Backcountry blends

skisuschrist

skisuschrist

New member
alright so quarantine is getting to me & i’m contemplating playing a little binding musical chairs. right now my touring setup is a pair of 179 enforcer 110s with barons. love how they ski but getting them up the hill is a bitch. so i’m thinking of switching out the nords for a pair of 178 blends. which i know, are considered a park ski, but for scale, i’m a 5’4 female, it’s hard for me to drag my blends through the park. so uh yeah, before i make regrettable binding decisions, lemme get some outside opinions on this one
 
I wouldn't. If you're having trouble getting up the hill then strengthen your muscles. Seems like a waste of holes. Stick with what you've got, it's a good setup.
 
Where are you touring?

And what makes you think that the blends will be easier on the uphill?

Line Blends at 177 are 1935gram a ski. Enforcer 110 at 177 are 2100g a ski. that's like a 1/3 of a pound difference. The blends will totally be more jibby and maneuverable at 100mm underfoot.

Personally, i'd look for something a bit more stiff than the Blends for a touring ski. 4Frnt Hoji / Raven? ARV?

It wouldn't be the worst thing to throw barons on the blends, could be fun, especially if you mount em close to center. Regardless, kudos for you for rocking a 178 at 5'4.
 
14127615:GKS said:
why the fuck would you tour on a park ski lol

/thread
Click to expand...

This attitude drives me nuts. Why not? What actually makes a park ski bad for touring?

Weight? nah, Blends weigh less than ON3P's old tour skis.

Width? nah, Blends are wider and more fun in pow than what many people ride day to day in the Tetons

Flex? nah, if you like soft skis, you like soft skis, in or out of bounds

Image? Sure, maybe, but that's a personal problem

Tour on whichever you will enjoy more on the down. If you're touring with frame bindings, they'll be more of a hamper to your efficiency than any ski. (A 2300 gram ski with pins is going to walk better than a 1500g ski with frames).

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Chairlifts are canceled, I'd call that desperate. Do you rip skins on your Enforcers and then ski down sad that you're not on your Blends? Then throw those bindings on your Blends!

I've long thought that a light park ski would make a great skimo setup. Hell, the Bentchetler 100 literally blurs that line.
 
14127617:cydwhit said:
This attitude drives me nuts. Why not? What actually makes a park ski bad for touring?

Weight? nah, Blends weigh less than ON3P's old tour skis.

Width? nah, Blends are wider and more fun in pow than what many people ride day to day in the Tetons

Flex? nah, if you like soft skis, you like soft skis, in or out of bounds

Image? Sure, maybe, but that's a personal problem

Tour on whichever you will enjoy more on the down. If you're touring with frame bindings, they'll be more of a hamper to your efficiency than any ski. (A 2300 gram ski with pins is going to walk better than a 1500g ski with frames).

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Chairlifts are canceled, I'd call that desperate. Do you rip skins on your Enforcers and then ski down sad that you're not on your Blends? Then throw those bindings on your Blends!

I've long thought that a light park ski would make a great skimo setup. Hell, the Bentchetler 100 literally blurs that line.
Click to expand...

tfw when you write an essay in response to twelve words

blends would suck juicy elephant peen as a touring ski and everyone can see that
 
14127677:GKS said:
tfw when you write an essay in response to twelve words

blends would suck juicy elephant peen as a touring ski and everyone can see that
Click to expand...

Give me one objective reason then.
 
14127617:cydwhit said:
This attitude drives me nuts. Why not? What actually makes a park ski bad for touring?

Weight? nah, Blends weigh less than ON3P's old tour skis.

Width? nah, Blends are wider and more fun in pow than what many people ride day to day in the Tetons

Flex? nah, if you like soft skis, you like soft skis, in or out of bounds

Image? Sure, maybe, but that's a personal problem

Tour on whichever you will enjoy more on the down. If you're touring with frame bindings, they'll be more of a hamper to your efficiency than any ski. (A 2300 gram ski with pins is going to walk better than a 1500g ski with frames).

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Chairlifts are canceled, I'd call that desperate. Do you rip skins on your Enforcers and then ski down sad that you're not on your Blends? Then throw those bindings on your Blends!

