if you wanted them to be more powder oriented.

The Icelantic Natural is one of the more tough options of the list above -fairly lightweight without being flimsy or anything- and I'd also highly suggest the 101 width as an everyday touring ski.

**This post was edited on Mar 1st 2021 at 9:54:01pm