Saturday, December 27, 2008

Mt Erie ..

Steve and I decided on doing some rock climbing at Mt. Erie on Monday. Skies were to be clear, and temps around 40° up in Anacortes. This was our choice after being somewhat tired from our Saturday climb, and not thinking the skiing was going to be all that great.

We had a leisurely start to the day, and left Edmonds around 8:30am. Our intention was to climb in the Snag Buttress area of the mountain, and check out some new (to us) routes in that area. Steve's main interest was in the route Touching the Sky, a 5.9 sport route accessed from Snag Buttress. That meant climbing the first pitch of Zig Zag (5.7) to get there. Once on the ledge, we determined that the down climb, and water seep on the route meant we did not want to do it. Instead we opted to climb up the ledge slightly above the top of Snag Buttress where there were multiple routes to chose from. We opted for the Ray Auld Memorial Route (5.7) which brought us up to the top of wall.

We hiked around a bit trying to make sense of the maps and crags. We stumbled upon a short blocky sport route which I am thinking might be A View to a Climb (5.6) on the Lumpy Crag. Hard to tell. We climbed it, and just west of the top we were above the Friction Slab area. After that, we played the typical Mt. Erie find the best way down game. We looked through the book and followed some weak trails down. (Made more fun by walking on slippery grass with rock shoes.) A free-hanging rappel off a Madrone tree and some bramble bushwhacking got us back to the packs.

It was a fun day. However, I seemed not mentally up to the climbing and had difficulty at times with moves/grades that are well within my ability. Also of note, was the generally crummy rock quality and lack of good protection in some areas. Plenty of relic pitons and old bolts around too.

Coming up Zig Zag (photo by Steve Machuga)

Steve leading up Ray Auld

Show off

Thursday, December 25, 2008

Mount Rainier :: Perfect Timing!

Tuesday, September 14th - - It was mid-morning when I finally entered the southwestern side of Mount Rainier National Park. The morning had not been hopeful, awakening to cloudy skies once again. But luck was with me and as I drove toward the park the sun appeared and burned away the clouds. Quite a welcome change from my previous visit of a week ago, which was basically a drive-thru since I couldn't see anything at all due to the clouds, the fog, and the rain!

I forget the name of this creek but it was only a few miles into the park and it was the first view I had of Mt Rainier. Breathtaking.

This is a little further into the park. When the roads were constructed through the park the engineers took into account the “viewing pleasure” of the public and I must say they did an excellent job in selecting the sites for the viewpoints.

A couple of close-ups of the top of the mountain.

Probably the most visited area of the park is in the south-central part. It was about 12:30 in the afternoon when I arrived in Paradise and, as you can see, the clouds had moved in. I spent some time in the visitors center at Paradise - looked at the exhibits, viewed the park movie, then looked through the telescopes and saw three climbers halfway up the mountain.

The mountain played peek-a-boo with the clouds, but they eventually completely blocked out the view. I joined some of the other visitors on a short walk along one of the many trails in the area.

Mount Rainier and me!

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Hollow Rock Ice Cave


































Remember my shot "Into the Ice Cave" from yesterday? That shot was taken from outside the cave, looking into it. Well, here is what it looked like once I crawled into it! It was a fascinating wonderland of ice! I had to lay on my back on the ice and stick my arms (holding the camera) through and around the icicles you see on the right of this photo in order to get this shot. I couldn't look through the viewfinder because my arms were outstretched to reach around the icicles, so it took several attempts to get the shot I wanted. It wasn't an easy shot to get, but I sure do like what I ended up with, so to me it was definitely worth the effort!

La Sportiva Hi5 skis

I see that Lou over at Wildsnow finally let the horse out of the barn :-)



http://www.wildsnow.com/5292/la-sportiva-hi5-ski-review/comment-page-1/#comment-36675



Big help now as I really wanted the info a couple of months ago! I know Lou had the skis and wondered why he waited so long on the review. Likely out skiing. What was he thinking? Let me help make it a stampede of sorts.









If you follow this blog you know I hadn't skied much (as in none) for a decade or so. The climbing trip last winter to Chamonix was my cardiac jump start. The continued ski season (and terrible weather) here in the NW and with the resulting never ending snowit has allowed me to ski instead of ride my bike or rock climb.



Enjoying it actually. Getting togo back to several old spring ski haunts because of it.



I have been skiing on an assortment of old and new boards over the winter. Shaped, asymmetrical,super short, skinny, fat and in between. Lots of skis. They all generally turn left and right as required.My BD Aspects, Dyna Stokes and the Dyna Broad Peaks are missing from this picture. No huge surprises except one. And that one ski the Hi 5 has been an interesting education that continues.







I first saw the Hi5 at OR last winter and was more than a little skeptical ofthe newLa Sportiva Hi5 or La Sportiva in particular for skis. But I did want a pair of thoseall carbon race boots the STRATOS!Any way, hard to miss a bright green, giant ski that resembles a retro water ski more than snow ski.Or so I first thought. It was a ski that stood outin the ski racks at two "ski bars" and ridingthe trams in Chamonix over the winter. And of the La Sportiva Hi5sI did recognise, all seemed amazingly LOOONG in comparison to the other skisbeing toted around the valley.(from a distinct mental note taken back in March...and obvious ski/mtn gawds riding them)















Hugerocker on the tip of this ski. (well huge to me, the guy who had only skied one pair of rockered skis, these) a squared cut tailand a full 105mm wide at the waist. It is a 75/25 % rockered ski. My early production 188cms pair measure 135/105/125 mmand weight in at 8# 10oz.Light I thought for such a fat and long ski. But they will get lighter in the / production. The goal is 7#15oz for a pair of 188s. My skinny162cm Se7en Summits with arace binding weight 6# for the pair as a comparison, My 178cm BD Aspects are just over 7# with bindings.



The Hi5s are a good bit wider and longer than either with the resulting performance advantages.



In French here:



http://www.sportiva-fr.com/produits/catalogue7.php?id=74



- Longueur : 168 - 178 - 188





-Weight: 1.600gr - 1.700gr - 1.800gr - Poids : 1.600gr - 1.700gr - 1.800gr



- Construction: Sidewall Fusion - 75% Camber / Rocker 25%.Progressive sidecut Progressive sidecut



- Songs: ABS thermoplastic



- Core: Wood Light Karuba - Ame : bois de Karuba léger



- First layer: fiberglass tri-directional



- Second layer: carbon fiber bi-directional / fiberglass inserts



Almost nothing on the Net early on besides these:











Having been on the same hill, on those same days, lhave to admit I now really wanted to try thesefat boys out. But sadly, mine would show up in Apriland the closest I would come to a Cham pow day was a foot of nasty Cascade cement at Crystal that was doing point release slides under the lifts by the afternoon..







But that turned out to not be a bad thing. I wanted to get some skinning in on my lwt stuff but the new snow and avi danger made that problematic. So I stuck withthe Hi5s on the lifts all day. It seemed better than going home, as most did. The first steep I dropped into was 4 turns to the packed again. And I thought that was rather easy. Easier than expected for sure. Next drop I made 6 turns and was still not being pushed. Seemed too easy in the sloppy snow. Terrible snow to ski on but the kind of snow a good snow boarder loves So next time I dropped in the same place and did sixturns before the first tree. Holy shit! Are these really 188cm and 105cm wide? These will take some imagination and relearning what is possible was my thought that day.



Just say no to short skis ;)These are realskis!



No wonder the kidsin Cham were on head height or better skis lengths. These things turn like they are a150mm soft, skinny skis or a snow board. And maybe they are with that much rocker and flotation! What ever is going on here for technology, they sure are a hoot and super easy to ski on!



Check out the actual surface area being used on flat groundbetween my 162cm Se7en Summits and the Hi5 in a 188cm. That is SOME seriousrocker!



When you start looking at rockered skis you need to be really careful with the definition because the ski companies aren't. "Early rise", "semi rockered" and the other terms so easily bandied about generally aren't truly rockered skis. Real rockered skis, ski and turn like much shorter skis than their measured length would first indicate because there is less surface on the ground taking full weight.









When the tips of your skis set on the snow like the Hi5 obviously does, the ski is rockered. 410cm of rocker by my measure on the 188s. A quick example of the difference? A 173cm Stoke ski like a 188cm Hi5. If I cut hairs here, the 176 Aspect feels slower to turnthan thelongerand wider 188 Hi5. Most of that is rocker, some of it is the additional side cut of the Hi5. The pointis the Hi 5 turnslike a much shorter skis in my opinion. Surprizingly so and much to my personal enjoyment.





I hear fat skis are a little tough to edge. Big, stiff boots will solve part of that.



Fat skis are not suppose to like light weight boots. I took that test and like the Dynafit TLT Ps with these skis. And I generally ski the Ps without the tongue, as I was doing in the skiing comments above. Add the tongue and there is plenty of boot for the Stokes or the Hi5s in any length. But I haven't bothered adding the tongue. Might be the fact the Hi5 is so easy to ski and not the boots. It is a question yet unanswered to my satisfaction. But I have the technology to find that answer and will come back to it when I do. I like to think of the Hi5 as my Aspects with power steering and 4 wheel drive if that makes sense. Lower geared, and easier to drive in shitty snow.





The only other fat ski in my quiver is a pair of the new Dynafit Stokes. Goodski as well.But neither ski is really FAT by today's standards. Can't consider the BD Aspect as fat either.I wanted some serious rocker just to see what it was like to ski. Butif possible on a more traditional ski with some side cut. Dbl rockered skis seem a little extreme. But may be I am wrong there. Traditional you say? Well no tail rocker (unless you consider the last 2" of ski rockered" and thereasonableside cut seems almost traditionalthese days. The side cut isn't that far off between the Aspect and the Hi5.BTW I simply haven't noticed the square cut tail. When you sit back there is good support and edge there...like a decentGS ski. Looks a little weird a first but then so does this ski.That was amazingly easy toget over. And amazingly easy to set tail first in hard snow if it is required. The Hi5 numbers made it looklike a more "traditional" ski with some added rocker...OK a lot of rocker.



