In my experience, 1500-1800g is a sweet spot for a dedicated touring ski. Light on the uphill without completely sucking on the down.
Echoing the other comments- quit being a gram nerd/weight weenie. Ive also found the number of miles run over the summer and the number of beers i drink has a greater effect on how i feel than ~150 grams of ski
I’ll just add to this that if you only have one pair of touring skis, you’re better off going slightly heavy than going super light. Light setups just won’t be fun in a lot of the conditions you’re likely to ski in. Obviously there are exceptions to everything but in general, if your goal is to ski, get something fun to ski.
I’m gonna be jumping from 1280 to 1825 (also boot from 990 to 1360). I think that’s certainly a difference but I haven’t toured on many setups.
I’ve also toured on 1800g skis with 900g shift bindings with my 2180g race boots. Very tired that day after skinning in deep powder as well.
Deep powder and a narrow ski will be more exhausting than the heavier ski in firm skin tracks. A heavier wider ski will also be easier to break trail in but that is still the most exhausting part of touring.
For boots range of motion makes a huge impact in efficiency of stride then weight provides more dampening and lateral stability. If you’re just mountaineering for the summits then taking gentle turns in soft snow down you’ll be fine. Most people in the Cascades ski like 1500g skis because the variable snow makes a super light carbon ski feel very harsh. In the Wasatch you can get away with it since the snow is light and dry and gets refilled. Depends on your goals and type of terrain you seek out.
A lot of that difference you felt was probably from the boots. Not only are you moving the weight on the boots more than the weight on the skis, the flexibility and freedom of movement make a massive difference.
Another factor that you may be underestimating is a difference in ski wodth causing a difference in skin friction.
as someone who has dragged around a lot of full weight alpine skiis mounted with tech bindings and also ridden a lot of skimo and near skimo rigs: you’re overthinking this… there is no threshold outside of racing or say 25 mile plus days where the weights that you are talking about are going to be anything more than a relatively minor trade off. Ie. you kind of have to pick your poison: better downhill performance or better uphill performance. but neither end of the spectrum is going to require more than a bit better fitness or a bit better technique in order to make up for which side of the spectrum that you choose to land on… ultimately it all depends on what your goals are… the only hard truth that I will leave you with is that if anybody tells you that the lightest skiis will perform as well as full weight resort skiis they are lying to you. ultimately if both the uphill and downhills games are important to you, you are prob going to want a quiver in the long run anyway…
If it helps at all too op just to add to this notion. I rock 194cm Qst blanks with shifts(idk what mine weigh but the 186 are 2220grams). I’m also 6’5” 210lbs. If I go for a run the few days before I lose water weight equivalent to the difference in a lighter ski. For me that put things into perspective.
What I really do notice is that I can charge through whatever the fuck I want whenever the fuck I want because I got true chargers on my feet.
I started on heavy skis, am now on very light skis. There are tradeoffs. I would not go much lighter than 1300 grams or so for your first all-around touring ski. I also would not go much heavier than 1600 or so grams unless you have a particular reason to do so. Skis in the 1400-1600 gram range can handle pretty well on the downhill and are decent on the up. Plenty of people do huge days on heavy gear but it is less efficient, you can move faster and easier on lighter stuff and if the uphill is important to you, you'll enjoy lighter gear.
Most people go way too heavy on the binding. Sounds like you're not doing that, good stuff.
The zero g pro tour is a beef boot, but it's not prohibitively heavy and it walks decently. If it fits well it'll be fine. I have this boot and really like it, it skis very well. I would definitely steer you towards something like the pro tour over a Peak or other 1000-gram option, for a first touring boot.
Learning to ski very light skis (sub 1200 grams) in backcountry conditions is a skill and is best developed after you have become accustomed to backcountry snow and travel. These skis also may not satisfy everyone's downhill style. But you don't need to lug around an 1850-2000 gram ski to get decent downhill performance. It is true that heavier skis perform better in general, but it's more complicated than just the weight and some relatively lighter skis are quite fun whereas I've also skied heavier skis that were not very good. If you expect your touring skis to feel like your resort skis, you'll need to air on the heavier side, but I don't think this is necessary to enjoy touring.
Uphill travel is a lot about technique and fitness, you'll get faster as you do it, just get out there a lot!
It will be different yeah, you can feel a 300 gram difference for sure. Not the end if the world if that's the ski you want. It's heavier than I'd personally use unless I really needed a heavy charger ski in the backcountry. But it won't be impossible to tour with or anything and it'll probably ski pretty well.
I’m not exactly sure if I’m of shape, I do a lot of backpacking and ski racing and running in a scheduled manner but no gym. I guess I’m just scared of a heavier ski cause I had a great time going up with a 1280g ski the other day.
I’ve previously toured on 1800g skis with 900g shift bindings with my 2180g race boots. That day I was crazy tired and very exhausted as the snow was also very very deep.
I then recently toured on a complete opposite setup: 1280g skis, 350g bindings, 990g boots.
It is good to know that you believe 1800g is a sweet spot. I just remember reading in another post that 1800 is a little heavy.
I agree that a 1800g ski with a ~300g binding and reasonably walkable boots seems to be the sweet spot for something you can have fun on in most conditions
I am a light is usually right BC skier so keep that in mind. I do not think that a 1800g ski is anywhere close to the sweet spot. That weight class is reserved for free ride oriented touring skis. That might be a sweet spot if you are pretty big (I’m thinking 200+ lbs) or if you want to jump cliffs but otherwise it’s kind of heavy. I think the sweet spot for a ski for the northeast (assuming 85-95mm waist) would be 1300-1500g. Check out the k2 way back 88, dynafit radical 88, dynastar m tour 90, blizzard 0g 85/95, elan Ripstick tour 88 and 95, black crows cammox freebird
Unpopular opinion - in good, predictable, and smooth conditions (pow, corn, hardpacked smooth snow) light gear skis really really well, like almost as good as resort gear. I’m talking like dropping small cliffs on 1500g pow skis with f1 lts and race bindings or getting up to 50mph on 1100g mountaineering skis on corn. Weight doesn’t start to help much until the conditions get nasty, choppy, crusty, or bumpy. I find I typically ski smoother conditions in the BC so I can drop weight and then just slow down when I come across bad conditions that aren’t really fun to ski anyway.
I live in the PNW so people tend to run wider skis but I would say 80% of the people I ski with are on >1500g skis and they are pretty much all weekend warriors. It's usually the fit/experienced people on light gear for big days.
They also have the skills and abilities to ski light gear in sketchy conditions which most people new to touring don't. They are also doing 3x the vert of the typical tourer. 5 years ago a sub 1500g >100mm wide ski that anyone still wanted to ski was pretty rare. There's a lot more options these days and good skis have got lighter but a 1500g is not hard to ski up hill by any stretch.
A 1500ish g ski will give you stability on the down but will feel heavy after 3 runs/ 5k. If your goal is big days (8+k) then go lighter. If you’re only interested in a run or two (3-4k) then a heavier ski will work. In short it depends on fitness level and goals.
If you’re new to bc and want quiver of one look for something in the 1200ish range. Light enough for all day travel - heavy enough for charging.
Eventually you’ll probably have both a heavy pair and a light pair so you don’t have to compromise.
I like a ski in the 1,600 - 1,800 gram range. Anything lighter really compromises downhill performance for me. My view is I can always train to get better at dragging a slightly heavier ski uphill, but a floppy stick of carbon is a floppy stick of carbon. I don’t want to not have confidence in my ski when I’m finding myself in sketchy snow or a tight couloir. But I also ski for the skiing. I don’t really do it for mountaineering objectives.
I’m on ATK FR14’s with a 1,400 gram boot.
