We're open!  Read our COVID statement.

Movement Alp Tracks LT 94

$949.95 $759.96

In Stock & Ships Today

Free shipping

As the true all-mountain width in the Alp Tracks line, the 94 is a daily touring machine. With a crazy light yet robust construction, the AT series of skis are sure to gain some converts to the Swiss ski movement. The Alp Tracks 94 is part of a limited hand-made ski series whose build-process involves squeezing fiber layers around a Karuba wood core. The result is an impressive weight-to-performance level. The 94mm underfoot ski has a lightly rockered tip and a tail that releases easily, making it easy to ski in soft and mixed conditions. The variable thickness edges cut into harder snow and the ABS sidewalls add impressive hold. The Movement Alp Tracks 94 is a great one-ski quiver for North American ranges.

  • ABS Shock Absorbing walls underfoot smooth rough patches.
  • Unique VA-Tech tips have rubber & glass to absorb vibration.
  • Bindings are secured with a Double Plate Reinforcement area.
  • Forest-friendly certifications were achieved with the wood cores.
  • Tour Edges vary in thickness along the ski, a hard trick to pull off.
  • Hard P-Tex 5000 is impact resistance and skis well even waxless.

Update 2018/19: Just a graphics change.

Specifications
Lengths (cm) 169, 177, 183
Weight
convert to ounces
1100g [169]
1150g [177]
1200g [183]
Weight (pair) 2200g [169]
2300g [177]
2400g [183]
Dimensions 129-94-118 [169]
130-94-119 [177]
130-94-119 [183]
Turn Radius 18m [169]
19m [177]
20m [183]
Skin Fix Tip loop, flat tail
Specs Verified Yes
Design
Profile Rocker tip and tail, camber underfoot
Shape Rounded tips, medium sidecut, flat rockered tail
Construction Carbon wrapped half-cap with mini-sidewalls
Core Ultralight Karuba wood
Skimo Co Says
Usage Powder laps, spring skiing, you name it
Notes Mini sidewall adds edge grip and dampness
Bottom Line Best one-ski quiver?
Compare to other High-fat Skis

Related Products

$649.95 From $499.96

Questions & Reviews

6/28/2020
Brad H (downright abused product)
 
I love these skis! They are my everyday driver when it comes to touring! My friends HATE me for how light these skis are!

I bought these skis a year ago and they've been my primary touring ski since, I've put about 50 days on them. I've skied several volcanoes on them: Mt Hood, Mt Adams, Mt Saint Helens, Mt Bachelor. I've skied every possible kind of PNW snow imaginable on them from schmoo to chunder to ice to powder to hot pow to corn to corn chowder.

These skis are fun, easy to turn (they practically turn themselves), and they are surprisingly solid for how light they are.

I'm 5'4" 150lbs and I see the 169cm, with Black Diamond Helio 200 bindings, and Atomic Backland Ultimate Boots.
Comment on this review:

2/22/2020
Question from Chris
 
I am 152lb, 5' 12''. I am looking for a new durable ski for mountaineering and steep skiing because of breaking my backland 85 170cm (there were too short for me) on hard snow. I am considering Alp tracks 94 177cm and Session 89 177cm. Could you compare them a little bit for me? I would like a perfect ski for all the conditions but I know that such a ski doesn't exist. I guess that Session will be more stable due to 100% wood core but I would like to get some opionion from expert. You can recommend also something more than these 2 skis.
2/22/2020
Answer from TSB
 
Hey Chris, thanks for reaching out! Since you are not quite 6 feet tall (though apparently close) I would recommend you go for a ski that is not quite as long as the 177cm Movements (although close to it) for your mountaineering tool. If you like the sound of the damp wood-core Session, you might also want to take a look at the stable, easy-turning K2 Wayback 88 in the 174cm length. A slightly more energetic, quick edge-to-edge option would be the 172cm Dynafit Blacklight 88, which has just landed at Skimo Co and has already earned rave reviews for its poppy feel and quick turning.
2/22/2020
Answer from Jeff
 
Chris, A perfect Durable (not necessarily ultralight) mountaineering ski. In the Alp Tracks lineup, the LT 94 is the all-mountain ski. We do not carry the Sessions 89 in 177cm but we do have the Vertex 94. The same shape as the LT94 and the Sessions build, not super light, but durable and will ski anything. If you still want to stay light in a really well-built ski that can handle steep skiing to powder, look at the Ski Trab.
2/22/2020
Answer from Chris S
 
Thank you very much for your responses,

I had an opportunity to ski movement alp tracks 94 184cm and they were definatly too long. My previous backlands 85 170cm were too short. Is it really such a big difference 174 and 177cm that you recommend me to size down?

