The low refers to weight, and lighter is always expensive. Look at the materials used to make this, as well as the engineering.

Screw at the back of the heel, right in the middle. Correct forward pressure is that screw flush in the housing. If in doubt, go to a shop.

I've seen it on pants, but no suit sightings!

It does not appear that either option is available.

Marker Jester or Jester Pro, the wide chasis is great on these skis. The Rossi binding actually looks goofily narrow. The Marker is bomber, and the green in either the Jester or Jester Pro would look good on this ski.

At 6'1" 180, I've skied these in a 188 and I found they were quick and maneuverable. With your ability and strength, I suspect the 188 should be fine.

Nice that work so well. Great product.

When you have a sizing dilemma like this, your best bet is to call customer service. Worst case, they will send you two with a return label for the pair that does not fit. Good luck!

At 6'1" 180, I have been sizing down in the last couple years for exactly the reasons you identify, maneuverability and ease of use. Given this skis stability, I don't think you lose anything, and you have a little less weight for your touring days. 180.

Your best bet is to do a live chat with customer service. Click chat now on the upper right and they will help you out!

There does not appear to be any insert pocket on these.

183. Most versatile length.

If you really ski more than you tour, then you might look at the Dynafit Titan, which is a beefier boot. On the other hand, if these are comfortable, and seem stiff enough, that is half the battle. The Mantra is a great choice, but if you are really one up and done, perhaps consider a Marker Duke or Barron binding. A weight penalty, but beefier and more downhill oriented than the Dynafit. And, if you only de skin once, then the extra step required by the Marker won't matter.

I think you are comparing this to Arcteryx's technical shells, which are not insulated. This will be much warmer as it is insulated.

Your fastest answer will be live chat or a call to customer service.

At 6'1" 180 I take a large, I suspect you need an XL for the added length.

Man, at your height and weight, 177 could turn out to be way too small. I'd go 184, and you are still gonna have a quick ski.

See answer above

It is impossible to say these days with Arcteryx stuff until you see the actual garment. Arcteryx now manufactures in many different countries, and their take on it is as follows:

Arc'teryx is a Canadian company, and all of our product design, R&D, and production development is done in-house at our head office in North Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. We are unusual in the outdoor softgoods industry; we choose to design, perform our own patternmaking and develop all of our products in-house, and we have our own 30,000 square foot state-of-the-art manufacturing facility in Vancouver. This allows us to readily explore unorthodox design concepts and gives us complete control over the development of new products. As more North American brands move their design and production overseas, Arc'teryx remains a member of an ever-shrinking group of manufacturers that employs a full complement of vertically-capable in-house designers and product developers.

Arc'teryx is one of only a few major outdoor industry outerwear brands in North America to have its own domestic North American manufacturing facility, and we proudly employ highly skilled workers in our Vancouver, Canada factory. Our factory is only ten minutes from our design studios, which allows us to test proprietary production techniques and fully develop and commercialize our innovative products. Major brands often use outside design contractors, and usually conduct product development through independent manufacturing facilities. We prefer to have control at every stage of our products' design and development.

We also have product assembled in nine other countries around the world by high quality, experienced manufacturers. We have one quality standard and it applies to all of our products regardless of location of manufacture. We do not make substitutions or alterations to our products based on manufacturing location or facility. Arc'teryx refuses to compromise quality or performance for any reason, and all of our products are backed by our product lifetime warranty.
Currently, Arc'teryx products are also manufactured in nine other countries besides Canada: USA, China, El Salvador, Italy, Philippines, Taiwan, Thailand, Bangladesh and Vietnam. In all of these countries, including Canada and the United States, it is very possible to manufacture very high or very low quality product. Arc'teryx chooses the highest standards in all of our manufacturing locations, and helps train skilled and motivated workers to maintain the highest possible quality levels.

There are many factors that contributed to the decision to manufacture in various parts of the world: internal production capacity, cost margins that affect retail pricing, availability and origin of high quality raw materials, protective duties & tariffs that vary by region, global shipping of finished product and its environmental impact. With ever-increasing technology, our partner contractors have the technical ability and quality controls to meet our demanding standards of excellence. We have one world-wide quality standard and it applies to all of our products regardless of where they are made.

