Skiing last week (on the DPS, not the Objectives): I wonder what bindings and shoes you guys use on the Objectives (coming from Alpine ski world)? by MikeK Sat Sep 24, 2016 8:43 pm, Post The Objectives arent nearly this rockers, but I expect the shorter effective length will be a real asset in rugged terrain. So heavier than Ross but on a shorter ski. Ill try to post up some thoughts in a few weeks after the Bob Open, but then again, I start a thru-hike 3 days later so that blog post might get put off until fall. Theyre a lot lighter (2270g/pr @ 178cm) than my Karhu Guides (2800g/pr @185cm), wider (84mm vs 78mm) and probably much less of a handful to ski. I was out at a hut the last few nights and on the approach up it is was raining. I have the Objective BCs with Fritschi Xenics. I know they both skied this particular model on their trip to AK this year where they skied theMooses Tooth. My traverses are usually up one side of the mountain and down the other. Posts in all Forums, Free There are people who mountaineer, day after day, in plastic boots though. Skin wax is pretty essential for some trips where glopping can become an issue. Was so much lighter than my cohorts. You can get by without them if you happen to misjudge the situation, but it gets pretty tiring if you backslide a lot, and are forced to push a lot with your arms, or break trail and make a lot of additional turns. Eventually, my wife needed to put skins on her skis to tour out when the pitch dropped off. Great discussion going here. I think youll like that ski a lot. The weather is often very close to freezing, and varies during the day, which means that you would have to apply different types of kick wax several times. The four buckle boot is a tad heavier, but I do not feel like I lost any range of motion. The problem with plastic boots, though, is that they can be tiring for long trips. I also havent noticed my rock skis glopping more than my pristine skis. Thanks, Dan. Slimmer and lighter than the Vector BC, but both wider and lighter than the old karhu guides/madshus annums, they are 5lbs for the pair at178cm, 117x84x102. @Dan Wow, that is a very light and nimble setup. I suspect that Vector is similar, though probably a little better in deep stuff and less on the flats. Given how light it is, it is NOT damp on crud. Reviews only please, questions can be posted as replies but new threads looking for opinions should be posted to the main Telemark Talk Forum. No one races in them (because waxing is faster) but there is a market for areas like the Northwest. You could totally leave the skins behind as long as you had reasonable expectations for how steep you ascend. The only time Ive use skins with them is to add more drag, when Im skiing downhill through super tight bush/alder/willow. If you do want a nice pow ski with fish scales, Dan, check out the voile hyper vector bcs. We encourage posts re: human powered uphill/downhill shralping, TR's, pics, bc gear, avalanche tools/techniques/training/technology Anyone with more experience than I have any thoughts on how they may perform vs the XCD skis? they stick out more) so when I use them I almost never use skins. Skins are fine, but are best when you just go up all morning, and down in the afternoon. Or, a long tour with rolling hills in which I didnt even feel the need to lock my heel in. I also want to second the recommendation of Maxiglide. I did cross the lake below this past spring which is maybe 6 miles long and didnt notice any issues, but I was also pretty tired at the time and not really in top kick-glide form. I went with Altai Kom ski, Riva 2 bindings, and Scarpa T3 boots. Sounds like these would be pretty nice. So we switched to the much lighter NNN-BC. It seems like they only go to 178 when most Voile skis go a lot longer. Somewhat chattery as a result if youre in any sort of chopped up crud. Fischer does have bigger skis that have both fish scales and special attachments so that you can easily attach and detach skins (Easy Skin) bus so far the trend of using permanent skins hasnt made it up to bigger skis. by Woodserson Mon Sep 26, 2016 8:02 am, Powered by phpBB Forum Software phpBB Limited. Too steep to ski down with skins and loo long to side step or herringbone on the way up. Night and day. She's too much of a powder skier to ever agree to something as skinny as the Objective (which is a mistake on her part), but I think she could easily spring for a Vector BC after watching my basically sing with joy on approaches, while she slogged on skins. Get our free Handbook and Receive our weekly newsletter to see what's new at Backpacking Light! You do need to set a more gentle skin track, but you can still ascend at a reasonable speed with these. Grip wax is usually a real pain in the butt on the west side of the Cascades or Olympics. Tempting to think I could leave them out of the pack. Doesnt carve too well, but that isnt really an issue given what its intended for. I cant think of anything better for backcountry traverses. Noticed that there appear to be 2 or 3 other people on the internet that own the Voile objective, so thought Id post a review for them to get excited about. Dredging this thread up from the past Dan how did those Objective BCs work out for you? Depends on heigh and weight for the length really. I had a number of extremely frustrating days especially in the spring where these became basically unskiable. If youre in rolling terrain and constantly going up and down, others will go so much faster on the downhill portions that