I want to buy ONE ski system only. please advise ?

[AbnerLico]

Just so you know, I ski my FT X with an Alaska 75 boot. It is quite powerful with the Rotte ST binding with cable. I also have these boots
https://www.ebay.com/itm/224356416769?h ... SwCh1gLk8H

They are British size, so if you are a 10 US you are a 9 UK

The Alico boot is much stiffer than the Alaska 75. However the increased lateral stiffness offered by the Rotte ST binding with cable over the Voile cables, allows me to usually use the much softer Alaska 75. The Rottefella cable is a significant difference over the Voile with soft leather boots.

I do not use or recommend a T-4 for a FT X or s-98/112. If you are going to a boot like the T-4 go to a more powerful ski like a Voile Objective or Vector. There may be specific reasons to use a T-4, I think overnight trips where a double boot makes sense.

Another stiff leather boot that should be readily available is the Fisher Transnordic 75. There have been mixed reviews regarding fit and comfort. I would wear them indoors, flexing into imaginary turns. Some guys like the flex, others didn’t. I believe the 75 mm boot received more favorable reviews than the BC version. It is a strong, stiff, boot if it fits you and is comfortable. You do not need a T-4 for this class of skis. Although it is a good thing to own a T-4.

SO fisheater... I 'think' why I am getting from your response is that the system I am looking at would be acceptable with a leather boot or a transnordic type (excursion, etc)... I'd need skins as well

[fisheater]

@AbnerLico The Fischer Transnordic 75 is a newly introduced leather boot. I believe it was introduced last season. It is one of the stiffest available leather boots out there that is readily available.
The Garmont/Scott Excursion is a plastic two buckle 75 mm boot that is no longer manufactured.
The Scarpa T-4 is a plastic 2 buckle 75 mm boot that is still manufactured, but has limited availability this season.

So, if you want a stiff leather boot the Fisher Transnordic 75 is an option.
The Crispi Svartisen 75 is said to have a soft flexing sole, but it has an exoskeleton that stiffens the ankle. I think the Rotte cable would laterally stiffen that sole.
The Alaska 75 isn’t a really stiff boot, but with the Rotte cable it is more than suitable for me with any of the skis discussed (FT X, S-98 class)
Perhaps you can run into a used Merrill, Alico, Asolo 75 mm leather?
Another leather boot that is manufactured is the Alico Double. It is sold thru Campmor in the US. I think they special order them.
Crispi also makes the Antarctic, it is a quality old school Norwegian welt (as is the Alico Double). The Crispi Antarctic is available thru Fey Brothers in the States.

There is a pretty good list of options.

[DG99]

Just so you know, I ski my FT X with an Alaska 75 boot. It is quite powerful with the Rotte ST binding with cable. I also have these boots
https://www.ebay.com/itm/224356416769?h ... SwCh1gLk8H

I do not use or recommend a T-4 for a FT X or s-98/112. If you are going to a boot like the T-4 go to a more powerful ski like a Voile Objective or Vector. There may be specific reasons to use a T-4, I think overnight trips where a double boot makes sense.

Another stiff leather boot that should be readily available is the Fisher Transnordic 75. There have been mixed reviews regarding fit and comfort. I would wear them indoors, flexing into imaginary turns. Some guys like the flex, others didn’t. I believe the 75 mm boot received more favorable reviews than the BC version. It is a strong, stiff, boot if it fits you and is comfortable. You do not need a T-4 for this class of skis. Although it is a good thing to own a T-4.

The boots is a huge conundrum for sure. We used to have more of those boots like the eBay deal boot linked, Alico, Asolo brands, thick leather and Norwegian welts, Vibram soles. They had some horsepower and we did a lot with them. The new Nordic backcountry boots made of rubber/nylon/vinyl just don’t have the same lateral stiffness and support. I got Fischer BCX675 and also tried some equivalent Rossignol boots. Even using with a skinny ski, Outback 68, for better edge control. They’re fine for easy stuff and really good conditions but it’s just frustrating how quickly they are overwhelmed. The Fischer BCX Transnordics look good, but I see the sole and stuff around the toe looks the same as my BCX 675s. It feels promising flexing in the store but doesn’t provide all that much out skiing. They might not give much more control than those NNN-BC boots. Hence the full plastic boot thought….

I have old T2s and am looking for T4s and know it’s really hard to find. Any time now T4s are supposed to show up at telemark-pyrenees.com or freeheellife.com they say.

But you could just go easy, try some BCX transnordics on S-Bound 98s, probably not way too wide of ski for the boot, and see how far you get on that rig. Then add a T4 later if needed and wanted.

[TheMusher]

Interesting posts. This is the ultimate subject for all skiers - although of course no one ever ends up with just one system..

Just chipping in my 5 cents (… or in fact 300 dollars) - stay away from the Fischer Transnordic 75s. Me and others had terrible issues due to an inherent design flaw which ends up poking your toes to death. It’s up there with torture. Had to discard my boots and rehabilitate for 2 weeks after the first test run.

You can read more about it in the Transnordic thread if you like.

Otherwise lots of good input, especially from @fisheater.

I’d say it’s down to a variant of (a) 75mm (eg. (a1) Rottefella 75 + alpina or (a2) Voile SB + T2/T4/Lundhags) or (b) Xplore. Lots of good skis from Åsnes, Fischer and Voile that will fit each system.

[lowangle al]

You might want to get the t4 when you can in case they are discontinued in the future.

I didn’t have any problems with toe crunch with my transnordics, but I have a tight stance and don’t bend my toes too much. The problem I had was a pain on the side of my foot from the plastic reinforcement but was able to fix that(I hope”. The other problems were that they are cheaply made, but what I would expect for the 180.00 that I paid on sale. The other problem was they had too soft of forward flex of the upper. They had good support laterally and to the rear though.

