There is a lack of information (and marketing) for multi-day, long-mileage, backcountry ski tours, where distance and scenery are the objective rather than downhill skiing. This guide is a collection of insights from the Alaska Mountain Wilderness Ski Classics, 120-200 mile wilderness tours where there are multiple binding/boot/ski failures each year. Refer to Fast and Light Winter Travel for a review of winter camping equipment and general strategy, as well as suggestions for an as-light-as-possible Backcountry Ski Repair Kit.
Skis
Skis are the least likely part of your equipment to completely break, meaning that nearly any model should work. When skis do break, it is most likely to be edge failure or delamination, both of which aren’t that big of a deal. Complete breaks are almost always when the ski splits in half at the mounting holes. For this reason, it is probably not a good idea to remount bindings in different positions, and use shallow screws for the heel plate.
Each ski comes with a size chart depending on your weight. The sales reps say that the weight includes a pack, but I don’t believe it. If you are between sizes, step up to the heavier option. Longer skis can be more of a pain navigating through trees, but having a functional wax pocket is more important. You can expect the skis to lose some of their flex each season.
We do as much double-poling (on ice or overflow) and skate skiing as possible, so less sidecut is better. If you are planning more of a powder hunting mission with fun downhill sections, you probably want wider and more shaped skis than discussed below.
If your skis don’t have a toe-hinge line to guide the mounting, a good rule-of-thumb is to put the hinge 1 inch in front of the balance point.
Metal Edges
Metal edges make a huge difference in off-trail terrain, especially when you encounter ice. If you plan to do anything remote, or on trails that might be icy, get metal edges. Several brands (Madshus and Anses, probably others) make skis with 3/4-length metal edges to save weight.
Kickwax vs. Waxless (Fish Scales)
Most touring skis are available with and without fish scales. Scales make rolly-polly terrain easy to manage, but their inefficiency adds up on long tours. We did a Classic, two of us on scales, one on wax, and the difference in glide was significant. I’ll never forget the ‘zzzzz zzzzz zzzzz’ sound of scales reminding me how much energy I was wasting, and I haven’t skied scales since. I was intimidated about the complex wax options, but the reality is that you don’t need to know much about it. Slipping? Add wax. Too sticky? Scrape wax off. I carry a tube of ‘special blue’ and something colder and typically use about half a stick per 50 miles. I use my knife to remove wax when the conditions are skateable.
Fischer E99
The classic proven touring skis are the Fischer Europa 99/E99, which date back to the 1970’s. Used E99s can be found cheap and are a good option. I broke a pair of E99s (snapped underfoot at the second set of mounting holes), and when I looked to replace them, the modern Fischer E99s either weren’t made, weren’t the same, or weren’t available; I can’t remember the details. Fischer is currently making E99s that look similar to the classic version, but I don’t know anyone on the new model. I suspect they are an excellent option.
Madshus BC55 (formerly Glittertind)
I researched the best replacement for the E99s and decided on the BC55 because it had nearly identical dimensions and weight (68-55-62mm vs. 66-54-61mm). The BC55 has proven itself reliable and durable. You can expect 3 years of hard use before the metal edges crack and begin to peel out of the ski. I’ve snapped a BC55 under heel, through the heel-piece mounting hole.
Madshus BC50 (formerly Voss)
Madshus also makes a lighter option (by 100 g), the BC50, which is narrower and has a ¾-length metal edge (60-50-55mm). These lighter skis might not be as durable, and definitely don’t have as much float, but they have held up well on the Classics. If your route will be on trails or involve much skate skiing, these are a great option.
Karhu
The obsolete GTX has a good reputation. The 10th Mountain and Guide turned into Madshus Annum and Epoch, but, in my opinion, both are too wide and shaped for these kinds of trips.
Asnes
Asnes makes high-end skis that have similar dimensions to the E99/Glittertind/BC55. The Asnes options are lighter but more expensive. The integrated kick-skin is supposed to work well, but I don’t know anyone with Asnes skis.
Boots and Bindings
3-pin
Bindings
The classic 3-pin binding is still the most reliable (and cheapest!) option, and even in the case of a failure, repairs are often easy because the binding is so simple. Voile’s HD binding (without cables) is most popular in the market, and Rottefella’s Super Tele binding has an even better reputation.
