WildSnow Ultimate Ski Quiver — 2014-2015

Post by WildSnow.com blogger | October 10, 2014      
Black Diamond Carbon Convert is a winner.

Black Diamond Carbon Convert is a winner.

While most published ski tests are done at resorts and emphasize the down, we go mostly human powered and emphasize weight, width and even topskin color when we make our “editor’s choice” picks. This year I’m continuing my bias to lighter weight. Our testing indicates the propeller heads in their resin filled workshops have indeed figured out additional tricks to squeeze more performance from less mass.

#passthestoke WildSnow Girl, Rachel Bellamy, insists that DPS stands for DoublePositiveStoke.

#passthestoke WildSnow Girl, Rachel Bellamy, insists that DPS stands for DoublePositiveStoke.

To do our evaluations we use an informal system of gathering impressions from various testers. Most of the skis make a trip through WildSnow HQ. Lisa and I and our son Louie ski on many, and we lend nearly everything out to folks of various ages, genders and styles. I acquire varied opinions on everything and make the final pick based on this season’s biases. Please know that we make no effort whatsoever to evaluate every ski on the market. We cream-skim from the start, and especially in the case of new product lines we may entirely ignore something with the intent of giving it time to mature in the retail world.

Regarding weight vs performance on the down, It’s true that sometimes better downhill ski performance is achieved by heavier skis. BUT a “heavier” ski doesn’t ski better just because of mass. Often it simply skis better because allowing more mass gives engineers more freedom with material mixes. The lighter the ski, the less material you’re allowed, and your choice of materials becomes more limited. Thus, how a ski turns is about how well it’s designed, not that it’s lighter or heavier. What puts the lie to the “it’s heavier so it skis better, it busts through crud!” myth is that all skis have become lighter over the years. If they skied better heavier, they would have stayed heavier. Think of it this way, a lightweight ski today will be normal in a few years — will the norm of the future ski worse than today’s? Not a chance.

This year, for fun I’ve loosely ordered the skis according to their weight/surface scores. Caveat about that: WildSnow has been influential over the past few years in showing how serious the ski touring public is about hauling lighter weight gear. Ski companies have followed suit and engaged in somewhat of a weight war. All is fair in war, including gram saving tricks such as using less steel edge at tip and tail, providing smaller less beefy binding mount areas, and the most heinous trick of them all: molding depressions and hollows in the top surface that eliminate mass in the factory but encourage ice and snow buildup in real-world use. Thus, don’t nuke your credit card for the absolute lightest ski until you’re sure those sorts of “features” are okay for your intended use.

La Sportiva Vapor Nano

Out with the old, in with the new. Yeti from 1980s with La Sportiva Nano.

Out with the old, in with the new. Yeti from 1980s with La Sportiva Nano.

If a ski wins our weight/surface calculations it probably has to reside in the Ultimate Quiver. Nano is that. Obviously optimized as a soft snow ski, Nano is survivable on hardpack. In my opinion this is the “ultimate” powder farmer since it gives you optimal width at the least mass, with snap when you want it but some capability to slarve and “soft rail” as well. Lack of steel edges at tip and tail could be a concern, and the binding mount area is of minimal beef so careful installation of bindings is essential. With a full season of retail distribution we’ve not heard of any significant durability issues, but anecdotal evidence says this is an average strength ski, not burly, and should be treated as such. (2014-2015 model has added strength in the tip, not sure how much weight that’ll add, if any. We’ll update here when they reach our scale.)

(Dedicated cut skins are available for La Sportiva skis, sourced from Pomoca. Sportiva says they’re the 70% mohair, 30% nylon blend. We found them to be adequate but average; difficult to ascertain exactly which Pomoca variety is used as they sell several different type skins with 70/30 mix, but they’re the same yellow as the Pomoca “Climb” model.)

Sportiva Nano Review

Shop for Vapor Nano

Ski Trab Magico
116/83/104 (171 cm)

Ski Trab Magico (bottom) and the Ripido at top.

Ski Trab one kilo Magico (bottom) and the Ripido at top. Click image to enlarge.

Yes, our Ultimate Quiver reviews are usually biased to soft natural snow. But what about a ski for spring corn and steep couloirs, and situations where saving weight is of über importance?

Enter the Ski Trab Magico. At exactly a kilo per plank in a 171 cm, Magico indeed hits the magic goal of the “one kilo ski,” and does it well. (Make no mistake, these guys are light! Magico scores as numero uno in our weight/length ratings, and third in our weight/surface ratings.)

We had four experienced skiers test Magico. All raved about the edge hold and lively nature of this ski. We agreed it wasn’t the wide and rockered powder guppy we’ve come to want in our quiver, what with no rocker and an 81 mm footprint. But 81 mm will still feel okay in the polvo, while saving weight and giving that narrower knife-like cut on harder snow. I’d recommend this as a quiver of one for the ski tourer who likes a trad ride, but for most of us it is a more specialized tool.

(Dedicated pre-cut skins are available for all Trab skis. We’ve found these skins to be quite nice, very European in that they glide well and the glue isn’t too sticky.)

Read our Ski Trab Magico review.

Shop for Ski Trab Magico

Dynafit Cho Oyu
124/88/110 (174 cm)

Dynafit Cho Oyu 2013/14 in the 'one kilo' weight class and yes they ski.

Dynafit Cho Oyu 2013/14 in the 'one kilo' weight class and yes they ski.

These boards are designed in Germany, so I shouldn’t call them the Swiss Army Knife of ski touring — but I will anyway. Slice it, dice it, pound it, carve it — about all the “Choodie” won’t do is slarve it. Incredibly light, good edge hold, bouncy and snappy in pow (so 1980s, but so fun.) Cho Oyu is definitely a quiver of one for the traveling ski tourer who isn’t hitting the big pow destinations.

These are a carryover from last year’s Ultimate Quiver so I won’t go into detail. Though it’s worth mentioning they’re almost a one kilo ski at 1,183 grams for the 174 centimeter version. Honorable mention also goes to Dynafit Denali, but we felt it to be a more demanding ski than some of the others in similar weight class, so went with Choodie for the Quiver.

(Dedicated pre-cut “Speedskin” climbing skins are available for all Dynafit skis. These are sourced from Pomoca and we like their grip and glide. Confusion arises because Pomoca provides two types of glue, the North American version is sticky, but too sticky for our taste. We’re not sure what type of glue the Speedskins imported to North America will have, so we’re checking on it.)

Dynafit Cho Oyu Review

Shop for Dynafit Cho Oyu

Black Diamond Carbon Convert

Black Diamond Carbon Convert is a winner.

Black Diamond Carbon Convert is a winner. Only downside is a bit of an ice and snow catching duck pond at the tip, but the white color compensates.

