I was taking an avalanche safety course and rapidly realized that it is almost impossible to conduct decent column stability tests without a snow saw. But I really didn't like the idea of carrying another item in my pack, particularly a sharp, pointy one! This is about the only shovel on the market with a saw that stows in the handle. Blade is made of the bomber T6061 aluminum alloy of choice.

And having now dug 20 odd pits with it, I can testify that both shovel and saw are excellent. Maybe underkill for full avalanche professionals, but for most of us backcountry travelers, this is the perfect balance of size, weight, cost, function. Good stuff!

The overwhelmingly striking aspect of these shorts is their weight. They are amazingly lightweight, due to the very light fabric, and the welded construction. The fabric seems to be the same sort of light, stretchy, wicking fabric used in running shorts.

That's the greatest strength of these shorts: because they are so light and stretchy, they are fantastic for bouldering. (And presumably for hiking, too.) You can sweat like a pig, and the fabric breathes wonderfully, doesn't get heavy, doesn't feel hot, doesn't bind or restrict your motion in any way at all. The product description recommends them for trail running, but they seem a little long for that (knee length), and personally I need some uh... support when I'm running. So for that use, you'd probably want to use some euro-style underwear!

But the great strength of these shorts is also their greatest weakness. The shorts are so amazingly lightweight that you feel almost naked. I could certainly deal with them being just slightly heavier and less clingy for casual wear.

They do seem to run a little on the small side. I typically wear pants with a 31" waist, and ordered both a S and a M. The M was a little big, and the S just a little small. I went with the S, but the fit is certainly figure-hugging!

What I wish was different (apart from slightly heavier fabric, which would probably help with durability, too) is for the shape to be slightly more waisted: the shorts feel very straight-cut, like they were formed around a cylinder rather than a real person. I also wish there were belt loops, so that they could be worn with a belt if necessary. There are two small straps at the sides that cinch the waist, but I found them to be somewhat unsatisfactory, as they loosened spontaneously, and I have to keep tightening them every hour or so.

Overall highly recommended for climbing and hiking.

I bought this after wandering the Outdoor Retailer trade show in Salt Lake City. I went by the booths of every hydration vendor, and looked at what they had in the way of minimal packs. I was looking for hydration packs for marathons and ultrarunning events. The CamelBak Classic was by far my favorite.

There are two key advantages to this pack. Firstly, the bladder is super easy to refill without removing from the pack. The mouth is just tucked under a flap. This makes it ideal for race aid stations: you can easily unscrew lid as you approach, and quickly refill from jug etc. Secondly, there's really nothing to the pack that you don't want. There's a small zippered pocket on the outside that is big enough to hold a few gels. And a minimal bungee that can be used to secure a rain shell or a long-sleeve. Larger items can also be slipped into the bladder pocket. All the straps are mesh and highly breathable.

I liked the design so much I bought two, so that I can leave one at bag-drops/checkpoints and just swoop in and grab a full pack.

Ultaracing heaven!

I used to be a big fan of Montrail Shoes, and went through four or five pairs of the Masai before they were discontinued. I've not really liked any of their shoes since: they all seemed to be be heavy and clunky. However, that's all changed with the Rogue Racer.

This is literally a game-changer. It is astonishingly light but provides nearly all the support and cushioning of a traditional trail shoe. I tried them on, ran in them once, and had no hesitation in wearing them for 50 km trail race. I had no foot issues at all.

The amazing thing is that they weigh almost as little as super-minimal trail shoes like the New Balance Minimus or the Merrell Trail Glove. But they provide a lot more cushioning and protection. You may or may not think that is a good thing, but my experience is that the hillier the race, the more cushioning I want on my heel so that I can run fast downhill. Also, the longer the race, the more I want just to be able to put a foot down without worrying too much about placing the foot precisely, avoiding sharp rocks etc.

The Rogue Racers feel very much like a traditional trail runner (like the Brooks Cascadia) but ditch 40% of the weight. I don't know what sort of voodoo Montrail have been cooking up in their research department, but the results are stunning. Expect to see this shoe winning a LOT of races.

If Montrail were to tweak the shoe at all, here's what I would suggest. The forefoot is really nice: soft enough to provide great trail feel, but firm enough that sharp rocks don't leave you limping. However, it's got a noticeable concavity to it that I think is undesirable. The only discomfort I felt with this shoe (after a 4.5 hour race) was right in the middle of the forefoot. I don't know if this is related to the concavity, or just because that's the thinnest point of the sole. But either way, I would flatten out the concavity (which doesn't seem to have much benefit), and thicken the middle of the forefoot by a millimeter or so. Secondly, I would be tempted to drop the heel slightly. After running in near-flat shoes, the heel stack seems high. As I said above, this means that the cushioning is great for thundering downhill, and I didn't experience any instability, but I think Montrail could improve the shoe by dropping the heel 2 or 3 mm.

Despite my niggles (Hey, nothing's ever perfect, right?), this is really a breakthrough shoe that is brilliantly designed. I have more than ten different pairs of trail shoes, and these are the shoe I reach for without hesitation for any long, hilly runs. I'm planning to wear them next in the Pocatello 50.

Love these. Like @ols3441909, I wear mine all the time, and keep them on until they're so dirty that I start to feel embarrassed about it.

Fit is perfect. Not tight, not too baggy. Length is perfect. Sizing is right on the money. Fabric looks great, feels great. Not too light, not too heavy.

And I really like the zippered thigh pockets. I can put a wallet and phone in them without encumbrance. If you put a phone in a front pocket it gets in the way. If you put it in the back pocket, it can crack when you sit down. But I don't really like the look of cargo pant thigh pockets. These pants have zippered thigh pockets, but they're pretty much invisible.

All in all, AWESOME. I've just bought a second pair. Kuhl pants rock!

I really wanted to love these shoes, as the concept seemed a great one: shave unnecessary weight of a conventional trail shoe by removing the footbed insert, and reshaping the bottom of the shoe to compensate. I've never found there to be any merit in insole footbeds anyway, and the market for overpriced aftermarket insoles (cough -- Superfeet) has always struck me as selling snake-oil.

My size 10's weigh 22.5 oz per pair. A comparable shoe (Brooks Cascadia) with an insole is about 25 oz, so the weight savings are probably around 10%.

Vasque have done a great job. The shoe runs well, and feels very much like a regular trail shoe, except that they ride noticeably lower to the ground -- which is good thing! Great stability on uneven terrain and less chance of rolling an ankle.

However, the outsole is surprisingly stiff, both in the heel and forefoot, which is great for running over sharp rocks, but I found them uncomfortably lacking in cushioning on paved sections getting to and from the trails.

