Best Skiboards- Backcountry Hall of Fame

[jjue]

The last few years have seen a revolution in skiboards that are superb for backcountry riding . My critera for a great backcountry skiboard is that it can be climbed and ridden center mount, that it works well in the whole range of backcountry conditions from firm windblown snow , through breakable crust , and deep powder, and that it provide plenty of flotation and speed in soft backcountry snow. Center mount for climbing is really important for skiboards as this provides the most flotation for treking through deep snow . Having set back bindings on skiboards make the skiboards sink in the rear which is nice for going down but not so nice for climbing in soft snow .

My personal list and discussion is as follows :
1/ Spruce Sherpa - When I first got this board in hand it was a miracle .. it could do everything easily and with great stability , huge flotation , and super easy turning in nasty breakable crust . Center mount it works fine with very little tip dive in deep snow . Nice edge control on the steeps . I have been intrigued by how well this board performs for less experienced backcountry riders . Just this last weekend my neighbor Jeff M. was on the board in variable difficult breakable crust and although he has not had that much experience with this kind of snow did fantastic on the Jeff Singer Fritschi pro /Sherpa in steep technical terrain . Huge stability , easy turning , no catching of the tips in crust and no falls . In similar conditions I have found the Icelantic Scout a 140 cm long short ski much more difficult to turn and more likely to hang up in the crust . Recently I have been intrigued by Jeff Singer's statement on the forum that the Sherpa has a little bit of rocker ... I always thought it was a traditional design like the Icelantic Scout without any rocker . I asked Jeff what makes the Sherpa so good and if he would change anything on it :
Here is what Jeff Singer said:
"My guess is that the Sherpa works because of the combination of all it’s parameters. It has a little bit of rocker (5mm max for 110mm into the center of the board at both ends). The board is pretty stiff, so you don’t notice the rocker, but it likely helps a bit in crud, powder and turn initiation. The wide tip gets the edge carving early and the stiffness helps it hold on the ice. The turn radius is a lot smaller than a Scout, so that may account for much of the difference between the boards. My conclusion about the Sherpa is that if I say to myself, “How would I make this a better board?”, I really don’t know. I’ve thought about making it softer in flex so that it’s more forgiving, but it wouldn’t be as good on ice, and I don’t want to change that for myself. We could put more rocker in it but then I think the ends would be too stiff"
IMHO , don't change a thing , Jeff !... the Sherpa is an amazing bakcountry board and I still think the king in terms of sheer power.
Best binding board combo : Direct mounted Fritschi Pro AT Binding or similiar type binding .


2/ The New Spruce 125 Prototype: This is just an amazing board . I had the pleasure to demo this board in backcountry conditions earlier this season center mounted with a custom Fritschi tray riser designed by Jeff Singer mounted on the inserts.
This is a way different board then the Sherpa , significantly more rocker at the tips and tails , significantly softer, and significantly narrower . It is easier to turn then the Sherpa and you can be less aggressive on it but again , it is just amazing, ridden center mount there is no tip dive in nasty snow or pow , plenty of flotation , and great fore and aft stability . Yes being narrower then the Sherpa it has less stability side to side and having less flotation it may be less suited for heavy riders but as an all around backcountry skiboard it is a huge winner. Being thinner then the Sherpa it will not be amenable to direct mounted backcountry bindings . I have talked with Jeff Singer and told him I feel that mating an alpine touring binding with this board would be fantastic . Jeff has responded that he will be working on some sort of new tray riser set up for AT Bindings which will be fantastic.


3/Rockered Condor the Rocker Binding - What more can I say that I haven't said already ? This is my personal favorite . Yes the Spruce Sherpa and the new 125 have more fore and aft stability then the RC in variable backcountry snow , but I simply love the shorter 110 length and any fall off in fore and aft stability is compensated for me by the uber wide footprint that gives me huge stability side to side and the rockered tips and tails which keep me afloat in all kinds of nasty snow without diving my tips at speed . Super easy to turn and easier to turn then either of the two longboards , and most importantly hikeable in nice comfy snowboard boots yet with superb downhill control with the innovative Rocker binding . I can descend all manner of vairable snow , deep pow , and do controlled slides on firm wind blown snow on a a traditional length 110 skiboard in soft snowboard boots just as well as I could descend on the heavier set ups on the Spruce long boards wearing AT Boots and bindings... Magic ! ps I did not like the pairing of an AT Binding and boots with the RC which kind of killed for me the whole advantage of having a very lightweight set up . I think if you are going for the heavier AT boot releasable binding option the two Spruce longboards are a better solution .

