Alpine Touring (A.T.) Ski Gear

In the 1930s, the old telemark turn had been replaced with the new 'Arlberg' style of skiing, employing a hard, skidded 'alpine' or parallel turn. The boots and bindings became more rigid, so that all the power of the skier's legs could be put into turning the skis. This made it easier for skiers to learn to negotiate steep slopes. 

For the Second World War, engineers had developed touring bindings that could be converted to lock the boot heel to the ski, facilitating the powerful 'alpine' ski turn while also allowing long-distance travel on skis. These military bindings did not release in a crash, however, so were not very popular among civilian skiers and mountaineers after the war. 

In the 1970s, mountaineers who skied began looking for ways to quickly cover ground on the approaches to their climbing destinations. Some companies made alpine ski bindings that could be reconfigured to allow the foot  to pivot from the toes, allowing a type of walking or hiking on skis, over the snow. This became known by the French term 'ski randonnée' (hiking on skis), which was anglicized to randonée skiing. This plate binding design was a compromise solution for a limited purpose. The combination of mountaineering boots in these convertible touring bindings did not work especially well for linking downhill turns, but it worked well enough for ski mountaineers to get where they were going with reasonable safety and improved speed over the snow. 

In later years, the plate binding design was refined with the addition of reliable release and better skiing performance. This design is still popular with backcountry skiers who need very strong bindings that won't break from the repeated stress of 'extreme' skiing. The Marker Duke is a classic favorite for this type of skier. The reason this type of binding isn't more popular is that it is always heavier than the competing products based on designs by the Swiss company Dynafit. 

The 1980s brought a lot of innovation in the development of ski bindings of all kinds, including for randonée skiing. The biggest challenge facing engineers was how to design a binding that would hold the boot firmly in place for making parallel turns, be easy to convert to a walking (touring) mode for uphill travel, and would also release reliably in a crash or avalanche. Some companies developed acceptable solutions, but these 'plate bindngs' were much heavier than the telemark equipment that was popular at the time.  

In 1984, Dynafit came up with a much lighter type of binding that employed a pincer-shaped toe piece that clamps to indents in the toe of the boot (the tech toe), with a separate heel piece that can either lock down the heel or pivot out of the way to allow the heel to swing up and down. The tech toe system allows the boot to swivel up/down, while holding the toe of the boot firmly to the ski. This allows a super-efficient tour mode, a relatively easy conversion to locked-heel ski mode, and light weight. The original versions did not provide reliable release, but Dynafit engineers kept improving the design, until today the tech 'pin binding' is the dominant design.  

Skipping ahead to today, 'randonée skiing' has become known as Alpine Touring or simply AT skiing. Dynafit's patent on their tech toe pin binding design expired, and the design quickly became the industry standard. Cutting edge advances in plastics and carbon reinforced materials have allowed manufacturers to design boots that not only ski and tour well but are super light. AT gear has leaped far ahead of telemark gear in light weight, reliability, and safety, allowing downhill resort skiers to get into backcountry ski touring without the need to learn the unfamiliar and difficult telemark turn. This new AT gear has touched off a boom in the numbers of skiers heading off the groomed pistes into the backcountry (for better or worse). 

I recently demo'd a Dynafit setup at a ski resort, touring up and skiing some nice spring corn. I have to tell you, modern AT setups tour so free and easy, they're a joy for skinning up. Then on the down, well... "Fix the heel, fix the problem." It's true. For true control and easier turning in steep terrain, a fixed-heel alpine setup is unbeatable. In the steep, consequential terrain of alpine glaciers and couloirs, an AT setup is going to be far safer than any telemark setup.  I guess that's why they call it Alpine Touring. It's optimized for (well...) ski touring in the high alpine. It's as simple as that. 

But what about skiing the forested hills of the northeast US...?

Suggestions for an All-Around Alpine Touring (AT) Setup

The last few years have seen an explosion in the numbers of skiers heading into the Northeast US backcountry on alpine touring (AT) ski touring setups. The reason why is simple: The gear has gotten really good, really lightweight, and more affordable. 

The general consensus is that the 'sweet spot' combo would consist of a pair of skis that weigh about 3000 grams per pair and are about 95mm width across the waist (Elan Ripstick 96, Fischer Ranger 96, Voile Ultravector, Volkl Blaze 94, etc.), combined with sturdy pin bindings like the Dynafit Radical, G3 Ion or ATK Crest 10, and midweight boots with tech binding attachments like the Scarpa Maestrale, Tecnica Zero G, or Dynafit Radical Pro.  Add climbing skins and adjustable poles like the Black Diamond Traverse (or better, if you want). 

This kind of setup will be burly enough for you to descend the Headwall at Tuckerman Ravine, Big Jay in VT, or the Angel Slides on Wright Peak, while also being light enough for longer tours hunting for turns in the Catskills, climbing Mt Marcy, or a mellow day lapping Dutch Hill. 

You can go lighter if you value uphill speed more than downhill control, or you can go fatter and heavier if you're strong and want the very best downhill performance. Remember, "Weight is great, but light is right." I say, "Everything is a compromise." A wider and heavier ski is going to be more controllable in bad snow, but will make you work harder on the climb up. A narrower ski will be lighter, so easier on the climb up, and will have better edge hold on hardpacked snow, but will require more careful and skillful skiing for the ski down on steep slopes, especially when the snow is deep and soft. A stiffer boot will give you better control on steep downhill runs, but will be heavier and less comfortable on the uphill. You can have massive control on the down or you can have light and easy on the up, but you can't have both. "Everything is a compromise." 