The forefoot is also a little on the narrow side, and my foot is relatively wide. I got significant chafing -- enough that I had to alternate with other shoes to let my skin recover. I hoped that they might stretch enough to be tolerable (I had a pair of Vasque Blurs that felt narrow at first and then stretched out nicely) but even after ~50 miles, the transistors still feel too narrow -- enough that I wouldn't want to do long (multi-hour) runs in them.

If you like the shape of Vasque shoes, you'll probably love these. But I can't recommend them for wide feet.

First up, check out the weight of these shoes. My pair of 10.5's weigh exactly 1 lb (8 oz each). For comparison, my Brooks Cascadia 4's weigh 1 lb 10 oz per pair. That's a massive weight difference. The NB 101's are amazingly light. But that also means that they provide minimal support and minimal cushioning. So this shoe is going to feel *very* different to a traditional trail shoe.

If you're a trail-runner and have been watching the barefoot running revolution, been wanting to dip a toe in the water, but can't quite bring yourself to run in the (ridiculous-looking) FiveFingers, then this is the shoe for you. The 101 provides an impressive amount of foot protection for the weight, while still retaining great ground feel. Hallelujah!

What's not to like? Well, firstly, I found that they run a little small. I ordered a 10, which felt too tight, and had to return them for a 10.5. After a few runs, the shoes have stretched a little and now feel a little roomy, so maybe I could have got away with the 10. Hard to say. But it seems like they run about 1/4 size small, so if in doubt, I would suggest sizing up. (Maybe they are sized for use without socks?) Also, when I first put them on, the arch felt a little high (no real reason for arch support in a minimal running shoe!), but within a run or two, the arch seemed to flatten out, and was unnoticeable.

Finally, I've only put about 25 miles on these shoes, so I can't comment yet on their durability, or their capability in a wide range of conditions. I'll try to update this review when I've had more trail time in them.

I've put in about 10 days so far in this jacket. All skiing in back- and front-country. Nothing but good stuff to report.

I opted for the blue with orange zippers. Color is great. Fabric feels very nice (almost softshell-like), is reasonably breathable, and seems durable. I've skied through a lot of trees and caught branches that would tear flimsy fabric; so far the jacket is totally unscathed. Can't really comment on waterproofness, as I've not worn it in rain or melting snow.

Construction is impeccable. Seams are all welded. Zippers all waterproof. Reinforcements where necessary. Everything perfectly finished.

Design is very solid, well thought out, with a lot of innovative touches. It has two external chest pockets (hooray!) and one internal chest pocket for iPod etc. There's a powder skirt that I'm ambivalent about -- I ski wearing bibs -- but it's removable if you don't like it, or want to wear jacket for hiking etc. Hood is great. Stays out of the way when not in use. Large enough to flip up over a helmet. The jacket has unusual elasticated cuffs (with thumb loops) that grip your wrist and keep snow out of your sleeves.

My only quibbles: 1. There's also a strange left forearm pocket that seems completely pointless to me. 2. Underarm zippers seem well-placed, but are NOT mesh-backed as stated in description.

Sizing is VERY roomy. At 6 ft, 160 lbs, slim build, I have *plenty* of room in the Medium. In fact, a friend who is 6'4" tried on the jacket, and was able to wear it without it looking ridiculous.

Bought a pair of these last season, in early 2010, and figured that with the huge width, I would probably only use them on deep powder days. But EVERY time I ski, I reach for the Drifters. I literally haven't used any other pair of skis since. (With the exception of one rando race.)

The Drifters are just amazingly, insanely great. Obviously, I was expecting them to be wonderful in powder -- and no disappointment there. But I was pleasantly surprised at how well they perform in pretty much any condition. With the rockered tip, and 125 mm underfoot, they surf up and float over anything. They are ridiculously forgiving, and tons of fun. I have the confidence to charge at high speed through any kind of snow, in bounds or out. They make be look like a much better skier than I really am!

I ski these about 25% in-bounds and 75% out. For their width, they are amazingly light. (A hair over 8 lbs at 182 cm), and the rockered tip makes them feel more nimble and maneuverable than the length would suggest.I have mine mounted with NTN bindings, with boot center aligned with the boot center mark on the ski. I initially tried about 2 cm rearward, and then moved them forward. Felt much better in the recommended position. Doh. I guess the Voile guys know what they're talking about.

I think this is the best Tele ski in existence if you want to rip hard in deep snow. Everybody loves them. I've yet to meet *anyone* who has anything negative to say about these skis. Wow.

Just like the name says, this is a better sweater -- warmer, more durable, not itchy like wool. Nothing exciting here, just a jacket that you find yourself wearing all the time. Cut is on the slim side, without being tight. M worked perfectly for me at 5'11", 160 lbs.Unlike other reviewer, I like the full zipper, which makes garment easier to get on and off and allows more ventilation. Looks good in an understated, unobtrusive way. About the only thing I'd change would be to add a little more color variation to fabric. The brown, at least, seems a little monochromatic.

Super happy with this jacket. Looks great for casual wear. Fleece is extremely soft and cuddly. Very lightweight, very warm. Fairly slim cut (Medium worked perfectly for me at 5'11.5", 160 lbs) -- Hooray! -- I get annoyed when garments have lots of excess material for a beer gut that I don't have! Good stretchiness, too.

Fleece is not windproof at all. But the extra breathability makes this more comfortable to wear indoors -- perfect for slouching around a chilly cabin. And when the wind blows, a shell on top makes a full winter combination. This is a great layering jacket.

Love these shoes: comfy; warm; look great (in an understated, upmarket, granola-ish sort of way!)

Only downside is that the sizing is peculiar. I'm a size 10 (US) in just about every shoe I try. But having ordered these in a 10, I had to return for 9.5. 10 was just way too loose.

Suggest that most people down-size half a size by default...

Can't say I've used these in the mountains at base camp, or on the crags. So I can't testify to the stickiness of the rubber, or their suitability as an approach or descent shoe. But they are super comfortable, and they look great. Several people have complemented me on my footwear.(I got the more subdued "brown" color)

Sizing seems right on the money. I typically wear a 10 street shoe, and found the size 10 to be perfect. If you wear them without socks, they feel comfortably spacious. Slightly snugger with socks, but being able to adjust the velcro closure gives you more options than with most Sanuks.

I was concerned that if I wore these barefoot, they would get smelly fast, but so far so good. Amazingly so, actually. The footbed is silver-treated, and this really seems to work. Mine still smell like roses.

Comfortable, breathable, flexible, light, good-looking... what's not to like? Buy 'em.

I recently discovered Kuhl pants, and so far every pair I've tried on have looked and felt awesome. Amazing, because I rarely get that excited about clothes.

The "Jean Pant" is nothing like a pair of denim jeans, so I don't understand the name. The fabric is a nylon mix that is very lightweight but still feels tough. Nice and breathable and doesn't absorb much water. Cut is generous, without looking baggy, and allows great range of motion without binding.