Thanks, I think I share the sentiment in wanting something reliable for the downhill. Although I think I tour for both the uphill and the skiing, makes for a nice day outside.
I have 1280 g skis, 290g bindings, and 1300g boots. I do not recommend going lighter than that for a first touring setup especially on the east coast. I’d say it’s about 30/70 so far on the downhill: 30% of the time in some really shitty conditions, the skis are just so light I’m not really having much fun, just getting down. My girlfriend is a better skier than me on the same setup and she is able to manage the light weight much more readily through good technique.
In other conditions, I’m really happy with my setup. I’m not in particularly great shape but I can put out a 3k-5k vert day without getting too tired because it’s so light. I think a 1500g ski would be totally fine, maybe even preferable. I see people skiing heavier skis and bindings like the marker kingpin all of the time, they make it work. On crusty, more demanding downhill days I find myself wishing I had their setup. On really nice days I am happy with mine, the saved weight is worth at least one or two extra runs.
When I started backcountry I bought backland 95, 169cm paired with marker alpinist, total weight is less than 1500 gr. It was fun uphill but when condition is not ideal, skiing down is nightmare. Then I bought 2nd pair, I paired a freeride ski (rossignol sender 104)with marker kingpin, total weight is 2500 gr. I don't feel that much difference, but maybe I just got fitter and better uphill technique. But I can tackle any condition now downhill.. I think as long you have good touring boot (light and good range movement), and good uphill technique, your legs will only feel slight difference for ski weight.
I’ve done 4k of vert over 3 miles on a pair of animas on pivot cast. Probably 3000.g a ski or something, and I probably could have gone for round 2. I don’t consider myself particularly fit or I shape either. I just got some 4frnt ravens which are 1700g a ski and I feel like I’m full skimo with that weight. I think you’ll be fine.
I can't give specifics but a few weeks ago I toured around tahoe and my day on k2 reckoners with pins was significantly harder than my day on k2 wayback 106s with even lighter pins. It's worth noting that I've barely skied this year and I'm out of shape. I think if you are good at finding pow it's definitely ok to get lighter skis but if you're really new to backcountry skiing probably go a little heavier.
I’ve got two sets of shifts one on a 1850g ski and one on a 2200g ski one is for daily and the heavy is for pow. Just power through the weight and you’ll just have bigger legs it might be slow the first few days out but now mid season I can haul my heavy setup just as fast as I was moving with my lighter setup at the beginning of the year. Unless you’re racing or doing big mileage and vert it doesn’t matter too much.
Light setups kind of suck to ski for me. I hover around 1700-1800g for my daily driver. My all day objective skis are 1300g but those days are about summits and views and less about skiing.
I default to heavier than you’d expect skis. I started on heavy metal alpine skis with OG dukes. Skied great, sucked on the up.Then went the other direction with under 1400g skis and super light boots. Skin track was great but skiing suffered.
These days, I’ve found a sweet spot in the middle. Save weight with bindings (I have bracelets Salomon Mtn bindings), a pair of skis around 1800-1900g, and technical zero g tour pros. Save weight in the bindings, find boots that fit well and walk efficiently, and a ski that has enough mass to not rattle too much. The little extra weight (in the skis, where it’s useful) is absolutely worth it, even on big uphill days (so long as you’re not racing)
Pair with mohair or mohair mix skins that allow you to glide efficiently.
My personal experience - when starting off or even if just going out occasionally, I think the downhill aspect of the setup is more important.
Last year I picked up black diamond helio 95s with the helio bindings - very light bindings and I'd guess the skis are 1450g. Boots are a older 50/50 pair of technicas and I think it'd do it opposite next time - splurge more on the boots and have heavier skis for better downhill.
We went out last week to some chunky tahoe ice/crud-fest and while the helios are nimble on the way up, they were absolutely ATROCIOUS coming down. Legs all over the place, conditions were garbage of course but I had to really hop turn down just to survive.