[jjue]

I got this PM from cyborg and I wanted to answer it here as I think the answer will be useful to others....
"Hi jjue,

I am in need of your advice.

I'm headed to Colorado in March, where I will following my cousin's boyfriend, who is an experienced skier, around the back/sidecountry. He will skin up while I follow on snowshoes with my boards on my back. We'll be in ski terrain, so nothing super tight.

I have KTPs right now, which are plenty of fun, but slow down in deep powder and soft crud, and I have to lean back a lot to keep the tips up. I have fun just the same, but if I am chasing a skier around in his terrain, I doubt I will keep up.

It's worth it to me to pick up boards that won't hold me back as I try my best to keep up with a skilled skier. Fore-aft stability is less of a concern for me, as an inliner. I'm young, so a rougher ride isn't a deal breaker. Float and speed are the biggest concerns.

So my question is, what would you recommend? I think there are only 3 considerations, those being the sherpas, RCs and , if I could get my hands on a pair b4 March, spruce 125s. I'm leaning toward the RCs but want your opinion first, b/c I want to make sure this trip goes well if I am putting in the time and money to go out there. And of course, show the skiers that skiboards are capable of keeping up!

Also, I could be way over analyzing this, and may be just fine on my KTPs. If that's the case, let me know!"



I think that hiking with snowshoes carrying skiboards is a great way to get into backcountry skiboarding. I have done a fair amount of it myself and later I will edit this post with links to some previous posts on snowshoe skiboarding . But to answer your question I really think that if you are going to carry a skiboard on your back you want the lightest weight yet best performing set up on your back . This rules out the spruce boards because they require much heavier spruce riser/ release binding set ups .. I really like snowshoeing carrying a standard 4 x4 110 and below skiboard with a non release binding . The boards and binding set up is way lighter weight then a spruce riser release set up on a spruce longboard and the short boards 110 or below boards are more convenient and packable on backpacks.
I have had good success snowshoeing carrying the KTP or the Condors . If you use the KTP be sure you set up your bindings on the rear inserts . Setting back your bindings on the KTP make a world of difference in pow and crud in the backcountry .
The KTP is , like you say , great fun in the backcountry . When I switched to the Condor however , the added flotation was huge for me , the improvement compared to the KTP was dramatic in backcountry conditions in flotation and speed in pow and soft backcountry snow ... for essentially no weight penalty(the Condor and the KTP are similar in weight you have a board with way more speed and flotation in the backcountry .. So it was a no brainer for me . I switched to the Condor ( standard version ) before the Rockered Version came out , I carried those in the backcountry using snowshoes before I worked out a touring binding set up and it was great . I did use Receptor bindings which allowed me to set back my boot 4 cm which was great . Since the RC came out I switched from the regular Condor to the Rc because it floats even better then the regular Condor and I can ride cener mount without any need to use set backs which is great .. Also I find the Rockered Condor easier to turn and with better flow in crust then the regular Condor .

ps here is a lnk about my experience using snowshoes carrying my skiboards in the backcountry
http://www.skiboardsonline.com/forum...ad.php?t=10569

[cyborg]

Thanks so much jjue!

I have read your experience using snowshoes. Over here, in the mid-atlantic/southeast, we have too much variable terrain to do much skinning, as far as I can tell. However, I haven't seen enough of the backcountry here to make a real judgement.

That being said, I am not opposed to a skinning set up. I had to cut it out of my pm because it was too long, but I originally was going to tell you that weight is not a concern. I'm a weight weenie in general, so my pack and supplies are already very light. I will do fine with a few extra pounds on my back. I would have to buy a touring binding to fit my boots anyway, so a set of skins might as well come with.

Does that change your opinion, if the Spruce boards are in the running? Essentially, in terms of keeping up with skiers and snowboarders in the backcountry (especially in pow), are the RCs top dog?

[jjue]

Does that change your opinion, if the Spruce boards are in the running? Essentially, in terms of keeping up with skiers and snowboarders in the backcountry (especially in pow), are the RCs top dog?

