Best Touring Skis 2026 for the Backcountry
The best one-ski answer for most backcountry tourers is the Salomon QST 100 at under $1,000, a 100 mm waist that floats in soft snow and still holds an edge on a firm exit track. On a touring ski, weight is the specification: every gram is lifted thousands of vertical feet, which is the exact inverse of a resort ski, where mass is a feature that damps chatter.
The best one-ski answer for most backcountry tourers is the Salomon QST 100 at under $1,000, a 100 mm waist that floats in the soft snow that makes touring worthwhile and still holds an edge on a refrozen exit track, which describes most real tours. If you are just starting out, mounting a tech binding to the Atomic Bent 100 at under $500 is the cheapest honest way in, because it is one ski for both the resort and the backcountry. For big vertical days, the Blizzard Zero G 96 at under $1,000 is a dedicated carbon touring ski.
Touring skis compared at a glance
The four touring skis on this page side by side, from the budget fifty-fifty ski to the widest carbon option. Waist widths are the manufacturers' published figures; prices are Amazon listing prices checked in 2026 and change often.
| Pick | Tier | Budget | Waist | Use | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atomic Bent 100 Skis, 165 cm | Beginner | Under $500 | 100 mm | Resort with occasional touring | A fifty-fifty setup for someone touring occasionally and skiing the resort the rest of the time. |
| Salomon QST 100 Skis | Intermediate | Under $1,000 | 100 mm | Fifty-fifty to touring | Most tourers buying one ski for everything outside the resort boundary. |
| Blizzard Zero G 96 Touring Skis, 171 cm | Expert | Under $1,000 | 96 mm | Big vertical days | A dedicated touring setup for someone doing serious vertical. |
| Blizzard Zero G 105 Touring Skis, 172 cm | Expert | Under $1,000 | 105 mm | Deep snow touring | Deep maritime snowpacks and powder-focused touring. |
On a touring ski the advice from the resort side of this site inverts completely: every gram is lifted thousands of vertical feet, so weight is the specification you shop on first and the ski gets less damp and more nervous as it gets lighter. The honest question before buying is what fraction of the day is actually spent going up, because that fraction is what decides whether the weight saving is worth the downhill compromise.
Weight, waist, and where the trade actually lands
| Ski | Waist | Built for |
|---|---|---|
| Atomic Bent 100 | 100 mm | Fifty-fifty, resort weight on a touring ski |
| Salomon QST 100 | 100 mm | The one-ski answer for most tourers |
| Blizzard Zero G 96 | 96 mm | Big vertical days, firm-snow capable |
| Blizzard Zero G 105 | 105 mm | Deep, soft, maritime snowpacks |
Manufacturers publish weight per ski at a stated length, and the only honest comparison is at matching lengths: a light ski measured at 180 centimetres against a heavy one at 170 centimetres is not a real comparison, it is two different decisions stacked together. Expect a dedicated touring ski to give up damping on hard snow compared with a resort ski of the same width, because damping comes from mass and mass is precisely the thing being removed.
The picks, at three budgets, plus splitboards
Beginner tier here is the fifty-fifty answer: a resort-weight ski with a tech binding mounted, which is heavier on the climb and correct for someone touring occasionally. Intermediate and expert tiers are dedicated touring skis, where the weight comes down and the width splits between firm-snow efficiency and soft-snow float.
Touring ski picks
Atomic Bent 100 Skis, 165 cm
- Waist:
- 100 mm
- Weight:
- Resort weight
- Use:
- Resort with occasional touring
A resort ski with a tech binding on it is the cheapest honest entry to touring, because it is one ski instead of two. It is heavier than any dedicated touring ski, and for the ten days a year a new tourer actually gets out, that is the right trade.
Best for: A fifty-fifty setup for someone touring occasionally and skiing the resort the rest of the time.
What it costs you: You will feel every gram on a long climb. Once you are touring twenty days a season, a dedicated light ski is the upgrade that changes the most.
Salomon QST 100 Skis
- Waist:
- 100 mm
- Use:
- Fifty-fifty to touring
A 100 mm waist is the width that floats in soft snow and still holds an edge on a refrozen exit track, which describes almost every real tour. Light enough to climb on, substantial enough to ski down properly.
Best for: Most tourers buying one ski for everything outside the resort boundary.
What it costs you: Lighter than a resort ski means more chatter on hard snow. That is the cost of every gram you saved on the climb.
Blizzard Zero G 96 Touring Skis, 171 cm
- Waist:
- 96 mm
- Build:
- Carbon, dedicated touring
- Use:
- Big vertical days
The Zero G is the reference dedicated touring ski: carbon construction, genuinely light, and stiff enough to ski hard snow at speed, which is the combination most light skis fail at. On a four thousand foot day the weight saving is measured in whether you get the last lap.