[lowangle al]

Just to add to what I said above; The soft flexing upper makes it hard to get any pressure to the tips of the skis, which is a more aggressive way to turn than weighting alone. This could be an easy fix by adding a stiff tongue from another boot secured under the laces. I hope to try this out this year.

[AbnerLico]

Interesting posts. This is the ultimate subject for all skiers - although of course no one ever ends up with just one system..

Just chipping in my 5 cents (… or in fact 300 dollars) - stay away from the Fischer Transnordic 75s. Me and others had terrible issues due to an inherent design flaw which ends up poking your toes to death. It’s up there with torture. Had to discard my boots and rehabilitate for 2 weeks after the first test run.

You can read more about it in the Transnordic thread if you like.

Otherwise lots of good input, especially from @fisheater.

I’d say it’s down to a variant of (a) 75mm (eg. (a1) Rottefella 75 + alpina or (a2) Voile SB + T2/T4/Lundhags) or (b) Xplore. Lots of good skis from Åsnes, Fischer and Voile that will fit each system.
[/q@fisheater
Crap... I just placed a bid for a pair on ebay for $100 (USD). Maybe I'll lose. This is not the first warning ...@fisheater also stated something similar in an earlier post... I should just grab a pair of Alaskas and call it a day... I am hoping a more flexible /lighter boot will make the K2s (pictured above) more touring worthy....

[TheMusher]

Could be worse than 100 bucks!

Keep in mind, not everyone has experienced the failure/design flaw (which specifically relates to a convex internal plastic beam that forces itself into the toes even during regular skiing).

If you’re lucky you’ll be fine - because otherwise they boot seems like a good proposition. Fingers crossed!

That being said, if you can still cancel it, I definitely would

[AbnerLico]

I don’t know those skis in particular, or those boots as well. I believe that would make a suitable kit for the resort. Probably really good for learning and having fun riding lifts.
Those three buckle boots would probably be just fine or maybe very good if you were mostly going uphill to go downhill, or for when you needed or preferred a 3 buckle boot to go downhill.
Now if you’re touring in flat or more rolling hills, areas where you you may be serious about making turns, but you are going to be kicking and gliding the greater majority of the time. I would think you will find those boots a bit heavy and lacking in range of motion as well. Looking at the shape of the K2 skis, I would think they would be a bit squirrelly on compacted trails.
However if you these fit in your budget, and you could get a light leather boot and an old E-99 type ski for the flatter trails you would be set up for a wide range of conditions.

Thanks.. I trust your expertise and it does sound like these are more set up as 'resort skis/boots'. And I already have Rossy BC70 with NNN and fairly hefty boots. I think the ideal set would be something exactly in between these two..as the title in this post suggests, I am looking for one ski system and truthfully that include a significant kick and glide but also handle the up/downhills well. (The Fishcer 98 or Asnes 62 with a scarpa t3/t4 But they're no-where to be found used and also new) .... Do you think a lighter boot would make them comparable to the Fischer/Asnes?

[AbnerLico]

If you go plastic boots, go with the Voile 3-pin. I would go with the 3-pin Hardwire for plastic, which I have mounted on my 86 mm underfoot ski. However, the Switchback could be considered as well. Perhaps a free pivoting binding would be beneficial when climbing.
Now if you want to ski in leather boots I would recommend the Rottefella Super Telemark with cable. I can still put my T-4 into the Rotte ST, but where it shines is that it clamps onto my Alaska 75 boot in a far superior manner. Also when I clip the cables onto the Alaska boot the change from no cables to a cable the difference is significantly greater than the Voile cable. The Rotte cable makes for a much stiffer lateral connection. I didn’t like the connection before I skied it, but I’m sold now.
I have the new Falketind Xplore, it is to me the best XCD ski I have ever been on. I have never been satisfied with the kick of an XCD ski. I liked my original Falketind better than the Fisher S-112, but the original FT had k&g limitations. The new FT X kicks and glides period! No it does not come close to my Gamme, but it sure does come close or exceed the k&g of some ancient E-99’s I bought on EBay. Bottom line, I find it acceptable in multiple conditions for an XC ski. As for downhill, it is a solid ski. I’m in the snow more than I would be with 86 mm underfoot. It is stabile, stiff enough for wet backcountry snow. I only skied at a resort for two days, both on powder. The old FT could hold an edge at the resort, this one should as well, while handling mank much better!
However the original question was what system would be best. I say 75 mm for one system. However a soft boot like an Alaska and a plastic boot like a T-4 would be nice. Also for Ontario, (I’m from Michigan), a go fast ski like a Gamme, and a more turn oriented ski like an FT X or a Vector would be really good.
I actually ski my Gamme the most. I ski on my rolling hills, steep and twisty, local trails. My vertical isn’t serious, but pedal to the metal on the Gamme’s is sure a lot of fun! My other two skis come out on powder days or when I drive a few hours.
To clarify, for one system I recommend 75 mm. My Gamme is mounted NNN. I also have an Alaska BC boot. Without the cable, I think the Alaska BC actually is a better turner. I kind of think the Alaska 75 may be a better kicker. That being said I am quite pleased with the NNN for my go fast, straight touring ski. I am also very pleased with 75 mm for my XCD skis

Hello @fisheater I just had a pair of used Garmont boots delivered to me and I am interested in your opinion if you have one. I 'thought' they were Excursions as this what the seller believed but when they arrived I could plainly see that they were Veloces. I am trying to find the differences online but can't. I wanted a touring boot more T3/T4. thanks