Thread: Review: 10/11 ON3P Vicik

Page top edit - To answer the questions on the last page:

With regard to length, notwithstanding any numerical data that might be out there, the Vicik skis longer to me than the Prophet. I would stay the Viciks in 186 feels similar to 184 mantras in terms of length. They are definitely longer tip to tail, and appear as such when side by side, but the early rise does shorten them a small amount. But, with regard to the Prophet 100, the Vicik without question skis longer and for me that is a good thing. The P100 is a favorite of mine but it really feels like an ice skate sometimes, and it has a definite speed limit.

My major beef with the Prophet is the turning radius. I don't mind that it initiates easily, but hate the way it locks in to one radius. I find it difficult to change turn shape or skid the end of a turn when necessary on terrian that is either very steep or very icy. So as much as it holds an edge well, it doesn't want to make the type of turn I want when it gets a little gnarly which results in the feeling that the ski is a little jumpy and fighting me.

The Vicik to me is not quicker edge to edge compared to the Prophet. I am surprised you found a 115 Nordica quicker edge to edge then the Prophet, because to me the Prophet is extremely quick in this regard.

In trees, the Vicik is quick and agile. I think it is all about the early rise and weight. The Prophet is great in trees because it is light, but I much prefer the pivoty smeary feel of the Vicik because sometimes the Prophet gets catchy and hooky.

Both are great, versatile skis. For me the Prophet is more of a playful, pop-around and have fun kind of ski that makes short turns very well. The Vicik, although it turns more than I expected, has more of a charger feel and when on edge wants to ski like a fat GS ski. As I said in my review above, I love that it has this quality while also remaining light weight and pivoty in trees.

I hope that helps.

Hmmm, wish I could get a pair of Vicik's on my feet to try.

The Nordica's I tried were extremely agile and could pivot turns MUCH faster than the narrower Prophets and although "longer" in tip-tail length than the Prophets, they skied "shorter" in that I found them more agile and easier to make quick turns in choppy terrain such as bumped up tree runs. They did feature a very forward binding mount though as well. The Prophets are fast edge to edge on carves, but I find that in tighter trees, they just don't respond to fast turns nearly as nicely. Where do you have your Prophets mounted if you don't mind me asking?

That's the type of reaction I think I am hoping for out of the Vicik. Agile, pivoty yet with a solid edge hold for east coast groomers (aka ice).

Originally Posted by BigAirSkier1580

In your opinion, did you find that Viciks quicker edge to edge than the Prophet 100s? Also, how do they compare length-wise? Did the Vicik ski shorter than the Prophet 100s? Ice performance in direct comparison to the Prophets?

I don't have enough time on my viciks to review them here, but I used to have a pair of prophets, and they are VERY different.

I found the prophets to be very turny, as in they seemed to have more sidecut than advertised. That, plus the full twin tips made them ski really short. They didn't like to straightline, and definitely had a speed limit. In cut up heavy wet coast cement, they got deflected a fair bit, and on the few days we get something approaching blower here in the PNW, I found myself wanting a lot less sidecut. For those reasons, they weren't the right ski for me, but they were fun in other ways. It was easy to carve turns of any size on groomers, and they were surprisingly good in bumps as long as you took roundish lines. They had a really damp feeling (like a K2) and a medium flex.

The vicik has more of a gs sidecut, a stiff flex, and likes to go fast. If I were going to use a benchmark to measure them against I'd say they are in the legend pro camp.

The Prophet measures out with a running length of 155cm vs the Vicik at 147cm, so that's where my confusion is. Wouldn't the shorter running length of the Vicik make it in effect ski shorter and more agile in a tighter east coast tree situation?

I wonder if that is really true? Line skis are made by K2 who use a different tape measure than just about everyone else. Even if it is, I've owned/skied them both at 186, and the vicik skis longer.

Originally Posted by Smails

My major beef with the Prophet is the turning radius. I don't mind that it initiates easily, but hate the way it locks in to one radius. I find it difficult to change turn shape or skid the end of a turn when necessary on terrian that is either very steep or very icy. So as much as it holds an edge well, it doesn't want to make the type of turn I want when it gets a little gnarly which results in the feeling that the ski is a little jumpy and fighting me.

...Prophet gets catchy and hooky.

Yes, exactly.