Start a live chat session or call customer service for the quickest answer to this question.

Did you have any specific issues or problems with the 163? Were they ever unstable etc.? I'd say if you felt comfortable and they worked for you, 163 is fine. There is no magic, or definitive answer. My wife skis the Kiku and started on a 170. She just felt they were too long, and is happy, happy on a 163. She skis the same stuff you do, is 5'7", but only 115, so the weight is the only difference. If you skied two days, and liked the 163 a lot, that is probably the answer, isn't it?

I am 6'1", 180, so close to your size. I've had the Katana since they came out. I used to ski a 190, but dropped to the 184 a few years ago, and have had no regrets. This is beefy ski - essentially GS ski construction with a layer of metal. It is super stable, and I think you gain versatility by going 184 instead of 190.

Unless you plan to ski a lot of tight lines or tight trees, that should be the call. The ski tends to ski a little shorter anyway, and at your height and weight, that should be fine.

Good points.

Yes, the length adjusting screw should be flush with the housing, that is the appropriate forward pressure.

You should check with Backcountry customer service, this is likely a warranty issue or can be returned and replaced under BC unlimited return policy.

By all accounts, these should do the trick for you. Not gonna carve icy steeps, but they will carve and be controllable on medium, flat groomers.

This will provide what you need at 4-14 DIN. Also, get the 110 and you likely won't need to bend, that should be within the tolerance.

Volkl Aura is your ski, available in 156 and 163. Will work on the Single, the Quad and Utah very well for you.

Your size seems to dictate a 185, but that's a big jump from the AC, so you might consider the 178. These skis are so stable, you should be fine.

AC 30 is a fairly demanding ski, that really works best on groomed slopes. It will work in the bumps, but is not ideal. So, it fits some of your needs very well, but not all of them.

Call customer service, they can likely direct you to Smith.

Where you on the Kuro or the Kiku in the Volkl? In any event, there is no reason why this ski would not work for you provided you can find it In a 170. At your Size I would not go longer.

Large

I am sure you have read through the comments and reviews, so some of this will be old news, but here is my 2 cents. You are correct on the toss up aspect when you are talking pure powder - both will perform very well. Same for crud. The balance may shift to the Shiro when you are dealing with less than ideal conditions, or groomers. The Volkl ELP makes the ski more versatile. In a year like this, with low snow, I'd rather have the Shiro, at least from an all around stand point. As for length, I am 6'1", 180, and ski very hard. I've skied both the 192 and 182. I opted for the 182, because it was easier in the tight spots, you gave up no stability, and it was less ski to have to move around towards the end of the day. Bottomline, you cannot make a bad decision here.

All things considered why not go with the 177? If your goals are steeps and bumps then the extra maneuverability afforded by the shorter length will help. I am sure you can handle the 184, but I am your height/weight and have skied both the 177 and 184. 184 is in my quiver, but I skied the new ski in the 177 last spring. The 177 is so stable, that there is no concern there. The biggest problem right now is finding them in stock!

Given your locale I think you are correct in steering away from the Mantra (as much as I love this ski!). Check out the Volkl RTM 84 as another option, and demo/rent out west if you get more than 6 inches of new snow, and dont be afraid to go wide (110 plus underfoot). The RTM will be better in moguls and turny in trees.

Very good choice, but at your height, weight and ability, you might throw down for the Duke.

They are designed to work with any alpine binding.

At 90 percent inbounds, definitely Duke or Baron, just must burlier and NO play at all. While the Tour is a nice setup, it is way slanted to backcountry.

Both great, Rocker 2 more pure powder, Shiro more versatile.

It's 550 fill down, which is not the absolute highest, but it is gonna be pretty darn warm and with an added layer of fleece it should handle Chicago just fine.

The most technical bulletin from Rossi that I have seen says -2 for powder, 0 for Freeride (which would mean you're gonna ski switch. I mounted -2, and ski POWDDA and they ski great.

