Results 101 to 125 of 296
Thread: What powder touring ski?
-
12-05-2015, 01:02 PM #101Registered User
- Join Date
- May 2010
- Location
- Innsbruck, Austria
- Posts
- 562
My SD's are at the shop getting mounted atm, but I'll post some comparison photos with my old EHPs when I get them back.
I can't compare to the CD102, but the rocker on the SD is generally long but low and subtle: the tip is just a little higher than the EHP and the rocker goes a lot deeper into the ski (improvement IMO), but the tails are v similar to the EHP - if anything while the rocker goes deeper into the ski, there's a little less splay overall. However, those sections going deeper into the ski are still very subtle, and almost flat: a lot closer to EHPs than Hojis, for example.
Looks pretty perfect to me. Can't wait to ski 'em!Last edited by ClarkleberryFinn; 12-05-2015 at 01:16 PM.
-
12-05-2015, 01:58 PM #102
Re the Lhasa vs R108 comparison. I have both in a 186. The lhasa is a carbon 2009/10 model and the R108 is a first year standard build. Main difference is that the tail on the R108 is a more noticeable companion on hard snow. With the Lhasa I struggled to feel the ski behind the heel of the binding. Otherwise I find them very similar.
Take my words with a pinch of salt. My ski bumming days are long behind me and I wasn't that good to start with.
-
12-06-2015, 01:09 AM #103
Still love my Praxis Woo 2.0 for touring and for powder.......epic.
Every man dies. Not every man lives.
You don’t stop playing because you grow old; you grow old because you stop playing.
-
12-06-2015, 03:10 PM #104
GO TEAM WOOTEST2.0
-
12-06-2015, 04:24 PM #105Registered User
- Join Date
- Jun 2014
- Posts
- 694
-
12-06-2015, 04:25 PM #106Registered User
- Join Date
- Jun 2014
- Posts
- 694
-
02-22-2016, 08:53 PM #107
Anyone have any more thoughts on this further into the winter? I'm always trolling the interwebs for this crap... what are people liking for something that is medium all around:
~110 underfoot
~180-185cm length
Medium weight or better, ~8lbs
Good in powder, but doesn't have to be deep pow specific. Decent amount of rocker but not crazy.
Decent or better in weird bc snow; upside down, crusty, etc.
Moderate turn radius, medium flex, doesn't have to carve tight arcs on groomers or be a cruise missile
Moderate twin tip or less a bonus
I like my older 112RP hybrids in powder, but the amount of sidecut and rocker is a little much for bc conditions. Hooky at times and little rearward support. I have some 180 BD Converts (non carbon) that are light, great for skinning and pretty good in pow for 105 under foot but a little soft and skittish otherwise. I just picked up some older wailer 99 pures for cheap but have yet to try them out, wouldn't mind something fatter for the depths of winter. I briefly tried the 181 Voile Charger but didn't get a good feel for it. The tail seems mighty stiff for a light ski, maybe too stiff for me. 186 Voile V8 seems cool, sort of one the fatter side, softer overall (too soft?) but haven't tried them out.
-
02-22-2016, 10:17 PM #108
What powder touring ski?
Next years Hoji would be cool. They got it down to 8.5lbs
https://issuu.com/devinsoisson/docs/...17_catalog_web
Renegade in a 186 is 9lbs too. Pretty cool if you ask me.
-
02-23-2016, 09:13 AM #109User
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- Ogden
- Posts
- 9,157
I ended up with the 186 Voile V8. I've got about 6 days on them so far and I really like them. I love how quick and nimble it is in tight places and bad snow but it also has the ability to make bigger turns. They seem really center mounted at the recommended line but it seems to work.
-
02-23-2016, 10:01 AM #110
-
02-23-2016, 10:19 AM #111
-
02-23-2016, 02:15 PM #112Registered User
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Location
- South Lake Tahoe
- Posts
- 3,612
I recommend my Wootests. A bit bigger than you wanted but they ski shitty three dimensional snow really well, survive firm snow, and are a blast when the snow is good. I am looking to upgrade my 4 year old woos to a more recent version. Only time I use my w99s is when I am corn harvesting.
-
02-23-2016, 02:28 PM #113
-
02-23-2016, 03:33 PM #114
Thanks for satisfying my need for online ski nerdery everyone.
Cool indeed. I always thought those were interesting but the old weight numbers looked tankish.
Looking at these in the shop, they seem unremarkable but everyone raves about them. If I saw a decent used pair for sale I would give them a go.
Funny story, I briefly has the 187cm version of this ski mounted alpine and never quite jived with it. I mean on wide open terrain it was great but perhaps I'm just not a good enough of a skier to love them in tighter spots. Just not quite pivoty or floaty enough for me. I swapped them for 186cm Atomic Automic 117s which I totally love.
This is a rarely seen/heard of ski, and the complete lack of sidecut makes me think it would be a love or hate thing, but I might try them out just because of that. They appear significant more rockered and pivoty than GPOs.
I actually saw these in EVO a couple of weeks ago. I've hadn't seen so little rocker on a powder ski in years, which seemed weird to me.
-
02-23-2016, 03:41 PM #115Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 609
I'm with Lindahl, the lightened up Hoji for 2017 looks awesome as a soft snow biased touring ski. The frictionless feel of 4FRNTs subtle reverse camber and minimal sidecut is hard to beat if the snow is anything but bulletproof. Clarkleberry, I'm still waiting for those Down SD115 pics. Sounds like a sweet ski too.
