Breakable crust *XC
- lilcliffy
- Posts: 4112
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
- Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
- Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
- Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
- Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger
Re: Breakable crust *XC
Hey man,
We have had our fair share of these miserable conditions this winter- due to extreme temperature changes- and a lot of the storms have been warm and wet. I have had a couple of week to 10 day periods with the exact conditions you describe.
(the current condition since our regional HORRID ice storm is an unbelievable strong ice crust- my 1000lb cows are WALKING on top of 3 feet of ice/snow! We've had some nice cold flurries since, but high winds have blown it off the ice crust. Currently skiing with E-99s and Easy-Skins- at the moment am skiing on top of the crust)
As far as that miserable, breakable thick ice crust- with granular, icy refrozen meal below- I have tried a number of skis on it.
1) My Annums and Hoks will stay on top- but MISERABLY slip and slide all over the place- frustrating and exhausting- and DANGEROUS on a steep descent when they inevitably break through...
2) The Eons are useless. The tip won't break the crust- it is too soft and flexible- the narrow waist breaks through- terrible.
3) The E-109 is significantly better than the Eon because the stiffer flex stabilizes the ski through its length- but, the soft open tips still flip and flap up there, while the rest of the ski breaks through. Better than the Eon, but with the E-109 you basically end up breaking trail with the kick zone, and feel like your cosntantly skiing on a slight incline...
4) The E-99 is acually better in these conditions than the E-109. This is primarily due to less sidecut- the E-99 cuts a cleaner straighter path through the crust, and it offers as much effective flotation as the E-109. The E-99's tip is bit more raised than the E-109 as well- but, the E-99 would be much more effective if the tip was more raised.
5) My Combat Natos have a powerful, broad, raised, elongated tip that smashes through the crust, and plows it way clearing a path for the rest of the ski. Awesome. The flex pattern of the Combat Nato also leads to the ski being much more stable and supportive throughout its length- compared to the E99/E-109 and especially the Eon.
6) The Combat USGI has a tip that is near as effective as the Combat Nato- the USGI's tip is much narower. It is much heavier than the Combat Nato- which can very noticeable in difficult snow conditions. However, the USGI still does very well- and at least as XC ski it has less sidecut and is wider underfoot than the Nato- it does track and grip better in these conditions than the Nato. (If the Nato had the 68mm waist it would be even better...)
As a final observation- the use of kicker skins- depending on the snow condition below the crust- can make a HUGE difference as well. With that ice, granular refrozen snow beneath- the narrow kicker skin is just the thing.
We have had our fair share of these miserable conditions this winter- due to extreme temperature changes- and a lot of the storms have been warm and wet. I have had a couple of week to 10 day periods with the exact conditions you describe.
(the current condition since our regional HORRID ice storm is an unbelievable strong ice crust- my 1000lb cows are WALKING on top of 3 feet of ice/snow! We've had some nice cold flurries since, but high winds have blown it off the ice crust. Currently skiing with E-99s and Easy-Skins- at the moment am skiing on top of the crust)
As far as that miserable, breakable thick ice crust- with granular, icy refrozen meal below- I have tried a number of skis on it.
1) My Annums and Hoks will stay on top- but MISERABLY slip and slide all over the place- frustrating and exhausting- and DANGEROUS on a steep descent when they inevitably break through...
2) The Eons are useless. The tip won't break the crust- it is too soft and flexible- the narrow waist breaks through- terrible.
3) The E-109 is significantly better than the Eon because the stiffer flex stabilizes the ski through its length- but, the soft open tips still flip and flap up there, while the rest of the ski breaks through. Better than the Eon, but with the E-109 you basically end up breaking trail with the kick zone, and feel like your cosntantly skiing on a slight incline...
4) The E-99 is acually better in these conditions than the E-109. This is primarily due to less sidecut- the E-99 cuts a cleaner straighter path through the crust, and it offers as much effective flotation as the E-109. The E-99's tip is bit more raised than the E-109 as well- but, the E-99 would be much more effective if the tip was more raised.
5) My Combat Natos have a powerful, broad, raised, elongated tip that smashes through the crust, and plows it way clearing a path for the rest of the ski. Awesome. The flex pattern of the Combat Nato also leads to the ski being much more stable and supportive throughout its length- compared to the E99/E-109 and especially the Eon.
6) The Combat USGI has a tip that is near as effective as the Combat Nato- the USGI's tip is much narower. It is much heavier than the Combat Nato- which can very noticeable in difficult snow conditions. However, the USGI still does very well- and at least as XC ski it has less sidecut and is wider underfoot than the Nato- it does track and grip better in these conditions than the Nato. (If the Nato had the 68mm waist it would be even better...)
As a final observation- the use of kicker skins- depending on the snow condition below the crust- can make a HUGE difference as well. With that ice, granular refrozen snow beneath- the narrow kicker skin is just the thing.
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Re: Breakable crust *XC
Bleh - even snowshoes suck in that kind of stuff.lowangle al wrote:That may have been a situation calling for snowshoes, sometimes it just plain sucks and turns into a character builder.