Overall, a great looking casual pant that would also work well for bouldering. Or pretty much anything else I can think of.

Nice.

I bought this jacket last year (in molten red) when there was a TNF promotion. I didn't really need another winter jacket, but it was such a good deal that it was hard to pass up.

I'm very glad I did. I live in the mountains in Park City, and this is the jacket that I grab every day in the winter. I use it for pretty much everything, from taking the trash out to going to the store, working outside, chopping wood, for travel, for hiking, even for skiing. It's amazingly versatile. It looks good enough to wear around the city. It's warm, it's windproof. It's got a smooth lining that makes it easy to put on and off, and the lack of "technical" features (like drawstring on hood, or velcro cuff closures) is actually a plus, because there's nothing to adjust.

Really there's nothing not to like about this. Everything seems right. Pockets are the right size in the right places. Outer fabric is light, but still pretty tough. Stains wipe right off it.

This is certainly no Arctic expedition jacket. There are warmer jackets; there are lighter jackets; there are tougher jackets. But this is really a great all-rounder at a great price.

The pricing on these socks is killer. And they look great, and run really well. They fit well, are nicely elasticated, seem durable (so far). BUT they do seem to get smellier quicker than my other socks. As long as you put them on to run, and take them off afterwards, you'll be fine. But I can't really recommend them for all day use. :-(

These things cost a small fortune, but they are absolutely, unequivocably the best socks I've ever owned. They are light, elastic, snug, breathable, tough, don't get smelly, look great, keep their elasticity. Nothing else I've ever tried comes close.

These are my favorite running shorts. And believe me, I have *a lot* of pairs! They look great. Function is absolutely impeccable. And length is a good compromise between being able to run freely and not looking like you're running in a pair of briefs.

There not much here. No flashy features, minimal number of pockets. But they just work. The fabric is super light and doesn't get heavy when you're sweating hard. Liner is great: supportive, but not too tight (for me at least - this seems to be something runners can't agree on). Freedom of motion is fantastic. Length (on the short side) is great for running, but you might feel a little exposed if you're wandering around the shopping mall afterwards! For longer runs, however, it might be nice to have a rear pocket to hold gels or energy bar.

Bought these mostly for bouldering. Can't stand heavy cotton shorts when I'm sweating hard. Perfect. These are light, breathable, dry quickly. Good pockets without looking bulky. Only issue is that length might be a little short for the new school. These stop just above my knees, and most kids these days seem to be wearing shorts that are a longer.

There's no such thing as the "perfect" trail shoe. The choice depends on the trail you're running (how rocky, slippery etc.); the distance; whether you're in a race (in which case, you'd trade weight for comfort and durability); there's the shape of your foot: no shoe will fit everyone well. And there's an enormous amount of personal taste in terms of cushioning, support, trail feel etc.

Having said that, I'm *really* impressed with these. I like my trail shoes light and fast, not heavy and clunky. I don't need or want lots of support from my shoes. These run fast and smooth, are light for a trail shoe (my size 10 pair weigh 665g, 23.5oz), and they look frickin' awesome. But you'd better run like the wind to live up to the appearance of these babies!

The rear end of the shoe is amazing -- utterly unsurpassed in my experience. The height of the upper is just right: it feels lightly supportive without getting in the way of a natural ankle flex. The sole is not too thick: on trails, you really don't want to be balancing on a tower of foam -- you'll just roll your ankle. Yet the cushioning feels plush yet stable. And the splayed out "wings" (about which I was initially skeptical) really seem to help align the heel strike, without getting in the way, or catching on rocks. Genuinely, this is a significant technological advance. Kudos to Salomon's designers.

The uppers are also great: the welded tape-over-fabric construction does a good job saving weight and eliminating pressure points. The fabric is open enough to be breathable, but dense enough to keep dust out of the shoe. I personally don't see much advantage of Salmon's Quicklace system over conventional lacing: you can certainly tighten the shoe very quickly, but you still need to tuck the buckle away, so you don't save a whole lot of time. Still, it works well here, and doesn't seem to loosen up while running. Maybe if you're hitting any water crossings, I guess that the Quicklace system will absorb a lot less water, and dry out quicker than regular laces. That would be consistent with Salomon's background in adventure racing.

I'm not quite so unreservedly thrilled about the forefoot. I enjoy trail shoes with flexible, compliant soles that allow me to feel the trail. These are very soft, more like a road shoe. That makes them feel very fast on smooth trails, and you waste less energy flexing the sole. But I think these could do with just a little more protection: running over rubble, I was getting more penetration than I would like. Perhaps it's just a matter of getting used to a softer forefoot. We'll see.

My other quibble is that the sole narrows a little too soon on the instep, just behind the ball of my foot. The first time I wore these, I got a blister on the front side of my arch. If I could have maybe 1 mm extra width there, it would solve the problem. However, now that the skin there has toughened up a little, it's not bothering me any more. My feet are flat, and slightly on the wide side: so this would probably be less of a concern if you have normal to high arches, and/or normal to narrow feet.

If I spent more time on the negatives than I would normally, it's just because these shoes are so damned good, that I would really like to see them perfected (according to my tastes, at least.) But let me emphasize that despite my quibbles, I still really like the shoes, and I plan to wear them both for training, and in a number of upcoming trail races.

And if I win wearing these shoes I'll be sure to follow up here! :-)

Love the tips on these. I much prefer them to the traditional bar used in BD skins. The G3 clips are quicker to put on, lighter, fit more ski shapes, and center the skin better. The skin itself is a little lighter and more flexible than BD skins. Grip seems similar so far, although it's hard to say for sure without going up the exact same track with different skins. Oh, and the new G3 trimming tool is brilliant: no need to mess around moving the skin back and forth on the ski.

I would change two things: firstly, add a removable strip down the middle of the skin to make them easier to separate (just like the BD skins); secondly, the G3 tail clip just doesn't work at all on twin-tips: this needs to be fixed.

I bought this as a warm jacket to throw on over the top of my regular clothing when I'm standing around in the backountry. (And for sitting around camp when snow-camping etc.) For that purpose, it's outstanding. Firstly, let's be clear what this garment is not: it's not waterproof, and it's not tough -- it's not built to walk through thorns etc. If you try that, you'll rip it to shreds. What it is is SUPER WARM, and SUPER LIGHT and compressible. For it's intended purpose, it's absolutely outstanding: the negative reviews are clearly from people who expected something different. The hood is large enough to comfortably fit over a helmet. The sizing is generous: I'm 5'11', 160lbs, and M is large enough to wear over my ski jacket with several layers underneath. The down is top quality, very voluminous, and the baffled construction (seams not stitched all the way through, causing cold spots) is quite impeccable. It could be more windproof, I suppose, but that would make it heavier and bulkier, and if you're standing around in a hurricane, you should wear your hardshell on the outside! About the only thing I'd change is to make the jacket a couple of inches longer to keep my backside warmer. However, I assume this is targeted at mountaineers who want to wear a harness without getting the jacket tangled up. Again: insanely warm, insanely light, breathable, compressible, etc. Awesome.