What about stability of movements? Will heavier Session/Vertex be more stable than light Alp Tracks? How big is a difference in stifness and grip in hard/icy conditions?

How about Ski Trab Mistico or Maximo. They look quite simillar. Will they be softer? What they would ski better and what worse? I have considered also zero G but I heared they are not so pleasent to ski due to thair construction.

Which of these 4 skis will be the best and the worst for pow conditions? Are you able also to compare these skis to backlands? It would be a great reference for me and tip to choose a perfect pair of skis.
2/24/2020
Answer from TSB
 
Hey Chris, thanks for the additional info! Not everyone will feel this way, but we certainly think that 2-3cm (around 1 inch) can make a significant difference in ski performance. We recently had a brand lengthen their skis approx. 1.5cm at each increment and we felt the difference was notable, especially when skiing a shorter ski with a lighter skimo-race-style boot. If you're looking for a light and fast mountaineering ski that goes on and off your pack, going up a whole 7cm (almost 3 inches) will be a notable disadvantage. That said, if you do want some additional stability at speed and float in soft snow, going a little longer than 170cm is a good choice.

I would say that the Session or Vertex skis, given their greater mass, will probably feel a little more stable/planted on hard snow than the Alp Tracks, and can ski at higher speeds on piste and in variable conditions. However, the Alp Tracks 94 (and the Alp Tracks series as a whole) has exceptional edge hold on hard snow, so that wouldn't be a disadvantage compared with the heavier skis. The Ski Trabs you mention have less sidecut, so will feel even more competent on steep, icy terrain. The Mistico is a stiffer, more responsive platform that utilizes Trab's proprietary 14-layer Aramid construction, while the Maximo is a more forgiving wood-core ski that feels like a traditional classic-touring ski (similar to your Backland 85s).

The Alp Tracks 94, with its rockered tip and significant sidecut, is a blast in powder and loves to make wiggles (but can also get up to speed under the guidance of a competent skier). I would say it's my top pick among the skis discussed for pure soft-snow conditions and long midwinter days lapping the goods. Really, it's hard to pick a ski that's "bad" in powder, but the stiffer, more cambered Mistico (or the Blizzard Zero G 85/95) will take a lot more input to make turns than a more progressively-shaped, rockered, and softer-flexing Movement offering. If you want the ski most similar to your Backland 85, go for the Maximo!

Don't hesitate to shoot us an email at help@skimo.co with other questions! Cheers!
2/25/2020
Answer from Chris S
 
Thank you,

I ask all of the questions in public because I know how helpfull and valuable can be such the comments for others. I hope you don't mind. I would like to ask the last question (at least at that moment). I understood that Alp Tracks will be a little bit less stable than Session/Vertex/Maximo. Considering that the feeling of stability on hard snow is very important for me (and for my psyche :D) I would go for Session/Maximo because as you said Mistico can be a little bit more difficult in pow. You have mentioned also the K2 Wayback88 - could you compare them with Session/Maximo ski and help me in "the final choice"?
2/25/2020
Answer from TSB
 
Hey Chris, we don’t mind at all — we love to chat skis and happy to provide any info we can! :-)

In general, the Movement skis (whether in the hand-laid carbon Alp Tracks layup or the damper woodcore Session/Vertex layup) will be a little more “turny” than the Trab Maximo/Mistico. If you want to go for a ski that evinces maximum stability when at speed and railing turns through chundery snow, the straight tails and damp feel of the Maximo is perfect. However, if you want a more powerful turning sensation and like your skis to come around faster than a Justin Timberlake pop song, the more aggressive sidecut of the Vertex will be more your style. (I would rule out the Session just because it’s wider and a little more freeride-oriented, less comparable to the touring skis we’ve discussed).

The decision for you may come down to which boots you are using on this ski. If you’re on a two-buckle touring boot like a TLT8 or F1, or a “race plus” boot (Backland Carbon, Fischer Travers, etc), the Maximo will pair nicely. If you’re on a beef boot like a Maestrale or a Hoji, the Vertex will be a more powerful platform to pair with the stiffer boot.

