Page 1 of 4

I bought used AT skis but now need boots

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 1:59 pm
Got me some AT skis (k2 seth pistols)but need boots.Idk what kind i will need since i know nothing about the type of bindings that are on the skis-Diamir Fritsch with Freeride?And since there are no more ski shops in LA,i come to the internets seeking knowledge.Trying to post smaller file pics.

Re: I bought used AT skis but now need boots

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:33 pm
by bobby49
You might want to describe the kind of skiing that you do.

Re: I bought used AT skis but now need boots

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:55 pm
by c9h13no3
Diamir Fritsch with Freeride bindings are a frame binding. The heel part of the back of the binding should be connected to the toe piece with a bar, and the heel piece will lift off the ski when in walk mode. Google "frame vs. pin bindings".

Frame bindings accept regular alpine boots, which is the main part of their appeal: you don't need new boots. But alpine boots are heavy & hike poorly. They have a limited range of motion so you can't slide your foot as far forward or back in the skin track. Skin with your boots unlocked & as wide open as you can get them.

Frame binding setups have largely been replaced by tech bindings (light & fast option) or heavier dual compatible bindings (Salomon Shift, Marker Duke PT). But because of that, they're cheap in the used market. Sure they're a bit heavy, but they ski downhill really well.

Standard Disclaimer: Know what you're getting into before you venture out into the backcountry. Avalanche terrain isn't controlled, creeks & cliffs aren't marked, and navigation is harder in winter.

Re: I bought used AT skis but now need boots

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:34 pm
thanks,youre right,these bindings have a frame and that bar thing.
My interests are something that goes a.bit faster than snowshoes...i got these for nothing.Old alpine boots are cheap.How much are skins?

Re: I bought used AT skis but now need boots

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:02 pm
by overheadx2
Dave, you really need to speak with some one qualified before buying boots. I am no expert and more advanced folks can chime in. First of all, I’m sure people do it, but I couldn’t imagine hiking in alpine ski boots. They are great for getting down, but even loosened up they seem like they would be very hard to hike in. Free ride bindings come in short, medium and x long sizes. When I was looking at the Free rides, my size 13 light weight boots fit the medium not the x long as expected. They state that medium is for size 6 to 12 and x long is above, but it is better to look at the cm of the actual boot since a size 12 gnarlier alpine boot is bigger and longer than a light weight size 12. You are probably OK to get a size 10 or 11 for a medium, but I found that a size 13 light boot did not fit a x long freeride AT binding. I would take them up to Mammoth Mountaineering and get the least expensive AT boot they have that fits, and have them set it up for you. You could also go to the gear exchange in Bishop and find some very inexpensive used framed binding boots. If you are not careful you could end up with a package that doesn’t fit together. Also, You really should have some one with experience with release values for those bindings put it all together. Skins are easier and getting a pair on line should be OK. just 2 cents from a guy that’s just 1 step ahead of you, phil

Re: I bought used AT skis but now need boots

Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 12:13 am
by c9h13no3
Most AT boots (like an Atomic Backland) won't fit a frame binding. Here's your two options if you don't own alpine boots already.

1) Buy an alpine boot. If you ski the resort, this is the best choice. Any route with serious walking, you'll use approach shoes. Alpine boots are also way cheaper, so it's not like you're blowing money with a quiver of 2 boots.

2) Buy a hybrid boot. These usually have a walk-to-ride sole, and tech inserts. Your bindings may not accept walk-to-ride soles, so you need to check. You can often buy alpine sole conversion kits that will convert walk-to-ride to alpine with 8 screws per boot. Either way, these hybrid boots are expensive, and they sacrifice a lot. They're not as stiff as a dedicated alpine boots, and they're heavy and inflexible for a touring boot. The Technica ZeroG's and Nordica STRiders are good examples of hybrid boots.

And yeah, make sure your boot sole length fits your bindings. Shoe size and boot sole length are different.

Skins are about $125 new. I'd try the used market if your skis are skinny (buy fat skins and trim them down). Shelling out & cutting new skins for a $100 pair of starter skis seems criminal.

A pair of alpine boots, cheap skins, and frame skis would be fine for skiing the 1000-2000 ft things around Tahoe. But I wouldn't enjoy skiing a big objective like Shasta or the Eastern Sierra stuff with that rig.