Best for: A dedicated touring setup for someone doing serious vertical.
What it costs you: A light ski is a nervous ski on chopped-up resort snow, and this is expensive. Do not buy it as a one-ski quiver.
Blizzard Zero G 105 Touring Skis, 172 cm
- Waist:
- 105 mm
- Build:
- Carbon, dedicated touring
- Use:
- Deep snow touring
The same construction at 105 mm, for tourers whose objective is soft snow rather than vertical. Width is float, and float is what makes a long climb worth the descent.
Best for: Deep maritime snowpacks and powder-focused touring.
What it costs you: More ski to lift and more skin to buy. On a firm spring morning the extra width does nothing for you.
Specifications are the manufacturer's published figures, not measurements we took. Sizes, prices and stock change constantly, so confirm on the retailer page before buying. We earn commissions from Backcountry and from qualifying Amazon purchases, and every link on this page is one or the other. Where a Backcountry button reads "shop the category" it opens a search for that category rather than that exact model, so it finds comparable gear alongside it.
For an existing snowboarder moving into the backcountry, a splitboard package solves the equipment side of the same problem: it separates into two skis for the climb and bolts back together for the descent, and buying it as a package removes the risk of an interface, pucks or skins that do not match.
Splitboard pick
K2 Freeloader Splitboard, 158W
- Length:
- 158 cm wide
- Includes:
- Board only
- Use:
- Backcountry snowboarding
A freeride splitboard, so the board you climb on is the one you want on the way down. It is sold as the board alone, so budget for a splitboard interface and skins cut to match before the first tour.
Best for: A snowboarder moving into the backcountry.
What it costs you: Splitboarding is genuinely harder than ski touring: transitions take longer, the climb is less efficient on a sidehill, and traversing out of a drainage is miserable. The avalanche training requirement is identical.
Specifications are the manufacturer's published figures, not measurements we took. Sizes, prices and stock change constantly, so confirm on the retailer page before buying. We earn commissions from Backcountry and from qualifying Amazon purchases, and every link on this page is one or the other. Where a Backcountry button reads "shop the category" it opens a search for that category rather than that exact model, so it finds comparable gear alongside it.
How we chose
We compared published per-ski weight at a stated length, core construction, waist width and stated use case across every ski in the range, then read verified owner reviews for the qualities a spec sheet does not capture: how a given ski actually skis on a firm exit track after a long climb, and whether the published weight matches rider experience once bindings are mounted.
We did not tour on these skis ourselves, and we never will. How a touring ski skis depends on snow conditions, skier weight and speed in ways a single test cannot generalise into advice for a stranger, and the honest comparison anyway is manufacturer-published weight at a matched length, which we can verify and quote directly. What we can do responsibly is compare those published figures and flag where owner experience across retailers consistently disagrees with the marketing.
Splitboarding is genuinely harder than ski touring, and that is not a reason to skip it
A splitboard climbs less efficiently than skis on anything other than a well-set track, because the two halves do not glide as cleanly as a pair of dedicated skis. Sidehilling is noticeably worse, the effective edge is shorter and the binding sits higher on the board, and transitions from climbing mode to riding mode take two to three times as long as swapping a ski binding's heel piece. Getting out of a flat drainage on a splitboard, pushing along on a nearly flat trail, is genuinely miserable in a way that skis are not.
None of that is a reason for a snowboarder to avoid the backcountry. It is a reason to plan tours with those limitations in mind, choosing objectives with efficient uphill tracks and avoiding long flat approaches where possible. The avalanche training requirement does not change at all: a splitboarder needs exactly the same course, the same beacon, probe and shovel, and the same forecast discipline as a skier in the same terrain.
Buying tips
- Do not buy a dedicated light ski for your first season of touring. Tour twenty days on a fifty-fifty setup first, and you will be able to describe exactly which ski to buy instead of guessing.
- Compare weight at matched lengths, not just brand to brand. A published weight figure that does not state the length it was measured at is not a comparison you can trust.
- Match skin width to the ski's widest point. A skin narrower than the tip leaves the shovel bare and the ski slips on a firm track.
- Buy the boot before the ski if you are choosing between upgrades. Cuff rotation on a touring boot is felt on every single stride, while a ski's weight difference is felt more gradually over the length of a climb.
- Have the binding mounted and tested by a shop. A tech binding's release setting is not a lookup on one number and is not a home adjustment.
Where a touring ski fits in the whole setup
A ski is one line in a much longer list, and it is deliberately not the first line: the first backcountry touring setup puts the avalanche course and the beacon, probe and shovel kit above the ski itself, with the fifty-fifty Bent 100 as the hard-goods pick. The committed touring setup steps up to the QST 100 once you are touring more than the resort. For the binding side of the pairing, see the touring binding roundup, and for the boot, the touring boot roundup.
