BC touring/XC skiing: 3-pin vs NNN, plus more q's.

[SadieKate]

After many years, I'm trying XC skiing again, but trying to do it right this time. Way back then, I had track skis (because that's all I knew about) that I took off track because I hated the tracks. Of course, the long narrow skis and low cut shoes didn't make this easy. Now 23 years and 4 knee surgeries later, I'm trying backcountry Nordic. We have huge numbers of ungroomed forest service roads on gentle slopes perfect for this without getting into high altitude slopes with the need for hard turns or telemark skills.

I'm trying to pick skis but I'm having trouble understanding the pros and cons of 3-pin (75 mm) vs NNN. I can't even find a good discussion of the subject. Can anyone explain why one would pick one over the other? Are the pivot points different? Does it change torque on your knees if you do need to carve a bit? What does one do better than the other?

Are there XC forums such as this one where I could easily find good BC touring info amongst the juvenile pranks? ;)

Another thing I need to figure out is how to determine if the tread pattern equates to good climbing.

[Onno]

Try www.xcskiforum.com
I'm a track and skate skier, so can't really help you.

[dauwhe]

Best place to start for an overview of gear choices is:

http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/DirtbagPinner/dirtbag.html

telemarktips.com has quite a bit of discussion of backcountry touring. And it's a pretty good web community (not quite as nice as here, but close).

If you're spending most of your time on ungroomed FS roads, I'd likely go with NNN-BC (or the Salomon equivalent) or 3-pins. The boots are the most important thing; find some that fit and have the support/features you want, and pick bindings that match the boots.

Dave

[dauwhe]

Another thing I need to figure out is how to determine if the tread pattern equates to good climbing.

If you're talking about waxless ski patterns, this does vary a lot by manufacturer. I'm really only familiar with the heavier backcountry touring skis, like the Fischer S-bound series and the Karhu XCD skis. The Karhus climb much, much better in my experience. My wife is quite pleased with the Karhu Pyxis (similar to the current XCD-GT). She appreciates the stability and snow-plowing power of a ski like this, compared to narrower skis.

I've also heard good things about the Madshus Glitterind, if you're looking for a narrower (but still metal edges and some sidecut) ski.

Dave

[SadieKate]

Best place to start for an overview of gear choices is:

http://home.comcast.net/~pinnah/DirtbagPinner/dirtbag.htmlHa! I just stumbled on this site and came back here to check for any responses. Thanks!

Yes, I'm talking waxless ski patterns. I rented Fischer Snowbounds on Saturday and loved the stability. I have no comparison to know if they climb well. The conditions were less than ideal. Warm with intermittent rain/snow. Powder on top of an ice crust that kept breaking. Lovely for re-learning . . . .

My husband rented the Karhu Pinnacle which is an XCD ski but narrower than the Snowbound and did like them. I was going to rent the Pinnacles next so it is interesting that you mention both. An experienced BC/Tele-skier friend said she has a softspot for the Pinnacle but also said she's intrigued by the Fischer E109, which have a different pattern on the base than the Snowbound and are a bit longer, but I'm not sure if I can find the E109 to rent. I think I can find the Madshus though.

On bindings, I was going to pick boots first and match the bindings, but thought I should know more about bindings in case I need a tie-breaker. I don't see myself doing much turning, but if all goes well I'll probably have to push the limits of my knees just because.

[dauwhe]

It's great you're able to demo the skis. My first skis were the Fischer Europa 99st. Couldn't turn to save my life, but skied to some great places! Haven't even seen the 109, might be good but I'd probably stick to skis I could demo.

I'm partial to the 3pin bindings just because of simplicity and durability. But I think you'd be OK with either pins or system bindings for the skis you're looking at.

Have fun out there!

Dave

[chrisroph]

3 pins are wide in the front and will catch a little more snow that nnn. nnn are engineered with grooves on the binding and the boot to provide more lateral stability that 3 pin. nnn is the way of the present for light touring.

re traction, i bought last fall a pair of waxless for the first time in my life and i don't really like them. they work well only in a narrow range of snow conditions and they are quite slippy in wetter snow. personally, i'd much rather wax for conditions.

waxing is an art and its wonderful when you get your wax matched well to the conditions such that you get a strong kick and a free glide.

but the waxless skis all seem to hook up a little different.

if you are going to buy new, go to a good shop and spend some time talking things over.

getting the right skis for your weight, your style and the conditions is pretty technical and the difference between getting everything right and wrong can be pretty large.