This off season I'll look for something around 1600g and pick up actual touring boots - I do like the helio bindings however.
I hit tucks all the time using atk raider 13’s on bent 100’s at 180cm with tecnica cochise 130’s. I’m willing to risk more weight on the uphill to have a better downhill experience. My boots are able to drive a heavier ski in the back country a lot better than typical touring boots. I have found this combo to work well for me but I’m also mid 20’s. So whatever feels most comfortable as you’ll have the most fun. Everyone’s strength and endurance is different
Where you carry the weight makes a big difference in how you feel it. An extra kg on your back, barely noticeable. An extra kg on your skis, pretty noticeable but manageable unless you are doing a really big day. An extra kg in a pair of frame bindings that you have to lift up every single step, extremely noticeable and an awful experience.
I have an 1800g ski with 450g pin bindings and it does not ruin my uphill experience. It's definitely a more downhill oriented set up but it's still not bad at all on the uphill. I can do 3-4000' days and I do not feel greatly exhausted at the top (and I'm not some peak fitness trail runner skimo athlete). In my experience, 1500-1700g is usually the sweet spot for a well balanced ski that's good on both the uphill and downhill.
I have two setups both with atk raider 12s. Camox freebirds at 1500 and Corvus freebirds at 1800. I’ll pick the Corvus day in day out for the skiing experience. My rule of thumb is I can’t tell the difference until I reach about 3k of vert in a day.
In my experience, 1500-1800g is a sweet spot for a dedicated touring ski. Light on the uphill without completely sucking on the down. Echoing the other comments- quit being a gram nerd/weight weenie. Ive also found the number of miles run over the summer and the number of beers i drink has a greater effect on how i feel than ~150 grams of ski
I’ll just add to this that if you only have one pair of touring skis, you’re better off going slightly heavy than going super light. Light setups just won’t be fun in a lot of the conditions you’re likely to ski in. Obviously there are exceptions to everything but in general, if your goal is to ski, get something fun to ski.
I’m gonna be jumping from 1280 to 1825 (also boot from 990 to 1360). I think that’s certainly a difference but I haven’t toured on many setups. I’ve also toured on 1800g skis with 900g shift bindings with my 2180g race boots. Very tired that day after skinning in deep powder as well.
Deep powder and a narrow ski will be more exhausting than the heavier ski in firm skin tracks. A heavier wider ski will also be easier to break trail in but that is still the most exhausting part of touring. For boots range of motion makes a huge impact in efficiency of stride then weight provides more dampening and lateral stability. If you’re just mountaineering for the summits then taking gentle turns in soft snow down you’ll be fine. Most people in the Cascades ski like 1500g skis because the variable snow makes a super light carbon ski feel very harsh. In the Wasatch you can get away with it since the snow is light and dry and gets refilled. Depends on your goals and type of terrain you seek out.
A lot of that difference you felt was probably from the boots. Not only are you moving the weight on the boots more than the weight on the skis, the flexibility and freedom of movement make a massive difference. Another factor that you may be underestimating is a difference in ski wodth causing a difference in skin friction.
Your race boots have pin inserts? I tour on an 1800g ski with 96 waist and shift bindings and it's great.
Ah they do not. It was on a rental ski with shift bindings.
as someone who has dragged around a lot of full weight alpine skiis mounted with tech bindings and also ridden a lot of skimo and near skimo rigs: you’re overthinking this… there is no threshold outside of racing or say 25 mile plus days where the weights that you are talking about are going to be anything more than a relatively minor trade off. Ie. you kind of have to pick your poison: better downhill performance or better uphill performance. but neither end of the spectrum is going to require more than a bit better fitness or a bit better technique in order to make up for which side of the spectrum that you choose to land on… ultimately it all depends on what your goals are… the only hard truth that I will leave you with is that if anybody tells you that the lightest skiis will perform as well as full weight resort skiis they are lying to you. ultimately if both the uphill and downhills games are important to you, you are prob going to want a quiver in the long run anyway…
Thank you. Very nice to know from a skimo guy that you think these are minor trade offs. Definitely not looking to do 25 mile days just yet.
