Atomic Backland UL 78 Ski - 2019/20

These skis are exactly what I wanted them to be: nimble on the up, fun and forgiving on the down.

I'm not the most experienced skier and my goal is to have long, enjoyable days in the mountains. My previous skis are longer and skinnier with a more traditional racing shape. They got the job done and were speedy and capable, but I really had to work my legs off on the downhill.

The Atomics make skiing downhill feel easy. I'm comfortably linking turns on terrain I wouldn't have touched a year ago. I think that they are perhaps not as fast as the longer skis on certain terrain like smooth downhills and skating road, but I'll take it. It's awesome to not be scared and exhausted when things get steeper.

(Caveat: I mounted the Atomics with race bindings that provide a neutral ramp angle compared to the +13mm of my long skis. I think this compliments the ski in reducing strain on my legs.)

I am a sidecountry/front country east coast skimo resort lapper and these are Goldilocks skis for this use. I use them with pdg boots and speed radical binders. A bit heavier then 161 skimo race skis but nearly as quick up and waaaaay more fun on down on iced-over dawn patrol groomers, east coast pow and typical iced up chunky junk. 85- 90% of the way to full bore alpine race kit but you know, skimo skis. Carve ‘em, slide ‘em, punch them into a waterbar- they handle it with ease. Great all-rounders!!! Especially at this price point.

I debated how to review these.....but I'll just say WOW!

In summary: They punch well above their weight, hold a fantastic edge, allow for varied turn shapes, and are forgettable when you carry them on your pack!

A couple more details: I'm 5-10, $1.65 and went with the 169, which is a little shorter than my normal lightweight Spring/Summer set-up (Current K2 Wayback 88 in 174cm). Mounted them with a Ski Trab Gara Titan Race binding, currently skied with Fischer Travers.

I used these throughout this late spring and summer here in the PNW on the usual trade routes and some lesser known hike-to marathons and was simply blown away by how well they skied for a ski weighing only ~1kg and coming in shorter than my usual ski length. They were effortless to bring around on steep terrain and held a great edge. The turned up tail seems to really help here. Skied plenty of funky snow types as well and while they get kicked around a bit as they are a smaller ski, they do so in "dare I say" a highly predictable and manageable way. But also when cruising down relaxed slopes and hero corn, they were still a pretty energetic and fun ski that allowed me to vary turn shape and how hard i drove them from the tip. With a heavy pack, I'd probably be happy to size up, but even at 169 it wasn't exhausting, especially when realizing how fun they were to ski when the terrain was steeper. Obviously haven't had them in soft/unconsolidated, and would imagine they are much less effective, but with the reasonable rocker in the tip, I'm sure i could do it, but personally I prefer a long wide board when our wet/heavy comes back.

Full endorsement for PNW mountaineering season!

The graphics are made to simulate the HRNZ feature. I bet it will be added to next updates.
The 78 UL is part of my new setup, still waiting to taste it in deep.
It feels solid, I'd say a very good "classic" lightweight all mountain Atomic (around 1070 grams on 169) , moderate 1/6th tip rocker, quite stiff, with very uniform flex from tip to tail. Tip and tail very slightly higher than others, easy round tail. Full front and rear mounting boxes for all kind of bindings (wide or smallish).
I was looking for a ski for our "extreme" conditions (most times hard and iced snow).
The only thing I dislike are the graphics! Too dark and loud. I`d say the graphic designer hasn`t worked much on it... :D

Hi there! How would you compare the Atomic Backland UL 78 to the Salomon X-Alp Ski? Are they comparable? If I compare the specs they seem similar. (Except the price...) And second question – I'm 184cm (6'0") and 72kg (159 lbs)--what length should I choose? 175cm for the Atomic Backland and 170cm for the Salomon?

Thanks in advance!
Sam

What did Atomic change from this vintage to the 2020 ski?

I have used these for almost every kind of fun: trips light, long, short, quick, slow, any kind of outing over several seasons. I've also loaned them to folks who swear they are the lightest funnest skis for kicking around everything from the backyard to the resort to the skin track to real ski mountaineering objectives, especially if you keep the length short. They edge well, plow through crud well enough and can float pretty well in soft snow, as long as you are not packing weight. They are fun and bouncy edge to edge, hold on ice, and the rocker is more noticeable than other Atomic and similar size skis I've used, and in a good way. I wish I had gotten my skins with a race tip/toggle and would change that if I could motivate. I think this would be the ski I'd feel most secure on whether skinning around the woods or dropping into a tight chute. I use with tlt 5s or 6s and dynafit low tech bindings.

Trying to decide between the 2019 Atomic Backland 85 and the 2019 Atomic Backland 85 UL. Can't seem to find the find what difference is between the two. Any help is appreciated.

Thanks,
Jared

I have skied these about 20 days in backcountry in various conditions in 175cm (114-78-104), with Dynafit TLT6 boots. Overall, I was very happy with the skis although I found the radius to be a little short for my liking. The skis ski well through crust and on firm or wind affected snow. I didn't ski anything super steep or icy so can't comment on that but they performed well on 40-45 degrees. They seem well built and quite durable.
I would have rated these 4.5 stars but I have recently switched to Movement Big Fish X so I am comparing to those -
it is a very similar on paper (174cm and 116-78-97) but the slight differences add up for me (a bit lighter, flowing better in deeper snow). See my review on that page.

Is there a weight limit on this ski? This seems like a good "race" ski for a 200lb + tall guy if run in the 169 length? Could it handle that?

Just checking here, but this 'step-down' sidewall - it's exactly the same as the new Salomon S/Lab X-alp right?