I was amused last winter when one of the Black Diamond product engineers asked me outright for my weight/surface formula — and said they were designing with the math in mind so they’d end up at the top of the chart. That’s mostly good (and they even found a small mistake in my calcs, thankyouverymuch). Nonetheless, what concerned me is the possibility of compromising something like durability or how far the ski edges run to tip and tail, just so the ski can look good in a list.

After a winter of testing, the C-Convert has proven to be adequate in the durability department, though it does have the edgeless tip and tail that many of the super-lightweights are sporting.

Up to you. If you do much Davenporting (rock skiing with minimal snow) you’ll chunk Ptex off the tips and tails — while in normal use that’s a non issue. Make no mistake, with a 105mm waist this plank is on the edge of being too fat for many committed human powered skiers. But with the weight savings of carbon, you can get away with it. Sadly, the Convert tip area has a top surface profile that holds snow, but the white color compensates for that somewhat. Works on hardpack, but as with most of our quiver skis we’d call this a soft snow plank.

Black Diamond Carbon Convert Review.

Shop for Carbon Convert.

DPS Wailer 112 RP & Yvette, Pure3

DPS = DreamyPropolsionSystem

DPS = DreamyPropolsionSystem

I was tempted to make the famed Wailer 99 Pure2 and Pure3 a perennial here but why repeat what you can read about in last years Ultimate ski review? Instead, I thought it better to feature the wider Wailer 112, the plank my wife Lisa says changed her life.

Wailer 112 and Yvette are both the same construction. Yvette is the “women’s” version with a different color and probably a different mounting position (though the mounting marks seem to have varied a bit according to exactly which year’s manufacturing you’re buying skis from.) Main thing to remember about this is if you’re a woman you’ll probably want to be sure you’re in a slightly forward mount position on the Wailer, +1 as it’s marked, and possibly forward on the Yvette as well. Find more discussion about that in Lisa’s reviews of the 112s.

Know that Wailer 112 Pure3 falls in the sweet spot on our weight chart, skis fantastically in nearly any snow conditions (it’s not for blue ice in couloirs, sorry), and of course shows the world that you are part of the Drakeonian cult (know the secret handshake?). Our only complaint is that the twin-tip tail could be slightly bobbed, trimming some weight and making the ski that much easier to jab in the snow or haul on a backpack.

Note that our take here is the Wailer 112RP. For this coming season they’ve done some small design tweaks and are calling the new version Wailer 112RP2. Frankly, we’re thinking anything they did to this ski was mostly for factory fun (as in, it’s getting boring around here…), rather than making any real world improvement in how they ski. My take: Purchase either version and you’ll be happy. Also, as far as we could glean the Yvette remains the same ski as the Wailer, only a different color with a shifted mount point. Caveat: If you end up looking to acquire the RP2 version, check the weight on a scale and make sure it’s in the ballpark with the former version as detailed in our reviews. Skis gain weight from year to year, just like people.

Lisa’s review of Wailer 112 RP and Yvette.
Shop for DPS skis.

K2 Talkback & Wayback 96

Wayback and tester Scott.

Wayback and tester Scott. Click to enlarge.

We’re pretty sure the Wayback 96 and Talkback 96 are the same ski, with different graphics and perhaps a slightly different women’s mounting position on the Talkback. If we’re wrong, I promise I’ll watch the Mono Lake sequence from Doctor Strange Glove 16 times in a row, as well as sleeping with every K2 ski we own for three weeks. How is that for a confident ski journalist?

In any case, just as our promise above goes to the dark recesses of ski history, heritage of the Wayback goes way back to a 2009 vintage ski called the Baker Superlight, which was in turn parented by the popular all conditions Mount Baker. This is strong lineage. Along the way, Wayback grew in width and gained more rocker, to become a modern powder slayer that also delights on the hardpan. In other words, this is indeed a ski you could travel with as a quiver of one. (Original Baker was 122/86/107 mm, this season’s Wayback is 128/96/118).

Honorable mention goes to K2 Coomback and Gotback. These planks have the heritage as well and ski strongly, yet they’ve always been a bit on the heavy side. Latest versions have been lightened up a bit, so worth looking at. We’ll be doing more extensive testing this winter.

(Dedicated pre-cut climbing skins are available for all skis in the K2 “Backside” product line. We’ve found these skins to be adequate, but lacking in glide.)

Review of Wayback & Talkback skis

Shop for K2 Wayback & Talkback

G3 ZenOxide C3 (2014/15, ZenOxide Carbon 105)

Ski review of G3's ZenOxide C3 ski mountaineering ski

Tester says: I've been skiing a test pair of ski's with white graphics. It's surprising how much less snow sticks to a white, sun-reflecting top sheet.

I almost didn’t include ZenOxide in the Quiver. That is until one tester I ultra respect told me they “ripped.” Why not give honors? Why not include? Remember my rant above about tricky stuff to lighten up skis so the weights look good in print? G3 molds a thinner section in the center of tip and tail, thus creating a duck pond for water and ice to collect in. This might seem terribly nerdish, but on a narrower pair of G3 Synapse Carbon 101s I filled the ponds with water and weighed. Result, 44 grams or more depending on how much sticky wet snow accumulated (the water ponds I made were small.) So where does that 44 or more grams take the Synapse 101 on the weight chart? Quite a ways down. Highly disappointing. I’m thus assuming that ice and snow ponding on the ZenOxide would be equally annoying and move it several steps down on the weight chart.

Yeah, G3 Zenoxide C3 rips. Moreover, I didn’t want to get turned away at the Canadian border for lack of Canadian loyalty. But please guys, could you make them a more heat reflective color and get rid of the swimming pools?

Summary from review and testing Zenoxide C3: Stiff and demanding, but powerful. For the expert skier who can deal with high energy levels. Early rise tip and no significant rocker.

(G3 makes two versions of their popular nylon climbing skins. Alpinist is the best gliding of any nylon skin we’ve used, but they lack traction. High Traction version climbs better and only sacrifices a bit of glide.)

Check out our G3 Zen Oxide C3 review
Shop for ZenOxide

Voile V8
141/112/123 (176 cm)

Voile V8 2014-2015

Voile V8 2014-2015

Everything about these Voile powder engines screams ride me. From the wood core feel to the reasonable weight, they rock. What’s not to love? The tail really doesn’t need to be a tip. Cut that down and the weight would be even more competitive. Even so, V8 falls in a good spot on our weight chart. These are a carry-over from last year’s quiver. Couldn’t help it. Amazingly affordable and they’re made in the U.S.A. Graphics are new this year but the V8 still fires on all cylinders.

