Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 110
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Juneau
    Posts
    878
    http://wasatchski.com/tts.htm

    But, I'd get your own Dynafit Radical toe pieces and just buy the heel conversion kit. The TTS inventor has had trouble dialing in his tech toes.

    Yes, you need either NTN boots with tech toe fittings, or find older versions of the Scarpa F1 (the lime green) or the Scarpa F3 (which is also sold as Scarpa Defender).

    3-pin bindings work great in rolling terrain. For long ups and then a run down, however, a free pivoting toe (like the Switchback X2) makes a huge difference, even with the weight penalty.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,327
    Quote Originally Posted by sheldonm View Post
    I thought you would need a boot with toe bellows for TTS.
    Quote Originally Posted by dschane View Post
    Yes, you need either NTN boots with tech toe fittings, or find older versions of the Scarpa F1 (the lime green) or the Scarpa F3 (which is also sold as Scarpa Defender).
    Nope and nope. I'm talking about stiff-soled AT boots in TTS bindings, which is my Vector BC rig. Dunno if anybody else is doing it, but it works great for fat fishscale. Yeah, TTS is designed for bellowed boots with tech toe fittings, but it works quite will with my TLT6Ms, great with fat fishscales for linking up lines via ledges and benches on billygoating descents. IME, downhill performance is 95%+ of locked heel. Stiff-soled AT boot + TTS is for fat fishscale use only; makes zero sense for smooth-base skis.

    If you're going with duckbill boots, agree that Switchback X2 would be a great choice for fat fishscale.

    ETA: Also agree re going with Radical toe and TTS conversion kit (or DIY back end).

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    5,676
    Alright...I need some waxless skis for laps in the NE. My credentials:
    * 5'll"; 230 lbs (very stocky, not much fat)
    * aggressive telemark skier
    * all mountain ski needed
    * strong ski needed (that won't break when I run into a hardwood or flex them under my tree trunk legs)
    * I have other skis for steeper, longer approaches with skins

    I see there are about 4 options, which one is best for me?

    * Rossi BC 125
    * Madshus Annum
    * Voile Charger BC
    * Voile Vector BC

    Thanks!!!
    They think I do not know a buttload of crap about the Gospel, but I do.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    6,935
    Anybody played around with Hok Skis?

    Aaron Wright let me borrow his pair since he's out of commission. They are kinda neat. Really short, permanent climbing skin attached to the bottom, full rocker/reverse camber. Tapered tip.

    Running them with a 75mm binding with a Scarpa T3 boot.

    Scary on hard snow. I am a terrible telemarker so can't comment on performance too much, but in the envelope that I can effectively telemark in (20-25 slopes with powder) they are really fun. Best part is that you basically have zero transitions between up and down. You can ski short little pitches that I'd otherwise avoid on my AT gear because of the hassle of climbing out, etc.

    So perfect for skiing in the Foothills around Leavenworth.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Elmore, VT
    Posts
    1,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier View Post
    Anybody played around with Hok Skis?

    Aaron Wright let me borrow his pair since he's out of commission. They are kinda neat. Really short, permanent climbing skin attached to the bottom, full rocker/reverse camber. Tapered tip.

    Running them with a 75mm binding with a Scarpa T3 boot.

    Scary on hard snow. I am a terrible telemarker so can't comment on performance too much, but in the envelope that I can effectively telemark in (20-25 slopes with powder) they are really fun. Best part is that you basically have zero transitions between up and down. You can ski short little pitches that I'd otherwise avoid on my AT gear because of the hassle of climbing out, etc.

    So perfect for skiing in the Foothills around Leavenworth.
    I've used them. They are fun for exploring, etc, but I wouldn't make a tele turn in them. I just skied them heels down. They are just a modern version of the Karhu Meta.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Elmore, VT
    Posts
    1,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Grape_Ape View Post
    Alright...I need some waxless skis for laps in the NE. My credentials:
    * 5'll"; 230 lbs (very stocky, not much fat)
    * aggressive telemark skier
    * all mountain ski needed
    * strong ski needed (that won't break when I run into a hardwood or flex them under my tree trunk legs)
    * I have other skis for steeper, longer approaches with skins

    I see there are about 4 options, which one is best for me?