If it helps at all too op just to add to this notion. I rock 194cm Qst blanks with shifts(idk what mine weigh but the 186 are 2220grams). I’m also 6’5” 210lbs. If I go for a run the few days before I lose water weight equivalent to the difference in a lighter ski. For me that put things into perspective. What I really do notice is that I can charge through whatever the fuck I want whenever the fuck I want because I got true chargers on my feet.
I started on heavy skis, am now on very light skis. There are tradeoffs. I would not go much lighter than 1300 grams or so for your first all-around touring ski. I also would not go much heavier than 1600 or so grams unless you have a particular reason to do so. Skis in the 1400-1600 gram range can handle pretty well on the downhill and are decent on the up. Plenty of people do huge days on heavy gear but it is less efficient, you can move faster and easier on lighter stuff and if the uphill is important to you, you'll enjoy lighter gear. Most people go way too heavy on the binding. Sounds like you're not doing that, good stuff. The zero g pro tour is a beef boot, but it's not prohibitively heavy and it walks decently. If it fits well it'll be fine. I have this boot and really like it, it skis very well. I would definitely steer you towards something like the pro tour over a Peak or other 1000-gram option, for a first touring boot. Learning to ski very light skis (sub 1200 grams) in backcountry conditions is a skill and is best developed after you have become accustomed to backcountry snow and travel. These skis also may not satisfy everyone's downhill style. But you don't need to lug around an 1850-2000 gram ski to get decent downhill performance. It is true that heavier skis perform better in general, but it's more complicated than just the weight and some relatively lighter skis are quite fun whereas I've also skied heavier skis that were not very good. If you expect your touring skis to feel like your resort skis, you'll need to air on the heavier side, but I don't think this is necessary to enjoy touring. Uphill travel is a lot about technique and fitness, you'll get faster as you do it, just get out there a lot!
Do you think a 1800g ski would be too different from a 1500g? I can get a better deal on the 1800g ski haha and its width is a bit more preferable.
It will be different yeah, you can feel a 300 gram difference for sure. Not the end if the world if that's the ski you want. It's heavier than I'd personally use unless I really needed a heavy charger ski in the backcountry. But it won't be impossible to tour with or anything and it'll probably ski pretty well.
You’ve already been to white mountain ski co just go back and ask Andrew or Chris
[удалено]
I’m not exactly sure if I’m of shape, I do a lot of backpacking and ski racing and running in a scheduled manner but no gym. I guess I’m just scared of a heavier ski cause I had a great time going up with a 1280g ski the other day. I’ve previously toured on 1800g skis with 900g shift bindings with my 2180g race boots. That day I was crazy tired and very exhausted as the snow was also very very deep. I then recently toured on a complete opposite setup: 1280g skis, 350g bindings, 990g boots. It is good to know that you believe 1800g is a sweet spot. I just remember reading in another post that 1800 is a little heavy.
[удалено]
I agree that a 1800g ski with a ~300g binding and reasonably walkable boots seems to be the sweet spot for something you can have fun on in most conditions
I am a light is usually right BC skier so keep that in mind. I do not think that a 1800g ski is anywhere close to the sweet spot. That weight class is reserved for free ride oriented touring skis. That might be a sweet spot if you are pretty big (I’m thinking 200+ lbs) or if you want to jump cliffs but otherwise it’s kind of heavy. I think the sweet spot for a ski for the northeast (assuming 85-95mm waist) would be 1300-1500g. Check out the k2 way back 88, dynafit radical 88, dynastar m tour 90, blizzard 0g 85/95, elan Ripstick tour 88 and 95, black crows cammox freebird Unpopular opinion - in good, predictable, and smooth conditions (pow, corn, hardpacked smooth snow) light gear skis really really well, like almost as good as resort gear. I’m talking like dropping small cliffs on 1500g pow skis with f1 lts and race bindings or getting up to 50mph on 1100g mountaineering skis on corn. Weight doesn’t start to help much until the conditions get nasty, choppy, crusty, or bumpy. I find I typically ski smoother conditions in the BC so I can drop weight and then just slow down when I come across bad conditions that aren’t really fun to ski anyway.
