Sure, you can use those Solomon Shifts on your resort skiing days, but if you ski on piste a lot, you might want to consider otherwise.
An economic argument for the quiver of two
I see it often. In the field and on the internet. People want one set of ski gear to use inbounds and out. This is a noble goal. In a consumerist world, reducing our consumption is a worthy pursuit. However, if you spend a lot of time skiing inbounds, your experience will be dramatically and negatively influenced by choosing “hybrid” resort/backcountry ski gear as a “quiver of one”.
Further, it isn’t the cost savings you would hope for. Let’s just look at some numbers. All costs drawn directly from retail shops on the web. I sought equipment sized for me, with skis around 180-185cm. Skins and poles omitted, because in either case you’ll need one pair of each. You can go budget or deluxe with skins and poles, but those choices aren’t wrapped up with the rest of your gear choices like skis, boots, and bindings are.
SPONSORED BY: PATAGONIA
A random, semi-budget, semi-light, “quiver of one” set up, with numbers for cost and weight.
Dynafit Beast 184 ski. 1600g per ski. $700
Salomon Shift. 850g per ski. $725
Scarpa Maestrale XT. 1490g per boot. $899
This makes for a total set-up weight of 7.9kg and a total cost of $2324.
Now, let’s look at accomplishing this same thing with two sets of ski gear.
First, your resort gear. To replicate the resort performance of the above, you can secure an intermediate level set of equipment for about $1000. Its weight doesn’t matter, as you won’t carry it uphill for hours and days. I won’t do the shopping for you, but I can tell you that the above “crossover” gear skis about the same as intermediate, budget-level resort gear.
Next, let’s compare to a budget set of equipment primarily for human-powered skiing. Your typical, “daily driver” sort of backcountry ski set up. Some places will cut you a deal on packages, but we’ll leave that out of the equation for simplicity.
Voile V6. 1500g per ski. $695
Dynafit Speed Turn. 370g per binding. $350
La Sportiva Spectre 2.0. 1445g per boot. $679
Here you end up with a package that costs $1724 and weighs 6.6kg.
Compare the costs, and, yes, you save some dollars with the “quiver of one”. Specifically, you save dollars at initial purchase. The quiver of one costs about $2300 while the two-ski set up costs $2700. What do you get for those $400? Well, most obvious is that you save 1.3kg. That’s well over a pound per foot. That makes a big difference in your backcountry experience. Shop more carefully than I did and you can trim even more weight from your touring gear with minimal to no additional cost.
Less obvious is that, with the two-ski arrangement, you get to reap the value of your backcountry ski set up much, much longer. Way more than twice as long. Using that expensive, “lightweight” quiver of one touring gear at the resort will be extremely hard on it. Just yesterday I skied a rather average resort day and logged 20000 vertical feet on my Garmin. Even in this amazing Teton pow month it takes me a whole week to rack that up in the backcountry. Every turn downhill stresses and wears your ski gear. All ski bindings, with their moving parts, wear out with every downhill vertical foot. “Crossover” bindings have more moving parts than either dedicated touring bindings or dedicated resort bindings. This makes them both more expensive and less durable than either one.
Resort gear ages too, but not nearly as fast. However, for arguments’ sake, let’s assume that it wears out just as fast as backcountry gear, given equal use. Fast forward ten years in the two scenarios above. You ski enthusiastically. Say, 15-20 resort days a year and about the same in the backcountry.
With the quiver of one, you’ll replace that kit roughly every two years. That’s five setups at $2300 each for a grand total of $11500 over a decade.
With the “quiver of two”, more math is required. Your resort gear will wear out at about the same rate. Five intermediate setups at $1000 each, so $5k. Your touring gear, though, will hold up much better now. Maybe, just maybe, you’ll have to replace it in five years. Sure, many replace their gear more frequently. But they’re not budget oriented like you are, right? That’s two setups. And all are optimized for what you use them for. $3400 for two BC setups. $8400 for ski gear over 10 years.
Round it all up, a lot, and you’re still way ahead of the cost of the “quiver of one” strategy. Over ten years, roughly, the crossover strategy costs nearly $12k, while maintaining two sets of more specialized ski gear costs under $9k. The “quiver of one” set up, compiled of ever-trendy, but often under-delivering “crossover” backcountry ski gear, is what my mom would call “penny wise and pound foolish”.
Postscript:
Now, how about traveling? Isn’t it less hassle to just travel with one set-up? Sure, it is. But it is not twice the hassle or expense to travel with two pairs of skis and boots. With your long-term savings, get yourself a baller, padded, rolling ski bag that fits two pairs of skis. Traveling with a spouse or ski partner? I’ve put 3-4 pairs of skis in one such bag. Pack it with clothes etc to get it up near 50 lbs. Airline rules are ever changing, but I’ve never had a problem, jumping continents and states and regions, with such a bag and 2+ sets of skis.
38 comments
Hi Jed
I certainly agree with the direction you are taking this, but would go one step further. Forget about trying to tailor AT gear to resort use. The best of beefy “big mountain” AT skis capped with Shifty $725 bindings is still inferior to the alpine gear you can buy for pennies every fall at the Jackson ski swap. This year I added a pair of Stokli GS masters race skis to my quiver for $350. De-tuned from world cup skis with a 19 meter radius, perfect bases and edges and mounted with $350 race bindings. Match up perfectly with my Lange RS 130 boots that I bought out of Canada for $225 four years ago. So for $575 I have a package that is far superior for resort and hard snow skiing to any $2300 resort AT setup. The $350 rule has served me well over the years by putting a pair of Lahassa BRO powder specialty skis and Line Supernatural 100 “betweeners” into that resort quiver. There is no such thing as a one or two ski quiver!
The balance left in the budget vs buying two new AT setups is enough to buy the best possible touring AT gear with enough left over for a plane ticket to Alaska!
Great post and one that lots of people need to read! I have run a backcountry ski shop for the past 7 years and I can’t tell you how many people come in looking for the quiver of one. It sometimes doesn’t make me money, but I always try to talk them out of it. Having separate quivers for respective kinds of skiing is the only way to go. A ski that weighs 2000g will crush it inbounds, yet leave you gasping on the skin track. On the other end a 1200g touring ski will get tossed so hard in cut up resort chop, but will be a dream for a 7000k vert day. And like you said, a crossover setup in the middle won’t do anything really well and will wear out so much faster. (I have seen and replaced countless broken touring bindings because people have been skiing them hard in resort.). Different ski setups are the way to go! However, I do personally cross over my touring and alpine setups in one way, I use the same boots for everything. Touring boots, especially the Hoji Free, Maestrale RS, Tecnica Zero G, Salomon Mtn, Vulcan and others all ski so amazingly well and so similar to alpine boots. It’s also hard enough to get one boot dialed to my feet, let alone two. Saving money on boots also lets me buy a really, really nice and powerful set of alpine skis and bindings. You can put a binding like the Warden MNC on them and then light tech bindings like the Speed Radicals on all touring skis. I think if I compare my two main setups for inbounds and touring I come in right at about $2800. Not to shabby for the amazing performance in their respective categories that both have.
Alpine:
Icelantic Pioneer 109 – $699
Salomon Warden MNC 13 – $270
Touring:
Voile Supercharger – $695
Dynafit Speed Radical – $400
Boots:
Dynafit Mercury – $799
(Boots will need replacing next year, but I’ve had them for 6 seasons now. Pretty good value!)
An excellent summary of the debate over the merits of a quiver of one. Not to mention that the typical resort binding is likely a bit more relaible in terms of safety release and performance for choppy and hard resort conditions.
My one quiver bc and resort set up is a pair of Scarpa Spirit 4’s at 4lbs. per boot and Marker Barons on a Hart Outback 178 cms and 105mm waist.
It is not the lightest weight set up BUT it does it all and I have been skiing it hard for over 6 years now. I do have a lighter weight all day touring set up now as I am not as strong as I once was 73 ok. Scarpa Maestrale and G3 Ion12 on a DPS Wailer, and still ski my resort set up 60% of the time for powder days and side country as well as all day if it looks good once out and about.
I know that when you are young you are incredibly strong. You have endurance and all the qualities associated with good athletic abilities. Don’t be afraid of a little weight, you can handle it. I did and still do. Also taking care of equipment is paramount to longevity and the gear is built to last.
I put a frame-style binding (Tyrolia Ambition) on my resort ski and sized it so I can use the same skin as on my BC ski, (Hannibal 94 with Vipec 2.0). With the Scott Cosmos 2 boot it works well and I have a backup ski that is perfectly capable, albeit heavier, for BC use.
I will say that Shifts are an impressive product and useful if you do much lift assisted touring. They give up little to a pair of alpine bindings going downhill except price and a tricky-to-set-up AFD. But as a dedicated touring binding for someone who skis uphill more than a few days a year? No way. Too heavy. Too complicated. Can’t transition to downhill without taking off skis.
Similar things can be said about skiing inbounds on minimalist pin bindings: Harsh. Disconnected. Inconsistent release.
So yeah, skip the one ski quiver. If you’re on a budget focus on your boots. It’s not hard to find some solid used skis for $200. And affordable tech bindings are no longer the stuff of legend.
Man I wish I’d read this 2 years ago because I made this exact mistake. I got a set of Fischer Rangers with Shifts thinking I’d have a do-it-all rig, but instead have set of skis that are remarkably heavier than my dedicated touring kit and don’t ski groomers nearly as well as my budget alpine kit. End result is a pair of skis that rarely get used.
Does anyone know what the secondhand Shift market looks like?
I am, personally, a fan of having a varied quiver; but the one place that I stay to the touring gear is my boots – I don’t like to have any more than the absolute minimum number of boots, because I have never found it that easy – despite working with great fitters – to optimise boot fit in multiple boots. One feels great, the second feels rather good, and by the time you get to three at least one of them feels pretty “off” relative to the other two. I like to keep one light rando boot, and one that is more free-rando oriented. With that mix I have found that I can make the most of in-bounds skiing and touring. Currently I use the Atomic Backland Carbon for my light boot, and the Technica ZeroG ProTour for my “beef” boot. Am I leaving a bit off the performance on piste and off-piste with the Technica? Maybe, but I don’t feel like it’s holding me back. Sure the Dynafit Hoji would walk better, and Piste boot would probably have a little bit better flex for piste, but I have been so happy with the Technica’s that I don’t worry about the little bit that I may be losing. Would I possibly be able to go see a great boot-fitter and get dialled on three pairs of boots – maybe, but in France that’ll cost you upwards of 1000 €, easily, if you see someone who really knows their stuff. At that point, I start seeing the benefit of adding another boot to the mix as being far less appealing.
IME there are more used rigs than ever before cheaper than ever before, often at 1/3rd of original list for skis/skins/bindings/no tax. So there is no reason to not have a quiver of 10 or 12 skis and a couple pair of boots, you just need to have the cash on hand when that deal comes around.
If you are not sure how many skis you got in yer quiver … thats the right amount eh
Interesting discussion – one relevant to many of us I’m sure. I’ve become a convert to having a resort setup after years of bashing myself and my tech gear inbounds.
In defense of the Shift, I have been using it pretty solidly, including as a resort binding. Have had no problems with durability…so for those of us who want a resort / short tour rig, something like a Shift, a Dalbello touring boot and a suitable ski covers that. To be honest though, about half the people skiing Shifts are not doing much touring with them.
I think there’s greater issues with using touring boots inbounds than anything else. If you’re skiing decently hard pretty regularly, something like a ZGTP will not be as forgiving or capable as a resort boot.
As for skis, I’m still figuring out where my sweet spot is. I love skiing down on a 4kg pair, but even with a light binding and boot, it’s a hard ascent. I’d say I’ve found heavier skis with lighter bindings to be more work than lighter skis with heavier bindings (even when the total weights are pretty similar).
I do love the stability and downhill prowess of things like K2 Mindbenders, but yeah they’re heavy beasts. Finding the right ski to go with my ZGTPs and Tectons is still a work in progress. As with all things, experience is a dear teacher, and fools will heed no other.
The hand wringing from both mostly in bounds skiers and mostly out of bounds skiers on this topic is laughable. AT bindings, particularly Dynafit, are fine for hard charging in bound use. Don’t let the naysaying gear nerds (mostly old timers) scare you away. I and almost everyone I ski with have been skiing AT bindings at the resort for years now. No not skiing on eggshells, but skiing hard and fast and with abandon. And on mountains from Squaw to Jackson to Snowbird to Silverton. You can do it too. A mid fat AT ski w AT bindings is economical and will do fine for both in and out of bounds skiing for at least a couple seasons depending on how often you ski. Of course, if you make money reviewing skis, selling skis, etc. You might want to continue the party line that you need a quiver to ski hard and/or hike far.
This is hugely misleading. If you’re skiing hard enough, you’ll need to lock your toe or deal with prerelease and sacrifice your body either way. Never mind the broken gear. Touring gear is amazing, but no matter how well built, it doesn’t hold up to those repetitive forces.
I suppose “skiing hard” is pretty subjective, but I will say this. There is a reason you don’t see any tech set ups on the world cup or freeride world tour…
I have only AT (Dynafit boots bindings and BD skis), which I use at the resort. The comfort and lightness of the equipment, even at the resort, is quite pleasing. They work well in all conditions–just a while back I enjoyed the boilerplate ice of Killington. And I suppose it’s not the worst thing to moderate my speed occasionally when I worry that the bindings might not hold or that a prerelease would be a disaster. Having one set of gear that I never have to consider or reconsider provides the simplicity that I like.
I have to agree: dynafit tech bindings are wonderful, but they just seem to lack the compliance and shock absorption of alpine bindings. The binding/ski feel is totally different and I have to flirt with settings well above my alpine settings and still moderate the amount of power I push into the ski, especially on hard or chattery surfaces in order to avoid pre-releases.
Me too, I skied some kingpins on an icy groomer day and they made do, but they weren’t very fun and my knees were kind of angry at me, I think because they have less elasticity than a normal alpine binding that normally would provide more shock absorption. Or you know I’m just getting old:) I have 4 resort days on shifts now and can’t tell a difference between them and an alpine binding so far. But then again then again I’ve been skiing a frame/touring binding in resort for a long time so maybe I should spend time on alpine bindings to really compare.
Like shoes, I’d far rather have “rough use” choices along with nicer pairs for going out to dinner. It’s a no-brainer!
As for using pin bindings for lift cycling? Seems to me more like no-brains! NOT gonna wear out my expensive AT boots (pin sockets) or bindings by using them on lifts…….Ain’t no way!!
I think you can get by with an exclusive AT setup, with modern boots, like the Maestrale RS.
I have had good luck, and great skiing in the Alps, with the 2016/2017 Atomic Backland 95, a Skialper Editors choice for Freetouring that season. Buy a ski , a season or two past and save a lot of money !
I bought them in the 182 length, off E-bay for $350 NIB, then picked up a set of the new Salomon MTN binding in France for 315 Euros. So with my Maestrale RS boots, this is a relatively light setup, to carry through Airports, and Trains stations in my single ski bag. Maestrale is stiff enough for my piste skiing, and walk mode is great for well, walking up and down stairs, boarding trams, even shopping at the SPAR. I would never take a heavy Alpine or Tele boot to Europe , or even out West again.
They Backlands ski well on the piste, carve, very stable, and I have enjoyed them in a 2 foot dump of “euro snow” . While I do have a double ski bag with wheels, find it awkward and heavy at times. It won’t fit in the overhead bins on the trains in Europe, or even at the end of the car. Unwieldy for lifting on and off trains in a rush, switching trains, unless my son is with me…So I prefer Euro travel with a light single ski bag, and one ski pair, for now, the Backlands.
At the resort , back East I now ski the Blizzard, ZG 108, in a 178 length. A great ski, for Eastern skiing IMHO. Carves well, is light, and floats in the glades. Same Salomon MTN binding with brakes.
For longer touring days, Wailer 99s RP2, with ION LT, 175 cm . Great powder noodle, ski setup I took for my last Hut trip to Chic Chocs.
So skiing with these different AT setups, I see no reason for a dedicated Alpine setup. Wear is averaged out between my different skis, and if I get bored, with downhill skiing at our resort, I can just put on skins, and climb up the side of a trail.
nope, still happy with just one set. The previous one lasted 10 years so there goes your 2 year rotation argument…
Ignoring the lift-serve side of things, I see the “quiver of one” vs “quiver of two” argument play out with folks who like inbounds fitness-skinning. “I want something light & fast for inbounds laps, but that I can take into the backcountry too,” they say. So they end up with something that sucks for both: heavier & more robust than needed for corduroy, with wall-to-wall tip-and-tail connected skins and limited-ROM boots, but still light enough that they get knocked around in true “wild snow.” I advise folks that, if inbounds fitness skinning is something you’re into, get a superlight dedicated setup; it’ll make it even more fun, you’ll do more laps, get even stronger, and then you won’t have any trouble hauling around a heavier setup that kills it on funky wild snow.
A couple of minimalist/enviro nerd/cheapskate bro’s claimed they would only need 1 setup, which was ok until they broke some hardware beginning of season and they have to source more gear which isnt there, the up side to the situation is that I get to say … I told you so
I’ve been trying the quiver of one thing this season with BD Vipec Evos mounted on Head Kore 105s with Scarpa Maestrale boots. After 25 days inbounds and 12 days in the backcountry, I can honestly say that I’m pretty happy.
Yeah, the setup is a bit heavy compared to a dedicated touring rig. That said, I think it’s a mistake to think that only inbounds chop demands a burlier ski. I’m been on some punchy crust in the backcountry where I was happy to have the stiffer Kores. Most importantly, I never find myself at the top of a line in the backcountry wishing I had my “better skis”. In my world, inbounds days are essentially practice for backcountry, and I love that I can practice like I play.
The one area where my setup does come up short is railing turns on icy groomers. If I were to get another set of skis, it would probably be more of an alpine race ski for those days where I know I’ll be stuck on groomers all day. Fortunately, here in SLC, those have been few and far between lately.
I will say that binding safety deserves serious consideration. I used to ski Dynafits inbounds. After a season with several prereleases (usually in bumps) and one knee injury due to a failure to release in a high-speed twisting fall, I did some research and came up with the Vipecs. IMO, if you are going to ski inbounds on tech bindings, the binding must have a defined, toe-initiated release. It’s just too much of a risk without.
Along those lines, I would encourage those considering the Shifts to do a little research as well. My understanding is that given the sticky rubber AT soles and variability around thickness (between different products as well as due to wear), it’s extremely difficult to get a predictable release from clamp-style toe bindings. I’ve been extremely happy with my Vipecs, starting with the Blacks, now with the Evos. Knock on wood but, after a hundred or so days, I have yet to have either a prerelease or a scary failed release. FWIW, I’m a big guy (6’4″, 210#) and while I’m certainly not the best skier on the mountain, I ski harder than most.
+1 for the dedicated resort setup.
Even if you don’t mind/notice the difference in on-piste performance between an alpine and a backcountry ski, the durability issue is a major point for anyone spending more than the odd day a season inbounds.
My last alpine setup lasted about 50 resort days, equaling about 1 million vertical meters. My touring setups — in the vein of K2 WayBacks+Dynafits, i.e. no ultralight equipment — last about 200Km vertical, or 10 resort days. I’ve been now using a freeride ski (WhiteDot Ranger 108) as a dedicated backcountry ski and it is showing no signs of letting up after 400Km, no doubt because it has been designed with resort skiing in mind.
I own a bunch of skis, but I’m a weekend warrior and bringing two rigs back and forth every weekend was getting really old. Mostly it was dragging the boots around (to keep them warm indoors) that got annoying. I finally hit on a good quiver of one formula for me — Atomic Hawx XTD and Shifts on either Bentchetler 100 or Anima Freebird depending on the snow. If I have a serious backcountry objective I’ll still bring a better dedicated touring setup, but for inbounds uphilling or that last minute backcountry lap the quiver skis have streamlined my logistics. Yeah, I’m losing a bit of performance in both situations, but all in all I’m really happy having found the right compromises.
I’m going to Chamonix for the first time! woo hoo! I’m contemplating taking a steep skiing course there next season and considering a quiver for lift assisted touring: Shift bindings, K2 Coomback 110 x 177 cm, and Tecnica Cochise boots. My reasoning is : this is a more than adequate resort setup, good powder setup, capable on steep “no falls, please” terrain, and heavy but manageable for skins of moderate length to access steep terrain. Love Wild Snow.
As a quiver of one skier for 8? years now, I’m pretty happy with my setup, and it was a good way to mix many years of alpine skiing with getting into backcountry stuff without spending a bundle or having to think about which setup to bring etc. I still think that may be a good way to do it for people just getting into it. But there is some good wisdom in this article, a 2 quiver sounds pretty good. I can make about 1000-1300ft an hour with my setup that is about 12lbs on each foot (BD havoc, Fritchi eagle, BD factor, BD skins). I’ve never tired a super light setup with a boot with good ROM, I don’t think I would be much faster, but I can almost guarantee I would have way more endurance and less fatigue/recovery. $ and lbs aside, just in terms of the physical practicalities (and that manufactures would get blacklisted and go out of business if they actually made a true quiver of one setup) I’ve often wondered how my Fritschi frame bindings really compare to a good alpine binding in terms of safety. They have held up remarkably well and I never had problems even a lot of hard charging racing type skiing, but I dunno. I did switch to a shift this year after reading about toe elasticity, I figure my knees might appreciate it someday. And I’m thinking maybe I should just buckup and go back to a dedicated alpine setup too.
I ski both types of set-ups, and have three of each, six in total. I find that my alpine binding set-ups feel dead, heavy, and major overkill for my style and current approach to skiing. I’m almost 60, and I’m not a major league hard charger I suppose, so I find the heavy alpine set-ups way more than I need. I work part-time ski patrol, and I need the convenience and reliability of an alpine set-up. I am in and out of my skis 20 times a day. But, when I ski on my own time in or out of the ski area I just love the light set-up of my AT gear. The skis bend better in turns, and I’m not as tired at the end of the day pushing around heavy flat skis. I do agree that safety is a consideration – but I’m skiing much more “in control” these days so I don’t worry so much. If I could get in and out of the AT stuff more easily, and if the AT gear was a bit more bomber (no second thoughts when hauling a sled around!) it’s all I would use.
Jed, a great article, and very true.
But, we do need to remember, that just because your points are true, it doesn’t mean there can’t be another side that is also true.
For example, I DO use a double ski bag. We have always filled it with 2 pairs of skis: on for my wife, and one for me. The girls get their own double bag for their two skis. Then add two pieces of wheeled luggage and we hit the 1/person lugage limit. Going to more skis, not only starts to make it hard to stay within the weight limit, but mostly, more gear on the trip means more hassle schlepping it around, but even more so, makes packing up harder and take longer.
Also, I don’t ski that many laps each day, so although I might get anywhere from 10-30 days inbounds, I still seldom wear out gear. Backcountry gear certainly would never wear out if used exclusively for that.
So, just want to point out that both options can be valid, and each persons needs have to be considered specific to their situation.
Well I have not had a DH set up for over 30 years now. To get better at tele, it was always good to use the lifts. Also when the BC is bad, the lifts can be a way to get some skiing in. After transitioning to AT, it’s all I use. I do have a heavy set up for the lifts, that I rarely use in the BC, but I purchased it that way. (Tecton on Black Crows Corvus Freebird). I have been skiing the older Dynafit Mercurys, and will replace them next season with a 110 Hoji or ZeroG’s. For touring I now use my new La sportiva Skorpious which are really nice. I have even skiied the Skorpious at the DH area just to get used to them. Now I am only 5’6″, weigh 150lbs and at 66 don’t hit big airs or jumps anymore. Even so, I have never pre released or broken anything. That includes skiing with a full pack for a week of BC skiing. I have been thinking of getting a dedicated DH setup, but have never really pulled the trigger. So at this point I have a 3 quiver set up that seems to fit most of my needs. A uphill/Tour race set up, very light, a BC setup (hagen pure 10, blackcrows camox freebird and Skorpious boots), and a ‘DH” setup (Corvus Freebird, Tecton, Mercury). I am seeing many more folks using swift binding at the resorts. Here in NorCal, lots of BC skiers at N. Tahoe and the Sierras in general. Maybe next year (If we have enough snow!) I’ll rent a good demo pair of DH skis and boots just to see. In no hurry as my current setups are really nice!
I understand the economics of your discussion but I will also throw out a few other points.
As a professional mountain guide and ski shop owner, it really depends on the skier and their goals.
First off, the biggest mistake in people becoming better skiers is when novice skiers have a goal of becoming backcountry skiers but use lightweight AT gear at the resort. This equipment is not designed to make you a better skier….Buy a alpine skiing setup and bang out laps at the resort. That is the only way to learn balance, body position and being able to deal with varied terrain. You will never become a good skier with lightweight AT gear.
However, if you are expert skier and your main goal is to take on long missions in far out locations all over the world, the quiver of one is a good idea. Because when you decide to take on an objective that takes all day to reach the summit, the last thing you want to do is botch the descent and not fully take on this experience. And if you aren’t seasoned on this equipment that gets you to the summit, you wont be ready for the descent.
You become a better skier on resort, but you become a better climber with the right equipment.
I subscribed to the quiver of one concept for 10 years. Never again. Lying in bed with broken arm smashed up face and lost week skiing with my amazing kids cos my touring set up (Dynafit/La Sportiva Spectre/whitedot) dumped me on icy fresh groomed piste at 35kph. I’m buying a proper set of chargers for in bounds next season.
Interesting discussion, some input here from other side of the little atlantic ocean:
From where I live (Finland), the most common way of going to the big mountains skiing is by plane. For some reason the airlines nowadays like to charge you pretty much for everything you bring with you. Ok, you get one pair of skis and necessary equipment with you for more or less the base ticket price, but alas, another pair skis and the airlines see you as a “ATM machine”. Ok, you are ready to pay for extra pair of planks to the alps and bring them with you, Then you arrive in an overcrowded Geneva airport (which is a semi mess most of the time), somehow also managed to get all your bags on the same plane as yourself and dragged everything out from baggage claim, next destination car rental: try to cram 3-4 people + all the skis in the usually quite small rental car. Well, it won´t work out even if everyone only has 1 pair of skis. Never. Unless you hire a transportation vehicle instead of a car, or rent more cars.
FYI: piste skiing equipment are widely available in most alpine resorts. But try getting a decent pair of dynafit equipped powder skis and you might end up with … nothing. Therefore the most viable option here is to have a one pair of decent offpiste touring skis and hire some GS planks if you feel to ride the pistes instead.
Agree 100%
This year I’ve gotten by with a 1 ski quiver and I’m seeing the limitations.
Since I’ve been about 70% BC and 30% resort I figured I could get by with a DH oriented AT rig; Maestrale RS/4FRNT Raven/Tecton. Just yesterday I was doing laps in the bowls above Alberta at Wolf Creek and found the very real limitations of this setup. As things got slightly chunkier I started really wishing I was on Devastators. Keep in mind, I’m on a pretty burley set, as AT rigs go.
AT setups will always be a compromise between the up and down. With resort skiing there is no need to compromise. Weight is often your friend in-bounds. The additional wear and tear on much more delicate, complicated, AT gear is the final kicker.
I can pick up a used pair of Devastators & Pivots for $300-$400 and we all probably still have our Alpine boots.
I totally agree on the superior economics of multiple skis. But unlike others, I would take a masters race ski with matching plug boots for piste and pretty much any ~100mm 1500g ski for off piste, either lightweight boot, ski and binding for uphill touring or medium weight if doing mainly lift served. The plug boots and masters skis unlock a other level of speed and angulation so that carrying momentum becomes an art form. The second pair of wide skis should be your third ski purchase, not your second.
Buy all items at max half RRP by opting for Old Graphics Technology / second hand and then factor in lending out skis to friends and family rather than renting and the economics are golden.
Jack, that’ll be a good setup. I did a week last year at Paradiski with the Shift on Salomon QST 99 with Scarpa Mastrale RS (which were 4 years old). I went with a slightly narrower ski for the on piste time. It was a great setup for not knowing how much touring and on/off piste skiing I was going to be doing. Also kept my luggage weight down compared to a 2 ski setup.
I don’t see it so much as a quiver of 1 versus 2 or more; rather a versatile 1 ski set up. The set up you would take if invited on a trip, you couldn’t be sure of the weather, and you could only take 1 set up. No compromise is perfect, just the best option in those limited circumstances.It can provide a cheaper introduction to touring and as an all mountain setup it permits short skins uphill to better descents. No doubt in my mind that 2 setups are better if you are serious about rando (skinning) or have genuine powder days. 4 sets: hard pack, all mountain, Powder and Rando.
I should say that have a full quiver: FIS Race SL 165, General Piste ski 178, Soul 7 188 for powder (I live in Europe so that’s wide enough). Touring is Seek 7 176cm and Volkl vwerks BMT 94 186sm with quiver killers and 1 set of Tecton bindings….. but I still have been searching for the quiver one for that trip where it might include piste, off piste, a day tour and snowkiting. (I used to multiday hut tour including 4000m peaks on Pocket Rockets 185cm with Fritschi free ride bindings…. Now older I am a fan of light weight tech for touring)
Before the Shifts it was just too heavy for any uphill stuff: Volkl Kendos and the Soul 7s with guardian bindings. I thought about using the Tectons, but I was concerned about the wear and tear on lift served days (majority), and it would mean I would have to use tech insert boots and I prefer my alpine boots to rando boots for any downhill including off piste. The Shifts on Atomic Vantage 90ti 184cm really are a good option for me (pretty much the same weight as Jed’s theoretical setup in the article). I can wear whatever boots I want. I can use a freeride boot (ok 3 pairs of boots….) or my Rando boots for days with any skinning. For back country snowkiting. it is a more durable option and I can skin when needed. Lightweight tech bindings and skis are not built for the loads and I wouldn’t use a binding that did not have a lateral toe release.
Actually after 2 knee surgeries I am prepared to have the extra weight of Tectons on my rando skis too and, as above, really can’t recommend most tech bindings for lift served skiing.
I’m trying out “Quiver Killer” threaded inserts to save money and space on bindings and boots.
What’s the lightest/best frame binding for this strategy?
I prefer frame bindings because I don’t like taking off the skis to switch modes.
Fritschi Vipec and Tecton do. O require taking of skis to switch modes either.
I have a quiver.
All my touring skis were bought new but at the end of the product life when a successor model has been introduced. I have three pairs of skis and skins which were each bought for less than half of their normal listed retail price. I use one pair of AT boots, again one model behind the latest. For me this is the white Scapra Maestrale RS purchased after the current model came out.
Alas bargain bindings are harder to find, but still the overall saving on skis, skins and boots adds up. The result is that I have three pairs of touring skis which are:
Narrow (80mm) lightweight Trab skis which fly up the hill, turn easily and hold an edge on descent. Great in icy conditions. Ideal for the early season in Scotland where I live. Used them as a travel ski on a trip to the Andes where conditions were very firm. Excellent for spring steeps as well.
Medium (90mm) Scott Crusairs. A superb all-rounder no longer made. They rail when set on edge and are good enough in European fresh. When I think that the first powder I ever enjoyed was on 204 cm slalom skis with a 65 mm waist, these are more than good enough in most soft stuff. You can feel the carbon stiffness but they do float enough. I use them as my resort skis but putting in an uphill warm up every morning. I’ve also used them for three touring trips to Norway and one to Greenland. By today’s standards, they are a bit heavy but not annoyingly so. I wouldn’t take them to Japan.
These first two I bought without trying, just going on the reviews without problem. However, one week in Chamonix I was able to test skis and as a result went for my third pair:
Wider (105 mm) Black Diamond Carbon Convert, a lightweight dream for my 6 weeks of Canadian powder and surprisingly good on harder snow. I should use these more but just don’t feel the need. Next time I go to Canada, however, they will be the travel ski.
All this stuff is durable and lasts forever, so if you want more you have to sell it on because it just doesn’t wear out quickly. When the performance of new designs improves enormously you have to buy newer gear or you literally get left behind.
My main contribution here is to point out that savings are possible enabling a quiver with less impact on the wallet than might first be thought. Quiverkillers could reduce the outlay on bindings. All that said, having a sort of quiver, even one acquired economically, costs more than the full price ‘quiver of one’ option.
I would suggest that you should only expand ownership when you really need to. If you are going to Japan, take the right skis. Travel with one pair, but the right skis for where you are going. Afterwards back in Vermont or Scotland, where you might not use them enough, pass your good fortune on and sell them to someone else.
Comments are closed.