The closest thing to skis and snowboards in the backountry that still is a skiboard is the spruce sherpa set up with a fritschi pro touring binding and skinnng up ... just as fast going up and just as fast going down as most skiers and snowboarders
2nd best would be Rockered Condor skinning with Rocker bindings and snowboard boots but not way behind the sherpa
Third best would be snowshoeing up with a Sherpa or RC on your pack ... snowshoing especially in powder can be really much slower then splitboards or skis skinning up the hill even though going down would be fine . Snowshoes sink more in soft snow on the climb and are significantly less efficient then folks skinning up hill .
in the backcountry , since most time is spent climbing , and much less time descending, having the ability to keep up on the climb is actually more important then speed on the descent when in a mixed group of riders.

[cyborg]

... that still is a skiboard...

Are you suggesting that ultimately, a ski set up will outperform a skiboard set up just because of their inherent characteristics? Are skiboards too short and therefore out of their league in backcountry conditions along side skis and snowboards? I wouldn't be opposed to a short ski set up, if I didn't get the impression that:
a) the turning of any powder ski won't come close to a skiboard
b) the balance point of a ski, unless you center mount it and therefore throw off everything entirely, is counter intuitive to that of a skiboard/inline skate, which I can't do since it would compromise my skating and vice versa
c) I like being able to cut through trees and make almost any snow covered line, which skis can't do
d) short skis, like the Incelantic scout, have less float than the sherpa/RC anyway

I don't mean to sound cynical, I just want to make sure I get all the facts from people who have the knowledge and experience.

Also, I think if I do go for one of your aforementioned set ups, I would lean towards the rocker binding/skins on an RC. It seems like that would be the most versatile over all. What makes the Sherpa outperform the RC in those conditions? Basically what are the disadvantages of the RC in comparison to the Sherpa?

[rgzip]

Are skiboards too short and therefore out of their league in backcountry conditions along side skis and snowboards?

I can't speak to the RC's as I have not tried them, But the Sherpas can go head to head with long skis and snowboards.

I spent many years skiing (intermediate level), and still do from time to time, But I now spend 90% of my time on Sherpa's. They have never let me down, frontside, backcountry or sidecountry. I believe the riders skill level would slow them down prior to the boards being an issue.

I ride a lot of sidecountry (like back country but I don't have to hike) with my son-in-law who is an expert skier. About 3 years ago I got him a set of Sherpas which he now spends most of his time on. Last weekend we decided to change things up and spend the morning on skis. It was fun, we had a good time but at one point after a nice ride through some side country steeps, deeps and trees, my son-in-law looked back at me and said "Wow this would be awesome on the Sherpas".

I think especially in the back country the sherpas allow you to do everything skis would with less worry.

[cyborg]

Ok I'm glad to hear that! I didn't want to be forced onto skis haha. I hear only good things about the Sherpas, I just need to find out the key differences between them and the RCs.

I think I'll try to get a set up with skins regardless of which boards I choose. Them I have the option of skinning, but if the terrain is unsuitable, I can always carry them.

[jjue]

Ok I'm glad to hear that! I didn't want to be forced onto skis haha. I hear only good things about the Sherpas, I just need to find out the key differences between them and the RCs.

I think I'll try to get a set up with skins regardless of which boards I choose. Them I have the option of skinning, but if the terrain is unsuitable, I can always carry them.

Flotation of the Rc and the Sherpa are very close .
Rc much more manueverable , much more like the KTP .
easier to pack with if need to hike with it on back pack
Love hiking with the soft boot set up with the Rockerbinding
much easier then hiking in hard boots.

For me it is a no brainer , I WAY prefer the RC over the Sherpa system I used before .. but that is just me ! I pretty much keep up with skiers and snowboarders the same as I did on the sherpa with no drop off in downhill performance but a big improvement in ease of hiking up ! and a more playful and fun downhill board , more akin to the KTP and other standard shorter skiboards. For me there was NO DOWNSIDE in the switch from the Sherpa/At set up to my current set up and all gains ! If you are an inliner and used to the KTP , I would say go for a Rockered Condor set up .

For sure , for skiers going down in size to skiboards , I 100% recommend the Sherpa set up instead .. the Sherpa feels much more familiar to skiers. the RC will feel weird and squirrley with very little fore and aft stability compared to skis , whereas the Sherpa has tons of fore and aft stability


As to the question about performance of skis and snowboards compared to skiboards.. Big fat pow skis and snowboards will have more flotation and ride higher in deep snow then skiboards... but this is not the end all about backcountry riding .. I see plenty of out of control backcountry riders who are going way to fast on their big sticks and having to scrub speed in wide arcs and unable to make tight turns whereas I can head straight down the fall line with my somewhat less floaty boards in absolute control and manuever much better in tight trees and other tight terrain !