voile objective vs vector

As a Nordic ski patroller Ive seen enough back country accidents to know I need release bindings. I gotta say, the more I digest this, the more ground-breaking it is. 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. 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. 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. by MikeK Sat Sep 24, 2016 8:43 pm, Post With the right ski (not too fat, has a pattern) the approach is fun, with gliding and nice speed on rolling approaches. 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 was out at a hut the last few nights and on the approach up it is was raining. I have not noticed this scales impacting performance on steeper sections - only more gradual slopes. That said, the 178 tracks well when touring despite being a little short, and still floats fine. I also havent noticed my rock skis glopping more than my pristine skis. It's a very light ski, and also reasonably stiff for its weight. by Johnny Sun Sep 25, 2016 8:56 am, Post Press J to jump to the feed. A Membership is required to post in the forums. Mech. assisted tours into the bc, 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. Youve got a great design mind. So, when it hits ice, it doesn't get floppy, but it does get a little chattery, with some deflection. 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). Need to make sure the binding ramp angle is generally compatible with your boots. The descent was great - skied wonderfully. Backpacking Light helps hikers and other backcountry enthusiasts overcome their barriers to living a life outside in Wild Places. This ski can hold its own in powder. The problem with plastic boots, though, is that they can be tiring for long trips. 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)? 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. I think youll like that ski a lot. 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. For what its worth, I am heavy relative to the length of my skis so that may explain my glowing description of the grip. Im in Love with Voile fish scaled skis. by Johnny Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:54 pm, Post As mentioned, they are easy to turn. The transition from sunny snow to deep shadow is where we get balling-up (or glopping). 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. 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. Well I managed to find that late season deal. 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. What do you think? Even the ones without a lot of tip and tail rocker. Still some on sale at GearX.com and Steepandcheap for 25-30% off. 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. Thanks, Dan. If you are the opposite, then you might find yourself slipping backwards a bit. However, I do think the loss in glide will be more than offset by the gain in maneuverability. 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). There are people who mountaineer, day after day, in plastic boots though. Couldnt recommend this ski enough if youre interested in mixed touring. Gonna put them to the test at the Bob Open in a few weeks. Depends on heigh and weight for the length really. We like fish scales. A few determined kicks is usually enough. Ross if you dont mind, what length are yours and how much do you weigh? So we switched to the much lighter NNN-BC. I think gliding and slow descents might be a bit slow is all. 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? Id like a less side cut ski to complement my v6 BC and Ultravectors BC but the Objective is too short for me. Get our free Handbook and Receive our weekly newsletter to see what's new at Backpacking Light! Any issues with tracking straight on the level? Ive noticed that I move very fast uphill, but unlike a lot of people, I have to push my way downhill. No one races in them (because waxing is faster) but there is a market for areas like the Northwest. I think it really varies depending on where you are relative to the skis. I personally pair them with (plastic) Telemark boots. You do need to set a more gentle skin track, but you can still ascend at a reasonable speed with these. Seriously? Glop just happens, and when it does I either push through (hoping conditions change sometimes they do) or stop and apply the goop. The ski just rocks at every segment of the tour. I rarely got this with my fish scales. Eventually, my wife needed to put skins on her skis to tour out when the pitch dropped off. Make sure you pick an easy-to-transition binding and boot with a lot of range of motion, so you can make the most of the performance that the ski offers. I had a number of extremely frustrating days especially in the spring where these became basically unskiable. A few key characteristics before I get into performance: Mild sidecut. Overall, the ski is a dream for what I want to do - long approaches that may or may not include cool descents or powder. We find it useful to spray the sole with some sort of non-stick which limits how often the snow sticks and balls up. For a long time now, fish scale classic skis have been available for expensive (super light, fast) cross country skis. Ive been preaching to everyone how fish scales in addition to climbing skins are the future of backcountry powder skiing. 