It's difficult to review this boot alone, since the NTN binding + boot are a combination that are difficult to separate. So keep that in mind. I bought a pair of last season's T-X's from Backcountry.com. Loved the convenience of the binding and the fit of the boot, but was never completely convinced by the way they skied: something didn't feel quite right. I tried numerous remedies (as suggested in Telemarktips forums), including heating bellows with hairdryer, drilling new hole for a new lower lean setting, and lowering the heelpiece. Over the summer, Scarpa ran a program to replace the lower shell of last year's boots with the newer dual-injection shell from this year's updated model that have a softer bellows flex and decreased forward lean. Finally got to try them out yesterday. Great success! The NTN system finally seems to be fulfil its potential. This time around everything feels right. The boots are stiff and light and comfortable. I love the idea of having one boot for both AT and Tele (although I've yet to test these as AT boots). My only criticism would be that the buckles (on 2007/8 model) are not micro-adjustable, which seems a little cheap. But I think Scarpa added micro-adjust buckles to this year's model. (It certainly looks that way in the photos, even if the description says otherwise.)

These don't really work for me. Which is a shame, as they have a lot of great qualities. The good stuff first: bomber construction, good grip, very comfortable, nice forefoot fit and feel. What I didn't like: heavy; upper extends too high on ankle, and is over-padded there; sole is too thick at heel (makes it easy to roll the shoe); lacing area is too long (extends too far back on the shoe); sole too stiff. But much of this is personal taste: I have problem-free feet, and like to race, so my preference is towards lighter shoes with less support and less protection. Having said that, if Vasque could lighten these shoes up, and fix the flaws in the back end, I would be very tempted.

I've never really got excited by socks, and these are no exception: they're just socks. However, what's better than most other socks is that (1) they are wool, and so are much less smelly; (2) they are wool, and so don't get too wet and heavy; and (3) they seem to be pretty durable. My only criticism is that they're not very stretchy...

The best thing about this bag is its weight: it is really, really light for the size. There aren't too many back around that are this big and this light. They've saved a huge amount of weight by not having a telescoping handle and frame. I've not found this to be a problem at all, since the bag is long enough that the (soft, comfortable) handle ends up at the right height anyway. Over the course of a year's frequent travelling the bag has held up well. So far there's no visible wear at all. Construction quality is excellent, and it is nice to know that bag has lifetime warranty. The main handles can be extended so they can be used as shoulder straps to carry the bag like a backpack. This is very handy, but the straps aren't padded, so you won't want to carry a fully-loaded bag very far, particularly if you're only wearing a t-shirt! But that seems like a reasonable compromise between weight, cost, and comfort. The size is great. You can cram *a lot* of gear in there. The downside is that if you're not careful, it is really easy to overshoot the weight limit for US airlines. I guess about my only criticism is that the back won't stand up on its end: it would be nice to to be able to do this when waiting in line, at ticket counters etc. I would definitely buy again.

A beanie is a beanie is a beanie, right? Well, that's the way I feel. I mean, there's just not that much to them. But this one stands out from the pack as being "just right" in all the ways that count. It's not too big or too small. It's not too loose or too tight. It's not itchy. It's pretty much indestructible. It's warm, wind-resistant. And it looks good too.

Here's a counter-opinion to Sawtoothme. I *love* this stuff. Most sports drinks are too sweet (too much sucrose and high-fructose corn syrup), too flavored, and (particularly annoying to me) too acidic. Once upon a time, I went too far in the opposite direction, and bought a tub of pure maltodextrin. It had no flavor at all, and was almost unpalatable. This stuff is perfect. It contains pretty much just long(ish) chain carbohydrates and electrolytes. The flavoring is very slight, and the sweeteners almost unnoticeable. Just enough to make you enjoy swigging it. I've used it in races time and time again, and I swear by the stuff. In longer races (>2 hours) I'll typically use something with some protein in it. I like Hammer Perpetuem. The nice thing with the mild flavoring is that you can blend your own magic potion without creating something undrinkable.

This is a great sports drink: not too sweet, not over flavored. Even better, it has a nice electrolyte profile that makes it really easy to absorb when you're dehydrated. But best of all, it comes in little sachets. I keep a sachet in *every single* backpack I own, and on more than one occasion, it's been a life-saver. (Well, not literally, but it's helped get me back up and running and feeling strong.) Good stuff!

I'm guessing these are the logical successor to the venerable Minuteman Bibs. I'm thrilled with them. The Gore-Tex Pro Shell fabric seems to have excellent breathability, and is supposedly more durable than XCR. They fit great (M works perfectly for me at 5'11", 160lbs), and just feel right. The extra height of the bibs (over ski pants) means that snow doesn't end up down your back, and your upper layers don't come untucked. This is a simple, streamlined, elegant design, clearly optimized for backcountry skiing. There are two side vents (hip to thigh), and four pockets -- no unnecessary zippers or closures or strange features that you don't want. I wouldn't change a single thing.

The TNF Volt jacket is very reasonably-priced, and skips on a lot of expensive extras like seam-taping, wrist closures etc. However, it looks great, is super light, and wonderfully breathable. I'm not sure it would work very well in heavy rain, or long periods of melting snow, and the fabric is not 100% windproof. But the surface is tough and sheds snow very well. All in all, this is great spring skiing jacket, and is permeable enough to work as a layering piece too. I also plan to wear it for climbing in the spring. I'm 5'11", 160 lbs, and the M is a great fit, with enough space to wear a fleece underneath.

Nutritionally, these are great. They don't freeze up to a brick in cold weather (or at least down to the ~10F that I tested), and they are bigger and give you a lot more sustained energy than any of the other bars that I've tried. Personally, I prefer the taste of the original flavor, though that's completely subjective.

Maybe I've bought into the marketing pseudo-science, but I could swear that on long endurance events (2 to 12 hours), I feel that I have more energy when I use drinks with protein added, like Accelerade. I also think this makes a really great recovery drink -- really handy for getting some protein in you fast after exercise. The only reason I wouldn't give this five stars is that IMHO, the drink is too acidic. I think they've concentrated too much on trying to make it taste good. That said, I have plenty of triathlete friends who use this all the time for both racing and training.

