Quote Originally Posted by mudmucker View Post
I just saw this. Funny, I've been looking at the same 3 skis over the last 2 weeks. I don't have any personal experience but I've been doing some research and can offer some thoughts. Can see if it matches yours. I think our terrain and goals are similar...100% off trail use on rolling topography. No wilderness. No long gladed descents. No mountain type environment.

I too have a pair of older backcountry skis that have tip and waist similar to your Rossi 65s. I don't seem to want to do as much distance with those skis. And I'd like to better be able to carve out a couple of lazy turns in deeper snow if I want.

I'm looking for more float. Don't want anything too heavy.

I'm leaning towards the Epochs.

I have not seen any of these in person yet. I've called a couple of places to talk with the reps but I hope to go to a shop this weekend. The Alpinas have great float but appear to be more "telemarky" and I don't really have any extended long terrain that would warrant them. They are probably heavy because of it and I think there would be too much comprise of kick and glide.

The Rossi 90s on the other hand seem like they'd be lighter and have some control on the turns, and maybe better kick and glide on the level. But I'm wondering if the dimensions would actually offer that much more float over what I/we already have. Not sure if 26 mm extra of tip and 7 mm extra of waist would make that much of a difference with the deep snow that we have. Our snow usually has moisture and packs well but how comparable would it be? I'm thinking pretty similar.

So I'm leaning towards the Epochs. They have healthy dimension for float. A healthy sidecut for carving on a hill if you want that option. And I think still a fairly soft camber for quick responses for turning and navigating through tight trees for when I want to go through those areas. I have a lot of more open logging roads and access roads though that would probably be my predominant route but it's nice to have the extra option. You'd probably give up some kick and glide but I have fast skis if I want to do that. Can add skins I think if I want to climb something bigger. I don't mind slowing down for the remote and "no one's been through here yet or ever" experience that I'd like to get back to lately.

The verdict is still out for me. I hate to fork over all that money. I don't mind putting out for the skis. I already have an SNS system on my skis with a Salomon backcountry boot. I might be able to get away with that with the Rossi 90s but I probably would have to change out with the Epochs.

Let us know what you decide if you go forward with one of them.
We are really new to this so we're learning as we go along. Since the winter is zipping along, it will have to be a crash course. Neither of us minds checking out product reviews and FAQ information. After one outing/lesson, we were hooked enough to want to get away from renting and dealing with the 'traffic' at a resort.

But-like other sports we are involved with-(cycling, kayaking, etc.) it's hard to choose one set of equipment that will serve fairly well in multiple situations. We have touring bindings on our BC 65s (part of the package they came with) and touring boots. They do well on groomed/packed trails or a few inches of snow but flounder in the depth of white stuff we've been blessed with in the past couple weeks.

We'll probably skip over the backcountry bindings/boots option and go to a 3-pin setup with removable cables this time. Hopefully that strategy will serve us well in deeper snow and on hills. Our plans are similar to yours: trails in the woods, slogging through deeper snow and ungroomed trails in a state park or conservation land. No extreme or mountainous terrain. (At 57, I have no desire to fly down a mountain at warp speed. I do want to learn to navigate efficiently.) Turning and stopping would be handy skills...

John wanted to order the BC 70s, but I pointed out that they would not be different enough from what we have. I leaned toward the BC 90s at when the search began but-like you mentioned-they may not be aggressive enough. In retrospect (which is always 20/20), the 90s might have been a better choice for the first set of skis-although the 65s will still fit in a groomed track. We do like them.

I believe you can use either a backcountry or 3-pin system on the 90s, but think the Madshus Epochs require a 3-pin setup. Of course, this means another pair of boots, but it seems inevitable that we'll need another collection of equipment.

I don't know much about Alpinas yet, but the Madshus brand seems to be well-regarded. After what I've read (so far), the Epochs appeal most to me of the 3.