One final thing: snowshoes aren't that slow. They're very light, and you can glissade to get down quick. A big heavy frame setup is gear for skiing *down* things, usually small half-day type objectives. The comparable ski gear to snow shoes would be cross country skis with metal edges, or some Randonee race skis. Shorter, skinnier, and MUCH lighter. If speed to cover many miles is what you want, a frame setup ain't it.

Re: I bought used AT skis but now need boots

Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 6:50 am
Thanks c9,
I am clueless on this matter.
My main objective is not to do downhill stuff but rather traverse flat to moderate terrain with much better float and control than x country skis- which are a disaster for me doing the slightest downhill grades.

Re: I bought used AT skis but now need boots

Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 11:26 pm
by c9h13no3
Apparently XC waxless skis with metal edges and heel cables ski pretty well. But my tele turns are garbage. It’s definitely a skill you have to work at. And they’re quite cheap, with plentiful used options.

A light & fast AT setup will be more costly, but it’s seen as the superior gear. But all that stuff is expensive, and new so there’s very little on the used market. But you can find older styles of Dynafit bindings on Craigslist with skis that will usually work. Renting is probably a good place to start.

Re: I bought used AT skis but now need boots

Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 1:43 pm
by Harlen
c9 wrote:
light & fast AT setup will be more costly, but it’s seen as the superior gear. But all that stuff is expensive, and new, so there’s very little on the used market.
His point about the weight comparison between snowshoes and ski touring gear is a good one Davela-- you will be putting a lot more weight on your feet with anything but the very thinnest of skinny x-country gear (which doesn't work with a backpack)

After years of agonizing over the cost, and the possible need for changing to AT gear, I finally bought the bloody expensive stuff this year with the help of Mavericks discounted gear deal. He got me the Atomic Backland Tour bindings for around $430, and I found new Scarpa F1 touring boots for just $450 (which currently cost $700 at REI), from a discount company in Utah-see below. So there went a cool $900.00 for the boots and bindings.

My current source of agony is whether to mount the bindings on my Madshus Epoch skis, which were recommended as great all-around performers, or to go with something wider, like what Gazelle, and most everyone else out there seems to be using?? Already bought the Epochs for ~$300. The thing is Davela, most folks out there are downhill hot shots like Gazelle and C9, et al. I think you are more like me and HST "Paul," who famously said: I use skis to get into the mountains, not the other way around." I've learned to enjoy the feeling of sliding on snow more than shoeing through it, and now I just want better control on the downhill (don't I Gazelle?!). So maybe the Madshus Epochs, at 99-68-84, are just right for me and you? However, Gazelle agreed that I would find the downhill turning part much easier with a wider ski- something with ~90+ in the middle. You have to be a really good skier to make it work with longer, thinner skis on the downhills; I don't know your history Davela, but I've never spent a single day at a resort.

Paul wrote awhile back about his search for the perfect gear, and he was leaning both ways-- toward AT gear, and then back toward NNNBC superlight gear. I wonder what he'll do?

Best of luck to us.

*gear descriptions below: ... ur-binding ... boots-mens
*and here is a great deal on a larger pair of the Scarpa boots, and the Utah company I found-- Campsaver: ... -boot.html ... ch-68-skis

Re: I bought used AT skis but now need boots

Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:04 pm
by Harlen
I see now that you too chose to "go big" Davela. Below is a nice ref. to your "Sethpistol" skis:
Seth is a Yank. And he hucks these beauties like a Brit could only do in their dreams. I’ve had the pleasure of using my 189’s in the powder of St Anton and La Grave this year, the spring snow of Norway’s arctic circle last April and hard-pack in Cham and La Grave. Verdict: Not that heavy fitted with a Fritschi Freeride (for a big ski) and very capable of 1500 M skinning in good conditions. Not good in tight hard spots, but very fast and stable on good powder and corn. In fact they are awesome in powder and eat crud for breakfast. They are very easy to ski in reasonable conditions, and very easy to ski fast. Live fast (just like Sid) and die with a smile on your face.
I gather that "Seth" is the ski maker, and "just like sid" refers to Sid Vicious of the Sex Pistols. How heavy are they Davela, mounted with the frame bindings? Just weighed my 180 cm, Atomic Rainiers w/ 3-pin bindings (-the cables, which add ~1/3lb), and they are a shade over 3lb each.; and the 175 cm, Madshus Epoch skis with the Atomic tech bindings (-the brakes) = 3lb. each.
My older tele setup was between 4 and 5 lbs, depending on which bindings.