Originally Posted by Smails

The Vicik, although it turns more than I expected, has more of a charger feel and when on edge wants to ski like a fat GS ski.

My initial impression too.

Originally Posted by pisteoff

I don't have enough time on my viciks to review them here, but I used to have a pair of prophets, and they are VERY different.

I found the prophets to be very turny, as in they seemed to have more sidecut than advertised. That, plus the full twin tips made them ski really short. They didn't like to straightline, and definitely had a speed limit. In cut up heavy wet coast cement, they got deflected a fair bit, and on the few days we get something approaching blower here in the PNW, I found myself wanting a lot less sidecut. For those reasons, they weren't the right ski for me, but they were fun in other ways. It was easy to carve turns of any size on groomers, and they were surprisingly good in bumps as long as you took roundish lines. They had a really damp feeling (like a K2) and a medium flex.

The vicik has more of a gs sidecut, a stiff flex, and likes to go fast. If I were going to use a benchmark to measure them against I'd say they are in the legend pro camp.



I wonder if that is really true? Line skis are made by K2 who use a different tape measure than just about everyone else. Even if it is, I've owned/skied them both at 186, and the vicik skis longer.

I agree with all of the above. I will add, however, that I think the Vicik skis easier than the legend pro and is a more reasonable everyday ski in the east. The Vicik is certainly more in the LP camp than the Prophet, that's for sure. But I owned some original race room LPs (186) about 4 years ago. It may be that (a) they were mounted too far back (they were a third-hand pair and i just skied them where they were mounted without paying much attention) or (b) that I was just making the jump to wider boards from race skis and am more comfortable now. With that said, I think the Viciks are an easier ride because they initiate a turn more easily and are much lighter. They will truck and make gs turns, which the LP certainly does, but they also do a lot more than that and can probably be enjoyed by a wider audience.

Anyone know how much these weigh in the 186?

Mine were just over 10 lbs for the pair.

I am 5' 9" and about 150 pounds and am looking into getting a new backountry ski. I currently ski the 176 '08 Volkl Gotama. I am either looking to make the goats into my backountry ski or get a new ski for backountry that i can also ski on area if i so desire. I ski pretty hard all day and would definitely consider myself a charger. I spend most of my time in the trees or bombing semi packed, but also enjoy steep technical lines and cliffs. My Goat's are the year before they added the rocker, and i definitely love them in all condition's. My only complaints are in moguls and when trying to make quick slalom turns on groomers, however, these are not the conditions i bought the ski for. My dilemma is wheter to get the Viciks or the Wrenegades. I ski with power and am not afraid of the extra stiffness of the Wrenegade, but question whether it is necessary. Which ski would be preferable for steeper chutes? I also do not know if i want to use these ski's as my everyday ski or as a backountry ski. Any advise would be appreciated

I have to reiterate detune the tails significantly to ski bumps. I've toured on them once and they do great in soft snow. Their great for the PNW heavy snow which is the reason i got them. I was on pocket rockets and FR+'s but for spring touring i needed something that could float the heavy sunbaked stuff. They take some caressing to turn short.

I am a rookie to touring and switchbacks with the 186's are hard for me, 191 would be even worse.

I got out this weekend on my custom Vicik 'softs'. Not that anyone on TGR is likely to order softer skis, but just FYI. This is what Scott changed for me:

"They were made basically as soft as we can. It was the lightest cores I could find and the core is the exact same thickness as our sidewalls, so I literally cannot go any thinner. Usually our cores are 0.6mm thicker than our sidewalls which might not sound like much, but it is a lot.

Carbon is usually 3" @ 140cm in length. Last pair for you was 140cm 2", this is only 100cm at 2" and centered just forward of the the mount, so no carbon in the tips or tails at all"

These things are so money. I noticed NO change in dampness and stability at higher speeds, and the general turning characteristics of the ski are preserved. They do feel significantly less planky though, which I like. Even with a 50+ lb pack on, I found that I did not over-power them. They are a bit more lively and springy, which is very nice in tighter tree lines. They definitely feel a hair more floaty too. I like.