[alembical]

My thoughts as someone who has both systems is that the nnn vs 3-pin distinction is based upon the expected use. If coming down and making turns are your focus, the 3-pin might be the way to go. If your focus is on the actual tour, climbing, covering some distances and just having some fun, I would go to the nnn type system. If thinking about the nnn, I would also say that the nnn-bc might even be the better way to go. Same exact set-up exact with a much wider contact area and therefore better bc float, handling and stability, but the nnn-bc can not be used real effectively on real skinny skis.

I bought a new set-up this year and went with the Rossignol bc 70 skis, nnn-bc binding, and bc x7 boot, and am incredibly happy. All brands will have similar offerings though.

Regarding waxless (patterned) skis, if the patterns are set down into the base surface, the ski will be faster and glide better, but at the expense of climbing. Raised patterns, climb better, but do not glide as well. Longer length patterns climb better but do not glide as well. Softer skis with less sidecut are a little better in powder. More sidecut, typically means more difficult tracking but easier to turn. Best bet would be to go to a shop with lots of choices, fondle the skis, ask a lot of questions, think about how you expect to use them and try some out.

Alembical

p.s. - if downhill is the main focus, andd you are considering 3-pin, some of the new telemark touring bindings might also be worth considering.

[dauwhe]

p.s. - if downhill is the main focus, andd you are considering 3-pin, some of the new telemark touring bindings might also be worth considering.

I likely wouldn't put a binding heavier than 3-pins on a ski that was less than 70mm at the waist, and using a plastic telemark boot. Going to something like the Voile Switchback means a 3-pound, $260 binding. I have a pair on my Jak BCs (90mm waist) but prefer pins for most waxless metal-edge backcountry skis.

But I just got a pair of Lite Dogz bindings, which are step-in 3-pin with brakes, a heel tube, and a free pivot mode. Very, very cool! Have 'em on Karhu Guides, which is a very wide, very soft waxless ski (112/78/95). Lots of fun! but likely more ski than the OP is looking for.

Can't wait to put a pair of Lite Dogz on my TM22s.

Dave

[SadieKate]

Definitely not focusing on downhill other than to get down safely. I'm just guessing right now but I suspect that the tip width of whatever I end up with will be between 65 and 78. And certainly not going to tele unless right turns won't be required.

alembical, thanks for that summation of pattern, sidecut, etc. Standing in a shop and trying to assimilate all the info for use later is a tad hard. I'm over here in Bend so I have lots of choices but only a few in each shop so it's hard to compare sometimes. I feel like I'm going to have to take one day to try on every women's boot in town which is a whole 'nother set of challenges.

[alembical]

Sadie,

I completly agree with Dave's post above and it sounds like the nnn-bc is what I would recommend in your situation (and what I bought this year for similiar purposes). You are lucky living in Bend which has a great xc community. Boots are just like bike seats, what someone else loves does not really matter. Try a bunch on. As soon as I tried on the Rossignol bc-7, I knew it was the one for me... and that was before the shop did the thermofitting of it, which was included for free. I personally do not like laces, at least without a covering over them. They end up getting caked in snow, frozen and almost impossible to retie or get tight enough.

I am not an expert, but I love skiing, especially xc and telemark... well, and alpine too :) If you have any questions, feel free to pm or email me.

Alembical

[SadieKate]

Sadie,
I personally do not like laces, at least without a covering over them. They end up getting caked in snow, frozen and almost impossible to retie or get tight enough.
+1. I just replaced an old pair of gaiters simply because the arch strap was a draw cord.

I didn't think I'd XC ski again with my knees, but suddenly realized that the gradients here on the east side combined with highcut supportive boots and wider skis meant I could resurrect the few skills I had, and it would be a lot more fun than snowshoeing, which I loved to do on the steep slopes of the Sierras. I can ski practically right out my door this winter, but shoeing was all about the glissade in my "seven-league boots" and there isn't much of the right terrain for that around here.

Thanks for the PM offer.

[link]

I think it's all been covered fairly well so far. I'll throw in my .02 for the sake of discussion.

You said that downhill turning wasn't the focus but may be necessary at times. In that case nnn-bc. The nnn or nnn-bc are going to tour much more comfortably than a 75mm format as long as you're sticking to touring skis.

Waxable bases are the way to go, IMO. But, you're going to have to spend a 'bit of time understanding the "how to" before you get to the moment of having an a-ha experience. If you want simplicity, then waxless is the way to go.

[dauwhe]

I'd add that waxless can be nice when temperatures are often above freezing.