The Wayback 88 is also a terrific ski, don’t sleep on that one as an option! With K2’s Pacific NW heritage the Wayback really excels in messy, tricky snow but is also a blast in powder. Compared with the other skis the Wayback falls somewhere between the predictability of the Maximo and the verve of the Vertex. It also comes in a nice in-between 174cm length which splits the difference between the 169-171cm and 177-178 options.
2/25/2020
Answer from Chris S
 
My boot is rather in beef boots category (Technica Zero G Tour Pro). My previous pair of boots was too soft and I didn't feel that "power" in more steep terrain. Now my Zero G are definietly adequate and stiff enough for my goals. Which of these all mentioned skis in your opinion would be a powerfull combination for "45 degrees steep blue icy culoirs" and give at least a little bit fun in softer conditions? (152lb, 5' 12''.)
2/26/2020
Answer from TSB
 
Hey Chris, I think you and the Vertex are a match made in randonnee heaven! It's a great ski to pair with the Zero G, very confident on hard snow and with enough rocker to turn easily in powder. A perfect combination! Match the Vertex with a set of lightweight, fully-featured bindings like the Hagan Pure 10 and a pair of versatile skins like the Colltex Mohair Mix skins and you'll have yourself a terrific all-around, all-conditions setup.
2/26/2020
Answer from Chris S
 
Thank you for all your responses. I really appreciate that you offered me your time and gave me so many advices. I will let you know later what I choose and write my personal review. Cheers!
2/26/2020
Answer from Chris S
 
One more thing... There is only Vertex 94 in your offer nowadays. Would Vertex 84 be as good choice as 94? I understand that you would recommend me version in 169 cm?
2/27/2020
Answer from TSB
 
Awesome Chris, glad we could help! Look forward to hearing what you think of the ski.

We are not offering the Vertex 84 for this season. It's a narrower platform so less versatile as a powder ski than the skis we have discussed.
Answer this question:

1/4/2020
Question from Carl E
 
Dear Skimo.co,
I'm an expert telemark skier at 195 lb and 6'1" with over 35-years of doing tele turns. I still like to ski the flex of a ski in 3-dimensional snow and I like to do short radius turns. I'm writing because I'm really interested in the Alps Tracks 94. I mostly ski on 186cm Black Diamond Drifts (the softer 1st generation) and the BD Carbon Aspects both mounted with Dynafit Super light toes and Teletech cables. I live in Idaho and ski mostly powder and usually in the trees. For tree skiing I love the Drifts as they turn at slower speeds and they are smooth flexing throughout so if I end up on the back ski ducking tree branches they roll right out of it, but they are not light - at approximately one kilo heavier than the Alp Tracks. I was looking for a lighter all mountain ski when I bought the Carbon Aspects which I enjoy at higher speeds in open terrain (which almost puts them into light weight on piste skiis), but I find that they want to stay in a turn which is not good in tight trees and they like a little more speed to initiate the turn.

As a telemark skier what I'm looking for is: an even flexing (front and back) ski that will initiate turns in 3-dimensional snow at slower speeds, and that is light for touring, and that floats well but still has a little edge hold for spring corn. I also usually like a longer ski for flex but now many of the 180cm plus skis are often stiff and maybe for even heavier skiers. What is your recommendation for me in regards to the Alps Track 94? And what size also?

I still plan on using my Drifts for early season low snow years. But I would like to have a lighter ski for all mountain powder and trees to fill in my quiver. I just want it to fill in closer to the Drifts than the Carbon Aspects. THANKS Carl
1/4/2020
Answer from Jeff
 
Carl, We have stuff in common, I have teled that long and have the original Drifts. Many modern light skis are more like your Aspects. The LT 94 are stiffer in the middle, softer at the tip and tail. Also, like many other skis, they do not have full mounting plates and are NOT recommended to mount with tele bindings. My best suggestion is the Voile Hyper V6, but Voile plainly lists not to mount tele. Feel free to contact me at help@skimo.co to delve deeper.
Answer this question:

7/14/2019
Question from Dmitry
 
How does this ski compare to Voile HyperVector, from a perspective of using it in average Sierra conditions (something to ponder if the upcoming season won't be as great as the last one)?
7/16/2019
Answer from Jeff
 
