Alpine or Tele or AT?

tBatt wrote

For all you with experience with AT boots, how does it compare to Alpine boots? Pretty much what I've heard is the cuff is lower and the soles sometimes are, sometimes aren't and sometimes are interchangeable with alpine bindings.

Not sure why you would want to use AT boot's if you are going to be alpining? Yes the cuff tends to be a little lower. The boots are more lightweight, hence less performance.  And yes some people use them in apline bindings, but you need binding that has an adjustable toe height you can set. Then you will be compromising releasabilty  with the rubber sole on the AFD plate

and don't waste a dime on trekkers. Put them tanks on your alpine setup and tour for more than a 1/2 hr and see how you legs feel. Then you have to worry about busting your alpine bindings with those things in the event  you were to fall skinning or something

Harvey44 wrote

Who knows about AT? What am I giving up vs. a standard alpine binding?  

What's the AT binder of choice for those who use them? (Riv, skimore, who else?)

I have 2 pairs of freeride plus that I've had no issues with. Going to get a lighter setup with Dynafits though

You won't have the same releasabilty of an alpine. Which shouldn't bother a tele guy. I wouldn't be banging resort bumps all day with AT bindings, but I have on occasion with my fr's without any issues. I very surprised how durable they have been with how lightweight looking they are. You will lose some torsional stiffness that an alpine binding would have.......again no biggy for tele guy.  Not really sure they would be great on Gore hardpack/ice. I can't even remember skiing them on such surface. I just don't go when it's like that. The freerides also put you up off the ski slightly.

and if you are truely going to be touring of any length don't even consider the Markers. They are too heavy and just don't tour well. I have a pair on my resort skis and will only use them for sidecountry jaunts......sometimes not even that. The heel lifter for climbing is a pain in the ass.

I've had a more issues with the Maker than the FR. The pin on the touring lever that releases it to tour mode on both bindings wore to a point there was some play in the binding moving forward/back when in the locked down position. I hardly ever used them for touring or at all. They were replaced with same parts. So I can see this happening again

Did you go to longer skis Harv? I've found longer skis put more twisting pressure on the knees when the ski tips are deflected side to side. The longer the ski the more leverage that is placed on the knee. Just a thought.

Harvey doesn't tour enough to warrant the AT set up. He should just have a pair of skis mounted alpine to ski in the resorts for fun, bash the bumps, trees and just relax and have a good time. If he wants to tour, he can go tele.

For me, if I put AT bindings on every time I bought a new pair o skis, I'd be broke. Not just the cost of the bindings, but the cost of the skins too. Bindings plus skins will cost you over $500! for a third of that you can get a really nice pair of regular alpine bindings that will release when necessary and stay on when you want them to stay on, keep you safer.

My AT bindings sometimes pre-release when resort skiing. I would only use them for the occasional BC tour, which I only do a coupla times a year (if that...didn't go once last year).

Harvey can pick up a decent alpine rig at The Gear Source for less than $500...and even less if used. Jeff's got lots of skis there, new and used. This way he can see if he wants to have a pair in his quiver. He can probably demo them first.

Powderqueen wrote

My AT bindings sometimes pre-release when resort skiing.

sounds like Naxo's

Plus he'll be able to keep up with the Zipping Zelda on the cruisers.

skimore wrote

Powderqueen wrote

My AT bindings sometimes pre-release when resort skiing.

sounds like Naxo's

Nope Fritchies

I didn't realize that AT bindings were that much more expensive.

PDQ's right. I don't need an AT setup at this time in my life.  Basically I'm a resort skier until my daughter gets older.

If I get the opportunity to skin, I should use what I've got.

Snowballs ... my new skis are the shortest skis I've ever owned - 169s. They are also the biggest and heaviest.

I'm a little surprised that my knee feels 100% normal today.

I have to admit I'm very curious to know if I'd be any good as alpine skier. I haven't been on alpine bindings since a day I skied in Tahoe in 1992.

Hoping for the best.

Powderqueen wrote

 Look at SteveC and Pam...they are a pair of amazing telemarkers, but now they have locked their heels.

Really?! I haven't talked to him in a while. I'm surprised I haven't seen him at Gore at all this year. Maybe I'll stop in and say hi before I head back to school.

Harv.. if you're ok with a bit of extra weight and you're on alpine, you could consider Alpine Trekkers. I was thinking about getting an AT setup, but I'm pretty glad I saved some money and didn't. I'm still thinking of trying to make some Alpine trekkers out of old boots and maybe snowblade bindings though.

For all you with experience with AT boots, how does it compare to Alpine boots? Pretty much what I've heard is the cuff is lower and the soles sometimes are, sometimes aren't and sometimes are interchangeable with alpine bindings.

I ski both alpine and Tele, and I find that Tele is easier on all of my joints than the alpine equipment (plus the boots are more comfortable).

High level alpine turns sometimes require you to turn against your equipment (to develop counter in short turns, for instance), where in tele, the turns are more flowy and smooth (because the hips move with the lower body, not the upper body).  In addition, the most commonly occurring acl injuring fall (the "phantom foot") would seem like it's more common with alpine gear, as opposed to tele gear (a backwards fall where the hands are below the hips and the hips are below the knees seems like an uncommon type of fall on tele equipment - I tend to fall forward a lot more than I fall backward).  I used to have a statistic that said that, as a percentage, the amount of knee injuries to tele skiers was significantly lower than the amount of knee injuries to alpine skiers.

Either way, AT should not even factor into the decision for someone who xc skis and tele skis like you do.  AT is a means for alpine skiers to get into the backcountry without having to learn a new technique.  Since you already know the technique, there's not reason to switch.

Remember, Randonee is french for "can't tele"

tBatt wrote

I was thinking about getting an AT setup, but I'm pretty glad I saved some money and didn't. I'm still thinking of trying to make some Alpine trekkers out of old boots and maybe snowblade bindings though.

Why glad?
If you get a good setup, use it what it's intended for and go to the resort 10 less days it pays for itself. Once you have a good rig thats efficient you'll find you'd rather be out in the woods skiing untracked rather fighting the masses

mattchuck2 wrote

I ski both alpine and Tele, and I find that Tele is easier on all of my joints than the alpine equipment (plus the boots are more comfortable).

High level alpine turns sometimes require you to turn against your equipment (to develop counter in short turns, for instance), where in tele, the turns are more flowy and smooth (because the hips move with the lower body, not the upper body).  In addition, the most commonly occurring acl injuring fall (the "phantom foot") would seem like it's more common with alpine gear, as opposed to tele gear (a backwards fall where the hands are below the hips and the hips are below the knees seems like an uncommon type of fall on tele equipment - I tend to fall forward a lot more than I fall backward).  I used to have a statistic that said that, as a percentage, the amount of knee injuries to tele skiers was significantly lower than the amount of knee injuries to alpine skiers.

Either way, AT should not even factor into the decision for someone who xc skis and tele skis like you do.  AT is a means for alpine skiers to get into the backcountry without having to learn a new technique.  Since you already know the technique, there's not reason to switch.

Remember, Randonee is french for "can't tele"

I know a number of former telemarkers who have a completely different opinion on this than you do, including myself.

mattchuck2 wrote

 AT is a means for alpine skiers to get into the backcountry without having to learn a new technique.  Since you already know the technique, there's not reason to switch.

Remember, Randonee is french for "can't tele"

How true. 10 yrs ago when I started getting away from the resorts more I bought a tele setup. Then I would be out there and couldn't ski the same lines I could with my locked heels. I said f it. I used it about 1/2 dozen times. I didn't have the patience to learn the new technique. I was out there and just wanted to ski

Powderqueen wrote

I know a number of former telemarkers who have a completely different opinion on this than you do, including myself.

That's fine, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.  I like alpine skiing for some things (easier in the park, more confidence inspiring in rowdier lines, etc.), but on a mountain like Gore, where hiking to Highline and skating across Cedars is almost always part of a midwinter powder day, I'd ski Tele gear every time if I could.

Also, I'm 30.  Maybe that has something to do with it.

mattchuck2 wrote

Powderqueen wrote

I know a number of former telemarkers who have a completely different opinion on this than you do, including myself.

That's fine, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.  I like alpine skiing for some things (easier in the park, more confidence inspiring in rowdier lines, etc.), but on a mountain like Gore, where hiking to Highline and skating across Cedars is almost always part of a midwinter powder day, I'd ski Tele gear every time if I could.

Also, I'm 30.  Maybe that has something to do with it.

Yup! I telemarked when I was in my 30s, but by 40, it hurt more and more. I was happier and in less pain with alpine gear.

skimore wrote

tBatt wrote

 I was thinking about getting an AT setup, but I'm pretty glad I saved some money and didn't. I'm still thinking of trying to make some Alpine trekkers out of old boots and maybe snowblade bindings though.

 Why glad?
If you get a good setup, use it what it's intended for and go to the resort 10 less days it pays for itself. Once you have a good rig thats efficient you'll find you'd rather be out in the woods skiing untracked rather fighting the masses

I figure I'd go touring maybe three times a year. $375 for a season pass vs. $65 for a single day. Go 7 times, and you've got your money worth. That's why I was considering Alpine Wreckers. No way I'd pay full price for them, but if I can make something for <$30 I'd be willing to give it a try.

Maybe it's something I have to try for myself, but 40 mins up for 5 mins down just doesn't seem amazing when I can find lift served untracked and not see more than 3 people in my run.

mattchuck2 wrote

Remember, Randonee is french for "can't tele"

I love that!

That's almost as good as "Hey, if it was easy they'd call it "snowboarding."


ps - where is the "stirring the pot" smiley animation?