Ski/Shoe/Binding Combo most like a sliding snowshoe

vftt.org

Help Support vftt.org:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
T

Tom_Murphy

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2012
Messages
464
Reaction score
6
Location
Worcester, MA
I have been following the NNN BC bindings post avidly and want to ask a related question.

Does anyone have any experience with, or an informed opinion, on this ski?
HOK ski. It is marketed as a niche ski for accessing the back country and I am definitely in the target market.

My winter trips are typically 3 days/2 nights: hiking in with a pulk, setting up a base camp, and snowshoeing the area, maybe grabbing a peak if it is a blue bird day. Examples: Thoreau Falls area via Zealand Road, Sawyer Pond from 302, Hellgate ravine from Lincoln Woods. I want to go further in, more efficiently: 13 Falls from Lincoln Woods, Roaring Brook CG, Stillwater . I have no desire for anything downhill. If a wedge pointed straight downhill isn't enough to control any descent, I am probably walking down. I don't even want to do a wedge turn.:rolleyes: I also love the idea of using my winter boots in their universal binding rather than a ski boot and 3 pin if that isn't a horrible idea.

If these HOK skis are a waste of money, would this be a comparable set-up:
http://www.rei.com/product/859871/rossignol-bc-x6-75mm-cross-country-ski-boots
http://www.rei.com/product/876570/rossignol-bc-90-backcountry-skis
http://www.rei.com/product/790822/rottefella-super-tele-bindings

That's a lot of gear, so I am hoping someone here has experience with the HOK / universal binding / winter boot set-up.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I tried the Karhu Meta (http://www.orscrosscountryskisdirect.com/karhu-meta-skis.html), and sold them within a year.

1) There was almost no kick glide, so you were gaining no advantage over walking (on the flats).
2) As a bad XC skier, they were death traps on even the most moderate of downhills (Loj to Marcy Dam, AMR Lake Road, etc...).
3) We were using them for peak bagging, and although we weren't changing footwear, we were faced with the inefficiency of changing from skis to snowshoes, and back again. Plus there was the fact that now we were carrying the snowshoes when we were wearing the skis (we left the skis at the base of the mountain while we hiked).
 
I tried an equivalent "sliding snowshoe" - fat/short ski with built-in skins and bindings to fit winter boots. On Road portion of Gale River Trail up to the first water crossing (very close to summer trailhead) - VERY inefficient!!! Didn't really fit my big winter boot so I had to kludge it onto my boot. NO real glide. Glad I borrowed them from a friend so I could give them back quickly!!!
 
The Altai Hok is great for its intended purpose. I tried a friends pair last winter and the Wife and I Loved them. We went out in the Forest around our House and just did the trails we CC Ski and Snowshoe. Not Kick and Glide but lots of fun. My Wife even went off and found steeper terrain that she would never Ski on her CC Skis and started turning these like she had used them for years. I had the 145 and she the 125, she tried the 145 on a warm day and liked them a lot but at 115 LBS she is going with the 125. I had looked at the Marquette also but they are VERY heavy
 
For what it's worth, I use Silvretta 500 bindings (Google, also www.silvretta.de). They are hinged, but rigid and compatible with my plastic alpine boots (Scarpa Inverno) which are also compatible with my crampons (Chalet-Moser, now Charlet-Petzl) and snowshoes (Atlas). I have found this to be an almost perfect back-country solution as the Scarpa's offer great traction and support when I take the gear off. I lucked into a pair of US army surplus (1970's) strap-on skins and they are very good. G3 (www.genuineguidegear.com) also make strap-on skins as well a glue-ons. I think you can play all the tunes, including downhill, on this set-up.
 
Gremlin said:
For what it's worth, I use Silvretta 500 bindings (Google, also www.silvretta.de). They are hinged, but rigid and compatible with my plastic alpine boots (Scarpa Inverno) which are also compatible with my crampons (Chalet-Moser, now Charlet-Petzl) and snowshoes (Atlas). I have found this to be an almost perfect back-country solution as the Scarpa's offer great traction and support when I take the gear off. I lucked into a pair of US army surplus (1970's) strap-on skins and they are very good. G3 (www.genuineguidegear.com) also make strap-on skins as well a glue-ons. I think you can play all the tunes, including downhill, on this set-up.
Click to expand...

But they Silvretta 500's are impossible to find!
 
I used the hok skis last winter on some trips and loved it. They are much lighter than Marquette skis and climb much better. They are great on descending trails that are a little too steep and too narrow for comfort. Also great in times of low snow and more ice. I plan on using them again this year and also carry them on my pack instead of snowshoes as a backup.
 
I use the hoks with 3pin binding and leather boots.

For the trips you described I would probably leave the hoks at home and bring BCSkis like Madshus Epoch and good snowshoes. Depending on the trail of the list you posted I would choose shorter length or longer length of the ski.

The only trip from your list I would take the hok on would be to Thoreau Falls. I would start with BCSkis on the Lincoln Woods until I hit the narrow and twisty trails in the woods and then probably switch to the hoks. Continue on the BCSkis once I reached Zealand hut all the way to 302.

If your pull is heavy you might need to add kicker skins to your BC skis or in such case the Hoks might be more practical ...
 
Last year trip to Greeley ponds I carried hoks as a backup. Took the ski trail on Epochs all the way to the ponds and beyond and only switched to the hoks once I hit the last part of the steeper ski trail descent. It was during a huge snowstorm. Even though I could just ski down on Epichs.. It wasn't impossible but with the hoks I just let them run with no worry whatsoever. Now that I'm older I have started to enjoy less speed and more control.
 
Another trip last year where I wished I had the hoks was going from the AT on 302 to Ethan pond and out via Zealand road. I had 210 cm glittertinds with skins. For the ascending to Ethan pond I would have done better with the hoks. For the trail from Ethan to Zealand that was twisty/curvy I could have enjoyed the hoks or shorter skis vs the long 210's but the finish from Zealand hut and the road calls for much faster skis. The snow was icy and bit thin in many spots

Under same conditions I would carry both pairs of skis if I do it again. If the snow is deep I would carry Madshus Epochs 175's and snowshoes.
 
Last edited:
Wow, I can't imagine carrying two pairs of skis on any type of trip. :) I use my Fischer Outtabounds and light plastic boots when I want a compromise between control and lightweight cruising - on that combination I can tackle pretty much anything up to Moosilauke or Garfield. If the terrain is going to be steeper I'll go with heavier gear and just suck it up for the climb.
 
yeah but you are David Metsky ;-)

Dave I have probably 20% of your skiing provess. I need all the help I can get.

FWIW - The hoks are not much heavier than snowshoes.
 
Thank you for the posts.

The general consensus appears to be that the HOKs won't be any more efficient on the flats than snowshoeing or bare-booting and they are decidedly less efficient a XC/BC ski set.
 
LL Bean in Concord, NH has a version of the Boreal ski for under $100. 130cm x 125mm(ish) waist. Fishscales, metal edges, no perma skins. With a Berwin binding for $135ish.

cheers
 
I would disagree with that flat statement but if it is about general consensus then I suppose so.

The HOK is definitely more efficient than a snowshoe on flats as it still gives you a gliding motion as opposed to the chipping snowshoes gait. Yes they are less efficient than XC/BC ski set but that is by design. They are easier to let run down narrow and gnarly trails because they go slower than skis.



Tom_Murphy said:
Thank you for the posts.

The general consensus appears to be that the HOKs won't be any more efficient on the flats than snowshoeing or bare-booting and they are decidedly less efficient a XC/BC ski set.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MindlessMariachi
Help me pick some new XC/BC Ski gear
Replies
7
Views
2K
cushetunk
cushetunk
S
Those universal ski bindings.......
Replies
7
Views
15K
dave.m
dave.m
C
Do you use NNN BC ?
2
Replies
22
Views
14K
skiguy
skiguy
MikeK
A few more ski questions
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
23K
Gremlin
G
Snowflea
Catamount Trail End-to-End
Replies
15
Views
8K
Snowflea
Snowflea

Latest posts

Top