I've long thought that a light park ski would make a great skimo setup. Hell, the Bentchetler 100 literally blurs that line.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this, its stupid to drive the idea that there are "park" skis or "touring" skis or "powder" skis and they can only be used within those categories. They're all just SKIS with specific attributes that enhance or diminish performance based on the activity you're doing. There is absolutely nothing wrong with touring on blends for short day trips just to get out there and ski some snow

**This post was edited on Apr 9th 2020 at 2:22:15pm
 
14127681:cydwhit said:
Give me one objective reason then.
Click to expand...

I've ridden both blends and honey badgers, two very soft skis, in all sorts of Vermont sidecountry conditions and hikeable terrain and can say that it was definitely an exercise in frustration. softer skis are more sluggish to respond in deeper and/or heavier snow and require much more effort to keep stuck on a line. furthermore, center mounted skis in general are harder to keep pointed up in powder, and most touring setups will be 1-3 inches back from centre. there's legitamitely no reason to go and bastardize a pair of blends to save 1/3 of a pound of weight when they will handle objectively worse in skinnable terrain
 
14127737:GKS said:
I've ridden both blends and honey badgers, two very soft skis, in all sorts of Vermont sidecountry conditions and hikeable terrain and can say that it was definitely an exercise in frustration. softer skis are more sluggish to respond in deeper and/or heavier snow and require much more effort to keep stuck on a line. furthermore, center mounted skis in general are harder to keep pointed up in powder, and most touring setups will be 1-3 inches back from centre. there's legitamitely no reason to go and bastardize a pair of blends to save 1/3 of a pound of weight when they will handle objectively worse in skinnable terrain
Click to expand...

OP most likely isn’t gonna be skiing deep/heavy snow because it’s fucking April my guy. You can throw a touring binding on whatever ski you want and if you like how it skis, then that’s all that matters.

OP, if you like how the Blends ski and you wanna save a little weight, go for it. The Blend is labeled as an “all mountain ski” by Line anyway. One of my buddies started touring on a Blend and a beat to shit pair of Kingpins and he’s 6’3”. I think you should do whatever you think is gonna help you get more turns
 
14127825:animator said:
OP most likely isn’t gonna be skiing deep/heavy snow because it’s fucking April my guy. You can throw a touring binding on whatever ski you want and if you like how it skis, then that’s all that matters.

OP, if you like how the Blends ski and you wanna save a little weight, go for it. The Blend is labeled as an “all mountain ski” by Line anyway. One of my buddies started touring on a Blend and a beat to shit pair of Kingpins and he’s 6’3”. I think you should do whatever you think is gonna help you get more turns
Click to expand...

This. If you like how a ski rides inbounds, you will like how it rides out of bounds. More people need to buy their touring ski based on what they like to ski every day, instead of whatever misguided definition a brand has for their "touring" line.
 
14127737:GKS said:
I've ridden both blends and honey badgers, two very soft skis, in all sorts of Vermont sidecountry conditions and hikeable terrain and can say that it was definitely an exercise in frustration. softer skis are more sluggish to respond in deeper and/or heavier snow and require much more effort to keep stuck on a line. furthermore, center mounted skis in general are harder to keep pointed up in powder, and most touring setups will be 1-3 inches back from centre. there's legitamitely no reason to go and bastardize a pair of blends to save 1/3 of a pound of weight when they will handle objectively worse in skinnable terrain
Click to expand...

Okay....so you dont like soft skis....thats more of a personal thing, and I'm with you on that. Also its not like blends are center mounted all the time. The rec is -3, and I've seen them mounted farther back.

If someones style is skiing softer skis then blends could very well work perfectly for them. Its a fun, sub 2000g ski that is wide enough to be useful in most conditions. Its not insanely rockered so you will get good skin contact. While its not my style of ski, I don't see why it would be as horrible of a ski as you say.
 
Like others have said, if you like skiing the skis you’ve got in the sidecountry, skiing them in the backcountry isn’t going to fold them in two. Touring bindings do behave differently and adding a frame binding to a blend is going to introduce something of a dead spot in the middle because of the frame stiffness.

Maybe get daymakers and contour split skins, so if you don’t like going touring on your blends you can easily try another ski and you’ve not committed to drilling for touring bindings or cutting skins to fit your blends.
 
"Soft skis" are also subjective based on the rider. A soft ski for you might not feel like a soft ski for some else. I'm still waiting to see a set of pin bindings on some snowblades.
 
Keep in mind that frame bindings can make the ski feel a lot different. You may not like how the blends ski after you put a baron on it.

They suck out the flex of the ski underfoot. In some cases it's great, though, like heavy snow. Stiffens the ski underfoot and makes them heavier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top