I was completely unprepared for just how good this jacket would be. It is very small and thin, and astonishingly breathable, yet totally windproof. What blew me away was how warm it felt. I went hiking in 30F weather wearing the jacket over nothing but an ultra-light running shirt, and felt perfectly comfortable. Being able to flip the hood up and down makes a huge difference. Much warmer than just a hat. Next day, I wore the jacket on a backcountry trip. Skinning uphill, I was sweating like a pig, but at the top of the hill, it dried out instantly, without any cold sweat lingering cold. I've also got a transition zip tee, which I love for running in the rain (you can literally run in freezing rain, and come home warm and dry), but this is better still: the addition of a hood, thumb-loops, and a rear pocket makes the garment even more capable. BTW, though the description doesn't mention it, the "Windstopper" membrane is GoreTex N2S. Seriously, it is hard to overstate how fantastic this jacket is. This is really a giant leap in outdoor technology: I've not worn anything in years that has impressed me this much. You won't believe it until you try it. The jacket is cut slim and athletic, and designed to be worn close to the skin. I'm 5'11", 160 lbs, and the M fits me like a glove.

I have had great experience with Marmot gear in the past -- it is quality, well-designed stuff. And I had heard great things about these bibs from various hard-core mountain types. However, I never got to battle-test them. When I tried them on, the hips/thighs billowed out like those neo-Nazi pants that state troopers wear with their high boots! My guess is that the bibs are designed to allow you to wear a lot of high-volume layers and maybe also a harness underneath. Great for hard-core mountaineering, perhaps, but they seemed excessive for backcountry skiing, and I returned them...

Wow! *I* *love* *this* *ski*. It's huge width and soft shovel make skiing powder totally effortless and exhilarating. Furthermore, the ski is very light for its size, and great for touring. My "174 cm" (actually 176) weigh 3530g/pair (7lbs,12.5oz). Note that this is a *totally* different ski (based on Coomba alpine ski) to last year's heavyweight Anti-Piste. K2 have definitely pulled off some sort of Voodoo magic with the tip, which has a kind of dual camber and shape ("rocker") that makes the ski feel shorter on hardpack and longer in deep snow. Given the serious width, I was surprised how well the ski performed on hardpack and in the bumps. These skis are tremendously maneuverable: they absolutely scream through tight trees in deep snow. If you're a big, hard-charging skier, you might find them a little light and on the soft side (in which case go buy some BD Verdicts). But for the rest of us (I'm 155 lbs) the flex and weight makes the ski forgiving, nimble, and just damned fun. Best new (Western) ski this year, hands-down. Nothing else comes close in performance and versatility. Hard to understand how other reviewers could give this ski less than five stars. I'd give them six if I could! These are off-the-charts good: You'll think you're a ski movie hero. FWIW, if you look at the dates of their reviews, it's pretty clear that SingleTrackMind, cheater5_tokyo, and doublet were all reviewing *last season's* (06/07) Anti-Piste, which, as I said above, is a completely different ski -- much heavier and stiffer and slightly narrower than this.

What do you want from gaiters? As far as I'm concerned, I just want to keep the snow out of my boots. These do the job admirably. They are quick and easy to put on and take off, and seem to be pretty breathable, too. The velcro closure looks like it might be a weak point, but it doesn't leak, and seems to be holding up well. And you can't argue with the convenience: this closure is way quicker than a zipper. I've had these for a couple of years and worn them on something like a hundred winter runs/hikes in the Wasatch, an they look as good as new. Still, it's nice to know they have an unlimited warranty.

I've been skiing fat planks (Atomic Teledaddy) since the 03/04 season. The TD's were the first ski that I ever tried that made me say "Wow, these are way better than everything else." For the last couple of seasons, I demoed a variety of supposedly hot skis (Atomic TM-X, Rossi T2, Fischer T-Stix 92, BD Verdict, BD Kilowatt), but none of them really impressed. The Rapid Transits are the first ski in years to wow me again. I was expecting to have trouble adapting to the sidecut, and thought that the asymmetrical shape was a gimmick. But immediately after demoing the ski, I went right out and ordered a pair -- they're that good. Wide enough to get good float in the pow. Tremendous grip on hardpack. Great shape and flex for the bumps. Nice and light for touring. This is an outstanding ski, and almost perfect. Almost? My only, tiny criticism is that I find the tail of the straighter edge a little bit hooky. If I could, I'd round off that corner to make the ski release more gradually.

Not stiff enough to be a pure edging shoe (i.e. not for Smith Rock!), but surprisingly versatile, with awesome sensitivity. They really excel on overhangs, tiny pockets, smears. A fantastic bouldering shoe: similar to FiveTen V10 slipper, but more comfortable.

Note that these stretch significantly. I'm a size 10 US street shoe, and have found that a 41.5 in La Sportiva climbing shoes (Mythos etc.) worked well for me. On a whim I decided to order the Venoms in a 41.0. Initially they seemed painfully small, and I thought I'd got a little carried away with the sizing. But after a few days of bouldering, they stretched out nicely, and now fit like a glove.

I'll buy these again and again until La Sportiva retire the design!

These are not typical trail-running shoes. They are light, light, light. Which means they are *not* for everyone. If you're in the Clydesdale category, or you need a shoe with lots of support and/or stability control, these are not for you. On the other hand, if you are of athletic build, have trouble-free feet and normal running gait, and you want to run *fast* on trails, then you are going to love these shoes. The feel of running at breakneck pace over uneven terrain is exhilarating. The shoes are super grippy, and have a stiff enough sole so that running over rocks and stumps is still very pleasant. These are probably not shoes that you will want to train in day after day (although I have to say that they are surprisingly forgiving), and certainly not what you'd wear over a really rocky course (the sole is fine, but the ultralight uppers will get cut up fast, as will your feet inside!) But come race day, these are *exactly* what you're looking for. Zoom!

Finally, a note about sizing: I'm a fairly regular US 10 in most running shoes, and found the 10 to be a little on the snug side. The 10.5 however, was noticeably too big. So I guess they run just a smidgen on the small side.

Love these shades. They are everything you want: they look cool; they are comfortable; the clarity of the lenses is outstanding; they have Smith's lifetime warranty; they come in a hard, durable case. I've worn them skiing, biking, and running, and found them excellent in all conditions. Switching lenses out is very easy (I use the clear lenses when biking in the dark.) Can't think of a single negative thing!

My Atomic Teledaddys are now in they fourth season of hard skiing and starting to look a little ragged. Over the last two years I tried a bunch of different skis, and never found anything that compared to the versatility of the Teledaddy. I demoed the Verdicts, and finally have found a suitable replacement. They are everything I loved in the Teledaddys -- masses of floatation, light (astonishingly so), powerful, damp, stable at speed -- but with a little extra sidecut and a little extra width in the shovel. Remember that this is a *big* ski: don't be afraid to go shorter than you would normally. I'm 5'11 and 160lb, and a very aggressive skier and the 180cm feels a little on the large side. (Noticeably less flickable than 173cm Teledaddys, but super stable and reassuring at high speed in deep snow.)

I've got about a week's hard skiing on my Ascents. First off, there's no doubt that free-hinged bindings make backcountry travel far more efficient: once you've tried them, you'll never go back. Also, because of the free-hinge, you can use stiffer springs and have a more active binding without experiencing any negative effects (otherwise, very "active" bindings are a lot of extra work when skinning). I opted for the X-race (red) cartridges, and really enjoyed the extra power and earlier engagement (from the slight toe ramp). The new heel-piece is certainly slick (although I can't figure out how to get the bails to tuck behind them so they don't flap around when you carry the skis!) Many people are fretting about the durability of the binding, but mine seem solid, and I can't believe that a reputable company like G3 would put out a fragile, unreliable product. And if the bindings do start failing, I'm confident G3 would offer replacements. The Ascents are *significantly* (13oz) lighter than Black Diamond O1's, but switching to and from tour mode is not nearly as slick as the O1. I suspect the locking mechanism is more prone to icing up, too: I've had to clear out the ice with my ski pole to re-lock the binding. The binding also sits significantly higher (40mm vs 30mm) than the O1 -- I don't really know whether that's good or bad! But I can say that I'm very happy with the bindings: they ski great and combine the familiar feel of the Targas with effortless touring.

I've skied the last couple of seasons on Garmont Syner-G's. Always found them to be comfortable and to perform well. However, I was really cranking the top buckle and powerstrap to try to maximize control of my skis.
This season, I thought I'd upgrade to the Ener-G's, and I'm really happy with the decision. If the boots are stiffer, the difference is fairly slight -- I didn't notice it (but I've not tried switching back and forth). The fit of the boot seems identical: my foot is wide and flat, and Garmonts have always worked much better for me than Scarpas. What I really noticed, however, was the extra control of the ski that I got from the fourth buckle and higher cuff -- it is very noticeable. And this with the buckles and strap looser, so the boots are actually more comfortable too!
Best of all, the weight difference is negligible. My brand new Ener-G's (size 27.5) weigh 3760g (pair); my two-year-old Syner-G's weigh 3660g. The Ener-G's are only 2.6% heavier! That's a miniscule price to pay for the improved performance. Suh-weet!

This is really a fine-looking jacket. It's a great color (but noticeably more red than it appears in the images above -- check out the photos of the women's Cairn fleece in Sangria, which are much closer to the actual color). The fleece material is slightly stretchy, super-soft and has an outer weave that looks like it won't pill. Construction is top-notch (as you would expect from those Canucks).
What's not to like? Well, the fleece is definitely not windproof. (The flip-side is that breathability is outstanding: when I run outside in the cold I can actually see the steam coming through the jacket!) The product description also mentions an 'internal security pocket', but I couldn't locate such a thing. Perhaps it's just exceptionally well-hidden!
Finally, there are a couple of features that I could happily do without. There's the laminated 'stash pocket' on the left wrist. I can't see what I would want to put in there: anything with any weight to it is really annoying. A credit-card and/or a few bills is the limit. I'd prefer a chest pocket or having the pocket higher on the arm, at least.
Secondly, there's the waist cinch. Like everything else on this jacket, it's beautifully made, with the tails of the drawstring routed through reinforced eyelets into the hand-pockets, so that tightening the waist is just a matter of pulling from inside. Very nice. But again, I don't see why I would ever use the cinch. This is light-to-mediumweight fleece with little wind-resistance. When the weather is frigid and windy, you'd really want to wear a shell on top, in
which case the cinch would be redundant. And if you didn't have a shell, the cinch would make very little difference to your warmth, particularly considering that the jacket already has fairly snug fit, excellent elasticity, and a good long length that extends below waist level, nicely shutting the chilly gusts without any tightening required. Ditching the cinch would make the jacket lighter and cheaper.
But these are minor quibbles: overall this is a superb, well thought-out
garment. I expect to wear it day after day, indoors and out, until my wife
begs me to wear something else!
Sizewise, I'm 5'11" and 160lb, and the medium fit me perfectly. Slightly roomier than a Arc'teryx medium.

I've tried several winter backpacks with built-in hydration systems. When it gets cold enough, they *all* freeze. However, my Stash BC is, by a mile, the best: it's only frozen once, when temperatures were around zero Fahrenheit. Having the drinking tube zip into the strap makes all the difference. The downside is that it takes a little longer to extract the tube; the upside is that the tube doesn't flap around, and, most importantly, you can actually drink liquid! Apart from that, it's a great ski pack. Size is about perfect for a one-day backcountry outing: takes shovel, probe, food, spare clothing, radio. Looks great (particularly the red version), light, comfortable, well-made. Has adjustable ice-axe loops, plenty of attachment points, reinforced ski straps (takes skis vertically, diagonally, A-frame), waterproof zippers. I've yet to find anything about this pack that I don't like. A+.

The sizing of these shoes is bizarre. My feet are a typical US size 10, and I normally find that a European 43 fits me well. I ordered a 43 in this shoe, found it much too small, returned it for a 43.5 (still too small) and returned it for a 44.0 which finally fit my foot. When you order, I suggest you order *at least* one half-size larger than you would normally. These are clearly serious trail-running shoes. As such, the fit of the forefoot is, I believe, intended to be fairly snug to stop your foot sliding around in the shoe as it lands on angled ground. I'm used to running with a lightweight racing trail shoe (Montrail Masai), and the differences are very noticeable. These have a stiffer sole that makes landing hard on sharp rocks much more comfortable. There is also a pronounced ridge around the perimeter of the sole that stabilizes off-camber landings and helps prevent rolling your foot. I found the traction of the sticky-rubber tread was excellent. The footbed is relatively flat (no big bulge under the arch), which is the way I like it. I have fairly flat feet, and find that shoes with high arch support are uncomfortable and give me blisters. I've only had three long runs wearing these, but I'm starting to like them a lot. Overall, I would say that they are just a little too heavy and too stiff to be used as a racing shoe (unless the trail is covered in loose, sharp rock). But I'm optimistic that they will prove to be a great everyday training shoe. For comparison, the Barr Trail size 44.0 weighs 1lb 13oz (pair) vs. 1lb 10oz for the Masai (size 10). I can't yet speak to durability of this shoe, but the construction seems very solid. I typically wear through the uppers of my trail shoes at the sides, just where the shoe flexes: these have some serious-looking reinforcement right at this point (on both inside and outside) so the prognosis looks good.

After reading a copy of "Accidents in North American Mountaineering," I was sold on the idea of an auto-locking belay device: it seemed that a huge fraction of disasters could have been averted if an auto-locker was used. (Note that Trango, for legal reasons, refuse to call the Cinch an 'auto-locker'.)

I've had my Cinch for about a year, and I love it. It is just like a Grigri, but lighter. It works with skinny ropes too!