Voile V8 Review

Shop for Voile V8 ski touring skis

Volkl BMT 109
134/109/119 (109 version, quiver pick)
122/94/112 (94 version, honorable mention)

Volkl BMT

Volkl BMT 94 get honorable mention, little brother of BMT 109 quiver pick.

These guys fall in the middle of our weight/surface chart, which is good for a hard charging ski that’s comfortable both on and off the resort. I included here as a ski for the mucho agro.

Reviewer Joe Risi: “Straight over and through boot high moguls at semi-mach schnell speed we went. The BMT 109s barely shrugged in their presence assuring me they aren’t only for “Big Mountain Touring,” as they’re name suggests. In terms of backcountry natural snow performance, excelling in wind drifts and untracked boot high powder caused my confidence in the BMT’s to grow.”

Prize for “Best Looking Ski of the Year” from Sleight of Hand Publishing, this black on black ski also wins the prize for the ski most likely to develop an arctic ice sheet on top. But can she ski? Yes indeed.

If the BMT 109 sounds like too big a ski, let me give honorable mention to BMT 94. Actually, it was a tossup which BMT we’d include in the quiver. In Chile this past September I spent four days testing the 94 and was amazed at how solid and easy turning they were in less than ideal snow. They also held on some ice that we could have used for cubes to cool our pisco sour. Only issue with either of these planks is you’ve got the proverbial “climate change” black topskin that does a good job of creating sticky snow and ice you’ll have to lug around. As consolation, at least the topskin shape is raised in the middle and tapered towards the edges, unlike some of the other annoying “duck pond” configurations you’ll find with other brands.

(Dedicated climbing skins are available for BMT skis; they utilize the keyhole shaped hole in the tip. I found these to be fiddly during removal due to the need to rotate the skin tip to remove the anchor from the hole. Source brand is Kohla, a skin from Austria that’s said to use a “vacuum” adhesion that differs quite a bit from other “glueless” skins. We looked at these while at ISPO last winter; testing will commence.)

Volkl BMT 109 review

Shop for V-Werks BMT skis by Volkl.

Ultimate Quiver 2013-2014
Ultimate Quiver 2012-2013


Please Enjoy A Few Suggested WildSnow Posts


77 Responses to “WildSnow Ultimate Ski Quiver — 2014-2015”

  1. Mike Marolt October 10th, 2014 11:00 am

    Lou, Fischer AT boards on the way. I think you will be able to add to the lineup. Will look forward to what you think.

  2. phil October 10th, 2014 12:36 pm

    I’m looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the synapse 109’s on paper they look like they could be a sweet back country ski

  3. Matt October 10th, 2014 2:06 pm

    Uh oh, be careful with your assertion that heinous trickery of “molding depressions and hollows in the top surface eliminate[s] mass…but encourage ice and snow buildup in real-world use”. This 3D shaping adds structure to the ski – think corrugated roofing versus flat stock – thus allows further trickery with weight loss while keeping stiffness ‘constant’.

  4. Jim Milstein October 10th, 2014 2:22 pm

    I’m not convinced that color of the top sheet is so important for snow stickiness. Physical characteristics may be more so, for example, smoothness and hydrophobicity (hydrophobia?). Some skis just attract snow, even in cloudy conditions.

    Maybe this question can be settled (dark vs light top skins) by spraying glossy white paint on one ski and glossy black paint on the other. Do this on several different makes and models. Then take them skiing in various weathers. Oh, yeah, take notes, photos.

  5. tyler beck October 10th, 2014 2:57 pm

    Hey Lou,
    Thanks again for another great resource. Its a great reference when comparing all the offerings of the day.

    One point on your DPS Caveat “check the weight on a scale and make sure it’s in the ballpark with the former version as detailed in our reviews. Skis gain weight from year to year, just like people.” I was shopping the DPS 99 Wailer this summer and the DPS dude was kind enough to explain that the Pure2 is lighter then the Pure3. The Pure3 should handle better on the down but its got a small weight penalty. He went to say the Pure2 was more ideal for human powered touring and the way you tell…….DPS Logo runs vertically up the ski…Pure 3 the DPS logo runs more diagonally. This helped me when searching used skis and i specifially wanted the lighter version.

  6. Maciej October 10th, 2014 3:50 pm


    I’ve found that skis (and snowboards) without metal edges in the tip and tail have some advantages over their fully edged counterparts. As well as lower weight, it’s a LOT easier to base weld (or even glue in a piece of ptex) the damage to a tip/tail built this way. A bent or blown out metal edge is WAY harder to work with, and if you hit an edgeless ski tip hard enough to wreck a ski, chances are you’d have wrecked the ski even if there was an edge up there.

    That said, one of the ways companies save weight that’s no good is thinner bases and edges. Ski resorts groom most of the terrain in-bounds, which means that it’s possible to ski there without much chance of tagging a rock. Banging out steep mogul runs or going off-piste when the snow’s bony can result in base/edge damage, but overall in-bounds snow is pretty well packed over the underlying rocks.

    Backcountry skiing on uncontrolled and ungroomed snow is (in my experience) far more likely to lead to severe ski damage. That sexy spine dotted with sweet pow pillows might be hiding a few nasty rocks. What looks like deep coverage sometimes turns out to be just enough snow to cover the ground. While severe damage in the backcountry may not be frequent, it is likely to be REALLY UGLY.

    Some brands use thick, high density ptex and beefy edges (DPS skis and Venture snowboards come to mind as warranting praise). This provides a measure of piece of mind, to say the least.

    On the other end of the spectrum, I’ll call out BD, which make some of their skis with gossamer thin bases and edges that seem appropriate for a disposable razor, not a ski. A few years ago I had the misfortune of bending and cracking an edge on a BD “touring” ski clipping a rock which other brands of skis I’ve used would have shrugged off. I don’t mean to malign BD as a brand overall-I use BD poles as well as a BD shovel and probe and am on my 3rd pair of their boots.

    I’m all for dragging less mass uphill. However, thin edges and bases just seem like a chancy place to trim grams.

  7. Scott Nelson October 10th, 2014 7:26 pm

    Also curious about Fischer’s new AT lineup. Their race ski looks interesting, as well as the vacuum boots.

  8. Thomas White October 10th, 2014 9:09 pm

    I’m trying to parse the comment about the Dynafit Denali: a more demanding ski than some of the others in similar weight class.

    There don’t seem to be many other skis in the Denali’s weight class, it’s currently at 4th on the weight/area chart.

    The adjective “demanding” doesn’t really tell us if the ski has rewards that may justify the extra effort.