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. Their website seems to indicate that they do have rocker in the tail. 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. I love skate skiing around Yosemite meadows, touring out to huts, and generally just destination skiing really fast. It's lighter than the Kom, lighter than the Annum, lighter than the Helio Carbon 88 and lighter than the S-Bounds 112. Both skis have full metal edges and both have Voile release bindings and heel cables. Without the rocker and the lightness of course. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not. They are just a nice, nimble ski, that works well. Again, not the most playful ski in my quiver, but quite good for downhill nonetheless. Watch the Tarptent Dipole Review Premiere on YouTube: Backpacking Light community posts are moderated and here to foster helpful and positive discussions about lightweight backpacking. Just saying. !How to enable JavaScript in your Browser, Post Just remember, people have been skiing powder long before we had 6 wide powder skis. I'm already concerned for the future of the KOM - it had my interest last year, but now not even on my radar. 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. I also do a lot of cross country skiing, sometimes on an area that is occasionally groomed. I dont know if youve skied rocker skis in anything but powder, but they definitely have their advantages in a range of conditions. 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. I use skis that are not the fastest, but are pretty good on deep snow. It seems like they only go to 178 when most Voile skis go a lot longer. 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. by Johnny Fri Sep 23, 2016 11:22 am, Post For the numbers people out there my 2017 Objective skis in 171cm with SuperLite bindings weigh about 5.5 lbs/pair. The boots I use are 5 lbs a pair. I really want a pair. I havent been disappointed yet! I have a pair now and like them as well. My experience was that a 2 buckle boot was MAYBE a bit too light to power the ski. Since its so light, if you do have your heel locked in and you need to skate or sidestep, its quite easy and doesnt require a lot of energy. Reviews only please, questions can be posted as replies but new threads looking for opinions should be posted to the main Telemark Talk Forum. 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. Yeah, Ill just add my experience too. Stickers. 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. I got apair from OMC Gear for 40% off, which now appears to have beentheir last pair. Or, a long tour with rolling hills in which I didnt even feel the need to lock my heel in. (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. One thing worth noting in all of this is that there is an interesting trend in high end cross country skis. bootpacking, side stepping). Im a pretty good skier, but on a breakable crust those hugely cambered Karhus with minimal sidecut are a major handful. I use BD glopstopper skin wax, but Ive still had super sloppy conditions where glopping on skins wasnt avoidable. I went with Altai Kom ski, Riva 2 bindings, and Scarpa T3 boots. I wanted to be able to lock my heel in to get more out of the downhill sections. Im second guessing getting DPS for my next pair of powder skis because the fish scales are so awesome. To me that is one the misnomers about the ski (they arent just for powder). 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. Seemingly small amount of rocker upfront, with the predominant shape being the camber I mentioned above. Not too hard to flex (though going by memory as I havent flexed it that way lately). 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. Reminds me vaguely of an East Coast all mountain resort ski from 15 years ago. 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. by MikeK Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:09 pm, Post Interesting to hear about Maxiglide. Without the skins, Id just be crashing through the trees. Ive done tours where Ive passed much younger folks in lighter gears, just because they are spending a lot of time taking off and putting on their skins. I doubt Ill be using the Objective BCsin any conditions where therocker is needed for float. 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. 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. In my experience multi day ski trips tend to involve a wide range of snow (and not snow). If I was doing mid-winter traverses on moderate terrain then waxing might be more appealing. Voile must have some magician or something designing skis because the small amount of rocker on this ski makes a huge impact. Skins are fine, but are best when you just go up all morning, and down in the afternoon. 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. I like skis that are like that. Theyhavea partial steel edge, with no protection on the tip/tail. Some skins are quite sluggish and heavy, like more nylon based bd skins. I havent paid much attention to how they track on level ground. 