(all factory numbers..not my numbers)



Mustagh SL 187cm6lb 9oz 122-88-111



Aspect 186cm 7 lb 2 oz 130 / 90 / 117



Drift 186 cm7 lb 10 oz 138/ 100/ 123



Stoke 191cm 7 lb 14oz134 / 108 / 122



Hi5 188cm 7lb 15oz 135 / 105 / 125



Wailer HB 190cm 9lb 4oz 141/ 112 / 128



Megawatt 188cm 10 lb 1 oz 153-125-130







My pre production pair of Hi5s are a few oz.over at a measured 8# 7oz. La Sportiva missed the mark early on by 4oz per ski in a 188. Close enough from my perspective for what I am getting in added performance. I actually made a special trip to Marmot just to check my own numbers again when I started listingthe weight numbers on the Aspect and Stoke. Part of that is the HI5 is a little longer and a good bit wider. And the ski performance matches the Hi5's bigger numbers. Bottom line is I don't care about the weight on this ski (within reason) compared to my Aspects or Stokes.The Hi5shave proven themselves asmy go to, "Hero skis" any any kind of soft snow. If I need a hero ski that particular day I'll deal with the marginal extra weight on the uphill. (Thank Colin at La Sportiva for correctingthe production numbers on the skis being shippedas of Sept '11)



Ithink, if given thechoice, you'll find fewwilling to ski a non rockered 175 or 180cm ski where you can so easily ski the rockered 188 Hi5. The rocker makesthat much difference.I like skiing a little longer ski again.It wasan easy sale after just threeruns.









This is the most funall aroundski I have been on for junk snow. Short of ice and really hard groomers anyway. They aren't GS skis. There is a definite speed limit. These are my hero skis for junk snow. Ski just about anything,anywhere on these and feel awesome while doing it. Might even be able to give my boarding buddya run for the money inwind blown. Which says a lot. No way I would have believed that if the only place I hadskied them was on Chamonix pow. Might be the only ski I use for the down there next winter though. Rippingright out of the gateon the Midiis a dream I intend to make real with this board.









Bottom line? If you haven't skied a fat rocker ..you should ASAP. Hero skis, plain and simple.. With adecade off line...I needed a hero ski ;-)

When Simplicity Trumps Comfort

Will Spring ever arrive this year? Looking at all the new snow on the trail as we braved another "spring ride," I began to seriously doubt it. Nonetheless, my Rivendell is back in action after a long winter.



Now, here's an admission: Although the Sam Hillborne is super-comfortable, when it comes to shorter rides without major hills I've come to prefer a more pared-down roadbike. In fitting the Rivendell with a front rack, decalleur, handlebar bag and good sized saddlebag, we made a conscious decision to optimise it for long distance travel and exploration at the expense of simplicity. Though individually each accessory is fairly lightweight, all together they do add heft to the bike and make it more difficult to take in and out of the apartment. And I find it inconvenient to detach and reattach the bags depending on what kind of ride I am taking, so I would rather just leave them on.



I have a routine 30 mile ride that I do whenever weather permits, and on this ride my ideal bike would be a lightweight single speed (fixed/free flip-flop hub), with a tiny saddlebag and no fenders. Currently, my Moser and Bianchi share this role, with the Moser being the fixed gear and the Bianchi essentially acting as the freewheel singlespeed, since the 2x6 gearing is so unfinicky that it allows me to forget it's there. By contrast, the 3x8 gearing on the Rivendell feels cumbersome on a ride where I don't need to shift gears.



I am not the first person to experience the epiphany that "for fast and short rides I prefer Roadbike A, while for long and hilly rides I prefer Roadbike B." Still, I was surprised to feel myself developing this preference - particularly the single speed and no fenders part of it. There is something to be said for just being able to throw a bike down on the grass and not worry, for pedaling fast and not playing around with shifters. At times I value this simplicity and ease more than I value load capacity, gearing, comfort, and yes - even keeping my clothes clean and dry. There, I said it!

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Port Angeles


A few miles above Lake Crescent we came to the city of Port Angeles. Port Angeles is one of the northern most citys in Washington. From there you can catch a ferry, cross Strait of Juan de Fuca, and dock in Victoria, Canada. Regretably we did not have the time to take the ferry to Canada. I will save that trip for another time. (Remember it is another country, and now you need a passport to go there. Even for just a day visit.) In this photo you can see one of the ferrys. They were huge. We wern't able to get real close but did get some shots as some came in on there return from Canada. We visited some gift shops, had a bite to eat, and decided we would spend the night in Port Angeles as it was to late in the day to see Hurricane Ridge in Olympic Park, which was to be the high point of the whole trip.

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Rolling Log


Here is one of the logs coming into shore. It was rolling in the water as the tide came in. It couldn't go out due to the rock behind it, and seemed to be taking it's time coming on in. We didn't get to near as you could tell it was very heavy and would be deadly if a big wave were to pick it up and throw it on to the beech. We took it's photo and wondered on.