    * Rossi BC 125
    * Madshus Annum
    * Voile Charger BC
    * Voile Vector BC

    Thanks!!!
    If you need an all-mountain ski, I assume that means you will be doing some significant uphill. If that is the case, you dont want waxless. You would be better off using a regular ski with either full length kick wax (xtra blue will cover most conditions) or skins. Waxless grip sucks once it gets steeper than rolling, unless its above freezing.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,327
    Agree re "all-mountain" (see below) but while kick wax is an option in the EC or the interior West, it has limited use here in the PNW because on nearly every tour we encounter numerous hard wax zones and/or klister conditions. On a typical mid-winter tour, we'll start the tour in red, purple or klister conditions, climb through blueX then blue, and maybe to green, then back through those zones on the descent. We also get lots of twilight zone falling snow (near 32F, falling snow), and thus it's not unusual for PNW classic XC racers to race on waxless, e.g., fishscales or zero skis (more common now).

    Fat fishscales OTOH are perfectly suited for nearly all PNW touring. The only drawback is slower gliding out on a flat egress on some tours, but the advantages far outweigh that. Well, there is another drawback: Unless everyone in the party has fat fishscales, on many tours the FF skiers will do lots of standing around waiting for the others. ETA: On some tours, e.g., yoyoing or steep ingress/egress that requires skins, FF provide no advantages.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grape_Ape View Post
    Alright...I need some waxless skis for laps in the NE. My credentials:
    * 5'll"; 230 lbs (very stocky, not much fat)
    * aggressive telemark skier
    * all mountain ski needed
    * strong ski needed (that won't break when I run into a hardwood or flex them under my tree trunk legs)
    * I have other skis for steeper, longer approaches with skins

    I see there are about 4 options, which one is best for me?

    * Rossi BC 125
    * Madshus Annum
    * Voile Charger BC
    * Voile Vector BC

    Thanks!!!
    180cm Vector BC or 181cm Charger BC. I'm a bit bigger than you, have both and they get lots of use. My Vector BC is mounted with TTS, although I usually run them with AT boots (TLT6M), which allows me to scoot around easier when in downhill mode. My Charger BC are mounted with Dynafits w/toe shims to reduce ramp delta.

    Get skins for them for the steeper uphills.

    Not sure what you mean by "all mountain," but no fishscale ski is "all mountain" as that term is typically used (referring to lift-served use) because fat fishscales are slow on firm groomers or other skied out snow and can hang up during turns. OTOH, in soft snow, e.g., pow, wet pow, corn, mush, you won't notice the fishscales on the descent. I've done some very fun lift-served skiing on big soft snow days cuz the fishscales allow you to work over to lines that nobody else has skied, but they are primarily touring tools.

    The Annum is a dog, way too soft, XC construction, basically a not-so-fat logging road/meadow skipping noodle. A guy your size will overpower it.

    The new BC125 w/bit of tip rocker is an improvement over the original, but they are built like XC skis, i.e., not very robust. OTOH, Voile BC skis are built the same was their smooth-base touring skis. Voile makes tough skis, and pretty light ones at that. All my current touring rigs (4 = 2 fat fishscale + 2 smooth base) are Voiles.
    Last edited by Big Steve; 01-20-2016 at 12:28 PM.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    6,935
    Quote Originally Posted by milestogo View Post
    I've used them. They are fun for exploring, etc, but I wouldn't make a tele turn in them. I just skied them heels down. They are just a modern version of the Karhu Meta.
    What boot are you running? I had a hard time making p-turns on them in deep and steep snow.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,327
    Hok skis are sliding snowshoes, okay for exploring low angle woods and setting traps. OP is looking for skis to tour and make turns.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    5,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Steve View Post
    Agree re "all-mountain" (see below) but while kick wax is an option in the EC or the interior West, it has limited use here in the PNW because on nearly every tour we encounter numerous hard wax zones and/or klister conditions. On a typical mid-winter tour, we'll start the tour in red, purple or klister conditions, climb through blueX then blue, and maybe to green, then back through those zones on the descent. We also get lots of twilight zone falling snow (near 32F, falling snow), and thus it's not unusual for PNW classic XC racers to race on waxless, e.g., fishscales or zero skis (more common now).

    Fat fishscales OTOH are perfectly suited for nearly all PNW touring. The only drawback is slower gliding out on a flat egress on some tours, but the advantages far outweigh that. Well, there is another drawback: Unless everyone in the party has fat fishscales, on many tours the FF skiers will do lots of standing around waiting for the others. ETA: On some tours, e.g., yoyoing or steep ingress/egress that requires skins, FF provide no advantages.



    180cm Vector BC or 181cm Charger BC. I'm a bit bigger than you, have both and they get lots of use. My Vector BC is mounted with TTS, although I usually run them with AT boots (TLT6M), which allows me to scoot around easier when in downhill mode. My Charger BC are mounted with Dynafits w/toe shims to reduce ramp delta.

    Get skins for them for the steeper uphills.