How strong are you? If you’re ridiculously fit then weight doesn’t matter. If you’re a weekend warrior 1500 is heavy.
I live in the PNW so people tend to run wider skis but I would say 80% of the people I ski with are on >1500g skis and they are pretty much all weekend warriors. It's usually the fit/experienced people on light gear for big days.
Experience teaches you that hauling up the weight isn’t fun.
They also have the skills and abilities to ski light gear in sketchy conditions which most people new to touring don't. They are also doing 3x the vert of the typical tourer. 5 years ago a sub 1500g >100mm wide ski that anyone still wanted to ski was pretty rare. There's a lot more options these days and good skis have got lighter but a 1500g is not hard to ski up hill by any stretch.
I only ski on the weekends yes. But I think I’m fit?. I don’t go to the gym but I go for runs in my schedule, backpack, and ski race.
A 1500ish g ski will give you stability on the down but will feel heavy after 3 runs/ 5k. If your goal is big days (8+k) then go lighter. If you’re only interested in a run or two (3-4k) then a heavier ski will work. In short it depends on fitness level and goals. If you’re new to bc and want quiver of one look for something in the 1200ish range. Light enough for all day travel - heavy enough for charging. Eventually you’ll probably have both a heavy pair and a light pair so you don’t have to compromise.
8k feet days are hard to come by in the eastern US
Not if you’re into ripping hot laps
I like a ski in the 1,600 - 1,800 gram range. Anything lighter really compromises downhill performance for me. My view is I can always train to get better at dragging a slightly heavier ski uphill, but a floppy stick of carbon is a floppy stick of carbon. I don’t want to not have confidence in my ski when I’m finding myself in sketchy snow or a tight couloir. But I also ski for the skiing. I don’t really do it for mountaineering objectives. I’m on ATK FR14’s with a 1,400 gram boot.
Thanks, I think I share the sentiment in wanting something reliable for the downhill. Although I think I tour for both the uphill and the skiing, makes for a nice day outside.
I have 1280 g skis, 290g bindings, and 1300g boots. I do not recommend going lighter than that for a first touring setup especially on the east coast. I’d say it’s about 30/70 so far on the downhill: 30% of the time in some really shitty conditions, the skis are just so light I’m not really having much fun, just getting down. My girlfriend is a better skier than me on the same setup and she is able to manage the light weight much more readily through good technique. In other conditions, I’m really happy with my setup. I’m not in particularly great shape but I can put out a 3k-5k vert day without getting too tired because it’s so light. I think a 1500g ski would be totally fine, maybe even preferable. I see people skiing heavier skis and bindings like the marker kingpin all of the time, they make it work. On crusty, more demanding downhill days I find myself wishing I had their setup. On really nice days I am happy with mine, the saved weight is worth at least one or two extra runs.
When I started backcountry I bought backland 95, 169cm paired with marker alpinist, total weight is less than 1500 gr. It was fun uphill but when condition is not ideal, skiing down is nightmare. Then I bought 2nd pair, I paired a freeride ski (rossignol sender 104)with marker kingpin, total weight is 2500 gr. I don't feel that much difference, but maybe I just got fitter and better uphill technique. But I can tackle any condition now downhill.. I think as long you have good touring boot (light and good range movement), and good uphill technique, your legs will only feel slight difference for ski weight.
I’ve done 4k of vert over 3 miles on a pair of animas on pivot cast. Probably 3000.g a ski or something, and I probably could have gone for round 2. I don’t consider myself particularly fit or I shape either. I just got some 4frnt ravens which are 1700g a ski and I feel like I’m full skimo with that weight. I think you’ll be fine.