The upsides are the same: improved safety (if a rock fall hits your belayer, you're still safe); improved convenience (grab that sandwich while your leader dogs the route). The downsides are similar: no double rope belay; jerky lowering (particularly with a slick new rope).

Like the Grigri, it takes a little getting used to. I highly recommend carefully reading the docs on the Trango website.

Truly a stick-clipping dream. After messing around with jury-rigged monstrosities of branches and climbing tape, this makes you appreciate the joys of a purpose-built tool. It works well.

I love this rope. It's lightweight. It handles beautifully. It has a clear dual weave. It's highly water-repellent, and it's a lovely color too!

The only aspect I can't speak to yet is its durability. But it looks good so far (a couple of months use), and I've had good experiences with Edelweiss ropes in the past.

These are amazingly light: about 2/3 of the weight of a conventional quick draw.

Before I climbed with them, I was a little nervous that they might be too small. My preferred clipping method involves hooking the ‘biner with my middle finger and pushing the rope in with thumb and index finger, and I was concerned that the tiny ‘biner might not be big enough to permit this. But I've used these on about five climbing days and haven't had any problems yet.

The different colors for top and bottom ‘biners (bottom ‘biner is prevented from rotation with a rubber band) is a nice touch that enables you to orient the draw correctly at a glance. The BD neutrino and DMM prowires don't have this feature.

I'm very impressed. They make my old draws look like stone-age relics!

Bought the previous incarnation of this jacket for my wife a year or two back. Recently ordered myself one, and was surprised to find that the newer version has a slightly heavier weight nylon shell. I think I slightly prefer the old version, which used to fold up to miniscule proportions. Still, the shell was *very* thin, and probably a little too delicate for most people. The current model still folds up pretty small, is very breathable (I run in it every day), and seems to be much more abrasion-resistant.

This is the best fleece I've ever owned, bar none. It is extremely warm and windproof, but still very breathable, and provides masses of venting with the front zipper fully unopened. The mesh over the inner surface means it slides on and off quickly without snagging. Oh, and did I mention that it looks great too?

As you'd expect from a top manufacturer like Arc’tery, this is a very nicely designed garment. It has clean and simple lines, is lightweight, and looks great. It seems like it should be durable too, although I've not yet had time to assess this. My only tiny gripes are these: firstly, the sizing is a little on the small side. If you're used to generous American sizing, you might be caught out. I'm used to buying medium sizes, and the medium here turned out to be a little snug, particularly around the underarms.
Secondly, the fleece was slightly thicker than I expected: thicker than a conventional lightweight fleece, but thinner than heavyweight outerwear. Still, I expect that as winter rolls in, I'll appreciate the extra warmth.

Although I run over 90% off road, I've never been a huge fan of'trail-running shoes. They have always seemed heavy and clumsy to me. This shoe changed my perception completely. They are lightweight, but sturdy and well-cushioned. They do a surprisingly good job of keeping out mud and moisture, yet retain excellent breathability. I've worn mine in (and won!) both off- and on-road races. I’ve never had any problems at all. Love 'em. I'll keep buying these as long as they make them.

It seems that every hard-core outdoorsman wears Chacos, so I had high expectations for my first pair.

On the positive side, the continuous strap is really good: it's simple, and holds your foot very securely. You can always slide the toe loop flat for a more relaxed feel. And these sandals are clearly built to last.

But their most striking aspect is their weight: they are *heavy*. It feels more like you are wearing a pair of hiking boots than sandals. And because of the very dense sole, I felt that the cushioning was minimal. I'd happily jog ten miles in my Tevas, but not in Chacos.

The Chacos weighed 1075g (2lb 6oz) vs 655g (1lb 7oz) for my Tevas. Some running shoes for comparison: Montrail Masai 780g. Salomon Techamphibians, 710g.

All-in-all, I was disappointed. You pay a significant premium for Chacos, and for your money you get a sandal that feels like it will last 10 years. Personally, though, I'd rather pay half as much for a pair of Tevas: they might only last three years, but they are smaller, lighter, and more cushioned.

[I returned the Chacos...]

Right now, this is the one to get.

Clear, bright, large screen. Excellent reception and GPS performance. Simple, intuitive user-interface. Large memory. Long battery life. And the altimeter and compass are surprisingly useful extras too. Note that the latter can (and should) be left turned off to conserve battery power.

The only competition in my view is from Garmin's color eTrex models, which share the same long battery life, and are significantly smaller and cheaper (but only slightly lighter).

I purchased a T6 with the optional foot pod (to measure speed while running).

The system takes quite a bit of getting used to. The menu system on the watch is very different to most sport watches, but pretty easy once you've got used to it. The analysis software is also quite idiosyncratic: for example, it took a phone call to Suunto tech support to explain how to download the data from the watch.

However, once I had become familiar with it, I found that the system worked very well indeed. Unlike another reviewer here, I've had absolutely no problems with the HRM strap (whereas I've had mixed luck with Polar and Timex monitors). And the foot pod works amazingly well too: I just completed a marathon wearing it, and without any re-calibration it showed my total distance as 26.3 miles. I also found the Suunto tech support to be excellent.

To summarize, the device is very expensive; the software is rough around the edges; and the watch's user-interface could do with some fine-tuning too. But I still give the product five stars, because the system provides amazingly detailed performance data that you just can't get anywhere else.

Not only does it continuously log your heart-rate and speed (with the foot pod). But it also records your altitude throughout the workout, your breathing-rate, your power output/calorie consumption, and calculates other performance metrics like EPOC. (And allows you to export them.)

This is the closest thing you can get to taking a complete exercise physiology lab with you when you run.

I love them. They excel as a pure Tele binding. For those who like bindings with extra beefy springs and rear pivot point (which really stiffen up when you flex the boot), these are not for you. Instead, the 7tm has a very nice, neutral feel. I have G3 bindings on another pair of skis, and prefer the 7tm. The G3's seem slightly too stiff, and I prefer the slight ramp in the baseplate of the 7tm to the flat plate of the G3, which makes me feel like I'm always tipping forward ("rocker launch"). I don't notice any less control with the 7tm: there's absolutely no slop or looseness.

The release mechanism is unobtrusive and works flawlessly. I haven't experienced any undesirable or unexpected releases, and reattaching the binding plate to the base couldn't be easier.

Complaints? Price, firstly. Although I bought mine last year on sale from Backcountry.com, so the price was comparable to the regular price of most other Tele bindings. Secondly, the climbing bails aren't included. This is unforgivable, as they'll cost you another $25. Brakes aren't included either, but I've never felt the need for those myself.

One last point: if you want a releasable binding and like a stiffer binding -- at the 2005 OR show, Karhu were demoing a 7tm variant ("7tm Power") with a removable underfoot pivot pin which makes the binding more 'active'.