Light AT Gear for Northeastern Backcountry Skiing

In the Catskills, Adirondacks, and Green Mountains, most of the popular ski tours involve long sections of rolling terrain without sustained slopes. Since alpine touring (AT) skiers are usually on smooth based downhill skis, climbing skins are required for any kind of uphill skiing. One quirk of AT bindings is that the skier has to get out of the skis to switch between (locked heel/downhill) ski mode and (free heel/uphill) touring mode. Here's a video by Lou Dawson of wildsnow.com demonstrating how to get in and out of the Dynafit bindings, and how to switch from ski mode to tour mode. 

If the terrain you need to cross has constant ups and downs, it becomes too time consuming to repeatedly switch between ski mode and tour mode. Skiers on AT gear usually ski these rolling approaches in tour mode with their skins affixed to their skis, which adds weight to the load on the skier's feet and makes the skiing more like hiking in snowshoes than actual cross country skiing. 

Generally speaking, skiers with AT gear will choose to take on more challenging and steep destinations like the Adirondack slides, Tuckerman Ravine, the Gulf of Slides, or the Thunderbolt Ski Trail. Skiing with an AT rig is more fun if there is a consistently steep pitch both climbing up and skiing down. 

This leaves destinations with lots of up-and-down-and-all-around to telemark skiers on fish-scale based XCD skis, which can be used to climb mild uphill grades of up to 10 or 15 degrees without skins, and then ski down without the the need to rip off skins. In other words, using light telemark/XCD gear, you can switch from cross country to downhill skiing without stopping to make adjustments to your gear. 

It is possible to install AT bindings on a lighter weight fish-scale based ski. This would allow climbing gentle grades using the skis' fish-scales for purchase, leaving the climbing skins for when the climb is relentlessly uphill. Unfortunately, since with AT bindings it's necessary to step out of the skis to change from ski mode to tour mode, it's still inefficient to use an AT setup on undulating, rolling terrain, unless the skier is willing to negotiate the many short downhill sections in free-heel mode. 

While plate bindings do allow a quick switch between ski and tour modes, these bindings are designed to be strong for use with big skis, making them big and heavy, which disqualifies them for use with lightweight, fish-scale based touring skis. 

Perhaps a nearly 'ski-mo' style setup using a lightweight fish-scale ski can work well for those who want to ski AT gear in our forested areas, hunting for powder turns in lower angled terrain. Maybe a setup like this... 

This kind of setup won't be as powerful or stable as the usual AT setups based on 95mm waist all-mountain skis, Dynafit Radical or Scarpa Maestrale boots, and more robust AT bindings like the Atomic or Salomon 'Shift' models, but they will be noticeably lighter for long distance touring.   

My solution to this forest skiing problem has been to stick with telemark skiing in my 75mm duckbill boots. I ski forested slopes in the Catskills, Adirondacks and Vermont more often than anywhere else. However, since I put in the years to learn the telemark turn, I can use that technique for linking downhill turns on light telemark/XCD gear. If stem christies and parallel turns were all I could do with my heels free all the time, I wouldn't have nearly as much fun skiing that kind of terrain. 

So, what's a mountain forest skier to do? Learn to telemark? Or buy a second AT setup that's super-lightweight, optimized for rolling terrain and short descents?  Or save the money and use it for airfare out West, and avoid skiing most of our local terrain because it's 'no fun'? 

Tough questions, right? 

If you think of a better solution, please let me know about it! 

Super-light AT rig with Madshus Panorama M78 skis, Scarpa F1 boots, and Dynafit Speed Turn 2.0 pin bindings. 

A quick word on choosing the correct ski length

Advances in the design of downhill skis have made it impossible to make a blanket recommendation for your 'best' ski length.

A 'rockered' or 'early rise' ski on hard snow will have a shorter running length, which means less of the ski will be touching the snow surface. On hardpack the rockered ski will feel shorter that its stated length (it will 'ski short'), which can feel 'squirrely' and require you to ski more slowly and turn more often. However, once in powder the entire length of the rockered ski will be in the snow, allowing quick turn initiation and reduced likelihood of 'tip dive' (when your ski tips get buried in the soft snow and make you crash). In general, if you're looking at a ski with considerable rocker or early rise to the tip and tail, choose a longer length. You'll want the longer running surface on hardpack, and you'll enjoy the additional float in powder.

A ski with 'traditional camber' will have a longer running length, which means on hard snow more of the ski's running surface will be touching the snow. This makes a traditional camber ski feel longer on hard snow, increasing stability at speed. However, when skiing a trad camber ski in deep snow the skier will need to keep the ski tips from diving down under the snow surface. This can be especially difficult in deep snow with a crust on top (breakable crust). 

These days, traditional camber skis are considered frontside/hardpack specialist tools (as in ski racing). If you're an intermediate/recreational skier and you're looking at a traditional camber ski, go with the traditional length recommendation you'll see on many ski shop websites (for intermediates, stand the ski up in front of you and choose the length where the ski tip comes up to someplace between your mouth and forehead; on the short side for beginner skiers, on the long side for more advanced).

Once again — Everything is a compromise. You can't have a blazing fast resort hardpack/racing ski that's also an easygoing powder ski. The two are mutually exclusive. Today's 'all-mountain' skis are a blend of rockered and cambered characteristics trying to strike a winning compromise using the best characteristics from both extremes. How much of one characteristic vs. the other makes for an infinite number of possible designs.

That is why it's impossible to make a simple statement that 'if you weigh so much and are this tall, choose this length of ski.'

For a more in-depth look at this issue, check out How To Think About Ski Length from blisterreview.com.