Originally Posted by hiplainsdrifter

I got out this weekend on my custom Vicik 'softs'. Not that anyone on TGR is likely to order softer skis, but just FYI. This is what Scott changed for me:

"They were made basically as soft as we can. It was the lightest cores I could find and the core is the exact same thickness as our sidewalls, so I literally cannot go any thinner. Usually our cores are 0.6mm thicker than our sidewalls which might not sound like much, but it is a lot.

Carbon is usually 3" @ 140cm in length. Last pair for you was 140cm 2", this is only 100cm at 2" and centered just forward of the the mount, so no carbon in the tips or tails at all"

These things are so money. I noticed NO change in dampness and stability at higher speeds, and the general turning characteristics of the ski are preserved. They do feel significantly less planky though, which I like. Even with a 50+ lb pack on, I found that I did not over-power them. They are a bit more lively and springy, which is very nice in tighter tree lines. They definitely feel a hair more floaty too. I like.

Could I bother you to put those on a scale? Very curious to see what they weigh.

Now that I have 15+ days on these skis I’ll post up some comments. All of these days were at Mt Baker in Feb and March, where we’ve seen almost a whole season’s worth of weather inside of two months: deep light pow, deep heavy pow, rain, sun with very high and very low temps… the only thing missing was corn.

FWIW, I’m 6’1” and just shy of 170 lbs. with average skills. What I was looking for when I decided on the Vicik was an everyday PNW ski that could also be the ski that you could take on a trip where the conditions would be unknown. A quiver killer. Initially, I was leaning toward the Wrenegade , but I wanted something a little lighter to bootpack and/or skin into sidecountry - and I wanted flat(ish) tails.

/sweet blog

Size: 186 cm w/ Dukes on the line. Skied with alpine race boots and AT boots. Before mounting, mine tipped the scales at just over 10 lbs for the pair.

First impression: Quality. They seem very well constructed with close attention to detail. They came tuned and waxed, and for reference, I haven’t done any de-tuning at all. The edges are factory sharp full length.

General characteristics:

The flex is stiff, but not uber-stiff. Going from memory, I’d say stiffer than a Gotama, and maybe the Mantra too, but not as stiff as the original Legend Pro or Monster 103, and just a little softer than my AK made stiff Bros because the flex is more even/rounder. They have a similar feel to those skis (except the goat) in that they ski like fat GS race skis preferring med to large radius turns, and speed. That’s not to say that you can’t make short turns on them, but if that’s what you’re into, I’d look elsewhere.

On the damp/lively scale I’d put them right in the middle. Not as damp as a ski with metal, but not as lively as a lightweight full carbon lay-up. In this case, middle of the road is good. Damp enough to be a crud buster without feeling dead or planky.

As for skiing long/short; loose/locked, I’d say they ski on the long side and have a pretty locked-in (traditional) feel. The tip rocker works for steam-rollering everything in their path, but isn’t as pronounced as say the S7, or JJ, and with it’s flat tail, the Vicik is more charger than playful.

Powder:

Predictable. They float about the same as any 105ish ski. At low speed, they ride low and feel locked-in. Step on the gas and they rise up and loosen up, but never to the point of being smeary (like a full rocker). They always track. An analogy would be taking a corner in a car and having the rear wheels slide out just a little vs. a full-on four wheel drift.

As for the sidecut, I’d call it turny, but not hooky. Since this is something that has come up a fair bit with these skis, I’ll mention that the way I define ‘hooky’ is when a ski’s sidecut hooks-up pulling the ski across the fall-line when you don’t want it to. (The hookiest 100ish ski I‘ve ever owned was the Prophet 100. The Vicik is nothing like that.) Straightlining on the Vicik is easy, whereas a hooky ski really doesn’t want to go straight.

Chopped up / tracked out pow:

This where the Vicik really shines. As long as the ski is on edge, it will slice unwaveringly through tracks, ruts, and snow drifts. Initially, I was worried that the shape of the tip might deflect or pull the ski off line in variable snow, but that isn’t the case. Scott mentioned in another thread that next years tip will be more of a tapered, bullet nose shape, which might be an improvement, but isn’t necessary IMO.

Cascade cement and crud:

We get a lot of heavy snow here, and it does rain every now and again throughout the season, so an everyday ski here needs to be stiff enough to power through heavy glop. The Vicik is plenty stiff enough, and the sidecut is just enough to make turns at lower speeds, but not so much that you can’t go fast either.

Trees, tight spots, billy-goating:

If the trees are spaced widely enough to carry some speed, and the snow is soft, these are super fun. When the trees tighten up and/or the snow is hard, I’d rather be on a looser, more pivoty ski. I said it before, but it bears repeating here - they love to track like a GS ski, and don’t want to pivot/skid/slarve unless the snow is deep and light. The effective edge is the same as a 191 Wren, and in tight spots it shows.

Groomed:

Even though it has very little camber, the Vicik still feels pretty locked-in. Carving med-to-long turns is a piece of cake. Skidding the tails around, however, is work. If they have a speed limit, I’m not man enough to find it. Fun for mach-ing, not as much for bum-wiggling.

Bumps:

We haven’t really had bumps much this spring . Whenever they started to form, they’d get filled back in within a couple days, so I can’t really comment, other that to say that any stiff, 105ish, flat tailed ski isn’t designed for bumps. If you’re skiing bumps to get back to the lift, then sure, you’ll get through them. But if you’re actually looking for bumps, this probably isn’t your ski. That said, small soft bumps are a blast on these things - especially if you like to launch off every third or fourth one.

I left out ice, because we don’t really see the type of ice that you’d see in the east. From the few times I’ve encountered ice, I’ll just say that this ski has a soft snow bias.

So to sum it up, I’ll say that when ON3P says that the Vicik is a skinnier Wren, (i.e. an everyday PNW charger) they aren’t lying. Best suited for med and long turns, speed, straight lines, open spaces, pow, and crud.

/tl;dnr

pisteoff, i think you nailed it. All future questions should be directed to your post.

Originally Posted by pisteoff

Groomed:

Even though it has very little camber, the Vicik still feels pretty locked-in. Carving med-to-long turns is a piece of cake. Skidding the tails around, however, is work. If they have a speed limit, I’m not man enough to find it. Fun for mach-ing, not as much for bum-wiggling.

W/tl;dnr

Excellent review PO. I liked mine right from the start in all conditions, except on hardpack, which it sounds like I skied a lot more of it than you. Detuning the tips and tails gave me a lot more turn options on hard snow, but particularly the tails. They are factory tuned at 1/1, which makes the tails pretty catchy, and inhibited pushing them into smaller turns and releasing, particulary in harder bumps.

Originally Posted by Mudfoot

Excellent review PO. I liked mine right from the start in all conditions, except on hardpack, which it sounds like I skied a lot more of it than you. Detuning the tips and tails gave me a lot more turn options on hard snow, but particularly the tails. They are factory tuned at 1/1, which makes the tails pretty catchy, and inhibited pushing them into smaller turns and releasing, particulary in harder bumps.

Thanks. Yeah, I'm a procrastinator. Why put something off until tomorrow, when you can put it off indefinitely. I was going to wait until I hit a rock before doing anything resembling base/edge work to these skis. That, and the fact that it's been going-off here, so there hasn't been much hardpack.

I didn't realize they were at 1/1, that's good info. If there isn't any new snow next week, I'll probably de-tune the tails and see how that goes, although carving big arcs on these things is so much fun, and I am lazy...

Originally Posted by pisteoff

FWIW, I’m 6’ 1” and just shy of 170 lbs. with average skills. What I was looking for when I decided on the Vicik was an everyday PNW ski that could also be the ski that you could take on a trip where the conditions would be unknown. A quiver killer. Initially, I was leaning toward the Wrenegade , but I wanted something a little lighter to bootpack and/or skin into sidecountry - and I wanted flat(ish) tails.

Thanks for that write up. I fit a similar physical profile (6’, 170 but with diminishing skills) and am looking for the same type of ski but need something suited for the conditions and terrain of the East Coast, pretty much NH with 75% resort / 25% BC. Too old to bump and huck but I want to be able to handle everything else this area has to offer. I’ve already got the ski for frozen hardpack groomers.

Has anyone had a chance to compare the performance of the 176 cm ski to that of the 186? The other Vicik 186 reviews posted have been helpful, but it seems like most that ski similar terrain are way bigger than me. I’m wondering if the shorter length/radius would make that a better choice for an all-around EC ski.