It depends where one skis. If I still lived in Colorado, I still wouldn't own any waxless skis. They come in handy in Southern New England...

Klister is a lot to ask of someone who doesn't ski a lot :)

Dave

[SadieKate]

link, thanks for that $.02. You obviously didn't see my list of bikes to maintain. :) I think I'll stick with waxless. Don't need to be even more overwhelmed with chores. Why do you say a NNN-whatever format will tour more comfortably than 75mm? Inquiring minds want to know.

dauwhe, funny you just posted. I just found a pair of Karhu Pyxis for my husband to rent. The LSS doesn't have my size unfortunately, but fortunately the store's website lists the real live genuine measurements from the ski. I'd originally ruled it out because the Karhu web site states a 83mm tip which I think is too wide for my purposes. Thanks for tuning us into this ski.

http://www.mtnsupply.com/retail/common/shop/prod_detail.asp?store%5Fid=201&dept%5Fid=367&pf%5Fid=TELSK%5FKAR40%5F132220

[dauwhe]

The Pyxis has gotten wider over the years. Ours are 76mm at the tip, I think...

It's possible they're a bit too much for what you're looking at, but I've used them for most everything, from skiing at XC centers to long, rough backcountry tours. They climb really well, and I can even parallel turn them pretty well in the skating lanes. But they are probably bigger than some alpine skis were 30 years ago, and people who have good XC technique would likely think they were painfully slow.

But I sure like them for knocking around the backcountry...

Dave

[SadieKate]

76 is listed as the width for my length ski and only 80 for the big guy. I wouldn't say my technique is terribly good, probably more honed from inline skating than anything else. Giant slippery snowshoes would probably be fine with me because shoeing I didn't really use trails. I just want something that would be more fun on the very gentle terrain we have here.

If I want to go fast, I'll go try skating.

[link]

Why do you say a NNN-whatever format will tour more comfortably than 75mm? Inquiring minds want to know.

lighter boot sole
lighter binding
easier entry/exit
easier boot flex


75mm is - unfortunately - going away. I like it. But NTN (new telemark norm) has already made its entry into the consumer market. Sure, I'm talking about nordic downhill. But I wouldn't be surprised to see an NTN system for touring within the next 5 years.

[dauwhe]

I expect 75mm to be around for a while. NNN/SNS has certainly taken over the light end of the spectrum, and NTN (not to mention AT) may take over the heavy end, but I think there's lots of room in the middle. There's still a lot of innovation going on in 75mm bindings (Lite Dogz, Switchbacks) and once the molds are made it's easy to keep making plastic boots. I just picked up a pair of thermo T3s for $199...

I expect it will be a long time before there's a touring version of NTN that's as simple and light as a Voile 3-pin binding. I can't even try NTN now, as my feet are too small (they're only making larger boots). And I haven't heard for certain that they will make smaller boots next year.

Dave

[SadieKate]

Oy, my head is hurting . . .

What bindings are used for skating?

[SadieKate]

If you're talking about waxless ski patterns, this does vary a lot by manufacturer. I'm really only familiar with the heavier backcountry touring skis, like the Fischer S-bound series and the Karhu XCD skis. The Karhus climb much, much better in my experience. My wife is quite pleased with the Karhu Pyxis (similar to the current XCD-GT). She appreciates the stability and snow-plowing power of a ski like this, compared to narrower skis.
Wow, thanks for the recommendation! The Karhu Omnitrak base climbs way mo' bettah than the Fischer Snowbound and the Salomon X-Adv (turns out my husband had these rather than the Karhu Pinnacle). We just slogged out the big commute to a ski area (aka the end of our driveway, yes, life is hard) and were just out for 2 hours on the ridge above our house - hubby on Karhu Pyxis and me on Karhu Pavo. The skis even gripped in the icy compacted ruts on the road climbing up to the ridge (and I didn't biff on the same ruts returning). I think we're both convinced that Karhu is probably the way to go, but hubby still wants to try the narrower Pinnacle. Me? I'll go with the recommendation from the experts that the Pinnacle is too narrow for all day breaking trail. I think I'll be ordering the GT in a nice size for Goldilocks here.

Now I have to find boots that don't kill my feet. If you hear a lot of subsonic grumbling, it's all the local shops as Goldilocks tries on every boot in the store. :rolleyes:

[dauwhe]

Good luck with the boots. Let us know what you find!