At 6'0" 180, the 184 will work just fine for you, east or west.

Yes, this is the successor boot. And a worthy successor.

The question is what is to be gained by going long? Stability? It's just not an issue anymore in any of the Volkls. I am 6"1' 180 and used to ski 190 through the Volkl line. Sort of by accident I dropped to the 184s and have not looked back. I ski 184 in the old Mantra and skied the new Mantra in a 177 last spring in mixed conditions, exactly what you described, and they were actually great. I suspect 184 is perfect. When you ski Jupiter you don't want a 191. By the way I Park City and Alta as well, so this is apples to apples.

Mom, I SUSPECT he wants a Marker Baron, which is touring binding with more of a downhill skiing emphasis. I say this because the Griffon is a reference to a regular Marker alpine binding, but then you throw the tour in there.....so, does he do any ski touring at all? If a little, then the Marker Baron, if none, the Marker Griffon, and if a lot, this binding, the Marker Tour F10. The 110 refers to the brake width, which is standard on this binding, and you choose in drop down menu. Or, cal customer service to make sure you are getting the 110 in whatever binding you settle on. Good Luck!!

It certainly appears to come with a backpack, and other sites show that It does.

Oakley replacement lenses generally do not come with the microfiber bag. You can separately though.

The Site has been around for years with a loyal following and great track record. I would not be worried at all.

Yes.

Thanks for the confirmation Mike on 188, I hear that sentiment on the shorter S7s often.

As with a number of Volkl system skis, this is available with a 12 and 16 DIN, but Backcountry may have opted to just carry the 12 DIN.

All your choices are great and will work well. I have the Jesters and Looks, no pre release issues with either and durability has been great. I do like the Jester for it's wide ski specific design and the aesthetic is nicer on the wide ski - it would look great on the SFB. No specific comment on the Salomon since it's been a while since I skied them.

You need to buy the Thermic battery packs separately. These units then plug in to the batteries.

Yes.

The Nunatuq is the touring version of this ski - 20% lighter. Would be a better option if this is the primary use.

Come on, ya gotta go to AK! I have the 195 Suoer S7 and while it is a lot of ski, it skis much shorter than that. The consensus is this ski will ski short. A 5'7" ski buddy has the 177 and frequently laments not having the 188. Your height and weight would seem to dictate a 188. What throws me off is the 174 B3s.....I heli skied in Revelstoke last year with a bunch of strong skiers, and they all started short and moved up in length. So, particularly if you are going for this version, without the extra metal - lean towards 188. Good luck, it is a great ski.

They will work with any alpine binding.

You can choose USPS, or if you choose any other options it will be UPS.

This would be a great binding for that ski since it is designed for a wide ski.They will ski well, but be heavier than other touring options and require you to take your ski off to de skin. Size is determined by your boot sole length (stamped on the side of your ski boot sole) match it up and go.

If you are breaking Fritschis, then you are gonna break a Dynafit. I use a Dynafit for touring only at 6'1", 180, and I'm always a little nervous. I also watched a guy hit a bump the other day and face plant, breaking his Dynafit binding in the process - actually the break caused the fall. I KNOW people swear by this binding and you do see them in the lifelines at Alta etc. but at your height, weight and intended use - you just might have to put up with a Duke. This is one where you might just test Backcountry's unlimited return policy to run your own test.

My wife uses these as a touring ski, but they are on the heavier side. If this is going to be your all day Monster tour ski, then you might look elsewhere. But, for short tours and sidecountry, it would be a great choice. She uses a Marker Tour F12 binding and it works well for her.

179.These tend to ski short. Maybe even the 186 if you are aggressive.

They will work great.

Hard to figure that out, here is what Arcteryx says on the point:
Arc'teryx is a Canadian company, and all of our product design, R&D, and production development is done in-house at our head office in North Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. We are unusual in the outdoor softgoods industry; we choose to design, perform our own patternmaking and develop all of our products in-house, and we have our own 30,000 square foot state-of-the-art manufacturing facility in Vancouver. This allows us to readily explore unorthodox design concepts and gives us complete control over the development of new products. As more North American brands move their design and production overseas, Arc'teryx remains a member of an ever-shrinking group of manufacturers that employs a full complement of vertically-capable in-house designers and product developers.