  9. Lou Dawson 2 October 10th, 2014 10:06 pm

    Thomas, since it wasn’t a quiver pick I didn’t want to go on at length. I like them and ski them quite a bit, they were my quiver of one for South America. They’ve got a lot of sidecut and are not particularly damp. They’re fun in powder and on hardpack, a bit more difficult in breakable crust. Is that parsed enough (grin)? As for weight class the operative word is “similar.” If exerting exactitude is prefered mode of evaluation, yes, they’re incredibly light. Honorable mention is a kudo. (grin) Lou

  10. Lou Dawson 2 October 10th, 2014 10:07 pm

    Scott, I’d forgotten the boots use Vacuum tech, we’re getting some to fool around with. Lou

  11. Thomas White October 11th, 2014 8:13 am


    Plenty parsed on the Denali now.

    It’d be nice to get up to date weights on the new Pure 3 construction for the Wailer 99 & 112RP. Scanning photos of your South America trip it looks like Louie was riding the Wailer 99 (older Pure version) on that trip.

    Anyone located near one of the Worlds Best ski shops who can drop in and ask for a scale?

  12. Lou Dawson 2 October 11th, 2014 9:06 am

    We’ll keep working on the weight issue…

  13. Mike October 11th, 2014 9:15 am

    I am also a little confused about your comments on the Denali ski. After what seemed like a glowing review (https://www.wildsnow.com/12777/dynafit-denali-ski-review-2/) and stating “They’ll easily be included in our Ultimate Quiver this year, and are most certainly a go-to in my personal stash”, it seems the enthusiasm has been tempered a bit. What I took from your Denali review is that in comparison to the Cho Oyo it is a more forgiving and fun ski than the Cho Oyo, mostly due to the relaxed sidecut. Has your opinion changed?

  14. Thomas White October 11th, 2014 10:01 am

    Maciej makes a great point about skis durability.

    If by Lou’s account BD is trying to game the charts then other maker may have a similar approach. There is a place for ultralight construction as a design choice in a product that intentionally will have a limited useful life. But these are backcountry skis not lunar-landers.

    I wonder if there is a way to try to quantify the likely useful life of a particular construction. It wouldn’t be as precise as the weight charts but a categorical rating like high-medium-low for expected lifespan. Of course we all know a durable ski can die an early death from bad luck but it would be nice to know if your choosing a few extra dollars and extra grams to get a better useable life from your skis.

    If a Wailer 99 costs almost twice as much as a Wayback 96 and weighs a bit more is part of that because it’s more durable?

  15. Lou Dawson 2 October 11th, 2014 10:02 am

    Mike, sorry to confuse all you guys. Probably poor writing on my part, or perhaps I did change my mind a bit? Happens every 25 years or so (grin). I actually did include Denali in Ultimate Quiver, as an honorable mention. Matter of semantics, I guess.

    The ski is still a go-to for me, that should be clear to you guys.

    What I should do is go back and edit that review with latest take that the Denali is more forgiving and fun in soft snow than the Cho, simply due to its width, though the sidecut might have something to do with it. Neither Cho or Denali are the best for breakable crust, due to the fact that they’re not heavily rockered skis like for example the DPS picks.

    What happened with the Denali in particular for Ultimate Quiver is that other skis of that width, with more rocker, were more liked in difficult snow. Thus, I favored them and decided to include Cho instead as an Ultimate choice for a narrower ski that easily fits in the one-kilo weight class. Since I was attempting to only do one final pick for each brand, I decided on Cho.

    I don’t think my enthusiasm has been tempered, it’s more like I’m trying to balance the writing between a lot of skis and give a good mix in the Quiver, after all, it’s a quiver of many, not one.

    Is that more clear? Yes, it’s an ongoing process and things change. Also, again, apologies for my wavering writing.

    If you guys want to discuss Denali in terms of specifics about buying or not, based on ski style, weight, age, height, etc., I’d also be up for that. I’d still travel with them as quiver of one, if that’s any consolation. I really really like how light they are, and the snap is fun is cool, they’re just not as easy as some other skis in true breakable crust.


  16. Lou Dawson 2 October 11th, 2014 10:07 am

    Maciej, I’d agree that thin edges could be problematic. Not so sure if a bit thicker Ptex really makes any difference, as I’ve gouged all sorts of skis with all sorts of Ptex. My advice about the edges is to know your style, and pick skis accordingly. Me, I just don’t ski fast or hard enough to worry about a rock really plucking out and breaking an edge, so bring on the lighter skis with the thread edges. This winter I’ll try to pay more attention to edge thickness and mention in reviews. A bit tricky. Lou

  17. Alexis October 11th, 2014 10:16 am

    Do you think a “weight to surface to stiffness” ratio might be more appropriate to rate theses skis? Beside the little tricks you describe to reduce the weight, I also feel that many companies end up using less composite material, thinner cores or lighter material. Beside reducing the mass, these modifications all results in softer skis. I am a big guy, and I feel that many skis are often too soft for me…

  18. Lou Dawson 2 October 11th, 2014 10:34 am

    Hah! I’m a skinny guy, and many skis are too stiff! I actually gave up many years ago on using stiffness as a big indicator of ski performance (no puns, please). There are just so many factors, and our ski evaluations are not intended to be scientific measurements of everything, we just don’t have the resources for that. In fact, no one seems to be going there these days. Probably because skis have overall gotten so good, it’s almost absurd to split too many hairs. Lou

  19. Mike October 11th, 2014 12:05 pm

    I appreciate the clarification on the Denali skis. And I would be interested in talking about skis based on style, weight, age, and height. I am looking for a dedicated backcountry setup, which is why I am so interested in your reviews of light weight gear. I think I am a reasonably proficient skier and want this gear to ski well, but I am not looking to max out speed. Mostly powder farming with bigger days and trips in good spring weather. The problem I have is I am 6’4″ (193 cm) tall and weigh 215 lbs. For some reason all of the light weight skis seem to top out around 180 cm. I currently ski 188 cm Coombacks with 31.0 Maestrales, but I was thinking Denalis with F1 Evos could drop a lot of weight while providing similar utility. I like the sound of K2 Wayback 96, but the 184 cm length makes me nervous even if it is a K2 184 cm. I cannot seem to find skis that are long enough for me that are not really heavy and 115 mm underfoot. Which seems weird to me since rocker skis ski shorter. The Cho and the Denali seem to be the exception to this rule. And I do not want to pay DPS/Vapor Nano prices for skis.

  20. Lou Dawson 2 October 11th, 2014 12:19 pm

    Mike, first thing to think about is that proportionally at your height and weight, any ski is light, as the added length is less of a percentage increase in weight than your size is in strength. So my first suggestion would be to save weight with the boots and bindings, and just buy a ski that’s the length and width you want, without as much concern about weight. Thus, I’d tend to say if you like the way Coombacks ski, stick with the Coomback. As for boots, I think the Evo would not be stiff enough for your size. Maestrale is more like it and still light, or a Vulcan. For bindings I’d suggest sticking with what has worked for you in the past, what might that be?