Dave

[tch]

I'm late to the party, but that never stopped me. Yes, from what you say, I'd recommend NNN-BC bindings. 75mm is good if you're going up AND down, but NNN-BC will be lighter, more efficient, and easier to use. Don't go standard NNN; they are for light touring and will not be strong enough for backcountry skis.

I'd strongly recommend you try on several boots -- and go with the stiffer,
more supportive one rather than the cheaper, lighter version. Boots are where 85% of your control comes in.

I'd also put in a shout-out for the Fischer Rebound Crown. I do find that Karhus climb well -- but personally I think it's because they're flat and have little life. YMMV. I have a pair of Rebound Crowns that I use in all conditions in icy, mixed, up-and-down terrain here at the foot of the Berkshires, and I love them. Several of my friends also demo'ed others and ended up with the Rebound. They are a double-camber ski that floats and kicks well.

Have fun.

[SadieKate]

Yes, don't be shy. :)

I'm probably going to spend days and days trying on every single boot in town. I was going to pick the one that fit the best and that would give me the best control. Today's rental boots were Alpina 1550s and were large floppy blocks on my feet. I now have a nice line of hot spots across the top of my toes. Plus the instep is too low. I tried on a few different models of Alpina, even for classic, and they all fit this way so Alpina just goes out the door.

The Rebound seems like far more ski than I can handle or need at this time. The east side of the Cascades is loaded with nearly flat logging roads that we'll be on 90% of the time. This side is famous for our pedaling-descents because the gradient is so shallow. 20 mile climbs but nothing steep which means the XC skiing can be pretty gentle also.

The snow here is pretty dry and even evaporates as it sits on the ground. At least it sure seems dry compared to what I'm used to in the Sierras. Does your snow compare?

Thanks for joining the party.

[tch]

The Rebound seems like far more ski than I can handle or need at this time. The east side of the Cascades is loaded with nearly flat logging roads that we'll be on 90% of the time. This side is famous for our pedaling-descents because the gradient is so shallow. 20 mile climbs but nothing steep which means the XC skiing can be pretty gentle also.
.
I'm not sure the Rebound is more than you can handle -- it's really a pretty civilized ski. Here in the NW corner of Connecticut, we get classic New England conditions: powder followed by melt and drizzle followed by wet snow followed by days of nothing, so the whole mix re-freezes and softens and re-hardens. No day is ever the same. I have two classic-style skis: the Fischer Voyageur with NNN for days I go out in the track or even the little groom we have, and the Rebound Crown for breaking trail and skiing in dicey conditions. I think of them as Honda Accord and Jeep Cherokee. I ski the Voyageur in decent conditions when I'm interested in moving along (though they are hardly a race ski). The Rebounds are heavier, for sure, but I can do almost anything with them and never feel like they're "too much". For ME, they seem like the ultimate just-go-and-ski-anywhere ski, the equivalent of a light trail bike.
Again, your experience may vary.

[SadieKate]

The snow here is pretty dry and even evaporates as it sits on the ground. At least it sure seems dry compared to what I'm used to in the Sierras. Does your snow compare?Whoops, going to have to eat my words today. Forecast is for same through Monday.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b310/SadieKate/The%20Lodge/IMG_0799.jpg

[link]

I expect 75mm to be around for a while. Dave

On second thought - I think you're right. At least I want you to be right. Besides, I'm not giving up my Hammerheads or Bishops - T1s and T-Race anytime soon.

I tried the NTN a la Scarpa Terminator X and Rottefella. I'm a grouch about such things. But in an effort to try and be objective, the boot is built on a T2 frame so it's part area and part BC. The binding is all area - not a BC friendly animal at all. I think the Rotty engineers and Scarpa (and Crispi for that matter) enginners forget to talk to each other. Also, there's about 3-5 mm of lateral play in the binding regardless of whether it's active or not (trailing or lead ski position.)

I do like that the Scarpa Terminator X is also a Dynafit compatible boot too. Kinda cool with that feature.

Sadie, Skate = SNS

[SadieKate]

I just bought my new skis!

We're supposdely living on the "Dry Side," in the "Transition" Zone of the Cascades to the High Desert, but we're slowly disappearing from sight. More than double the monthly average for January and there's a good change we'll get double the February average as of tonight.

It's fun to ski from the driveway, but only if you can find your way home again. If I can't ride, I want to at least ski. Sheesh.

For those that want to know, I bought the Karhu XCD GTs with Rossi X7 boots and Rottefella Magnum bindings. Maybe I can provide a report tomorrow. If not, I can provide a report on port and chocolate from the fireside. :rolleyes: