Climbing skins

I begin to think about winter and I will have to buy skins. I was wondering if it was better to use straight skins (skins that are a little bit narrower than ski waist) or trimmed skins (larger skins that you cut to expose only the skis edges). What do you think is the best for the northeast backcountry?

Thanks.

Depends on what you want to do with them. Straight skins are generally cheaper, a little easier to get on and off, and can be used on more than one pair of skis. Shaped skins grip a little better.

I'm cheap and wanted to use my skins on more than one pair of skis so I have straight skins. I have seveal pairs in different widths to match several ski (waist) widths.

Doug

If you have wide skis (like my K2 Super Stinx) you really want skins that you can trim to cover most of the ski base. Otherwise you'll find yourself slipping backwards on steep climbs. I've got one pair for my widest skis, and another pair that are mostly straight for everything else.

-dave-

I know this kind of goes against conventional wisdom, & I certainly avoided it for years, but I picked up a pair of kicker skins a few years back (had to get some skins, & it was all that was in stock) & have been quite pleased with them. Unless you are really climbing, slippage has not been a problem, & putting in a few extra switchbacks on you ascent will usually ease the pain. The advantages are easier on & off, & I can use them on different pairs of skiis a little better than long cut-to-fit skins.

And hey - isn't it too early to be thinking snow?!?!?

I would echo Mr. Metsky's approach. Wide/shaped skiis definitely benifit from a skin that is cut to the shape of the ski to reduce slippage. These skiis are more than likely what you would be using for an "Elevator" style ski tour. This would be mostly up and steeper on the way in where climbing power should be maxmized. If you have a secound pair of skiis that compliment the other skiis they are more than likley to be a double camber or camber and a half ski and are also somewhat narrower which would probably be used in more rolling terrain...the straighter skin would apply.
Bottom line...if you have one pair of skiis and don't plan on getting anything else, get the skins that fit. If you have more than one pair get the skins that fit or be prepared for a performance compromise.

I have a pair of Fischer E99 and already have skins for those. I’m at the point that I need tele skis to do some steeper stuff. I’m planning on buying the new atomic Diran (the ski that replaces the Beta TM:22) that is 106-72-97. I will buy Black Diamond Ascension ClipFix 95mm that I will trim to go on those skis.

My wife is in the same situation. I’m planning on having her buying the K2 She’s Piste (112-70-97). But I’m not sure if she should get the 95mm skins or the 110mm (there is no 100 or 105mm). Any advice on that?

Also, should we get heel lifters?

All suggestions are welcomed,

Thanks,

Definitely get the 95mm skins, not the 110. Coverage is most critical underfoot and through the body of the ski, but you don't strictly need the tips'n'tails to be fully covered. Skins are the most expensive carpet per square foot you'll ever buy, so why go overboard?

If money's an issue, you can probably get your E99 skins onto your Atomics. They won't have the best grip, particularly on sidehill, but you will have decent grip.

As for heel lifters, I'm not clear what sort of terrain you intend to climb. Generally, I use them on my telemark skis, but not on "backcountry touring" skis -- and inbetween, I use heel riser plates without extra wire risers. What sort of bindings are you planning to use? To me, heel lifters and bindings are fairly integrated.

Go for the 110's for your Wife's She Piste; that will give you more base coverage at the tip of the ski,therefore better grip.Heel lifters are a nice addition. Basically they put your boot on a leveler plane while climbing and therefore greatly reduce leg calf strain and overall energy conservation. You can even find Lifters that offer more than one height of climbing bar on the same heel plate therfore giving you more than one option of elevation depending upon the grade of the slope. Lifters do add some weight to the ski but I find the increased leg comfort and climbing performance to be worth it.
I wish you had'nt started talking about this as now I will be dreaming about SNOW! oh well....

Prices on skins are high, but there may be little or no diff between 95mm and 110mm. If that's the case, I'd go for the 110s and get as much coverage as you can. The most important part isn't getting full coverage on tips and tails, but if you're going to use the skins for several years, a few bucks up front for better performance (IMO) is worth it.

Kicker skins are great! There are a lot of times here in New England where they make the most sense. I'm going to make a pair out of the left over trimming from my wide skins.

I bought skins on Sierra Trading Post, right now they have 65mm and 80mm skins for a good price but nothing wider.

It's never too early to think about skiing.

-dave-

Your wife's She’s Piste will be nominally dimensioned 112-70-97. This should be the "outside width" of the skis -- if you measure across the entire ski: base, edges, and all.

When you trim your skins, you will definitely want the metal edges to be exposed. After all, if they're buried in plush, they won't hold on our interesting snowpack. One way to make sure that they're exposed is to put the untrimmed skin on the ski 2mm off-center, trim along one edge (outside the metal), then shift the skin 4mm to the side, trim along the other edge (again outside the metal), then recenter the skin and see your steel edges gleaming on either side of the plush.

Your edges are about 2mm per side, I suspect (though Atomics can run thinner on some models). You'll thus be trimming the skis 4mm narrower the ski's dimensions. (At the tip, for your tip loop attachment, you'll be trimming even narrower.) You thus nominally need 108-66-93 skins. 95s will thus cover your entire base from tail through the waist toward the tip. At the very tip, you'll have 1.3 cm of uncovered base showing -- but again, you'll have trimmed your skin tip to take the tip loop, so some base showing is inevitable anyway.

Go for the 110s if you want; they aren't much more expensive. You may be able to reuse the skin material for kickers or for a ski tuning table. (If you're making kicker skins, try using detergent bottle material as the frontplate for your skins. Bright orange, and stiff but flexy enough to do the job -- and it'll take a 1cm nylon strap well enough to hold on.) Just be aware that you could get away with 95s if you prefer.

Kickers work well, but more for the touring aspect than for up-up-and-away yo-yoing.

WAY Fat

Definitely like your ideas on home made kicker skins el-bagr...could be a future there.."The el-kicker" by el-bagr.
Anyhow 110mm skins could be useful on an even wider pair of skiis.
The She's Piste is actually a Mid Fat ski not a Way Fat.
Who knows Y.L. will make a ski quiverer out of you yet.
Some interesting input here..I guess there's more than one way to skin a ski!

Now you've done it, Y.L. - one post about skiis & the fanatics come out of the woodwork!!

DO NOT BUY THE ASCENSION CLIP FIX!

Buy Ascension Skins, 110mm width, with NO tail attachment.

Then either make a rat tail (http://www.wildsnow.com/tips/skin_tail_fix.html)
or buy the G3 or Ascension Glide Lite tail kit.

The Clip Fix has worked well for many people but, nonetheless, it is inferior to these other three options.

Excellent link TEO!

There are about as many opinions as there are skiers, I guess. Clipfix tails work fine if you tension them right, which can be a bit tricky. They are marginally heavier than rattails or stretchy G3 tails, but it's a matter of grams. I use clipfixes with great success on my heaviest telemark skis, but use tailless skins for everything else. I don't find any problems with any of it. If your clipfixes don't hold, the skin glue should be enough anyway -- the tailless skins stay on just fine for me.

The rattail idea seems to work fine, but I don't mind the clipfixes at all.

Thank you for your very good advices.

I will ski the backcountry around 50% of the time and will climb things like Mount Marcy. I plan on using the G3 Targa bindings. I’m not sure if they come with the climbing wires (heel lifters). Do you know? If they don’t come with, should I buy some?

GlideLite: I just found the existence of those skins (thanks TEO). They seem to work better than the ClipFix (at the tail level). Any comments on that?

Rat tail: I knew that option, but I think the ClipFix or GlideLite will work fine for me.

Kicker skins: While climbing Mount Marcy (with my E99), I once saw a guy with kicker skins. I saw him on low angle terrain and don’t know how it went for him in the steeps. To have a better glide when the skins are on, maybe I should buy kicker skins instead of full length skins? Would they handle steep terrain? I guess no…???

Kicker skins are great for certain conditions. I have been caught by above freezing temps and rain on the second day of a ski tour when on waxable skis (no red klister along). Kicker skins would have saved an otherwise miserable ski day. They help to ease the decision of whether to use waxable or waxless skis in transition conditions. They also glide a good bit better than full skins.

Snow conditions also affect the relative performance of shaped vs straight skins. If the surface is hard enough and you are placing the ski flat on the snow, the uncovered portion of the ski will not touch the snow. Under these conditions, I would not expect the choice of skin type to make much difference. In soft snow with a ski with a deep sidecut, I'd expect a much bigger difference.

Doug