One disadvantage with 3-pin bindings is that they don’t offer much lateral support, which makes side-hilling and skate-skiing difficult in leather boots.
Boots
3-pin boots are the most comfortable boot option, especially if your route involves much walking, but unfortunately, good (new) 3-pin boots are hard to find.
Popular boots are Crispi’s Antarctic, available via Telemark-Pyrenees, but buy a used pair if you can. Crispi has switched to synthetic leather, and Vibram changed (downgraded) their resin. A used pair of Asolo Alaskan boots would be a good option too. Resoling an old pair of boots is probably a better option than buying a new pair. The word from Norway is to go with Alfas, but I’ve never seen a pair in Alaska.
Typical 3-pin boot failures are:
- sole separation where the boot transitions to the duck-bill, about an inch behind the 3-pin holes
- duckbill breaking along the 3-pin holes (you can reinforce the holes with after-market metal smile plates)
- 3-pin holes stretch/rip
You can also count on your boots getting soaked and freezing solid overnight. A pair of ~liter water bladders filled with hot water inserted into the boots will thaw them out in the morning.
NNN/SNS
For backcountry use, the toe-bars are a major gamble. Don’t do it.
BCNNN/BCSNS
The advent of BCNNN/BCSNS boots has done a serious disservice to long ski touring market. The boots became so popular with the low-use (weekend) market that they edged out the more reliable 3-pin options. The BCNNN/BCSNS boots aren’t built to withstand a long or rugged trip. Don’t be fooled by the marketing, they fail all the time and your boot will end up strapped to the ski at some point. Dave Cramer, the Alaska Mountain Wilderness Classic organizer, says: The fact that the skiing public puts up with it [BCNNN/BCSNS boots] is either a testament to the power of mass marketing or a measure of how few people really get out and do the multi-day mixed terrain trips anymore– probably both.
Bindings
BCNNN/BCSNS bindings are pretty reliable, the problem is with the boots. The most common complaint with BCNNN/BCSNS bindings is about icing up. In addition to being annoying (Eben Sargent’s boots were frozen onto his skis for 2 days in the Brooks Range), icing can lead to bending or breaking pieces within the binding. BCSNS has a slightly better reputation for ease of de-icing.
Boots
All boots are reviewed as being somewhere between ‘OK’ and ‘they suck,’ so there aren’t any specific recommendations. The great hope are Alfa boots, but I don’t know anyone who has used them. The Alfa Polars are the go-to for Greenland traverses and look really promising for cold weather trips.
The most common boot failure is the toe-bar loosening or completely pulling out of the boot. The boot material and seams also fail with low mileage, especially on the top and sides of the toe box where the boot flexes. Zippers break and ice up too. The waterproof models are not waterproof, though you probably don’t want a waterproof boot on a long trip, you can be certain to soak it from the inside, if not out.
Despite these problems, BCNNN/BCSNS boots are light, comfortable, and skate-ski well. If you aren’t too far removed from the road system, they might be worth considering.
Dynafit/Tech bindings
Frustrated with BCNNN/BCSNS failures and concerned about cold temperatures, many people are using backcountry boots and tech (downhill backcountry) bindings for long tours. The plastic boots are completely rigid, which sacrifices comfort and toe flex when trying to kick-and-glide. However, this setup still works surprisingly well for skate skiing. For many applications, the reliability of the boots and bindings outweighs the disadvantages.
Binding
A tech toe piece is a light and reliable binding. I’ve heard of an occasional broken throw-lever (Dynafit), and seen rare complete failures of the toe piece (La Sportiva and Plum). Dynafit heels break fairly frequently, but we save weight by not mounting the heels (Kreuzspitze heels might be worth their weight if you expect more downhill skiing). The most common failure is that the mounting screws come loose. Make sure the screws are glued, and carry extra mounting screws. Gorilla Glue has worked well for me, and if I need to remove the screws (at home) I place a soldering iron on the screw heads for ~10 seconds to loosen the glue.
Telemark-Pyrenees is the cheapest source of bindings, though you can buy just the toes from Spark R&D. If you buy the full binding you might want to use inserts so that you can keep the heel on a pair of downhill skis and just swap the toe piece back and forth. I also like the inserts because you get more screw surface area in the ski, which makes me think the mounting is stronger.
Boots
What you gain in reliability with a tech toe-piece is lost in the disadvantages of the boots. Backcountry boots are heavy and not designed for flat touring. There is a lot of debate about how much worse these rigid plastic boots are for blisters, but all the other boot options have destroyed plenty feet as well. In general, experienced nordic skiers dislike these rigid boots, and people that come from more of a backcountry background are more comfortable with this setup. There is no doubt that the plastic boots are less comfortable and that you lose some of the kick compared to 3-pin and BCNNN/BCSNS options.
The disadvantages of weight, comfort, and limited kick are compensated to some degree by several advantages. The rigid shells are ideal for use with toe-bail crampons, a nice feature if you expect much ice. The plastic shells can be heat-molded (DIY boot punch) to accommodate pressure points, and you can glue/tape closed-cell foam around the cuff to customize the fit/comfort.
We spent several years modifying the boots for ultralight touring. This mostly involved removing the forward-lean locking mechanism, tongue, and cuff, which can remove more than a pound of material. One disadvantage of a modified boot is that skiing downhill can be a real challenge, especially without a heel piece. The other problem is that the boots will take on snow unless you sew/glue/tape/rivet gaiters to the shells, but they often don’t last the length of the trip. Forty Below‘s overboots are a good gaiter option for cold weather.
The newest boots are so light that they don’t need any modification, more on this below.
Liners
The closed-cell foam liners are by far the best option for cold temperatures and multi-day trips. The liners don’t absorb water (other than the thin fabric that encloses the foam), which means the liners insulate when wet and are easier to dry out. I love how easy it is to slip my feet out of the boot and liner, allowing moisture to evaporate whenever we take a break. The liners also thaw out and warm up more quickly when you start moving in the morning. Intuition after-market liners are significantly better than the stock liners, the Pro-Tour model is popular.
The revolution is coming… if you can afford it
Skimo (ski mountaineering) race equipment is approaching skate-ski weights, but it all costs a fortune, so I don’t have any experience with it. The boots go on sale each spring, otherwise you can expect to pay $1000 for boots (but don’t worry, the 75-gram bindings are only $900). Check out skimo.co for gear options. I think skimo is popular in Europe, but the only guy I know in Alaska is Brian Harder, his blog posts about gear might be of interest.
Poles
A lot of people break poles. Make sure to include appropriate supplies in your repair kit!
Length
If we plan for a fast pace or expect supportable crust, snowmachine trails, ice, or overflow, we carry full length skate ski poles (chin to nose height). Double-poling on ice is just about the best thing ever. Some folks have successfully added a second grip at classic pole height (shoulder), which can be as simple as a webbing loop hose-clamped to the pole.
If you aren’t looking for speed or don’t expect ice, a classic pole height (shoulder) is probably better.
In theory, adjustable poles are less likely to break because the pole segments are shorter and therefore stronger, but they are breaking just as often as one-piece poles.
Material
The general suggestion is to avoid carbon and anything over-engineered or suspiciously clever, however some guys still swear by carbon and the advantage of the light swing weight. Aluminum is nice because it generally bends and can be bent back, but they snap too.
Tips, Baskets, and Leashes
Ski tips often break on ice, and baskets can crack at cold temperatures, especially if you use them through rocky sections. We carry spare tips and baskets and use them often. Broken tips can be removed by heating over a stove until the glue is reactivated, and there should be enough glue left on the pole to just slide the replacement on. If not, you can use superglue, but you might not be able to replace the tip again. If you are doing this at home, use a pot of boiling water to heat and remove the broken tip, and use heat-gun glue on the replacement (you might consider including a small nub in your repair kit).
I like the angled nordic tips better than the round backcountry tips because the angled tips grip the ice so much better. I prefer steel to carbide because the steel is easier to sharpen before each trip. Carbide is nearly impossible to sharpen; you risk melting the plastic if you use a grinder.
You might need to replace the wrist leashes with larger loops to accommodate bulkier gloves.
Skins
Different people have different systems, all of which have worked well enough depending on how much climbing you anticipate: kicker skins (just covering the area under foot, make sure they aren’t wider than the ski), skinnies (~1 inch wide skins that extend the full length of the ski), 3/4 length skins (from tip to behind the heel), and full width/length skins. I would definitely look for thin and pliable skin material, something like the (discontinued?) BCA Low Fats as compared to the bulky Black Diamond options. Pomoca makes light and pliable skins, but the glue has a bad reputation, especially in cold weather. You can buy the Pomoca skin material by the roll, and I’d consider scraping the glue to replace it with Black Diamond glue (I use a heat gun and metal putty knife to remove glue).
Sleds
We don’t really consider sleds for pack weights under 70 lbs. I feel like sleds significantly slow me down on rolling terrain, even though they take the load off my back. When we do pull sleds, we use the cheap kids sleds (Paris), and run cord under the perimeter lip so that the cord is being pulled, not the plastic (I’ll add a photo soon). The pros and old-schoolers use bigger sleds with pvc or metal pipes over the attachment cords to prevent the sled from ramming into you on downhills.
Contributors
This guide will continue to be updated as I get more feedback. Contributors include Dave Cramer, Andrew Cyr, Ben Histand, Luc Mehl, Greg Mills, John Pekar, Toby Schwoerer, Nicholai Smith, Katie Strong, Aaron Wells, Chris Wrobel, and John Wros.
Thanks for the excellent write-up, Luc! And for getting the comments back too. I find these guides based on proper real-world experience very interesting, especially as I do some things differently which means learning new approaches to try!
I agree with most, or probably all, that you wrote but different needs, different tools…
I wrote this earlier to Dave C’s blog when comments were disbaled so I’ll just copy&paste it here:
“My say would be that there seems to be place for the NNN BC system (and why not SNS BC as well).
This is my 8th winter using the system and I’ve done lately around 1000-1500km per season off-track with them inclusing some reasonably long tours too (up to 600km). And almost all of this in groups (2-12 people) using the same systems and I’ve only seen one minor binding failure (my own binding: the screws closest to the toe-bar had snapped for unknown reason and accumalted ice snapped the plastic turning an auto binding into a manual one needing some extra screws) and some non-critically worn/broken boots. There are also lots of long polar expeditions done with NNN BC systems. But I’d say the success is due to certain type of environment and surface: usually quite flat with hard snow. For mountaneous routes including lots of down-hill and/or heavy slushy snow I would take something else instead…”
As an extra information regarding the boots:
– I use hiking boot style NNN BC boots (Alfa Quest Advance atm) and add overboots if it’s cold. I rarely get any blisters from there. I like the light weight, soft feeling and low cuf for slow pulka hauling which is what I mostly do. Goretex (and overboots) keeps out most of the external moisture and VBLs keep the moisture from the inside in control. But of course the boots can get wet and then you are screwed.
– I’ve had some clients using the (pretty damn expensive) Alfa Polar APS boots. They have insulated gaiter and enough room for an inner boot. These boots are also quite soft and not too supporting but I guess you could you Intuition inners instead of a felt inner boots to get more support for the slopes (and/or skate skiing). But again, if these boots get wet they soak all the moisture (except for the cellfoam inner if you use one.)
And another different approach would be poles for slow and heave sled hauling. I’m seem to be moving to shorter poles season after season. You don’t really get any glide with a heavy pulka and having your hands lower saves energy and keeps them warmer. I now use poles about 0,8 times my own height so pretty short. DIfferent story if I can and want to go fast, then I’d go for longer poles, maybe 0,9x my own height.
Thank you very much for the guide. I can add the following:
1.
“Asnes makes high-end skis that have similar dimensions to the E99/Glittertind. The Asnes options are lighter but more expensive. The integrated kick-skin is supposed to work well, but I don’t know anyone with Asnes skis.”
I have the Asnes Amundsen and the Asnes Combat Nato (both with short skins). The skis are fine (but probably not better than the Fischer E99 or E109). The Asnes short skin system has one major flaw. The metal piece at the front that clips into the ski does not work well on hard snow (i.e. it has a deterimental braking effect). Possibly, the new Fisher Easy Skin system is better.
2.
Instead of using a pulk sled for longer trips/heavier loads, I have started to experiment with a cut off Paris sled that is attached behind the backpack. This concept is called “Rulk” ( see, for example, http://www.fjaderlatt.se/2010/04/across-sarek-in-winter-rebooted-rulk.html ). I like it because it is relatively lightweight and, moreover, you can carry the backpack on your back if you encounter steeper terrain etc.
Great info thanks. A few notes about norwegian welted boots:
The Crispi Antartic is still made in genuine leather and as good as ever. They also make the Crispi Bre if you can find it. Look into the Andrew Rifugio as well. Resoling old leathers is an option but only a few cobblers in NA still do it. Id say it is a requirement for boots more than 20 years old and the glue and rubber weaken with age. Much better than the thermomolded equivalents that is for sure.
Alfa boots are great boots but they are known mostly for their NNN-BC variants, not for great for 3pin. Korpi-Jaakko has already provided some good info about their models in the comments section.
There is NNNBC auto and NNNBC manual. Which one are you refering to? Auto is know for ice up and the manual is considered better. I think many bad things you read about BC are auto. I have not had any problems with manual in my rather limited use. Usualy 3-4 day trips in Swedish lapland mountains.
Good point. I haven’t been paying much attention to auto vs manual. The issue is that all bindings are getting wet in overflow, so then it becomes a question of which bindings are easiest to de-ice.
A guy who used bc manuell on “Vita bandet”, a 800 miles traverse through the swedish mountain range had this solution http://ht-vb2019.blogspot.com/2019/01/ett-tips-till-alla-er-som-har.html?m=1. Many people who do this traverse seem to use bc manuell, according to my literature study (haven’t tried for myself) so it must be a viable option
I like it! But doesn’t solve the fact that those bindings can ice up in places that are hard to release. Ice and plastic bindings is not an ideal combination.
Great info, thanks for posting! One whole class of boots that I didn’t see are 2-buckle plastic 75mm 3-pin boots. The Scarpa T4 is the model I use for my backcountry nordic set up:
https://us.scarpa.com/t4
They are sturdy and stable, plus they have a bellows so you can actually kick and glide with them (and enjoy the general comfort of metatarsal flex). They come with moldable Intuition liners too.
Another option along these lines is to find an older boot in this class (like a Garmont Libero or a Garmont/Scott Excursion) and put new low-cuff Intuition liners in them:
https://intuitionliners.com/shop/logan/
These boots are rugged and, as you say, Luc, simple 3pin bindings tend to be too.
Colin
I agree that the bellows are welcome. But tele boots aren’t as popular in my circle because of the binding. The tech-toe (Dynafit-style) binding is light and easy to de-ice.
I’ve been using NNN boots and bindings on the BC55 skis for 3+ years now, with all varieties of terrain. I skied out to Rohn and back for the ITI350 in 2021, almost all trails but with some good crashes in the mix, as well as multiple trail breaking trips in the White Mountains north of Fairbanks in -30, and just recently a trip from Anaktuvuk Pass to Wiseman along the (barely) leftover Ski Classic tracks. I use the Rossignol Turnamic Bindings, and the Rossi SC X6 Boots.
I’ve had no binding failures, only one frozen binding from dunking my foot into the North Fork, and no boot failures. My friend was using the new Rottefella BC binding, and his froze onto his boot whenever overflow was touched.
The boots are light and comfortable, the bindings seem to be plenty strong, and my feet don’t overheat in the boots. There’s a little bit of ankle support in the combi style boots, and they work for everything.
The upside? This setup is super light, simple, and easy to classic, skate, or trudge on skins pulling a sled with. It’s pretty affordable, if you’re into that. (Who isn’t?) It’s also easy to thaw out the bindings if they freeze up.
The downside? Just like with most boots, once they’re wet inside, they’re wet until you’re back home. Also I wouldn’t try any actual downhill style tele skiing on this setup. I’ve done low key off trail downhill like the Arctic to Indian traverse, but that wasn’t very enjoyable.
Hi Luc, I would like your opinion. I am putting my ski touring set-ups together and am wondering if you ever use ski crampons on your skinny AT touring skis? I have some Asnes Nansen and Asnes Combat Nato skis that I am setting up with Plum AT toes. Would you recommend making sure the Plum toes are ski crampon compatible or is that simply unnecessary? Thanks for weighing in. Curt Pollock, Anchorage.
Oooh… I’ll be excited to what kind of adventures you do with that setup!
I’ve actually never used ski crampons … I’ve envied partners who had them, but when I’ve needed traction I carried aluminum crampons and booted.
I think a lot about how ‘one-stop-shop’ equipment sacrifices performances on both ends … ski crampons aren’t as functional as skis or crampons, and I’ve only had one or two applications where I’d want a ski crampon but not a real crampon.
But I think you should go for it and share what you learn!