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 toured in the first third with the pattern and put skins on the remaining 2/3 to the top of the trail. On a rolling descent (or rolling terrain), I think fish scales are easily going to pay off over a climbing skin setup since they havevastly more glide than even the fastest skins (if you were to just keep your skins on the whole time), or since the drag losses are likely much smaller than the time lost putting skins on/off (if you were to put your skins on for the uphills) or since the drag losses are likely less than the effort avoid putting your skins on for the uphills (e.g. trees), rather than by the glide of the skis. That was a similarly versatile ski, though is designed for tele and did not have any rocker. I think this type of fishscales is a no-brainer on backcountry touring skis. 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. This is the ski I've been looking for for a few years now. @Dan Wow, that is a very light and nimble setup. This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. 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. However, you will arrive with far less exertion and fatigue, which is especially useful on an approach. My thing is spring Sierra touring on corn, mostly for the scenery and just to be out there turns are secondary to me. Also, how well do they do when things get icy? Just my two cents. That is not the only time you can get glop. It kicks and glides like a champ. We are talking here of a complete fat setup under 6lbs including the bindings, at 178cm! My guess is the vast majority of longer distance ski mountaineering trips (like this) take place using plastic boots. I think it will go a long way in promoting xcd skiing compared to the xcd stuff available since the advent of plastic boots and dh oriented skis. Given the small amount of rocker and long camber, it is not the most playful or turny ski I have. There are basically three ways to propel you up a hill (well, four if you count skating): grip wax, fish scales, or skins. Al - this could be your chance to get back under 10 lbs! I cant think of anything better for backcountry traverses. The only time Ive use skins with them is to add more drag, when Im skiing downhill through super tight bush/alder/willow. You can drive them with BC boots, but it is harder (although a lot depends on the conditions). I probably wont bring skins on future traverses and not using them at all on my last 3 even while having them. Reddit's OG off-piste sub for all things backcountry skiing/splitboarding. Skis like that are often paired with plastic boots (A. T. or Telemark) just because they are pretty big and have plenty of sidecut. I agree with your other points. But I would probably bring them, just in case. Was so much lighter than my cohorts. UPDATE: Ok, so after a few months on the Objectives, I can only say that this is the best BC ski ever. I did not, because of the pattern. I'd trust it on ice, but I would be wary of it holding an edge solidly if you really need to crank. What really caught my eye this year, though, is that a lot of these skis now have built in skins. @Paul Im somewhere around 155 (give or take) and bought the 177 length ones. I just skied the Objective BC on a tour in the Adirondacks, skiing the Wright Peak ski trail. Imagine traversing where you get a bit low instead of side stepping up to gain a few feet, the fish scales do it effortlessly. 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 really dont care about speed when Im using those skis, so less weight and better grip suits me fine. They wont be a substitute for true nordic skis, but for mixed-mountain touring they seem perfect. I dont really see the appeal though it seems like a lot more hassle for a less reliable outcome even if it can be better in certain situations. they stick out more) so when I use them I almost never use skins. This ski 10mm THINNER would basically be the Rossi Bandit XX/Big Bang. Needed to change There to their in my post. However, if you're on something steep enough to be on your edges, I don't think the scales impact speed. Id love to find a late season deal on a pair in time for mountaineering season. Anyone with more experience than I have any thoughts on how they may perform vs the XCD skis? 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. I know they both skied this particular model on their trip to AK this year where they skied theMooses Tooth. We encourage posts re: human powered uphill/downhill shralping, TR's, pics, bc gear, avalanche tools/techniques/training/technology It is a trade-off though, as Serge said; going down tends to be a bit slower. However, still turns readily when skied properly. Im looking forward to including a pair of these BC models in my quiver for sure. So the Objective BCs are super light, easy to ski and with a high performance fish scale. Also if anyone spends any time on these this season, post yourfeedback here. 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.

• Tactical Shirt Long Sleeve
• White Linen Shirt Short Sleeve
• Stearns Original Puddle Jumper
• Lavender Bergamot Candle White Barn
• Swarovski Lavender Pendant
• Alps Mountaineering Chaos 3 Tent
• Ixl Reading Comprehension 2nd Grade
• Charm Bracelet Tanishq
• Pochette Metis Reverse Availability
• Taylor Instant Read Thermometer Reset
• Dusty Blue Tulle Table Runner
• Red Mulch Bulk Near New York, Ny
• Joes Jeans Frankie Bootcut
• Hanes Beefy Tees With Pocket
• Calvin Klein Jacke Herren Schwarz
• Orbit Tractor Sprinkler Troubleshooting
• Kohler Toilet Paper Holder Installation Instructions