    Not sure what you mean by "all mountain," but no fishscale ski is "all mountain" as that term is typically used (referring to lift-served use) because fat fishscales are slow on firm groomers or other skied out snow and can hang up during turns. OTOH, in soft snow, e.g., pow, wet pow, corn, mush, you won't notice the fishscales on the descent. I've done some very fun lift-served skiing on big soft snow days cuz the fishscales allow you to work over to lines that nobody else has skied, but they are primarily touring tools.

    The Annum is a dog, way too soft, XC construction, basically a not-so-fat logging road/meadow skipping noodle. A guy your size will overpower it.

    The new BC125 w/bit of tip rocker is an improvement over the original, but they are built like XC skis, i.e., not very robust. OTOH, Voile BC skis are built the same was their smooth-base touring skis. Voile makes tough skis, and pretty light ones at that. All my current touring rigs (4 = 2 fat fishscale + 2 smooth base) are Voiles.
    Thanks Steve.

    ...looking to explore the trail network around Jackson, NH in the upcoming weeks with the girlfriend.
    They think I do not know a buttload of crap about the Gospel, but I do.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Juneau
    Posts
    878
    Quote Originally Posted by Grape_Ape View Post
    Thanks Steve.

    ...looking to explore the trail network around Jackson, NH in the upcoming weeks with the girlfriend.
    I'll second what Big Steve said -- the Voile skis are alpine skis with scales vs. the others, which are fat XC skis (fine for noodling).

    I'm 185-190 lb, and have the Vector BCs and had the regular Chargers (until this year and replaced with Praxis Rx). I'd go with the Charger BCs.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    8,336
    Quote Originally Posted by milestogo View Post
    I've used them. They are fun for exploring, etc, but I wouldn't make a tele turn in them. I just skied them heels down. They are just a modern version of the Karhu Meta.
    I've skied both the Meta and the Hok, other than the concept they're nothing alike. In soft snow I can make perfect tele turns on anything between 15-30 degrees. On hard snow they're terrifying, okay in breakable crust.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier View Post
    What boot are you running? I had a hard time making p-turns on them in deep and steep snow.
    I had trouble in deeper snow and steeper terrain making alpine turns because of the length, best to tele then.
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Steve View Post
    Hok skis are sliding snowshoes, okay for exploring low angle woods and setting traps. OP is looking for skis to tour and make turns.
    Hoks are great for mid winter powder conditions, they ski way better than I expected. See above, soft snow less than 30 degrees they are a blast.
    I've skied off the NE side of Windy Knob at Blewett on my Hoks. I hadn't planned to but there was 6-8" of light snow over soft base so I went for it.
    Here's a video of Don Portman skiing Sherman Peak off the Kettle Crest

    I know they're not a tool for getting rad, but they're real skis for meadow skipping and poking around in the woods getting turns. YMMV.
    Altai skis are now making a different ski similar to the Vector but right now they only come in 16x? something.

    In the end they're just another tool to get out and make turns. I've skied all over the Wenatchee foothills on them and many secret glades and clearcuts off Squilchuck between town and the Ridge. A couple years ago I skied out on the SE ridge of Badger Mountain on the Duffy Creek BLM allotment.
    Last edited by AaronWright; 01-20-2016 at 02:20 PM.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    6,935
    I emailed the Altai folks and they said they might be interested in building a Hok in a ~170 length for meadow skipping with light AT or Tele gear.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    8,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier View Post
    I emailed the Altai folks and they said they might be interested in building a Hok in a ~170 length for meadow skipping with light AT or Tele gear.
    A couple years ago I asked Nils if they would make the Hok in 165-170 and he didn't think there was interest. I think this segment of the market is under appreciated. The older Hoks, like mine, have inserts but the newer ones and the Koms are flat, no inserts.

    I thinks the Voile skis are great but they're not the same type of ski and are intended for a different purpose than Altai's offerings.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Central Mass.
    Posts
    1,199
    I have the 181 Charger BC mounted with Hammerheads that I had laying around and ski them with Scott Synergys. They're very fun for cruising up and around local woods trails and hitting a few tree shots here and there. Also very fun for longer low angle touring. As everyone said, suck on hard snow on the downhill, and work well in pow. I put a lot of miles on them with all of the snow we had here last winter. They work well for me, 5'10,200, aggressive tele skier.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    between campus and church
    Posts
    6,802
    I bought a pair of 191cm Charger BCs last season with a few local tours in mind. Two have exits where you have to go up to get back to the car (I hated either herring boning up or re-skinning), one has a 2+ mile flat trail before it turns uphill, and another is a NELSAP that has a moderate up track that can be climbed with fish scales in the right conditions.

    They are a little long for me at 6'1", 185lbs but still plenty fun. They really are powder guns though. I also have 181 flat bottom Chargers.