Right now, I think these dimensions represent the optimal all-round compromise: wide enough to float fairly well in deep powder and heavy snow, and narrow enough to grip well on hard snow and ice. This ski is also lightweight, and great for touring.

I spent a day with friends switching between seven different pairs of tele skis under challenging conditions (a wild mixture of hardpack, icy crust, and wind-blown powder), and these were my favorite. They are not necessarily the best for any single type of snow (for example, I have a pair of TeleDaddy's that absolutely rock in deep Utah pow), but they do everything well.

I'm genuinely mystified by the reviewer above (Candor) who hated this ski. Because this is a ski that is hard to fault and hard to dislike.

I needed something to improve my traction on snowy trails. After they've been packed down, wearing snowshoes is definitely overkill. However, on the steeper sections, or where the trail slopes off to one side, it can get icy, and you need something to give you a little more grip. These are just the ticket. You pop them on your running shoes and you're good to go. They're light, flexible, and thin: you don't really notice you've got them on at all. (Except you don't slide around!)

I'd also like to mention how good the 32north service is. My five month old puppy got hold of one and chewed it into oblivion. I emailed 32north, and they sent me a replacement for free.

My only gripe? I'm not convinced about the sizing. I'm a size 10, and ordered the 'M' version (size "8-10"). This is very snug on my running shoes, and doesn't fit over the toes of my hiking boots. Maybe I should have ordered the 'L' size ("10.5-12.5"), but I was worried that the larger version might be loose and slide around on my shoes.

The digital/analog Pieps avalanche transceiver rocks. Luckily I did not
need it in a real situation, but all testing and simulations went very well.
In 5 days in the deep snow backcountry, the lockout and multiple burial
feature seems exceptionally useful.

The Arcteryx minuteman bibs are excellent. I noticed everyone else on our back country trip hanging up their stuff to dry while mine just shed all moisture and never needed to be hung up. The partial waterproof side zips stop above the knee to keep good movement while allowing venting. In general the small seams and no need for zipper flaps
is very nice as things tend to not get caught. My only complaint is the small pockets, but adding larger ones would make them heavier and or catch on stuff.

Black Diamond Winter Bivy Sack came in super handy in the Backcountry. It added warmth to my bag and kept it dry when the hut had too much condensation. All for 9oz. Very nice.

Arc'teryx Cairn L/S crew: I wore this shirt for the first two days of my backcountry trip, just the right combo of warmth and breathability as a base layer.

I use them as mitten liners, for which they are great: when you need to do something with requires dexterity (tying laces, adjusting bindings etc.), you don't need to expose any skin to the biting cold. The quality of the fit is great -- nice and snug.

They're not tremendously warm: it would have to be a very mild day to make you want to wear them as a single layer on your hands. If they were thicker, however, they'd probably be clumsy and not be so good for gear manipulation.

My one reservation is their longevity. The stitching in one palm is unraveling already. I'm not sure if this reflects poor design, or a manufacturing defect. Most likely it was caused by my carrying skis with sharp and/or jagged edges.

The pants are comfortable, but when I sit on the climbing gym floor, all the little recycled tire bits they use for padding stick to the pants and I look really funny when I get up!

From the initial outing learning to tele in Utah to blustery days in San Francisco, the jacket is faultless. The weather outside may be grim and horrible but inside it's like the cabin of a private jet.

The jacket is great, but you just don't notice how good it is until you start to really work in it. Wind is not a bother, rain at the moment is shed gloriously -- though I'm interested to see how well it does after a few months wear and tear.

The jacket itself is cut on the roomy side, probably to take into account the fleece that you have to wear under it to keep warm when it gets really cold out. Which brings me to my next point, it's not that warm, could do with a touch more insulation. Yes, yes, I know that I should wear more layers but this jacket is very thin. I guess they were not lying when they called it a *soft shell*.

All in all, a fabulous jacket, one that is so good you won't know how good it is ‘til someone straps a pair of telemark skis to your feet at the top of a snowy mountain and tells you to "just ski down". And that front pocket looks way cool too!

The first reviewer of this shoe (BrianInColumbus) remarked that the sizing was off. I have to agree. I'm normally a 10 and found that the size 10 in this shoe was way too short. The 10.5 was a better fit, but this shoe is generally an unusual shape: it is wide and short. In addition, the tongue folds dug uncomfortably into my upper foot. These might be great shoes for some people, but they didn't really work for me.

I just upgraded from my aged Veloces to the new Syner-G's. Generally, I'm very happy with the change: the new boots are both lighter and stiffer. (Although I have to admit that the increase in performance, though noticeable, is not earth-shattering.)

One point I would make, however, is that the advice above to size the boot 1 to 1.5 cm bigger than your foot outline is nonsense. The sizing system for ski boots (mondopoint) can, and does, take this into account. My foot length is 28 cm and I bought a size 28.0 boot which fits perfectly. For a real racing fit, I think I could even have fitted into a 27.5. If I had bought a 28.5 or, God forbid, a 29.0 boot, I would have been extremely unhappy.

Nicely designed winter hydration daypack. Good size for in and out of bounds. Lots of options for carrying skis and snowboard. Nice snug fit.

Despite the fact that the drinking tube has a neoprene sleeve, rubber shield over the mouth, and fits inside the right-hand strap, I've had problems with it freezing. Would any pack do better? I've had only limited experience with winter hydration packs in cold weather.

My gripe: On the strap through which the drinking tube passes, the zipper won't stay closed. Apart from slightly decreasing the insulation of the tube, the exposed tube tends to flap around and catch on things. Its a minor annoyance, though.

I demoed these skis one afternoon in Squaw Valley, CA. Wow. These puppies float through the deepest powder, but more importantly, they drive effortlessly through the crust, crud, and manky snow. Instead of having to be reserved, cautious, controlled, and having to observe and assess the changing snow conditions, I was able to launch myself without hesitation into anything. My aggression, confidence, and consequently my enjoyment went through the roof. I suddenly felt like I was master of the mountain: I could go anywhere, ski anything!

I also have a pair of (highly reviewed) Atomic mid-fats, and I just never use them anymore. I guess it would have to be a day of the hardest ice to make me even consider it. Yes, they are a little more of a handful on hard bumps, but the benefits *far* outweigh the negatives.

I can't say enough good things about this ski. If you like to ski anything other than corduroy groomers or tight hard bumps, then this is *THE* ski. Don't hesitate: go fat! I promise you won't regret it.

I struggle to think of anything bad to say about this shovel/probe combo. It's small, light, and robust. I love the fact that the probe is stored within the shaft: it protects the probe, and is one less critical item to forget when packing for the backcountry.

Some hard-core ski patrollers or gnarly old-school mountain men might complain that the probe is too short. But frankly, if it's small and light, I'm more likely to leave it in my pack, and there's no better argument than that.

(I make the same case for LED headlamps, that some old crusties claim are insufficiently bright.)