they will net out ahead of you. I know people who pick out a non-rockered ski in the Spring, but they didnt have the option of using something so light. Get Backpacking Light news, updates, gear info, skills, and commentary delivered into your inbox 1-2x/week. With rocker on a short ski, much of the surface will be on fish scales. It still catches me off guard with how easily a little turn initiationmakes them go from straight to perpendicular in an instant. One of my favorite things about multi-day ski trips is effortlessly gliding for miles down long mellow descents. I was too heavy for the shorter skis, and while I would fit into the longer ones (from a weight perspective) I figured it wasnt worth the bother. I imagine if they werent my only skis and I skiied a lot less in them it wouldnt have been such a problem, but there is no good solution once they get scratched up since you cant resurface the scales. Al - this could be your chance to get back under 10 lbs! And if you are reading this Im super excited about your upcoming tents. Absolutely slower on moderate descents if your whole base is in contact with the snow. Im in Love with Voile fish scaled skis. This was a pretty each choice. Or when youre skiing back out but there is a short uphill section that everyone side steps or bootpacks? Long narrow straight stiff skis: fast on the flat, but difficult to turn. I crossed the range a few years ago on my current skis, much skinnier fishscales (atomic Rainiers) and only used my skins a few times. Personally Id go with the dps skis in a heartbeat if they were in my price range. Gonna put them to the test at the Bob Open in a few weeks. The ex-Powderwhore himself, Noah Howell and a ski partner, Ben Peters, have put the Objectiveto work and I believe have given itgood marks. Better to stick with one type of form both days. Are you able to talk about your boots/bindings setup as well, since that is also very significant as to how the ski will perform and be used overall? Those two, non-detachable low speed quads are the best season pass you'll ever own. Stickers. It kicks and glides like a champ. I use skis that are not the fastest, but are pretty good on deep snow. Voile must have some magician or something designing skis because the small amount of rocker on this ski makes a huge impact. They wont be a substitute for true nordic skis, but for mixed-mountain touring they seem perfect. Theyhavea partial steel edge, with no protection on the tip/tail. So awesome. I'd buy this ski 10 times over. Press J to jump to the feed. I'd trust it on ice, but I would be wary of it holding an edge solidly if you really need to crank. Reddit's OG off-piste sub for all things backcountry skiing/splitboarding. Theres just so many times where theyd come in handy, whereas you absolutely can not tell they are there when you are skiing downhill powder. My regular powder ski is a DPS Lotus 138, which has zero camber and is all rocker. As for efficiency, certainly fish scales add some amount of drag, so if your descent is purely downhill then they wont help. Ive personally skied on nearly all of their skis over the last few years and have nothing but positive things to say Voile makes a bunchof fairly light, predictable, durable, fun, and inexpensive skis to suit a variety of skiers needs. We used to use leather boots with 3-pin bindings, but that got complicated when Scarpa discontinued leather boots for a while and we had to replace ours. I would also offer a different opinion than Dan in terms of grip. Glop just happens, and when it does I either push through (hoping conditions change sometimes they do) or stop and apply the goop. If they made it in 184 and allowed Tele mounts without voiding warranty Id buy it. I personally pair them with (plastic) Telemark boots. However, if you're on something steep enough to be on your edges, I don't think the scales impact speed. Just a huge smile shape. You should have very good grip going uphill, and be able to bounce your way down just about anything. Couldnt recommend this ski enough if youre interested in mixed touring. Even if youre just doing powder laps the fish scales are still so handy to have for flat sections, rolling logging roads, long approaches etc. I've heard that people feel like they're a lot slower on the descents - have you noticed that? I ski them with the G3 Zed and the Scott Cosmos. Some skins are quite sluggish and heavy, like more nylon based bd skins. If I could afford to Id ad a pair of scaled skis to my quiver, I might, but Id be pretty selective about what trips I used them for and careful to preserve the bases. Its not super stiff. by Johnny Sun Sep 25, 2016 8:56 am, Post However, you will arrive with far less exertion and fatigue, which is especially useful on an approach. Seemingly small amount of rocker upfront, with the predominant shape being the camber I mentioned above. Its good to have a pair of skins to take the inevitable abrasion from the not snow, unless you want to spend all day taking your skis on and off. I'm in no way affiliated/sponsored/or paid by Voile. So I love them. Youve got a great design mind. We are talking here of a complete fat setup under 6lbs including the bindings, at 178cm! It's a very light ski, and also reasonably stiff for its weight. Softer skis with more curvature: a bit slower, but at least you can turn on them. Or, a short approach with mellow skiing. Also, Im approaching this from the perspective of a downhill skier that also does traverses, rather than the perspective of an XC skier