Arc'teryx is one of only a few major outdoor industry outerwear brands in North America to have its own domestic North American manufacturing facility, and we proudly employ highly skilled workers in our Vancouver, Canada factory. Our factory is only ten minutes from our design studios, which allows us to test proprietary production techniques and fully develop and commercialize our innovative products. Major brands often use outside design contractors, and usually conduct product development through independent manufacturing facilities. We prefer to have control at every stage of our products' design and development.

We also have product assembled in nine other countries around the world by high quality, experienced manufacturers. We have one quality standard and it applies to all of our products regardless of location of manufacture. We do not make substitutions or alterations to our products based on manufacturing location or facility. Arc'teryx refuses to compromise quality or performance for any reason, and all of our products are backed by our product lifetime warranty.
Currently, Arc'teryx products are also manufactured in nine other countries besides Canada: USA, China, El Salvador, Italy, Philippines, Taiwan, Thailand, Bangladesh and Vietnam. In all of these countries, including Canada and the United States, it is very possible to manufacture very high or very low quality product. Arc'teryx chooses the highest standards in all of our manufacturing locations, and helps train skilled and motivated workers to maintain the highest possible quality levels.

There are many factors that contributed to the decision to manufacture in various parts of the world: internal production capacity, cost margins that affect retail pricing, availability and origin of high quality raw materials, protective duties & tariffs that vary by region, global shipping of finished product and its environmental impact. With ever-increasing technology, our partner contractors have the technical ability and quality controls to meet our demanding standards of excellence. We have one world-wide quality standard and it applies to all of our products regardless of where they are made.

Alpine boot compatible.

If there is any chance it would be identified as a woman's coat, don't buy it. There are plenty of men specific options out there!!

They have a zip that extends from chest down to the fly area. No separate fly zip per se though.

This is a shell, so on it's own it will not be alll that warm. Like any technical shell, it is designed to be worn with layers - think a fleece, light down parka or other garment. You add layers as things get cold. But, if you want a stand alone winter jacket look for something that has insulation.

In think the Mantra would be a great choice.. This is a great ski on the groomers, unless it is steeper and you will lose the ability to really hold a turn. The new rocker will work well in the glades and some bumps, and you will love it in the powder. The Kendo is a good choice, but you lose that width for your powder days and Utah trip. The Watea is a nice ski, and the Rossi Experience 98 would fit the same bill. You will like any of these skis for your needs.

And by BIG, I mean he really likes this brand.....

My buddy who is a big OR guy and about your size goes with the large.

Hmmm, good points. My wife skis these on her Kikus, mainly in resort, she is 5'7", 115. Strong skier, but no 50 footers on her resume. I can say she skied and toured in them all last winter with no issues. If you are mainly touring though, get something that you can deskin without having to take you skis off. This is main weakness of these and the Barron/Dukes.

I am not the shoe expert, but I can say I have flat feet, and this line of shoes is my favorite, and works well for me. If they don't work, send them back and try something else. The beauty of Backcountry.com.

That should not be a problem.

Call Customer service or sign in and go to "order status" on the top right off the page.

The drawback is drag both on the skin path and when the ski is tipped on edge while skiing. 20 mm of extra brake will be quite a bit. If you are mainly skiing powder, should really not be much of an issue, but in variable conditions or hard pack it could be. It also depends on how much "retraction" is built into this brake. The irony here is that people these days are always seem to be looking for a wider brake, so there might be a trade option out there.

I have 2 PP jackets, although not this particular model. I can say that these run true to size. You don't have the sometime Euro issue of way too small.

The LCD green in L is the only one marked down, probably because it is the last of last season's colors (on sale) left. See bottom of drop down menu.

You need the thermic insoles which have the actual heating element on the toe. Sold separately.