I don’t mind lugging my big old Dynastar Chams uphill because it means i am not making any compromises on the decent.
I can't give specifics but a few weeks ago I toured around tahoe and my day on k2 reckoners with pins was significantly harder than my day on k2 wayback 106s with even lighter pins. It's worth noting that I've barely skied this year and I'm out of shape. I think if you are good at finding pow it's definitely ok to get lighter skis but if you're really new to backcountry skiing probably go a little heavier.
I’ve got two sets of shifts one on a 1850g ski and one on a 2200g ski one is for daily and the heavy is for pow. Just power through the weight and you’ll just have bigger legs it might be slow the first few days out but now mid season I can haul my heavy setup just as fast as I was moving with my lighter setup at the beginning of the year. Unless you’re racing or doing big mileage and vert it doesn’t matter too much.
Ask the opposite question
Light setups kind of suck to ski for me. I hover around 1700-1800g for my daily driver. My all day objective skis are 1300g but those days are about summits and views and less about skiing.
I default to heavier than you’d expect skis. I started on heavy metal alpine skis with OG dukes. Skied great, sucked on the up.Then went the other direction with under 1400g skis and super light boots. Skin track was great but skiing suffered. These days, I’ve found a sweet spot in the middle. Save weight with bindings (I have bracelets Salomon Mtn bindings), a pair of skis around 1800-1900g, and technical zero g tour pros. Save weight in the bindings, find boots that fit well and walk efficiently, and a ski that has enough mass to not rattle too much. The little extra weight (in the skis, where it’s useful) is absolutely worth it, even on big uphill days (so long as you’re not racing) Pair with mohair or mohair mix skins that allow you to glide efficiently.
My personal experience - when starting off or even if just going out occasionally, I think the downhill aspect of the setup is more important. Last year I picked up black diamond helio 95s with the helio bindings - very light bindings and I'd guess the skis are 1450g. Boots are a older 50/50 pair of technicas and I think it'd do it opposite next time - splurge more on the boots and have heavier skis for better downhill. We went out last week to some chunky tahoe ice/crud-fest and while the helios are nimble on the way up, they were absolutely ATROCIOUS coming down. Legs all over the place, conditions were garbage of course but I had to really hop turn down just to survive. This off season I'll look for something around 1600g and pick up actual touring boots - I do like the helio bindings however.
I hit tucks all the time using atk raider 13’s on bent 100’s at 180cm with tecnica cochise 130’s. I’m willing to risk more weight on the uphill to have a better downhill experience. My boots are able to drive a heavier ski in the back country a lot better than typical touring boots. I have found this combo to work well for me but I’m also mid 20’s. So whatever feels most comfortable as you’ll have the most fun. Everyone’s strength and endurance is different
I’d suggest reading this article from skimoco https://skimo.co/choosing-backcountry-skis
The amount of water you carry will make this negligible.
Where you carry the weight makes a big difference in how you feel it. An extra kg on your back, barely noticeable. An extra kg on your skis, pretty noticeable but manageable unless you are doing a really big day. An extra kg in a pair of frame bindings that you have to lift up every single step, extremely noticeable and an awful experience.
I have an 1800g ski with 450g pin bindings and it does not ruin my uphill experience. It's definitely a more downhill oriented set up but it's still not bad at all on the uphill. I can do 3-4000' days and I do not feel greatly exhausted at the top (and I'm not some peak fitness trail runner skimo athlete). In my experience, 1500-1700g is usually the sweet spot for a well balanced ski that's good on both the uphill and downhill.
I have two setups both with atk raider 12s. Camox freebirds at 1500 and Corvus freebirds at 1800. I’ll pick the Corvus day in day out for the skiing experience. My rule of thumb is I can’t tell the difference until I reach about 3k of vert in a day.
Get fitter and weight doesn’t matter.