    Now, if you insist on using lighter skis, with your weight to press them and flex them rocker is not a important, and they can be stiff. And you need some width. I think Denali is indeed in the running.

    You are 193 cm tall, and a reasonable rule of thumb with non or lesser rockered skis is to just use length that’s cheek height or forehead height, depending on your style of skiing. So the 193 Denali sounds like it’s made for you (grin) if you want to be sure you’re on something long enough.

    P.S., Denali does have rocker, BTW, I don’t mean to imply that it does not, it has less than some skis especially when considering tip and tail, I think sizing for it at body height is fine.


  21. Jim Milstein October 11th, 2014 12:34 pm

    I notice skiing breakable crust has been coming up a bit in this thread. Lou, would you care to speak directly to this problem and the skis to solve it? I assume it’s a problem, except for those who genuinely like skiing on breakable crust.

    Most of what I ski is powder snow of some description, fading into wet snow. Breakable crust comes in at third place. A distant fourth is bulletproof crust, so there’s little point in optimizing for that. So long as I can get down those slopes undamaged I’m satisfied.

    My current skis are 2nd gen Manaslu. So far on these I have not been brought to tears on breakable crust, as in the old days (telemark), but I still curse though seldom fall.

    Sounds like the Vapor Nanos would be a good bet, if I could afford them.

  22. Mike October 11th, 2014 12:43 pm

    Interesting thoughts. My Coombacks have Dynafit Vertical STs. I only thing I would want to change on the Maestrales would be to have more range of motion in walk mode. What do you think about La Sportiva Spectre for somebody my size? My hesitation on the Dynafit boots is I know I will never mess with the removable tongue. Sort of defeats the purpose of the ultralock thingamagig in my mind. Maybe I need to try on the Neo/One or the Mercury/Vulcan without the tongue. I appreciate the insight. This gives me a good game plan for when the Maestrales eventually need to be replaced, and potentially dropping some weight in the ski.

  23. Lou Dawson 2 October 11th, 2014 12:57 pm

    Sheesh, Maestrale is no slouch for range of motion! Picky. (grin) Spectre might work. Lou

  24. Greg Louie October 12th, 2014 1:23 pm

    @Mike: The Spectre is a nice boot, the hardware is a little finicky especially when you aren’t used to it and it has a bit more instep height than the Vulcan/Mercury which helps a lot of people. The flex is smooth, but the boot caves in under heavy load, probably because of the bellows in the tongue.

    Re: the Dynafit tongues, I almost never take them out either – I’ve cut them down or cut a “V” in them, and place the power strap in back of both the fixed and removable tongues which lets the cuff hinge backward almost as well as removing them.

  25. Greg Louie October 12th, 2014 1:28 pm

    @Mike x2: This year’s Maestrale/RS with the square shaft instead of the plate in the walk mode mechanism seems smoother and more effective than last year’s – hard to say how it compares to the Dynafit version as I’ve not skied in them.

  26. Burnsie October 12th, 2014 8:44 pm

    Hmmmm, Carbon Convert with the Fritschi tech binding…coulda sworn I saw that exact same pair at the AVSC ski swap at Whole Foods in Basalt today. Could it be …an ultimate coincidence?

  27. Robin October 12th, 2014 9:27 pm

    “Slarve”…”polvo”…hmmm, my english is getting rusty. Help?

  28. Greg Louie October 12th, 2014 9:33 pm

    “Slarve” is to slide and carve intermittently or concurrently; “Polvo” I think is Lou’s shortened version of “Polvere” – Italian for powder.

  29. Russya October 12th, 2014 9:33 pm

    One good change with the new Pure3 constructions DPS Skis. I was checking the wailer 99, 105, and the 112rp in the black diamond store today and I noticed that they have a much flatter tail and there’s a flat spot so the rear clip on skins should stay on a lot better. I’ve owned both the 105 and the 112rp in their original versions, and the tails are very different. I personally hated the old tail, and filed sections of it to get both sides of the skins to stay on tight. Good to see they’re making changes to make their skis better touring skis, even if a little weight was added.

    Old version

    New version

  30. Bob Perlmutter October 13th, 2014 9:01 am

    Hi Burnsie, different pair. Love the ski! I’ll let you fill in the blanks from there.

  31. Lou Dawson 2 October 13th, 2014 9:14 am

    Greg, “polvo” is Spanglish-Italian for powder (grin). Lou

  32. Roger K October 13th, 2014 3:02 pm

    Thanks for putting together another informative “best of.”

    Based on reviews from other sources, I was very surprised not to see the Voile V6 here. Knowing that the V8 made the list twice, I figured the lighter weight of the 95mm version made its inclusion a sure thing.

    I do want to say that I miss the soft snow & hard snow ratings of 2012/2013. It would be nice to know which of these skis are pure powder skis, and which have more “all around” ability.

  33. Lou Dawson 2 October 13th, 2014 4:44 pm

    Roger, the “one ski per maker” thing made it harder, but cut the list. Brevity. I might put in the hardsnow, softsnow ratings. Problem is, none of us ski hard snow that much any more (grin). V6 gets honorable mention.

  34. Kerry October 13th, 2014 5:25 pm

    Can anyone review the new 7Summits with comparison in various snow conditions to old 7Summits and Cho Oyu?
    I’m also interested in the answer to Jim’s question about crust.

  35. Lou Dawson 2 October 13th, 2014 5:31 pm

    Jim and all, I get to ski with some really good skiers. A common technique I see in breakable crust that’s not too steep is just carving rails like you’re on hardpack. I do this myself a bit, though I’m sometimes on skis that are not as good for this, and sometimes I just don’t have the legs and timing. It’s super fun when you lock in and do it. Commitment is the word. Best skis are rockered, with some sidecut but not a huge amount. The DPS Wailers seem to do really well with this technique. When it’s steep it’s usually more about power and throwing snow around, strong legs and bigger boots help. In those situations I prefer a good weissbier and sunny porch at the hut. Lou

  36. jim October 31st, 2014 1:16 am

    I’m 6’3: about 200 pounds geared up. I’ve a 2012 188 Coomback I used for a couple of years as my one ski quiver. Both inbounds and side country. I paired with a Marker Baron and Titan boot. (mainly ski Alta, Snowbird and surrounding). Last season I picked up a used JJ with a Fritschi, loved it inbounds and put the Baron on the JJ. I picked up FT Radical for the Coomback and swapped myTitan for a Mercury.

    This season I’m aiming to do more spring mountaineering type stuff. I will tour the Coomback most of the season; but some local ski mo guys have been saying ‘go shorter and lighter’ in the spring. Wondering how the Magico or the other skimo oriented short sticks (thinking 178 ish) will compare to my Coomback – and if it could be worth the added investment for the extra pair. Would love to demo first – but tough to find. Thoughts?

  37. Mike November 4th, 2014 7:25 am

    Any thoughts on the Manaslu 2.0? Seems like it might be similar to Cho Oyo with less sidecut, a better price tag, and still very light.

  38. MVA November 6th, 2014 4:11 pm

    No stoke/grand teton!?!?!?!

  39. Sarah November 9th, 2014 10:24 pm

    Can anyone help out with a comparison of the 2015 Voile V6 and the K2 Talkback. I am 5’5″ 145# and am looking at the 163-ish length. I’m looking for a ski that doesn’t require too much power, but can handle it at the same time. I will take it everywhere with me this season from Japan to the Haute Route to some sick colorado groomers 😉 Which one shall be my partner in crime to explore it all?

  40. Will Sater November 25th, 2014 8:40 pm

    Dear Lou,
    I really need some help. A few weeks ago my wife came to me and said she wanted some new at skis like the ones I’ve been raving about. It was her Idea, and I thought “fantastic”.
    She is 5’2 and 125lbs. An intermediate skier on 153 K2 Miss Bakers and Zzero 4. She has never felt comfortable on them. I thought something with rocker might make things a little easier. Lighter would be nice too. I feel pretty bad for her when we are skinning up and I am on my C-Converts.
    Problem is that most of the new skis, even in the shortest sizes are over her head. I understand that rockered skis are skied longer, but I am think she may feel overwhelmed by a long ski.
    The light weight options seem to be the 158 Manaslu Womens 2.0, and the Talkback 88. Shortest size in the Talkback 96 is 163. Heavier options might be something like a 152 Dynastar 97 or 87. I’ve done a good bit of homework, but I realize I could barking up the wrong tree.
    We live an hour east of Rocky Mountain National Park, which is where we spend most of our time. We rarely ski anything over 30 degrees.
    Any help you can give will be greatly appreciated.
    Will Sater

  41. Bar Barrique November 25th, 2014 9:03 pm

    Hi Will; If you are not daunted by the high price; Goode makes a rockered “3 sisters” ski with a 98 mm waist, short turning radius, and, comes in lengths as short as 149 cm. Light weight at 1034 grams for the 149 cm.

  42. Bar Barrique November 25th, 2014 9:07 pm

    Correction to my previous post; the 1034 gram weight is for a single ski.

  43. Will Sater November 25th, 2014 10:21 pm

    Thanks Bar,
    Looks like a great ski,but my wife would have a kitten if I told her the price. 🙂

  44. Bar Barrique November 25th, 2014 10:49 pm

    Hi Will; I hike, bike, and, ski a lot with my wife. She is a smaller stature person, so often it is a challenge to source equipment for her. This means that we have to search for the right gear, and, usually pay whatever is asked for it.
    The benefits of getting the right gear, however; are worth it.



  45. Lou Dawson 2 November 26th, 2014 6:56 am

    Well, I’ve always made sure Lisa’s skis were just as good as mine, though she does have different taste and we’re always on different brands and models. I’d suggest that as a basic principle. Her favorite continues to be the DPS Yvette/Wailer112. Oddly enough the Yvette appears to only be available in 168 and 178. Your girl’s 5′ 2″ is 62 inches, 157.48 centimeters, which would indicated a ski length of around 160 cm in a rockered ski would be ideal. I’d suggest trying the K2 Talkback as you mention. It is a good ski, and if she feels uncomfortable on it then it might be time to realize that while the correct skis can indeed make a person feel more comfortable, how you feel while skiing has a lot more to do with practice than with gear.

    As for weight, keep her in light bindings and boots, with nice glidey mohair skins, and don’t worry about ski weight. If necessary, carry her lunch as compensation for skis that weigh 3 grams more than another pair.


  46. Will Sater November 26th, 2014 7:37 am

    Thank you very much Lou

  47. David December 7th, 2014 1:00 pm

    Would love to get your view on ski length for Wailer99 , I am 5’8 170lbs , want to use as all mountain ski and 176 or 184 seem to be choices .

    Thanks In advance for your advice

  48. Harold December 30th, 2014 4:22 pm

    Yes,MVA, I was also wondering why the Grand Tetons didn’t make the list ahead of some these others. They are fantastic to ski. It must be, that though they are not heavy, they are not light either compared to a few others in that size range.

  49. Lou Dawson 2 December 30th, 2014 4:25 pm

    David, tell us more, are you using them for backcountry (not lift served) skiing? Lou

  50. Will Sater January 5th, 2015 7:30 pm

    Hey Lou,
    Thought I would give some follow up on the above posts.
    So my wife ended up getting the 2015 Manaslu womens skis in 158 mounted with last years Speed Radicals and her Zzero 4 boots. They seemed softer than the Talkbacks, and I thought that might be a good thing. At 1150 grams, they are feather weights. At a pound per ski lighter than her old Miss Baker setup, climbing was way way better.
    Going down in 8 -12 ins of fresh on 15 to maybe 28 degree slopes was amazing. After her typical slow, tentative start, she started to pick up a little speed and make some graceful confident turns. Next we drop into a narrow stream bed, and she starts making numerous short radius, somewhat snappy turns!
    And then it happened, out in front of me, around a bend I heard MY wife hootin and hollerin and going on about how much she loved those skis.That has NEVER happened before.
    Finally, we get down to where the trails converge and have been totally chopped up. She turns to me with a big smile on her face and tells me how easy it is to ski through all this cut up snow. Then, turns around and takes off down the hill.
    It was a truly amazing day.

    So all that said, I think the Manaslu womens are a great, easy turning, confidence building intermediate ski that seems to be good in nice powder and in less than perfect snow. And even though we hit several rocks in the early snow cover, there was no real damage. Certainty not a comprehensive review, but I hope this helps anyone else in a similar situation.

    Thanks again Lou, for your help and insight.
    Will Sater

  51. hairymountainbeast January 8th, 2015 10:42 am

    Hey Lou, any plans to review the g3 synapse skis? Seems like they’d be comparable to the BMT series, but without the warranty issues if you wanted to go with non marker binders.

  52. Silas Wild January 11th, 2015 8:45 pm

    Lou wrote “What happened with the Denali in particular for Ultimate Quiver is that other skis of that width, with more rocker, were more liked in difficult snow” What are those other skis? Thanks, sorry if I missed your answer already posted somewhere.

  53. Lou Dawson 2 January 11th, 2015 10:26 pm

    Hi Silas, the DPS and Volkl would be some examples.

    Hairy, we’ve been working on getting more G3 reviews done, we’ve had trouble getting testers in the lengths and models we want, due to the popularity of the G3 skis.


  54. Kasper January 13th, 2015 1:07 am

    In the review, the G3 Zen-oxide is described as “stiff and demanding, but powerful”. I’ve also seen the Dynafit Denali described as “demanding”.
    Can you explain what you mean by “demanding”? (won’t turn unless skied at 70 Mph or more, won’t turn unless you are in a technically perfect position, will throw you around if you hit irregular snow and you are a bit “off” your stance….).

    And “powerful” – does it mean good edgehold on icy snow, able to bust through crust as if it was powder…?
    By the same token, some skis are described as “forgiving”. What does that mean – easy to turn whether in the backseat or in a race position, slow or fast…?


  55. Lou Dawson 2 January 13th, 2015 5:23 am

    Demanding means it supports good and powerful technique but might not be easiest ski for example for someone learning to ski.

    Forgiving would perhaps be easier but not as much fun for an agressive expert.

    Don’t take it all too seriously, each person has very unique experience with each ski.

  56. Landon T January 13th, 2015 11:13 am

    Hi WildSnow,

    Gear question: I recently had some Speed Radicals mounted to a new pair of Cho Oyu skis (incredibly light combo! 🙂 ). I took them to a local ski shop that I had had some positive experience with in the past hoping they would do the best job of mounting the bindings. I picked them up but made the mistake of not checking the bases of the skis before I left the shop. I checked them when I got home and noticed that there were some bumps on the ski bases where the binding mounting screws are. They aren’t huge bumps, but I can feel them with my hand and you can see them if you hold the ski so that the base reflects light. Not all of the screws have bumps which makes me worry that the ski shop drilled too deeply into the ski for some of them. Everything was mounted as normal; no modifications were made to what comes out of either box.

    Can anyone tell me if I should be alarmed about this? Will it cause any significant performance or durability issues? Did the ski shop make an error by drilling too deeply into the skis or are the screws too long which could cause them to cause deformations on the ski base? Should I confront the ski shop about this?

    Thank you to anyone who can offer some tips.

  57. Lou Dawson 2 January 13th, 2015 11:16 am

    Landon, did they install the crampon holders on the toe units? Let me know this first then I’ll address your question. Lou

  58. Landon T January 13th, 2015 11:34 am

    Lou Dawson 2, yeah, the crampon holders were installed as normal. Some of the bumps are under the toe unit while some are under the heal unit.

  59. Lou Dawson 2 January 13th, 2015 12:02 pm

    Ok, they possibly did something wrong and quite possibly damaged the skis. I’d have too look at the skis to go farther. This is usually caused by screws being too long or holes not deep enough. Perhaps they used screws from a different model binding by mistake. Lou

  60. Lou Dawson 2 January 13th, 2015 12:03 pm

    If you can feel the bumps that is not good in my opinion. Lou

  61. Landon T January 13th, 2015 12:57 pm

    Ok, thanks Lou. I think I’ll take them to the ski shop to voice my displeasure. It’s not much fun having brand new skis that have a defect. Not optimistic about what they’ll say, but we’ll see.

  62. Lou Dawson 2 January 13th, 2015 1:09 pm

    If they’re bulged out much at all they might owe you a pair of skis. Small claims court exists if they don’t make good. What’s interesting is that they didn’t notice, because if they had noticed a free machine tune will usually hide the bulges, at least until they grow from the ski vibrating and delaminating, which is what can happen. Of course, one would hope that a shop would be ethical enough not to try to disguise a possible mistake…

    In any case, a common procedure is to give the customer a new or new-used pair of skis and put the possibly wrecked ones out for demo, keeping an eye on them for progressive damage.


  63. Lee Lazzara January 13th, 2015 1:13 pm

    Landon – I had the exact same thing happen to a pair of K2 Hardsides up here in Washington in the fall of 2012. When I saw it I was pissed – first time I had paid for a ski mount in 15 years . . .

    While it is a mistake it hasn’t affected the performance or durability of the ski in 2.5 seasons of legit use. The shop did a light grind to take down the bumps in the base, refunded me the cost of the mount and that was it.

    The only issue could be the lightness of the construction of the Cho Oyu vs. the heavy metal of the Hardside. Just picked up a pair of the Cho’s and they are ridiculously light. Can’t really speak to their construction beyond that . . .

  64. Landon T January 13th, 2015 1:19 pm

    Thanks Lou and Lee. I just phoned the ski shop. They said it could be caused by some debris that they weren’t able to get out of the screw holes. They also said that it’s not uncommon and they will be able to fix it quite easily. Still not psyched about it, but hopefully they can fix it to ‘as new’ condition.

  65. Kerry January 13th, 2015 2:23 pm

    Lou, regarding the “bump” problem, is it possible to cause this with too much glue in the screw hole?
    Regarding Lee’s comment about “lightness of construction” in the Cho Oyu, I gotta say, the Cho has guts! The binding area has a metal plate, which increased my confidence mounting the Speed Superlight binding (has 4-screws less than other pairs of Dynafit bindings). I have skied this rig inbounds through mogul fields to gain confidence in the little Speed Superlight–no complaints. I like the Cho’s soft tip, which reminds me a little of the old Solomon Pocket Rocket. But that analogy ends quickly as the edge engages strongly on hard packed surface. Looking forward to skiing the Cho in the couliors; just waiting for more snow.

  66. alfinator February 17th, 2015 1:17 pm

    Just received a pair each of wailer and yvette 112rp2 hybrids from a mail order shop. I noticed that what I assume is the factory plastic with UPC code it said 112rp.2, BUT on the topsheet of the ski that the graphics said 112RP instead of 112RP2. Called DPS and they mentioned that an early run of this year’s skis had that manufacturing mistake….but they assured me that if the topsheet had a rough texture (along with lower rocker profile and other tweaks) then I can be sure it was the right ski.
    Only downside is if I try to sell them at some point I have to explain this anomaly.
    Just thought someone may find this info useful and maybe the dps folks can confirm here as well 🙂

  67. Jeremy February 17th, 2015 1:52 pm


    It might be worth checking the serial number which is usually stamped in the top sheet next to the mid-sole markings. My DPS skis include a reference to the model.

    For example my 13-14 Wailer 112RP Pure 3, include ‘112P3’ in the serial number.

  68. Alfinator February 17th, 2015 8:22 pm

    Thanks Jeremy! Rp2 is there!

  69. Tom September 8th, 2015 12:33 pm

    While we’re all waiting for Lou and crew to keep feeding us great posts like this all fall and winter, I just wanted to add that the Zenoxide mentioned here has been “Wild Snowified” for 15/16 with white top sheets. The bowl/groove still remains, which I’m guessing is because they feel it adds an important quality to the skis structure. My list for a new touring ski this year is pretty much down to the BD C-Converts and the G3 Zen 105s. I like the more powder friendly aspects of skis like the Synapse 109, but as much as I try to ski powder in the backcountry 100% of the time, that is not always the case and the Zens and converts seem far more versatile when the snow surface is less than idea.

  70. Carl September 23rd, 2015 7:22 pm

    Well hi there folks! I hope someone sees this comment even though it’s on an older article. I am in need of some advice – hopefully some that everyone can benefit from!

    I’m looking for a touring set up. I have never been one to have a quiver of skis because I rock climb, mountaineer, run, cycle, backpack, etc so I just don’t have the budget, room, or desire to have more than 1 pair of skis. That said, I am leaning heavily toward having my next ski purchase expand my quiver to 2 (yes, i know how dangerous this is.. )

    About me: 5’10/11″, 150lbs. Skiing in the PNW. I consider myself an expert skiier, but not an overly aggressive one. I don’t huck huge cliffs or do really many aerials at all, but I love steep challenging terrain. I have been a resort skiier my entire life, and ski pretty much anything in-bounds. Powder, bumps, groomers, crud, corn,… if I’m skiing I’m having fun, almost no matter the conditions. My current setup is a pair of Line Influence 105s, marker griffons, and technica cochise boots with the alpine foot plates. This ski and boot are both probably burlier than I need, considering my weight and style, but I actually have really liked it. The boot fits my foot incredibly well. And the weight of the skis isn’t a big deal since I just ride the lifts with it.

    What I want to do with a touring set up: Ski year round – winter slopes, summer volcanoes, and SkiMo too.

    So.. my thinking for a touring set-up (i’ll probably keep the Lines for skiing the lifts since I like them so much) would be to keep same boots but get the tech foot plates, tech bindings, and lighter slightly narrower and much lighter skis. I can get the Dynafit TLT Radical ST for about $315 so that’s my current choice.
    For the skis, I’m deciding between the Voile Vector in 170cm, or 180cm or the G3 ZenOxide Carbon Fusion 93 or 105 in 177cm. I have looked at the Black Diamond Carbon Converts too, but I just don’t think want to spend that much money…
    I’m open to other options too! But I want to make the decision soon and get some new skis!

    Thanks in advance for any input!

  71. hairymountainbeast September 23rd, 2015 8:47 pm

    Hey Carl, if you are interested in the carbon converts, check out bd’s cosmetic seconds. I just picked up a pair for about half price.

  72. JCoates September 24th, 2015 6:54 am

    The Voile Vectors are also awesome “do-it-all” skis. You will be happy on them for at least a few years as a quiver-of-one ski. Plus, the price is right. I wouldn’t get the fish-scaled version, though, unless you do tons of low-angle uphill skinning. They are much, much slower on the down than traditional bases.

  73. Carl September 25th, 2015 5:27 pm

    Thanks for the tip Hairymountainbeast! I used to check out the cosmetic seconds every once in a while, but I had forgotten recently!

    JCoates, I was planning on going with the standard Voile Vectors, not the BC/Fishscale version. I should probably just get the Voile’s and enjoy having skis instead of fretting over this any longer. hmmm.

  74. Jim Milstein September 25th, 2015 5:38 pm

    Carl, the Dynafit Manaslu is pretty similar and is also discounted. Keep fretting!

  75. Carl September 25th, 2015 6:11 pm

    I think the Manaslu’s are a bit thin for what I’m looking for, but they are indeed similar.. too much fretting! haha to be honest, they were on the list earlier, but I needed some reason to limit my choices so I deemed them too narrow.

  76. Jim Milstein September 25th, 2015 7:59 pm

    Don’t stop fretting, Carl. Vectors are 118x94x107, and the Manaslus are 122x95x108. The Manaslus are fatter than the Vectors! Actually they are about the same for all practical purposes. Their weights are almost the same too. I’ve never skied the Vectors, but the Manaslus have been good for me on all but hard snow.

    Price might be a good way to decide.

  77. Al t November 15th, 2015 1:37 pm

    Hi lou- I just got a new pair of the last year of the original manaslu 178cm. They do not have the pridrilled mounting holes that earlier models had. I have 27 tlt 6 performance boots and I’ll be using dynafit st bindings.

    My question: where should I mount these things? Any tips? Epoxy or whatever for the holes? Appreciate any guidance I can get. I ski almost exclusively soft snow, while touring with some spring corn outings. Thanks al

  Your Comments

  Recent Posts

Facebook Twitter Email Instagram Youtube

WildSnow Twitter Feed


  • Blogroll & Links

  • Welcome to Louis (Lou) Dawson's backcountry skiing information & opinion website. Lou's passion for the past 50 years has been alpinism, climbing, mountaineering and skiing -- along with all manner of outdoor recreation. He has authored numerous books and articles about ski touring and is well known as the first person to ski down all 54 of Colorado's 14,000-foot peaks, otherwise known as the Fourteeners! Books and free ski touring news and information here.

    All material on this website is copyrighted, the name WildSnow is trademarked, permission required for reproduction (electronic or otherwise) and display on other websites. PLEASE SEE OUR COPYRIGHT and TRADEMARK INFORMATION.

    We include "affiliate sales" links with most of our blog posts. This means we receive a percentage of a sale if you click over from our site (at no cost to you). None of our affiliate commission links are direct relationships with specific gear companies or shopping carts, instead we remain removed by using a third party who manages all our affiliate sales and relationships. We also sell display "banner" advertising, in this case our relationships are closer to the companies who advertise, but our display advertising income is carefully separated financially and editorially from our blog content, over which we always maintain 100% editorial control -- we make this clear during every advertising deal we work out. Please also notice we do the occasional "sponsored" post, these are under similar financial arrangements as our banner advertising, only the banner or other type of reference to a company are included in the blog post, simply to show they provided financial support to WildSnow.com and provide them with advertising in return. Unlike most other "sponsored content" you find on the internet, our sponsored posts are entirely under our editorial control and created by WildSnow specific writers.See our full disclosures here.

    Backcountry skiing is dangerous. You may be killed or severely injured if you do any form of ski mountaineering, skimo randonnee and randonnée skiing. The information and news on this website is intended only as general information. Due to human error and passing time, the information, text and images contained within this website may be inaccurate, false, or out-of-date. By using, reading or viewing the information provided on this website, you agree to absolve the owners of Wild Snow as well as content contributors of any liability for injuries or losses incurred while using such information. Furthermore, you agree to use any of this website's information, maps, photos, or binding mounting instructions templates at your own risk, and waive Wild Snow owners and contributors of liability for use of said items for ski touring or any other use.

    Switch To Mobile Version