Dmitry, That is a good question. As you can see in the specs, both skis are very similar in shape and profile. The most notable difference is the Voile has a stiffer flex. Both are considered all around skis and would say both should ski the Sierra nicely. But when you get to that long Sierra Spring, we think the Hyper Vector may be the better choice. Maybe some others can chime in here.
Answer this question:

4/30/2019
Question from Tim
 
Do these have full length edges, wrapping around the tips and tails?
5/1/2019
Answer from eric
 
Tim- Full edge wrap on the tip but not on the tail.The tail has an insert where the edges end at.
Answer this question:

2/16/2019
John M (used product regularly)
 
I have used these skis about a dozen times now, skinning up at the resort (Mt Crested Butte) and alpine touring in the local backcountry. For reference I am a 62 yr old nordic skier/racer and am "re-introducing" myself to alpine skiing after about fifteen years of doing strictly nordic. I am 68" and 155lbs., and I have these skis paired with Superlight 2.0s and Alien boots. Obviously I am trying to keep the weight down, but I have no interest in skim racing. No huge ambition to try and ski everything with these skis either - I use them in soft conditions.

I don't consider myself a great skier so it is a good thing these skis seem to ski themselves, so far in multiple types of powder whether embedded deep in or floating along the top of very firm windblown. All I have to do is think about turning through the gladed areas and it just happens. Bottom line I think is that they make me a better skier and I am having a blast with them.
Comment on this review:

2/12/2019
Patrick (downright abused product)
 
These skis are fantastic. I've put them through the ringer this year, and they're pretty much my desert island ski. For reference, I like light skis that punch above their weight class (Atomic Ultimate 78, Salomon X-Alp, Movement Alp Track LT 106 are the rest of the quiver). Though I have both lighter skis and fatter skis, these are my go to for everyday touring and ski mountaineering. I'm 5'11" 155 lbs and ski the 177cm.

The ski is stupid light. Unlike other light skis its not chattery or floppy or noodly or weak. It feels very balanced and neutral, and stiff enough to hold an edge on steeper stuff without becoming harsh. Playful and easy to turn would be good ways to describe them.

They are NOT a ski for terrible snow. I tried them at the resort a few times and only in piked crud do you notice tha their weight can be a downside. Still, they're more than enough width for breakable crust and other inevitable backcountry scenarios. Pair these with a pair of lightweight bindings like the superlite 2.0 and be happy.
Comment on this review:

2/12/2019
Question from Michael Smith
 
Can you describe the difference between the DPS Cassiar 95 Alchemist Ski and Alp Tracks LT 94 and offer conclusion/ opinion?

Thank you
2/12/2019
Answer from jbo
 
Hi Michael, very different skis! If you're charging at the resort, the Alchemist is a decent option for all-mountain skiing. Very damp and durable. For backcountry skiing, the AT 94 is a light ski that will get you a lot further, and also be a ton of fun on the way down.
Answer this question:

1/22/2019
Question from Kevin
 
I'm wondering how these ski compared to the Zero G 95? I currently have the ZG95 in a 178 and while I find them totally acceptable, I'm not in love with them. I'd like a touch softer and "looser" while still being capable of hard, spring mountaineering.
1/22/2019
Answer from Nate
 
Hi Kevin, the Alp Tracks 94 is definitely a little softer and it's an easier turning ski with a fair amount of sidecut. Depending on your flavor of hard, spring mountaineering it could be a very good choice, but the tendency to want to be turning can also be a detriment at times.
Answer this question:

11/23/2018
Question from Paul
 
Is this ski avail in 177cm now? (In stock)
11/23/2018
Answer from jbo
 
Hi Paul, we are expecting them on Monday!
Answer this question:

6/2/2018
Question from DK-
 
Does anyone know where the mounting point is on these and the 84's and which one of the two is more stiff?
6/4/2018
Answer from Trace Leches
 
Hey DK-! In terms of basic profile, shaping, and stiffness, the 84 and 94 are pretty dang similar. There are some subtle differences that make the 94 a better all around ski with a soft snow bias and the 84 a better all around light 'n fast ski with a hard snow bias (still a riot in powder though).

Not sure exactly which size you're looking for the mounting location on, so I'll assume the middlest length, the 177cm. Both skis, the 84 and 94 in a 177cm length use a mounting location that's 98cm from the tip, about 9.5cm back from true center. There are a handful of manufacturers that we routinely urge to mount slightly forward/back from their mounting location and boot choice factors into that a little bit, but for the most part the mounting locations on the Alp Tracks line are perfect.
Answer this question:

3/20/2018
Hannah (used product regularly)
 
Hi, I'm 5-9 and 122 lbs, intermediate backcountry skier. I bought the Alps Tracks 94 169cm last year and have just struggled with them. I'm constantly bumped into the "back seat" on these boards, and have a difficult time doing quick turns in the trees. I feel kinda of overwhelmed by the Alps Tracks and I'm wondering if they are maybe too much (big?) ski for this old lady. Due to illness I've skied about 80% in bounds this year but the problems are worse in wild snow. (We have full array of wild snowpack in Albion Range of So Idaho except not much deep powder.)

The AT 94's replaced my Movement Logic 167cm skis (87 width), which I loved dearly and had no problem at all "staying in the front seat" or making tight turns. I use Sportiva Womens Sparkle boots and Dynafit Speed Mtn bindings.

I am giving up on the Alps Tracks and would like your advice on a replacement, superlight, not too expensive (no DPS), ski, probably in the 87-88 width. I own Hagan 75 skis so 84 seems a bit narrow for the quiver. All the descriptions of your skis in the 84-88 range seem pretty similar to me. I need help on what would be a better ski --- different length/surface area? Smaller radius? Softer flex? Semi rocker instead of full rocker?

Thank you
3/20/2018
Reply from jbo
 
Hi Hannah, there are several things that could be going on with your setup. It could be a quick fix. Looks like you didn't get them from us so we don't have the details. Any chance you could e-mail us your phone number so we can talk through it?
Comment on this review:

2/28/2018
Question from TSB
 
Just noticed that the whole Alp Tracks line went on sale recently -- does this mean that the "limited" run is coming to an end or being phased out of the shop? Or just a spring discount on a ski that you'll be stocking 2018/19? I love the AT 84 so much I'm considering other widths, wouldn't want to get burned by indecision. Thanks!
3/1/2018
Answer from eric
 
TSB- We will be carrying these skis next year too. But take advantage of the spring sales now.
Answer this question:

2/27/2018
Question from Dominik
 
I'm comparing the Alp Tracks 89 and 94 and found the attached test. Would you agree with differences for the flex and rocker?

I’m wondering what’s the effect on the performance and which ski would be the best for me.

I’m 145lbs at 5”80 and maybe the softer ski would be better for me. Also the bigger rocker appears al little more comfortable to ski.

I’m looking for an ski which can handle all conditions at ski mountaineering and floats weel at powder snow.
2/28/2018
Answer from Nate
 
Hi Dominik, these things are pretty subjective, but for the most part I agree with the data in the image you've posted. My personal opinion is that the Alp Tracks 94 is slightly more versatile for the powder conditions you mention given it's wider underfoot dimension, straighter side cut, and tail geometry. At your size and weight, you'll probably be happiest on the 169cm length.
Answer this question:

1/8/2018
Question from andrew
 
How might this ski compare/contrast with a Voile V6? It seems a bit lighter, any other thoughts you might have heard? There is not as much internet-based info on the Alp Tracks LT 94 as some other skis?
1/8/2018
Answer from Trace Leches
 
Hey Andrew! Both skis are fantastic so you can't really lose here! The V6 is a killer ski but because of the flex pattern, shape, rocker profile, etc, it's definitely a soft snow oriented ski that would pair well with a two or four buckle boot (1,000-1,400g). Voile has a special place in my heart because their headquarters are 20 minutes from our headquarters and they are really tough to not have a great time on.

The Alp Tracks line is definitely built for the light 'n fast backcountry skiers and ski mountaineers though. They handle that way, they pair with those boots really well, the surface area to weight ratio screams efficiency, the flex pattern wants to be skied from the center of the ski like how lightweight boots drive skis, and the bases are rock solid compared to most other skis in this weight category so it all depends on what you're looking for out of your skis.
Answer this question:

8/31/2017
Question from Andre
 
Is this the 2017-18 model.
I thought it was on sale yesterday? Skins?
Will you be carrying Movement products this winter?
Thx
Andre
I ordered a pair of Movement boots from you last fall and enjoy very much...
8/31/2017
Answer from jbo
 
Hi Andre, we are definitely still carrying Movement! We had a bit of mixed inventory, I just verified and updated the listing to clarify the season. Only the color changed for 2017/18. Happy to extend the sale price to you on the newer color if you'd like due to the mixing (skins are also on sale, yes). Thanks for the feedback on the boots.
Answer this question:

8/4/2017
Comment from Randy
 
I have spent about 40 days now on these skis in every condition; I love them! Watch.
8/4/2017
Reply from jbo
 
Awesome video Randy, thanks for sharing!
Reply to this comment

6/11/2017
Question from Doug Hendrickson
 
What does this ski weigh in a 183 cm length?

How compared to the Zero G?

Thanks DH
6/12/2017
Answer from Trace Leches
 
Hey Doug, thanks for reaching out!

The AT94 in a 183cm weighs 1230g/ski. At the moment I don't have an equivalently sized ZeroG 95 to measure against, so instead I weighed the AT94 and ZeroG 95 in a 169cm and 171cm, respectively, just to get a close comparison and frame of reference. Tip to tail cord length on the AT94 169 and ZeroG 95 171 are almost identical actually, so the direct comparison is even closer than I had originally thought, which is great news! The AT94 169cm weighs 1125g/ski and the ZeroG 95 171cm weighs 1215g/ski. That's only a 90g difference per ski between the two, but I would guess in the longer lengths around 183cm, you'd be looking at over 100g, possibly 120g per ski.
Answer this question:

4/22/2017
Randy (used product regularly)
 
I have had these skis for about a month now and have put about 50,000 ft of vert climbing (and just as much skiing) on them so far. I am 5’9” and 170 pds, and I went with the 169s. I paired them with the Superlites 2.0 and the Spitfire 2.0s. My primary use is for ski mountaineering. I am very impressed with everything about this ski. They are light, nimble and playful. They are really responsive and turn on a dime in the tightest places. I have skied every condition that the mountain can throw at me, sometimes all in a single day. I was surprised at how well they handle in icy cruddy conditions, and when you get any kind of soft snow (whether powder, heavy wet, windblown, etc.) they make you look like a pro! I love them on steeps. They are so light on my back, I forget they are there, and I’ve had days where they were on my back for over 8 hours. At first I had buyer’s remorse for getting such a short length. I have never skied anything under 185. But now I’m happy that I went short. I have ice climbed up narrow gullies (not much wider than one person) with them on my back in places that I would have never taken my previous set-up. I still ski as fast and hard on them as I ever did on longer skis, and they handle it fine (not that I ski that hard in the backcountry; they ski comfortably up to 35mph and start to feel wobbly after that). They did take some getting used to at first. It was like learning to ski again, but I quickly adapted. They are, now, my favorite ski.
6/2/2018
Reply from DK-
 
Hi Randy, I'm debating between the Alp Tracks 94 vs. the 84 and as I'm reading your review I'm leaning towards 94 more. Regarding the size, I'm debating between 177 and 169 and usually I would pick 177 without thinking since I'm used to rocker skis north of 187, but I think these skis have more of a subtle rocker and more effective edge. As I read your review, I'm wondering how come you went with the 169 and not the 177? If you have tried the 84's and/or have any feedback on them, would be great to know. Thank you.

P.S awesome video!!
6/3/2018
Reply from Randy L
 
Hi DK, I haven't tried the 84s, but as far as width goes I am very pleased with the 94s and wouldn't want to go any narrower. I went with the 169 as kind of an experiment. I usually ski around 185. I was looking to shave weight and ease of movement on the ascent, knowing that the kind of terrain I'd be hitting would include a lot of carrying on my back and looking for a tight turning ski on the downhill. I kind of regret not going one size longer. I love them on the uphill and in tight places, but the short length greatly effects the downhill stability, especially when trying to push the speed. However, most of the time I am fine with the length. I have to make a conscious effort to stay centered on them as they don't function well in the back seat, and it seems like they quickly throw me there. It was a bit of a learning curve. I'm not sure if the back seat thing is an issue with the ski or with the short length. I highly recommend these skis, but I'd suggest going longer rather than shorter. That's my two cents!
6/6/2018
Reply from DK-
 
Thanks a lot for the feedback Randy. I greatly appreciate it. As i read the above i wonder if you would recommend going with Alp Tracks 100 if a bit of the extra weight wasn't an issue for you but having all the conditions you have encountered on the 94's in mind
Comment on this review:

Earn store credit by writing reviews. Learn more.

Model: Alp Tracks LT 94

Follow us on social media

View full screen version