that wants to go beyond the nordic track. I'm looking at other lightweight skis like the Blizzard ZeroG 85, BD Cirque 84 or the Dynafit Blacklight Pro and can't decide if the Objective BC would be too much of a one trick pony.. It wont matter much on deep snow, but might in the Spring or if you end up on a groomed area. Conditions in which scales excel, and for which waxing is a nightmare. So, I took the plunge and bought the Objective for my long tours with occasional turns. I was quite ready to get rid of them by the time I passed them on. One thing worth noting in all of this is that there is an interesting trend in high end cross country skis. My choice on the binding was a balance of weight and ramp angle. bootpacking, side stepping). This is the ski I've been looking for for a few years now. I felt nuts ordering them, but I went with 164cm. by lowangle al Sat Sep 24, 2016 2:35 pm, Post by Johnny Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:54 pm, Post But where fish scales really shine is when you are going up and down, up and down, several times. If I had fish scales there were have been no such problem. I also do a lot of cross country skiing, sometimes on an area that is occasionally groomed. I always thought it was due to my skis (having fish scales) but then I realized my brother, with the exact same skis, had the opposite situation. Choosing the right pair of skins makes a huge difference though. Voile ultravector bc owner here. I think it really varies depending on where you are relative to the skis. What a concept! As for a grip wax setup, I havent seriously considered this. Points: 60, Latest In powder, this ski screams to the surface and the tips stay up top. Im about 170 lbs these days plus typically a backpack full of gear, and Im on the 164cm Objective BCs. Compared the Karhu Guides (181cm) that these replace, they are much lighter (1900g vs 2800g), 2mm wider and hopefully far easier to handle, with more sidecut and rocker instead of huge camber. But even here its very rare that Im on a slope where I wont glide with fish scales but would without them Ive never felt like my fish scales werent gliding on a surface where I expected regular skis would. Occasionally Id enjoy the benefits of scales for the extra glide on flats, but I much prefer a good pair of mohIr or mohair/nylon blend (pomoca) for a better balance of grip and glide. If you are the opposite, then you might find yourself slipping backwards a bit. I think gliding and slow descents might be a bit slow is all. Theyre awesome. by Johnny Fri Sep 23, 2016 11:22 am, Post I think this type of fishscales is a no-brainer on backcountry touring skis. If youre doing mixed terrain with someone who is fully reliant on skins, you will end up using your pattern joyfully while they struggle with the decision on whether to put skins back on or sidestep/skate/duck walk. This feature requires an active Backpacking Light Membership. Ive noticed that I move very fast uphill, but unlike a lot of people, I have to push my way downhill. It skied gloriously without the skins. Great info, I'm interested in this ski, however still trying to figure out where it would fit in my quiver. I also found that the scales slowed me down more often then they sped me up on deproaches. assisted tours into the bc, Maybe its conditions related. Need to make sure the binding ramp angle is generally compatible with your boots. I gotta say, the more I digest this, the more ground-breaking it is. Truth be told it is a light setup, so I think it can handle just about anything you throw at it, but you may need to ski things a touch more conservatively to stay within the ski's capabilities. For the type of use I have envisioned for these (ambitious long traverses through diverse terrain), I find that my downhill speed is mostly limited by my ability to navigate through the terrain (e.g. Use the links below to share this content: Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 43 total), Live Webinar - Introduction to Map & Compass - July 2 @ 9 AM US MDT, This topic has 42 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated. I tend to go with a shorter ski if in doubt, as Im only out in the spring and on mostly firm snow, and I value grip over glide. Reminds me vaguely of an East Coast all mountain resort ski from 15 years ago. I really dont care about speed when Im using those skis, so less weight and better grip suits me fine. For example, in deep, wet snow, they are better than flat, stiff skis because you never submarine you are on top of things the whole time. You can drive them with BC boots, but it is harder (although a lot depends on the conditions). Login or become a member to post in the member forums! Just saying. by Woodserson Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:59 am, Post New Live Webinar - Introduction to Map & Compass - July 2 @ 9 AM US MDT. This ski 10mm THINNER would basically be the Rossi Bandit XX/Big Bang. I have not noticed this scales impacting performance on steeper sections - only more gradual slopes. Interesting to hear about Maxiglide. There is some tail rocker, no doubt but not a lot. Altai now has the Kom in 152, 162, and 174. That said, its pleasant. I wanted to be able to lock my heel in to get more out of the downhill sections. I got apair from OMC Gear for 40% off, which now appears to have beentheir last pair. This ski can hold its own in powder. at some point nothing will help, but I havent found a difference from old to new bases in that regard. Just the fact that they are 20 cm shorter than what most of us skied will make them easier to learn on. If you dont want to shell out for full skins, try and find some kickers (which tend to be cheaper, and can easily be transferred to other skis). As soon as you take the time to put your skins on once or struggle up one small hill without them, fish scales would have paid off. As a Nordic ski patroller Ive seen enough back country accidents to know I need release bindings. The ski itself is obviously not an XC ski, but the range of motion on the pins is such that it kicks and glides stupendously. Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. My first pair of BC skis were voile vector bcs. They have some camber and thus have a recommended weight range. The only time you can notice them at all it on groomed runs, which are sparse in the backcountry :). I have voiles, not scaled, but love them more than any other thing I've skied. by MikeK Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:04 pm, Post The fish scales are all you need so you can normally leave the skins behind. Ive used some thoroughly beat up waxless skis, and generally I found the old beat up skis still gripped well, and did not collect more snow than the new. A longer length is only needed for shredding at high speeds, which is uncommon on traverses, whereas a shorter length is much easier to handle in those spring traverse conditions where youre bushwacking with skis on. Love them! It has performed great on flats when kicking and gliding, and great on untracked powder. We like fish scales. Once you realize how helpful they are, youll notice a million times where they would be a benefit where most backcountry skiers just flail along without realizing theres a better way. For what its worth, I am heavy relative to the length of my skis so that may explain my glowing description of the grip. The ski just rocks at every segment of the tour. However, if you have the right binding, you can easily step out, swivel the heel, and kick/glide. Including some additional info for people that come across this post in the future. Overall, the ski is a dream for what I want to do - long approaches that may or may not include cool descents or powder. Serge Ive learned that I can almost always predict where someone skis by their opinion on waxless skis skiers in California and the Pacific northwest generally prefer them (except for the folks who go straight up and straight down), skiers from the rockies and the east coast generally dont. Some of you have been hoping for a skimo/XCD hybrid ski for backpacking style trips in winter, and it looks likeVoile has just produced a new contender. (107-74-94 if I remember correctly), "And if you like to risk your neck, we'll boom down Sutton in old Quebec", TELEWIKI - The Telemark Skiing Wiki Knowledge Base. I dont want to give up performance in the powder by buying a ski with the wrong shape, so I really wish there were more fish scale options for powder skis. I probably wont bring skins on future traverses and not using them at all on my last 3 even while having them. Yeah, Ill just add my experience too. by MikeK Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:09 pm, Post Sometimes the snow conditions are just gloppy (somewhere a few degrees from freezing). Most of the time Ive been going up or down, rather than kick/glideing on level ground. Its all about the local conditions. With the right ski (not too fat, has a pattern) the approach is fun, with gliding and nice speed on rolling approaches. That was a similarly versatile ski, though is designed for tele and did not have any rocker. UPDATE: Ok, so after a few months on the Objectives, I can only say that this is the best BC ski ever. I doubt Ill be using the Objective BCsin any conditions where therocker is needed for float. Great ski, and the pattern is super grippy (though doesnt have any rocker). Is it pretty flexible if you try to bend the tip and tail up? Once they had some marks on them, the scales glopped snow terribly. Even then if it is a shallow enough grade, I prefer the speed of fish scales. I dont need much float for spring traverses, but I do need a nimble ski that finesse through tight trees. Holds an edge, and is stable when you stomp on it, but its too light a ski for it to be very damp. I dont know if youve skied rocker skis in anything but powder, but they definitely have their advantages in a range of conditions. Of course, skills, familiarity, conditions and terrain all make a difference. Just my two cents. The Objective BCs are a nice modern shape so they are easy to ski, whereas the Karhus had massive camber much more like an XC ski they were very hard to initiate turns with. I love skate skiing around Yosemite meadows, touring out to huts, and generally just destination skiing really fast. I havent paid much attention to how they track on level ground. However, still turns readily when skied properly. I wish everyone would get into doing fishscales. It's lighter than the Kom, lighter than the Annum, lighter than the Helio Carbon 88 and lighter than the S-Bounds 112. In my experience multi day ski trips tend to involve a wide range of snow (and not snow). Ross if you dont mind, what length are yours and how much do you weigh? I always use Maxiglide on my bases, and it makes a big difference when the conditions are ripe for glopping which around here is fresh snow that is relatively warm. For the numbers people out there my 2017 Objective skis in 171cm with SuperLite bindings weigh about 5.5 lbs/pair. Wild