Fischer BCX-5 or Alaska BC? Choose wisely

[bgregoire]

darn tough seemed overpriced for what you get - these are my favorite socks for ski & hike right now - made in Iowa, not Vermont nice amount of cushion:

https://www.foxsox.com/2099-trailmaster.html

If the boots are a size too big, or you need to fill in space, these are fantastic - THICK cushion:

https://www.foxsox.com/2097-trailhead.html

Yeah Canna. FoxSox is not bad, used to me my fav brand before I discovered Darn Tough. Darn Tough socks seem to keep their shape and fibers quite a bit longer than the FoxSox socks I have used. Be well!

[Cannatonic]

it's a tighter weave for sure - I think I like more cushion

[bgregoire]

it's a tighter weave for sure - I think I like more cushion

I understand, I was dissapointed in their nordic ski sock...super thin for the colders temps I ski in. I'm using these Full cushion socks now:

https://darntough.com/products/boot-soc ... 4195138613

I would not go with any less cushion.

Their mountaineering sock is also very cush:

https://darntough.com/products/mens-mou ... 5924100627

Any snow left where you are at?

[Cannatonic]

wow, Darn Tough has morphed into a million options since I had a pair. All the way up to "extra cusion"...impressive! We didn't do well for snow this year locally, but Mt. Washington is about 2 hours away, tons of snow in the mountains.

[STG]

lilcliffy:

Thanks! You saved me $249. I was about to buy the Alaska, but after reading your comment that they cannot drive the Annum when conditions are more marginal, I changed my mind. I guess I will stick with my old plastic boots. As always, there are trade-offs; a lighter boot probably means less control and power.

[bgregoire]

STG, its always good to save money! I'm assuming your running your annums with 75mm bindings? This particular thread is about the Alaska with a NNN-BC sole. The upper of the 75mm is the same and the sole is actually a little softer. But, combined with a 3-pin cable binding and some experience, I bet you could still drive the annums in less than ideal conditions. Plastics and a springy bindings will surely alway give more control, but if you are looking for that other-worldly leather flex, you may want to reconsider your choice!

And if you are about to buy a pair of Alaskas at 250$ for some downhill use, you should also consider the Crispi Antartic or Andrew Rifugio. Canna will tell you all about those boots if you ask!

Be well

[lilcliffy]

lilcliffy:

Thanks! You saved me $249. I was about to buy the Alaska, but after reading your comment that they cannot drive the Annum when conditions are more marginal, I changed my mind. I guess I will stick with my old plastic boots. As always, there are trade-offs; a lighter boot probably means less control and power.

I love my Annum/Guide with a soft leather boot like the Alaska.
This combination actually helped me accept and appreciate the limitations of the Annum/Guide.
With a plastic boot I tend to push the Annum/Guide on terrain and snow that it is just not designed for.
The Annum/Guide is a wonderful, soft, round-flexing ski that is a ton of fun on soft snow and moderately-steep terrain.
I personally do not think that this ski has the stability and torsional rigidity to be pushed very hard as a downhill ski.
There is no question that a full-on Telemark boot is needed to overpower and drive a ski as wide as the Annum/Guide- but does this ski have the stability needed to respond? At least not in my limited experience...

I still enjoy my Annums/Guides very much (paired with my Alaska/Svartisen/Guard Advance)- but I reach for my Storetinds or my Koms (paired with Telemark boots) if I want to downhill ski on challenging terrain and/or snow.

[lilcliffy]

STG, its always good to save money! I'm assuming your running your annums with 75mm bindings? This particular thread is about the Alaska with a NNN-BC sole. The upper of the 75mm is the same and the sole is actually a little softer. But, combined with a 3-pin cable binding and some experience, I bet you could still drive the annums in less than ideal conditions. Plastics and a springy bindings will surely alway give more control, but if you are looking for that other-worldly leather flex, you may want to reconsider your choice!

And if you are about to buy a pair of Alaskas at 250$ for some downhill use, you should also consider the Crispi Antartic or Andrew Rifugio. Canna will tell you all about those boots if you ask!

Be well

My experience-
I have downhill-skied with both setups:
1) Guide with 3-pin cable and Alaska 75mm boot
2) Annum with NNNBC-Magnum and Alaska BC boot

In general, my experience is that a heel cable adds considerable stability, and mechanical advantage/leverage over a basic 3-pin binding (just the heel-lift resistance alone makes a difference).

The Alpina Alaska is a XC boot, not a Telemark boot.
I personally find that the Alaska 75mm is too soft to effectively take advantage of the heel cable.

I personally find the Alaska BC to have a much more stable sole than the 75mm.

IMHO- the only reason to choose the 75mm over the NNNBC version of the Alaska boot is if you regularly wish to swap out the Alaska with a much stiffer, more stable 75mm Telemark boot. This can be a VERY real advantage for many skiers.
Over many years I have realized that I never want to put a Telemark boot on the skis that I wish to use with a boot like the Alaska...Therefore, my decision to keep two binding platforms- NN and NNNBC- for backcountry Nordic touring.

Being able to use both XC and Telemark boots on one ski is very versatile, and potentially a big advantage of the NN binding...I just had to eventually admit that I didn't need that versatility...Testing the Alaska 75 vs. BC on the Guide/Annum actually helped me figure that out. And- I still think the Alaska BC is a better boot than its 75mm counterpart...