I'm thinking about getting a used pair of silvretta 404 bindings for a good deal. They are older but in excellent shape. I'm trying to get together an approach setup that works better than snow(slow) shoes. I have two pair of mountaineering boots that will work for the silvrettas. My questions for the SP community are:

Are the newer silvretta 500s significantly better than the older 404s? Should I forget about the bargain and fork over the $350 for new 500s?

What type of skis would work well for this setup?

I am not interested in skiing any steep or challenging terrain, the only skis I've ever used are cross country. I mainly want a setup for the snowed over forest service roads and moderate backcountry terrain on my way to some Cascade peaks. Thanks for your advice!

It's mostly weight. Also, 500s are easier to get back into if you crash and release. But it's not a huge difference, certainly no skiing (touring or downhill) performance difference.

I still use 404s. My wife has 500s. Both work and there is not that much difference between them except as stated above.

I would buy used rental downhill skis (about 170cm) with even flex and good medium wide showel. Most rental skis are medium stiffness and fairly easy to turn. The length would depend on your height, but 170cm is about right, unless you want to carry a very large pack, in which case, I would go a bit longer. But if you want to use them for defensive skiing and AT, don't buy them too long.

I have used the setup that asmrz recommends for over 10 years. Down side to it is that it will be a heavy setup, but it does save a lot of $$. I paid $25 for my skis (actually military surplus Karhus instead of rentals) which made my setup very cheap. As mentioned, getting back into the bindings can really be a pain, especially if the bindings are iced up. Downhill performance isn't much of an issue if you are skiing with mountaineering boots, so the 404's will work great.

Note that if you use mountaineering boots for skiing and tear them up, don't mention that you did it skiing. Some manufacturers void the boot warranty if you use them for skiing. I know that Koflach did, although it never hurt the boots using them for that.

404s will work just fine for what you want. i know several people who use them. in fact, my climbing partner is taking a pair of 404s on Denali next month. If you need to buy skis, check out galacticsnowsports.com I picked up a pair of NEW skis there for $35 and a used pair of silvrettas for $100 (cascadeclimbers.com). Super cheap set up that i've put a LOT of miles on. As far as ski length, I prefer something short, light, and easy to carry. My 150s have worked well. If i'm doing serious downhill, I certainly want something longer, but for what you're looking for it sounds like shorter is better. You won't need something really long for skiing forest service roads. If you can find something short with a decent width underfoot it should work out well for you.

Hagan makes a couple of light, short approach skis you may want to consider:

http://haganskiusa.com/HaganSki/Hagan_S ... _2012.html

Thanks for all the advice.

I use Silveretta 400s with a light, shaped, telemark ski in 163 cm length. This seems to be a great combination of floatation and light weight. They also ski very well in plastic mountaineering boots, although one should set the DIN setting very low because when falling the force is not trasferred efficiently to the binders as the boots flex a lot.

Yes, that's a very important point about the release setting. I ran mine at 4 or 5, when I usually ski around 7 on my backcountry setup, and when I had an alpine setup it was even higher.

wargowsky wrote: in fact, my climbing partner is taking a pair of 404s on Denali next month.

Just my two cents, I have used skis on every Alaska Range trip to very good effect, except for Denali. We used our skis for only two days - to 11k. Above that it was too icy and steep for skis so we cached them at 11k. Unless you are planning on skiing for pleasure (we saw parties carry both climbing and skiing boots for this. Watching rangers Meg Perdue and partner link turns below 11k while roped was pretty cool), I would opt for plastic snow shoes. They fit in a duffle so you don't have to spring for the extra cost of flying with a ski bag. Airlines have gotten really crappy about extra baggage, it is one way they can make money. I used to be able to check two 80lb bags and with a wink and a smile to the ticket agent get my skis checked for free. Those days are long gone. Also, skiing downhill with a Denali sized pack and sled is very difficult. We strapped our skiis to our sleds and walked down.