Sources
- Waist widths, construction and intended use: the published specifications from Salomon, Atomic, Blizzard and K2 for each model listed.
- Touring binding release: ISO 13992, the international standard for alpine touring bindings, which is why a tech binding's setting is not read off an alpine DIN chart.
- Avalanche hazard: your regional avalanche forecast center, listed for the United States at avalanche.org, and a formal avalanche course before touring in avalanche terrain.
The two skis this roundup does not rank, and why
Two touring hard goods sit outside the ranking above because they answer narrower questions. The Blizzard Zero G 105 at under $1,000 is the same carbon construction as the 96 pushed out to a hundred and five millimetres, which is float you carry uphill whether or not the day delivers deep snow, and it forces a wider and more expensive skin. The K2 Freeloader splitboard at under $1,000 is the snowboarder's version of this whole page, with the transition and sidehill penalties that come with it.
Frequently asked questions
What are the best lightweight touring skis?
Of the skis on this page, the Blizzard Zero G 96 (under $1,000) is the dedicated lightweight pick: a carbon touring ski with a 96 mm waist built for big vertical days, where every gram saved is lifted on every climb. The Zero G 105 (under $1,000) is the same construction at 105 mm for deeper snow. Both are noticeably less damp on firm, fast snow than a resort-weight ski, which is the trade for the weight saved.
What is the best value touring ski?
The Atomic Bent 100 at under $500 with a tech binding mounted. It is a resort-weight ski, so it is heavier on the climb than a dedicated touring ski, but it is one ski for both the resort and the backcountry, which is the cheapest honest way into touring for someone going out ten or so days a season.
What is a good wide or freeride touring ski for powder?
For soft-snow float, look at a waist of about 100 to 105 mm. The Salomon QST 100 (under $1,000) is the all-round pick at 100 mm, and the Blizzard Zero G 105 (under $1,000) is the lighter carbon option at 105 mm. Wider floats better but needs a wider, more expensive skin and holds a worse edge on the refrozen exit track most tours finish on.
Why does a touring ski get worse on hard snow as it gets lighter?
A ski damps chatter through mass, so removing mass to save weight on the climb also removes some of the stability that mass provided on the descent. A carbon touring ski at 1,300 grams is genuinely more nervous on a firm, fast groomer than a resort ski at 2,000 grams, and that is not a manufacturing flaw, it is the direct physical trade for the weight saved on every one of the thousands of vertical feet you climbed to earn the run.
Can I just tour on my resort skis with a different binding?
Yes, and for a beginner tourer it is often the right first move. Mounting a tech binding onto a resort ski, like the Atomic Bent 100 on this page, is the cheapest honest entry into touring because it is one ski instead of two. It is heavier on the climb than a dedicated touring ski, and for the roughly ten days a season a new tourer typically gets out, that trade is the right one.
What waist width should a touring ski be?
Something in the 90 to 105 millimetre range covers most touring objectives: wide enough to float in the soft snow that makes touring worthwhile, narrow enough to still hold an edge on the firm, often refrozen snow at the exit of a tour or on a spring morning. Go narrower for a ski focused on efficient vertical on firm snow, and wider for maritime snowpacks where deep, soft snow is the norm rather than the exception.
How much does a dedicated touring ski actually weigh compared to a resort ski?
A resort ski of a comparable width commonly weighs somewhere around 1,800 to 2,200 grams per ski. A dedicated carbon touring ski at a similar width can weigh 1,200 to 1,400 grams, close to half. Every one of those saved grams is lifted thousands of vertical feet on a single tour, which is why the weight difference matters far more here than the same number would in almost any other piece of equipment.
Should I match my skin width to the ski's waist or its widest point?
The widest point of the ski, which is usually the tip, not the waist. A skin cut to the waist width leaves the tip and often the shovel bare, and a bare shovel loses grip and slips exactly where you need it most, on a firm skin track. The skin sizing calculator on this site works from your ski's stated tip width for this reason.
Is a splitboard a reasonable alternative to touring skis?
For an existing snowboarder, yes, and it is covered separately below. It is a genuinely harder way to travel than skis: transitions take longer, sidehilling on a split half is worse because the effective edge is shorter, and getting out of a flat drainage is miserable in a way skis are not. None of that makes it the wrong choice for a snowboarder, and the avalanche training requirement is exactly the same either way.
How we choose: we compare published manufacturer specifications, published certification standards and verified owner reviews across retailers. We do not test equipment in person, and every figure quoted here is the manufacturer's published number unless we say otherwise. This is researched buying guidance and not professional instruction: binding release values are set by a certified technician on a calibrated jig, and avalanche terrain requires formal training and a current regional forecast that no article can replace.