Snow has the only pre-release take Ive seen here. The scales slow you down on flats, no question. Trade-offs. I did a 4 day hut trip last winter on this setup. It is easy to ski when your boots are firmer than required for the ski (e. g. using plastic boots on skinny skis) but much tougher to do the opposite. Examples of this would be when you're more or less flat on your skis on a cat track or similarly pitched descent. Certainly there are limits to the traction, but they are high enough that if you are setting the route then you can almost always choose a line that works nicely with the fish scales. As for backcountry traverse, I recommend getting these really short. The funny thing is that the only time Ive had skins glop was under the conditions you mentioned, but in that case I didnt wax them or treat them first. I really want a pair. Im really excited about these. And when Id moved on to scaless skis but my buddy still had his scales, Id be forced to wait for him to catch up instead of just cruising. With Scarpa Aliens, Voile Objective BCs and light tech bindings Im at 5.0 lbs per foot. There customer service was also excellent. A Membership is required to post in the forums. It is only in perfect corn (or a groomed ski area) where non-rocker skis would be preferable, and even then you would have fun with a rockered ski. I use TLT 8 boots. The kind of traverses I do are usually a bushwack filled spring sufferfest where Ive got enough to deal with that I dont want to be figuring out skin wax. I just skied the Objective BC on a tour in the Adirondacks, skiing the Wright Peak ski trail. Let us know what you think. I like skis that are like that. If you dont need to ski anything very difficult, then skinnier skis (which can be driven more easily by BC boots) are the better choice, in my opinion. No problem. Any thoughts on what length to buy? Not too hard to flex (though going by memory as I havent flexed it that way lately). Its a great ski for exercise off groomed trails. The descent was great - skied wonderfully. I also XC ski and I continue to think that this ski really tours comparably to a XC ski. You dont need something that wide to enjoy powder, and if you fixate on a wide ski, you may end up too tired to ski well on your descent. by Johnny Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:39 pm, Post Since I ski only in the spring in the Sierra, I encounter mostly spring corn and often pretty wet stuff; but also icy in the mornings. With a ski that lacks a pattern, you "endure" the approach for turns. But I would probably bring them, just in case. The shape of the Guides makes them require a lot of turn initiation effort, especially with the weight shifted back from wearing a big pack. No need to convince me on the scales wouldnt take anything else for the Sierra spring. Also, how well do they do when things get icy? Needed to change There to their in my post. Im second guessing getting DPS for my next pair of powder skis because the fish scales are so awesome. Given how light it is, and how grippy the pattern is, this thing tours wonderfully. Have them mounted with 22 designs lynx Telemark bindings. That said, the 178 tracks well when touring despite being a little short, and still floats fine. We do NOT, ever, run them across dirt or grass. But it did work. Their website seems to indicate that they do have rocker in the tail. The transition from sunny snow to deep shadow is where we get balling-up (or glopping). My experience was that a 2 buckle boot was MAYBE a bit too light to power the ski. You must be logged in to reply to this topic. But interestingly, I have never had your issue with older skis glopping more. There may be others. You should really check out the Madshus Epoch or Annum. So far as I know, this hasnt made it up to bigger skis (by these makers, or other companies, like Viole). Add your own today. Again, not the most playful ski in my quiver, but quite good for downhill nonetheless. For example, whendescending with theKarhus, Id often have to put my skins onfor extra drag because they were too much of a handful to ski in the trees. If you happen to be on the heavy end of things (for that ski) than you will have great grip going up (and be a bit slower perhaps, going down). Id like a less side cut ski to complement my v6 BC and Ultravectors BC but the Objective is too short for me. Because youre relying on the rocker to keep you on top of powder, rather than surface area through the whole ski, it does tend to push you back a bit, and, if youre not careful, you end up backseat on your heels. Home Forums Gear Forums Gear (General) Voile Objective BC ski. Im a pretty good skier, but on a breakable crust those hugely cambered Karhus with minimal sidecut are a major handful. I see about 185cm for my powder skis but Im happy with these in 164cm and would be content with 150cm. With my Atomic Rainiers I use BC boots, and with my other (skinnier) skis I use regular cross country boots. I toured in the first third with the pattern and put skins on the remaining 2/3 to the top of the trail. (Sidecountry, snomo, cat & heli bumps) sometimes accepted. I am interested in using them (or something alike) for multi-day trips where I may habe to carry them as well some time, so lightweight shoes with soft sole would be very important. To me that is one the misnomers about the ski (they arent just for powder). On a more serious note, its a ski with very little write-up, so I thought Id give my own thoughts to help others in deciding whether to buy.

Sitemap 19