Other good options seem like they've been covered pretty well. A CCR Wootest 2.0 or GPO in the UL layup and veneer layup sounds great too. VWerks Katana or BMT 109 with the new light top sheets look awesome. Like others have said, a Blizzard Zero G 115 would be sweet as well (and rumors are that protos exist of a Zero G Bodacious). The Voile V8, maybe the new stiffer Rossi Soul 7 HD, the Kitten Factory Toors Lite... An overwhelming number of good options out there
-
02-23-2016, 03:47 PM #116
-
02-23-2016, 03:51 PM #117
Dromond, given the above, and your feedback on the GPO and liking the Automatic, I'll throw out the Volkl Nunataq as an option. It's often overlooked, but a very good ski. Basically a lighter Gotama, it's definitely more pivoty than the GPO thanks to the reverse camber.
The Wootest and Hoji fit that bill too (for the same reason), but the 30m+ turn radius might not be your bag. Probably worth demoing though if you can find them.
Curious though, what flex and layup did you ski on the GPO? My thinking is that a 182, UL core, medium flex GPO is going to be a lot more playful than a 187, standard layup, med/stiff version - but that is an expensive experiment for sure.
-
02-23-2016, 04:13 PM #118
I forgot to mention, it was medium flex even! Perhaps yet more of a mark against my ability Although a 182 would certainly be easier to ski. 30+m radius might indeed be absurd. Demoing unusual skis on the right day with dynafits continues to be challenging. I'm more on the "buy 2 year old used ski and ski it a couple of days, pass it on if you don't like it" train. I never would have bought Automatics new for whatever reason but tried them used on a whim and they have been my go-to pow day ski since.
I never considered Nunataq's because one of my main touring buddies (a very strong and fast skier fwiw) never cared for them and traded to a Voile Charger which he loves. I think that maybe the low rocker combined with deep Cascade snow was the complaint? Then again, I've never skied them.
-
02-23-2016, 04:21 PM #119Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Location
- Juneau
- Posts
- 1,096
I'll also add the new Voile Supercharger to the mix. Haven't seen/read much about it though (coming out next year):
http://www.voile.com/voile-superchar...2016-2017.html
I agree re Nunataq.
And rockered skis turn and stay on top so well, sidecut in the 30+ range for powder/crud skis is muy bueno, IMHO.
-
02-23-2016, 04:35 PM #120
What powder touring ski?
FYI, when placed on edge, a 30m radius on a reverse camber ski is way a different turn radius than a 30m radius cambered ski. Physics... the more you know...
-
02-23-2016, 04:48 PM #121
-
02-23-2016, 05:41 PM #122
Not when placed on edge and carved. Its the same physics that go into bending a ski to get a tighter turn. The reverse camber ski is prebent, so it starts out with a tighter arc.
-
02-23-2016, 08:02 PM #123
Try placing your cambered skis together, base to base, then squeezing them with two fingers and see how easily they decamber. Now, don't you think that standing on those same cambered skis (gravity), then turning them (gravity + centrifugal force) is enough to decamber them and therefore describe exactly the same radius as the fully rockered ones.
They will not feel the same, especially when not laying into a turn, because of the camber, but only a 10 gram mouse on the proverbial 4 x 2s will not be able to press the full edge into contact with the snow. The cambered ones will have more pop, and possibly be able to carve harder (as more pressure is put on tips and tails), while the fully rockered ones will likely be smoother in powder (less pressure on tips/tails, i.e. less pool cover effect), but the turn radius is solely governed by the sidecut.
-
02-23-2016, 08:46 PM #124Registered User
- Join Date
- Feb 2012
- Posts
- 609
Turn radius numbers on paper aside, I think the perception that 25-40m radius = hard to turn in the BC is completely wrong. If anything, I find skis with sub 20 m radii much harder to control in 3D snow, because the side cut hooks up more than I want it to. I want my BC ski to have minimal or no camber and a straight profile because I don't want to bang out metronome-timed turns on groomer surfaces. I want to slarve between trees and tights spots, hold a surf turn with my skis perpendicular to the fall lane for a few seconds, hit the little air and then be able to pivot 2-3 quick turns to shut down my speed.
All this to say: long radius, flattish camber, straight side cut = freedom to determine your own turn shapes in 3D snow. IMHO, YMMV
-
02-23-2016, 09:03 PM #125
I've skied otherwise identical skis, one fully rockered, the other cambered (GPO's). From memory they both carved on the same radius once set, but certainly felt different into and out of the carve. The RC model did not carve tighter than was possible with the cambered model, however I was able to get the RC into a forced tighter carve faster than I could the cambered equivalent due to the ski being pre-bent in my favor. RC skis are like having someone chew your food for you.
Powder touring: IMO the Wootest is too narrow in the tip for deep trail breaking, and for float. They speared snow on the way up and down. Which kind of made their length a penalty, not an advantage. I am a very regular powder tourer and did not really find they had a place in my quiver for that role v.s. so many other skis that ski and tour just fine.
I strongly recommend the GPO reverse camber model in carbon layup. Would be better in variable and open alpine terrain if the side cut was closer to 30m though.
The Nanatuq was mentioned above: really nice pow touring ski, though need to go faster to get better float, or needs to turn a little more to get that rhythmic lift going. I did not like them going from pow to harder snow, where they ski much longer than they feel in pow due to the long effective edge (v.s other progressive taper pow skis). That made them not so versatile unless you bought them shorter than you'd otherwise like in powder.
And G3 Empire 115.Life is not lift served.
Bookmarks