    I second the need for skins regardless of what you buy.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    679
    Another plug for Voiles.
    I live in Maine and use mine a lot, Tight woods with a lot short sections of linked turns. separated by traverses or short climbs. I have also skied some steep open terrain on them. essentially, there is nothing I can ski, that I can't ski on these skis.
    I can also keep up with more casual cross country skiers.

    I ski them with Switchback x2 and T-1s. I think a lot would be lost with a strictly alpine rig, but my buddy like his with Fritchis.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    On another tangent.
    Posts
    2,837
    Advantages of fat fish scaled boards like the Charger BC vs narrower Rossi BC, etc include:
    -you can get more float and find turns on lower angle terrain as well as steeper and deeper stuff
    -they work better in mani and denser snows
    -you can add narrow skins as kickers for moderate climbing or funky and transforming snows
    -you can obviously use wall to wall skins for steeper climbs
    -the can serve as a back up BC rig for yourself or to lend out
    -they pack tracks better
    -they can serve as a highly versatile interim rig until you can get a dedicated BC rig

    Wax them for better glide and reduce ice and wet snow build up.
    Best regards, Terry
    (Direct Contact is best vs PMs)

    SlideWright.com
    Ski, Snowboard & Bike Tools, Wax and Wares
    Repair, Waxing, Tuning, Mounting Tips & more
    Paste 5% TGR Discount code during checkout: 1121TGR

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Shuswap Highlands
    Posts
    2,869

    Waxless/Fishscale BC skis ?

    I have a set of 191 alpina odyssey edge backcountry sticks with switchback X2. Excellent for the forestry roads, backcountry Nordic trails and other rolling meadow skipping, but they take serious technique to turn with their camber-and-a-half flex (especially with the highly variable snow profiles below tree line). I alternate between a set of T2X and a real comfy set of leathers depending on how much down I am expecting. I have been looking at either the V6 BC or drifter BC for a more downhill-oriented rig, but have yet to pull the trigger.
    Last edited by BCMountainHound; 01-20-2016 at 10:25 PM.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    mont royal
    Posts
    1,059
    I've got a pair of Madshus Eon 185's and more recently got some Fischer S-Bounds 98 in 189cm (69mm waist), both mounted with 3-pin bindings and I use some old Scarpa T2 or T2X's (or even leather boots if i'm really just cruising). I've had a ton of fun on these, but recently did a 20km tour with a lot of approach, then a big uphill section (broke out the skins) - the skis worked great, and I was flying. However, once I got to the down, although I was happy to find a ton of deep untracked, slightly wind affected snow - I couldn't really hack it on the skinnies. I made it down and had fun, but bailed a few times and definitely didn't 'slay it'. Now this wasn't a really steep line, but too steep and deep for the fischers.

    I'm wondering.. Next time I do a tour like this, should I just wax up my AT gear for the approach / deproach.. probably stay in free-heel mode the whole time except the descent.. Or expand the quiver... I have a pair of Black Diamond O1's laying around, and I have a line on some well priced Voile Charger BC's. My concern is that the Chargers are too 'chargy' and not really appropriate for this kind of setup. They're classified as a big-mountain ski which is not what i'd be using them for. I realize the setup would be a lot heavier, but i'm willing to compromise for some performance. Maybe the Vector's would be perfect, but I found the chargers for a better price...
    Last edited by therudeness; 03-07-2016 at 09:40 PM.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    mont royal
    Posts
    1,059
    the Surface Ruess seem great on paper but have terrible reviews, sounds like they fucked up the fishscale pattern and the skis have no glide - even in powder!

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,327
    Quote Originally Posted by therudeness View Post
    My concern is that the Chargers are too 'chargy' and not really appropriate for this kind of setup. They're classified as a big-mountain ski which is not what i'd be using them for. I realize the setup would be a lot heavier, but i'm willing to compromise for some performance. Maybe the Vector's would be perfect, but I found the chargers for a better price...
    I have and really like both. Charger BC is more nimble than its name suggests and skis everything quite well, but if I had to pick only one fat fishscale ski I'd choose the Vector BC.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Boulder
    Posts
    872
    for what it's worth, i have BC125s and love them for low angle touring. almost never put skins on them because i never go steep in them, but they can still crank a turn if needed. limiting factor is probably my boots and voile 3-pins over the skis, though...

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    mont royal
    Posts
    1,059
    wow the voile v6 BC looks awesome too.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Juneau
    Posts
    878
    Yeah, the Chargers are great skis, easy to handle. The Vectors even more so. Same is probably true for the V6s; I've just never skied them. All come in BC scaled versions.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •