Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site amiga.amiga.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!pyramid!amiga!tomp
From: tomp@amiga.UUCP (Tom Pohorsky)
Newsgroups: net.rec.ski
Subject: Re: X-C ski equipment
Message-ID: <431@amiga.amiga.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 21-Dec-85 23:07:10 EST
Article-I.D.: amiga.431
Posted: Sat Dec 21 23:07:10 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 10-Jan-86 06:06:40 EST
References: <1937@zehntel.UUCP>
Reply-To: tomp@stella.UUCP (Tom Pohorsky)
Distribution: net
Organization: Commodore-Amiga Inc., 983 University Ave #D, Los Gatos CA 95030
Lines: 68

In article <1937@zehntel.UUCP> davel@zehntel.UUCP (David Longerbeam) writes:
>
>Does anyone have experience with the Asolo Glissade 350 boot?

  I'm not familiar w/Glissade model numbers (they refer to boot height, don't
they ?). I use Asolo Snowfields for telemarking, for which they're great.
I've skied the medium-height Glissades a few times and recommend them highly
for what you're describing. The front half of the sole is very stiff, which
turns what might otherwise be a decent TMing boot into a fairly good one.
Obviously it's noticably easier for trail work than the Snowfield. In my
limited equipment exposure, this would have to be the ideal general, non-
"expedition" backcountry boot.

>How about the Epoke 900, Fischer Touring Crown, or the new

  Skied Touring Crown's a couple of times, like most general purpose "wax-
less" ski, they kinda suck. Or, in nicer terms, as good as most. Am I be-
traying arrogance here :-? Personaly, I like my Bonna 2400's: meant to
be a general-use mountaineering ski, they're semi-light (2400 grams) with
a full metal edge, tough (well tough enough, I only weigh 155) and fast.
the full metal edge has not been an encurberance, but they're wider than
most track skis and often won't fit in a machine cut track (bummer, I
guess I'll go back to the boonies :-).
   As an aside, out of impatience I've
(un)developed a technique for waxing, particulary appropriate for California
where conditions change fairly quickly: don't. Since I TM at the lifts alot,
wax, esp klister can be a nuisance. By poling a little harder and/or a
firmer step-down on the near-flat, and herringboning or whatever up the
steep stuff one can get by fairly well. This would affect one's
route selections away from the steady ascent approach. Obviously, this 
can't always work, and will be inappropriate for most, but it saves me
waxing effort and keeps the skis (and my car,hands,hair,etc..) klister free.
Just throw on some hard/glide wax at the start of the season, and off
you go, especially downhill (real efficient there).
You off-track hacks "stuck" with wax-oriented skis might try this someday
if you're curious. (No I'm not kidding, I actually like this approach).
Anyway, A friend w/good experience likes Epoke's.

>Karhu Edge skiis (the ones with the partial metal edge)?

  I've liked both Kahru's and Kazama's. Sturdy, highperfomance. I've
skied my girlfriend's partial metal edge, and am impressed with that
design, too.

>Also bindings -- I have heard various arguments against 
>some of the heavier touring bindings -- especially that they
>can ruin the welts of your boots.  Anyone have any experience

  Not much experience here, though I might add that the standard binding
has put welts on my welts under heavy use. sorry, maybe I shouldn't have
said that :-(  Telemarkers note that there are now releasable 3-pin bin-
dings, w/beefier springs now so the big guys won't release so easily.

>Not sure about full-length edges -- hear they slow you down too much

  naw, they're fine... and macho, too! is that a plus ???
>
>So let's get discussing!  Eugene Miya, are you out there?
>

  Eugene, any tips for the novice on use of skins ? If you've had the
patience to read all this, you know how much I like wax, and waxless
skis. Thanx.

>This should keep me going until I can actually get to the 
>mountains!  :-)

  see ya there :-), tomp.