Sometimes it's best just to lay down and wait for the wolves
- lowangle al
- Posts: 2732
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 3:36 pm
- Location: Pocono Mts / Chugach Mts
- Ski style: BC with focus on downhill perfection
- Favorite Skis: powder skis
- Favorite boots: Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Retired cement mason. Current job is to take my recreation as serious as I did my past employment.
Re: Breakable crust *XC
funny thing, last month when I was back East I did a lot of off trail hiking. I went through a lot of swamps and bogs and wondered if they were skiable because of the low brush. I guess anrother answered my question.
Anrother, was there a summer trail to get to that cabin? those kind of areas are usually too wet to put a trail through.
Anrother, was there a summer trail to get to that cabin? those kind of areas are usually too wet to put a trail through.
Re: Breakable crust *XC
lilcliffy wrote:Hey man,
We have had our fair share of these miserable conditions this winter- due to extreme temperature changes- and a lot of the storms have been warm and wet. I have had a couple of week to 10 day periods with the exact conditions you describe.
(the current condition since our regional HORRID ice storm is an unbelievable strong ice crust- my 1000lb cows are WALKING on top of 3 feet of ice/snow! We've had some nice cold flurries since, but high winds have blown it off the ice crust. Currently skiing with E-99s and Easy-Skins- at the moment am skiing on top of the crust)
As far as that miserable, breakable thick ice crust- with granular, icy refrozen meal below- I have tried a number of skis on it.
1) My Annums and Hoks will stay on top- but MISERABLY slip and slide all over the place- frustrating and exhausting- and DANGEROUS on a steep descent when they inevitably break through...
2) The Eons are useless. The tip won't break the crust- it is too soft and flexible- the narrow waist breaks through- terrible.
3) The E-109 is significantly better than the Eon because the stiffer flex stabilizes the ski through its length- but, the soft open tips still flip and flap up there, while the rest of the ski breaks through. Better than the Eon, but with the E-109 you basically end up breaking trail with the kick zone, and feel like your cosntantly skiing on a slight incline...
4) The E-99 is acually better in these conditions than the E-109. This is primarily due to less sidecut- the E-99 cuts a cleaner straighter path through the crust, and it offers as much effective flotation as the E-109. The E-99's tip is bit more raised than the E-109 as well- but, the E-99 would be much more effective if the tip was more raised.
5) My Combat Natos have a powerful, broad, raised, elongated tip that smashes through the crust, and plows it way clearing a path for the rest of the ski. Awesome. The flex pattern of the Combat Nato also leads to the ski being much more stable and supportive throughout its length- compared to the E99/E-109 and especially the Eon.
6) The Combat USGI has a tip that is near as effective as the Combat Nato- the USGI's tip is much narower. It is much heavier than the Combat Nato- which can very noticeable in difficult snow conditions. However, the USGI still does very well- and at least as XC ski it has less sidecut and is wider underfoot than the Nato- it does track and grip better in these conditions than the Nato. (If the Nato had the 68mm waist it would be even better...)
As a final observation- the use of kicker skins- depending on the snow condition below the crust- can make a HUGE difference as well. With that ice, granular refrozen snow beneath- the narrow kicker skin is just the thing.
Awesome info! Thank you for all the suffering you probably had to endure to come to those conclusions. Looks like I should always bring the Asnes USGI and keep it in the back of the truck, just in case. Ditto for always having the kicker skins.
Re: Breakable crust *XC
lowangle al wrote:funny thing, last month when I was back East I did a lot of off trail hiking. I went through a lot of swamps and bogs and wondered if they were skiable because of the low brush. I guess anrother answered my question.
Anrother, was there a summer trail to get to that cabin? those kind of areas are usually too wet to put a trail through.
No summer trail. It's near, but not easily accessible from, the Swanson River Canoe Route. All of the summer, and most of the winter traffic, in the guest book was from pilots or people who hired pilots to fly them in. It saw 13 visitors in the past year, 5 the year before that. There's an old map in the cabin that has a suggested 'hiking route' that sticks mainly to the islands of trees, but it hits the opposite side of the lake from the cabin, you would have to swim or build a raft or bring a packraft.
- lowangle al
- Posts: 2732
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 3:36 pm
- Location: Pocono Mts / Chugach Mts
- Ski style: BC with focus on downhill perfection
- Favorite Skis: powder skis
- Favorite boots: Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Retired cement mason. Current job is to take my recreation as serious as I did my past employment.
Re: Breakable crust *XC
I'm very familiar with that canoe route but am unaware of any cabins there. Did you ski in from Swanson River Rd. and is the cabin in the Refuge?
Re: Breakable crust *XC
lowangle al wrote:I'm very familiar with that canoe route but am unaware of any cabins there. Did you ski in from Swanson River Rd. and is the cabin in the Refuge?
There's only one cabin accessible from the Canoe Route; MaClain Lake Cabin. Snag Lake Cabin, where we stayed, is south of MaClain, west of the Swanson river, but would be a slog from the river. It's in the refuge, and both of those cabins are within the wilderness component of the refuge. We skied in from Swanson River Landing, the takeout for the Swanson River Canoe Route(unless you take it to the coast). There are also four other remote cabins(Vogel, Pincher, Big Indian, Trapper Joe) north of there that I would like to access one day. If conditions were not so shitty as they were this past weekend, a week long loop linking up all of the cabins would be fantastic. Swamps, lakes, rivers, small rolling hills through the woods, fifteen miles along the coastal flats(beach, then grassy area), foothills of the northern Kenai mountains. I have a route planned out with days of between ten to fifteen miles. One day would need to be twenty-five miles or split up into two days with camping one night. A lowland complimentary route to the Resurrection Trail's mountain pass terrain.
Snag Lake is about where Seward is on the inset map of the canoe route in this link: https://www.fws.gov/uploadedFiles/refug ... _route.pdf
Re: Breakable crust *XC
This shows Snag, MaClain and all of the possible routes to them. We've only skied the green route to Snag, twice now.
- lilcliffy
- Posts: 4112
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:20 pm
- Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada
- Ski style: backcountry Nordic ski touring
- Favorite Skis: Asnes Ingstad, Combat Nato, Amundsen, Rabb 68; Altai Kom
- Favorite boots: Alpina Alaska BC; Lundhags Expedition; Alfa Skaget XP; Scarpa T4
- Occupation: Forestry Professional
Instructor at Maritime College of Forest Technology
Husband, father, farmer and logger
Re: Breakable crust *XC
Another note-
The breakable crust conditions you describe are one of two contexts where I find tip-rocker- on narrow, distance-oriented skis- to be a real liability- the other being very deep soft snow.
I actually think that the non-rockered version of the E-99 xtralite is a better XC ski than the current version with Nordic rocker...(my E-99 Crowns have no tip-rocker at all). My non-rockered E-99 Crowns are more stable and supportive in these challenging conditions than my E-99 Tour with considerable Nordic rockered tips. It's a trade-off that is hard to make one's mind up about- because, the E-99 Tour with those open tips is just wonderful on the downhill...
You may be on to something regarding stiffness and camber as well...I don't have any experience with the Sierra, but I do with the BC70, and it is much stiffer than my E-99s...I find the BC70 stiff enough that- like the E-89- I find it too stiff for soft snow. Are you getting enough grip underfoot in that shit- or is that stiff kick zone shearing?
The breakable crust conditions you describe are one of two contexts where I find tip-rocker- on narrow, distance-oriented skis- to be a real liability- the other being very deep soft snow.
I actually think that the non-rockered version of the E-99 xtralite is a better XC ski than the current version with Nordic rocker...(my E-99 Crowns have no tip-rocker at all). My non-rockered E-99 Crowns are more stable and supportive in these challenging conditions than my E-99 Tour with considerable Nordic rockered tips. It's a trade-off that is hard to make one's mind up about- because, the E-99 Tour with those open tips is just wonderful on the downhill...
You may be on to something regarding stiffness and camber as well...I don't have any experience with the Sierra, but I do with the BC70, and it is much stiffer than my E-99s...I find the BC70 stiff enough that- like the E-89- I find it too stiff for soft snow. Are you getting enough grip underfoot in that shit- or is that stiff kick zone shearing?
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Re: Breakable crust *XC
Hard to say. The grasses and underbrush were grabbing my skis, boots and bindings with every stride, so grip wasn't an issue(see first and second photo in the OP). On the lakes(last photo in the OP), the brush wasn't an issue, but it was flat, and the snow wasn't that deep, so again, grip wasn't an issue. On the way back out, everything had set up and froze solid, and grip wasn't an issue, but I was double poling most of the morning on sections where it was icy and the trench wasn't deep enough to contact my boots. Where it was deep enough, there was barely any glide, but plenty of grip. A comfortable walking pace. I like the Sierras mostly for singletrack skiing. They do OK, but require good form for decent grip. They are a negative waxless pattern.lilcliffy wrote:Another note-
The breakable crust conditions you describe are one of two contexts where I find tip-rocker- on narrow, distance-oriented skis- to be a real liability- the other being very deep soft snow.
I actually think that the non-rockered version of the E-99 xtralite is a better XC ski than the current version with Nordic rocker...(my E-99 Crowns have no tip-rocker at all). My non-rockered E-99 Crowns are more stable and supportive in these challenging conditions than my E-99 Tour with considerable Nordic rockered tips. It's a trade-off that is hard to make one's mind up about- because, the E-99 Tour with those open tips is just wonderful on the downhill...
You may be on to something regarding stiffness and camber as well...I don't have any experience with the Sierra, but I do with the BC70, and it is much stiffer than my E-99s...I find the BC70 stiff enough that- like the E-89- I find it too stiff for soft snow. Are you getting enough grip underfoot in that shit- or is that stiff kick zone shearing?