Hi Luc,
Great article, thanks for taking the time to write it.
I was wondering if you use this set up generally only in the spring (after the snowpack has undergone the melt freeze cycle and is firm) or if in the winter, generally on packed trails (snowmobile, dog sled etc.)? I ask because I have a set of skinny nordic touring skis (similar to what you have discussed in this article, but with the NNN bindings which I’d like to change) and I just find them extremely limiting and inefficient in the mid-winter due to soft snow and trail breaking. I often find myself thinking that I’d just rather be on my (heavier) alpine touring set up – but that’s perhaps a bit overkill for the terrain/trips that I want to use a set up like this in. Any thoughts? I’m based in Whitehorse, YT. Thanks, Jasmin
Hi Jasmin-
We use that setup year round in all snow conditions. That said, we’ve definitely had some trips where the trail breaking felt impossibly slow. This has happened in the Brooks Range more than anywhere else … cold continental snowpack that is completely faceted. I suspect Whitehorse might have a similar snowpack?
Even so, it is only miserable for the first person … everyone else can shuffle along efficiently.
I certainly wouldn’t want anything narrower than my BC55s for off-trail travel. But that’s still what I default to unless the point is to climb stuff and ski back down.
That said, I’m out of the loop regarding modern lightweight bc skis … perhaps there are better options now.
Part of what I love about the BC55 (or equiv) setup is that it is so versatile … I can kick and glide, skate ski, break trail. None of those are as efficient as they would be on the ski made for each specific function, but to be able to do any/all of it on a single outing is awesome.
Hey Luc, I had a question or two regarding skis:
– for your dynafit toepiece + AT boot setup, are you mounting anything to the heel area on the ski to protect the ski topsheet from all-day heel impacts, or have you found that necessary?
– have you heard of anyone using the rotefella Xplore bindings? (https://rottefella.com/en_GB/discover-xplore-en) They’re at REI and appear to potentially solve the reliability problems of the NNN BC bindings while also saving you from wearing hardshell AT boots for long distances, which seems masochistic to me as someone coming from a downhill/BC background.
Thanks for the info-dense article.
I’ve been whittling away at an update on this post … hopefully I’ll have it soon. Keep your eyes out for “Monster Nordic!”
I install a flat heel plate so that the boot sits at the intended height with AT bindings. This can be as simple as a chunk of food cutting board. I’ve installed nordic ski heel plates as well.
The Xplore bindings have mixed reviews. The concept is great, the boots are comfortable, but why the heck did they put moving parts inside the toe box? The price tag ($250) also feels crazy given how basic the bindings are. I haven’t tried them personally but would sure welcome the opportunity. I think Alfa makes a boot with a removable liner … that’s what I’d want for my multi-day trips.
I know as many folks who have tried them and embraced them as folks who tried and went back to bc boots.
Thanks Luc. Any more wisdom on mounting that food cutting board or XC heelplate in the heel? Is it as simple as it sounds, do you just shop for a board of the requisite thickness (how would I determine that thickness?) and screw it on there?
Hopefully you might be able to dumb it down for me– I’ve never taken a drill to any skis so my knowledge of binding mounting is limited to internet research and I haven’t found any other info online of this dynafit toe-XC ski setup. I am mostly trying to save money on the XC bindings and boots, since I already have scarpa hardboots and some dynafit toes.
Thanks in advance.
The best match for a heel plate is to measure the height of the heel plate that comes with the AT toe pieces … it probably varies from brand to brand … and then find material of the same thickness.
A heel piece that is too low will put unintended strain on the toe piece and not be as efficient for skiing. A heel piece that is too thick might actually be a good thing, I’m not sure, but I like the idea of being tilted too far forward instead of too far back.
Honestly, I’m not a sensitive enough skier to really feel the difference and I’ve used scraps of wood, old bindings, and HDPE cutting board (white, from the grocery store). I cut a ~1 inch circle (using a drill bit … but the HDPE will melt) or square (hand saw), drill a hole through the center, then mount directly below the heel of the boot with a standard xc ski mounting screw.
The disadvantage of my system is that the heel piece can spin (not a big deal unless it starts to unthread) and ice up. But traditional heel pieces ice up too, so I’m not sure that problem is specific to my solution.
The main advantage of this system is that you can use the heel as a cutting board for your on-the-trail snacks 😉
Thanks for all the advice!