Originally Posted by Mudfoot

Excellent review PO. I liked mine right from the start in all conditions, except on hardpack, which it sounds like I skied a lot more of it than you. Detuning the tips and tails gave me a lot more turn options on hard snow, but particularly the tails. They are factory tuned at 1/1, which makes the tails pretty catchy, and inhibited pushing them into smaller turns and releasing, particulary in harder bumps.

how far have you detuned?

think we're the same height, but i'm way fatter. mine are only detuned on the tapered part of the ski.

trying to decide if i should detune into the flat running surface a little? was thinking i'd try the tails first?

I detuned about 2-3 inches past the contact point. WORLD of difference, felt like a different ski. In my world a PNW everday-ski has to ski bumps like a champ. I just ditched the dukes and put dynafits on them and retiring them to touring and pow days.

Has anyone played with the edge angles and tuning to make them more slarvable? I'm 6' and 180#, not a charger, ski a smaller mountain with tight trees and moguls. Actually, you can ski just about every condition/terrain in one 2500' run. Is this just not the ski for me? (I really like the plaid! j/k that's not how I choose a ski.)
My everyday ski now is a Nordica Enforcer. What skis like that, but I little bit bigger?

i've thought about the edge angle, and not ready to go there yet. i can be pretty hard on edges if i ever get on boiler plate, i'd rather have so extra there for awhile.


however i think most skis would probably be angled more from the get go, so who knows?

i'm gonna try and detune more first.

Originally Posted by capulin overdrive

how far have you detuned?

think we're the same height, but i'm way fatter. mine are only detuned on the tapered part of the ski.

trying to decide if i should detune into the flat running surface a little? was thinking i'd try the tails first?

If you go back to pages 2 and 3 of this thread, you'll see some discussion of detuning. I took ScottyB's advice and detuned the entire rocker in the tip (6"), and the half twin tail (4"), so basically everything that was not part of the flat running surface. I ended up dulling the tail edges quite a bit. If you want to keep some sharp edge beyond the running surface I would recommend experimenting with adding more bottom bevel instead of dulling, which you can always do as a last resort.

Maybe it is because I am 220#, tall and ski Kryptons with a weight forward style, but I found the factory tune snakey as hell on hardpack. Once I dulled them up they carve just fine, but can still butter a little when needed.

snakey as hell is a good description actually. I dealt with it for about 7 ski days. I retuned twice and detuned, finally got frustrated on the hill detuned past the contact points and with vengeance...

Originally Posted by Mudfoot

If you go back to pages 2 and 3 of this thread, you'll see some discussion of detuning. I took ScottyB's advice and detuned the entire rocker in the tip (6"), and the half twin tail (4"), so basically everything that was not part of the flat running surface. I ended up dulling the tail edges quite a bit. If you want to keep some sharp edge beyond the running surface I would recommend experimenting with adding more bottom bevel instead of dulling, which you can always do as a last resort.

Maybe it is because I am 220#, tall and ski Kryptons with a weight forward style, but I found the factory tune snakey as hell on hardpack. Once I dulled them up they carve just fine, but can still butter a little when needed.

yea, i never really thought i had any issues with them untill i got on some pretty hard stuff. but to be fair to the skis, for some reason every time i've got on them has been a shitty day for light and haven't got to work them hard as i'd like to.

i'm reluctant to go lower on the edge angle, but that may help. kind of toss up where to loose some metal?

i'd like to leave the angle for wear, and then i'm down south on some pretty steep boiler plate sometimes and would like the edge there.

basically it sounds like i'm detuned the same as you for length, but maybe not as aggresive.

fuck if i know?

I thought is was just common sense at this stage of the game to detune rockered segements on ski's. I just automatically do it

I am certainly no expert on the subject, but my reasoning is:

If you do not detune the rocker then when you lay the ski on edge it will suddenly grab, causing eradic grip. As Phiber said, isn't it common practice to deturne rocker? (I would love to hear other opinions on this issue.)

IMO, the best practice is to dull the rocker and taper the bevel at the contact points, going from 1/1 (or your preferred bevel) on the running to surface to 2 or 3/1 to transition into the complete dulled section.

If you want to increace your ability to slarve and butter then you need to do more dulling and consequently you will lose some carving ability. Dealer's choice.

I would love to only ski soft deep snow, but in my world a ski that cannot perform with reasonable effectiveness on hard snow is kinda useless, so detuning my Viciks correctly was extremely important.