All Things Volkl Thread

[Benneke10]

Ruby Mountain Heli skiing getting rid of a bunch of volkls:

https://www.facebook.com/marketplace...2111112l%22%7D

[eagle28]

Thanks for the thread. Enjoying hearing the reviews and learning from the discussion. I have the ONE & 100Eights both mounted with Shifts and love both. Resort & toured both with great enjoyment. I don't get out a ton being a flat lander in the midwest but love learning from those that get out much more!! Im addicted and keep adding to the quiver!

[Sylvan]

If Volkl made a 24 or 25m r K112 with K108 construction and rocker profile, I could probably stop buying skis for a while. K108 is a really good soft snow tool, K112 would be murder.

[1000-oaks]

If Volkl made a 24 or 25m r K112 with K108 construction and rocker profile, I could probably stop buying skis for a while. K108 is a really good soft snow tool, K112 would be murder.

Or K118 (with traditional mount), sign me up.

[Shorty_J]

Or K118 (with traditional mount), sign me up.

Isn't that the volkl confession that never really took off?

https://blisterreview.com/gear-revie...lkl-confession

[Sylvan]

Isn't that the volkl confession that never really took off?

Think you might be on to something Shorty. Spent a few days on 193s this week (one refrozen with falling dust (front side of the storm), and one cold blue pow day), and I'm really looking forward to spending more time on em next year. Weird how some skis take off, and others, well, get discontinued. Wonder if these were released on the heels of M102s/K108s, if they would have faired any better. Before their time? 193 straight pull, 117 under foot, 26.5m r, 2370 g/ski avg, +1(-11). Is it winter yet?

[1000-oaks]

Isn't that the volkl confession that never really took off?

https://blisterreview.com/gear-revie...lkl-confession

Interesting, for some reason I thought those had a progressive mount and ignored them. Will keep an eye on Craigslist.

[Sylvan]

Interesting, for some reason I thought those had a progressive mount and ignored them. Will keep an eye on Craigslist.

1000-oaks, They're a touch more soft snow focused than the '112 or 118 underfoot with K108 rocker profile and construction' we were envisioning earlier, but they're a well thought out ski. The shovel is slightly softer than K108s which helps em plane up in pow, but they still blast maritime chop with ease; a pretty good balance there. The rocker profile is like a soft snow cousin to the K108 with slightly more splay. They also need to be skied slightly more forward than K108s (been on K108s the last few weeks and the first few turns on C117s I definitely noticed the tail); with that in mind though, they're super smeary in 2 and 3D, AND can rail Super G turns in anything soft. Had em in all my favourite tight spots (steep chutes/trees) and I didn't notice the extra length. The straighter shape also makes em more predictable if you simply wanna go straight and jump off stuff. Suspension is more Bonafide in feel than K108; they're 170ish grams lighter than B97s so not on the same level, but plush for a soft snow 117, and they have that 'get out of your way' feel if you unintentionally smash into something, which allowed me to ski lines I know well faster than I normally would. I'm out of town for a bit, but when back home I'll post up some side by side shape and rocker profile pics (191 K108 vs 193 C117) to see if they're something you think'll work for ya. Cheers.

[SnakeMagnet]

Good writeup. Connies were on my radar for a pow ski when i was shopping a few years ago but I was wanting something less similar to how my m102's skied so glades wouldn't be so taxing on deeper days. Blister said they would be really locked in on edge and that dissuaded me somewhat. Your experience speaks what I had assumed they were like. Someone who can really needs to AB them with the bodes, because a lot of folks here (myself included) think cons are diet versions of that ski, and I would like to know from other sources if the cons have their own unique strengths.

[tuco]

Interesting, for some reason I thought those had a progressive mount and ignored them. Will keep an eye on Craigslist.

Didn't 1st yr Confessions have delam issues?

[1000-oaks]

Didn't 1st yr Confessions have delam issues?

Heard that (other models those years did as well), was it fixed by 2nd year?

[Sylvan]

Connies were on my radar for a pow ski when i was shopping a few years ago but I was wanting something less similar to how my m102's skied so glades wouldn't be so taxing on deeper days. Blister said they would be really locked in on edge and that dissuaded me somewhat.

Makes sense. Blisters review definitely delayed my purchase. FWIW, the slightly softer but supportive flex means the sweet spot is actually reasonably big (arguably bigger than 188 CMD 118s and 191 K108s for ex), which means they're easy to move around going straight and on edge, and they let me stand up when I get/land back seat (something the K108 decided against one time. This flex, combined with the wider platform, make em more smeary and fun for me than M102s/K108s in anything soft, its just that the easiest place to smear em from is slightly forward of the same spot on K108s, if that makes sense. This works well for my style, but perhaps not for others...curious about a Bodacious A/B as well, but as you alluded to, the almost 300 gram difference per ski likely makes em almost from different categories.

Didn't 1st yr Confessions have delam issues?

Yah, I read this as well, think it was the '17s (Black and Red top sheet); mine are '18s, and while no issues yet, it's only been a few days, and the construction definitely doesn't look as burly as my K108s for example. Will be taking care of these.

Edit to add: I did freight train over some buried peppers on our May 19th pow day, and the bases/edges held up strong, I just won't be using em as a walking stick or tossing em in the bed of my truck (not something I do anyway), but also not something this ski would handle as well as M102s/K108s I don't think.

[kc_7777]

This combo works.

[Fred Pabst]

Couldn't resist grabbing these old Snow Ranger's from the "mall" at our transfer station. They are like 9.5 out of 10 condition, maybe used just a few days??



I was looking for a boot center mount point line but this is all they give you. I may remount a little more forward.

[turnfarmer]

Nice score on the Rangers.
Snow Ranger possibly best ski name ever.

[tuco]

Couldn't resist grabbing these old Snow Ranger's from the "mall" at our transfer station. They are like 9.5 out of 10 condition, maybe used just a few days??



I was looking for a boot center mount point line but this is all they give you. I may remount a little more forward.

Schuhspitz is boot toe line.
1/2 your boot sole back from that line if you want/need to go from boot center line

[Sylvan]

Nice sticks Fred!

I'll post up some side by side shape and rocker profile pics (191 K108 vs 193 C117) to see if they're something you think'll work for ya.

L to R: 191 K108 (190 straight pull, 2455g/ski avg, +1(-10.5); 193 Confession (193 straight pull, 2370g/ski avg, +1(-11).

Shape. Confessions have more tip, and slightly more tail, taper, and are straighter (36/21/43m r vs 26.5m r).



Rocker Profile. Very similar. Similar tip rocker lines w/ K108 slightly deeper; C117 deeper in the tail. Unsurprisingly, Confession has a bit more splay in tip and tail. Similarly cambered despite sidewall colour illusion (or maybe that's the gummy bear). ('Outside' of strap denotes rocker transition.)



De-Cambered. Biggest surprise for me. Despite the camber similarities, there is a ridiculous amount of tip and tail rocker in the K108 when de-cambered; that said, the splay in both tip and tail starts (and continues) almost imperceptibly until closer to the extremities. Again, a bit more tip/tail splay in the big brother.



They're both fuckin rad in their environment; can't wait for the lifts to spin.

[waxoff]

Great comparison Sylvan!

Agree with the Conf's being calm and composed, if just a wee bit carbony pingy ... Have not been on the K108, therefore in my book as of yet, OG Bodes are class leader in suspension and feel on snow.

My first year Conf's have not been skied enough to see any delam issues, crossing fingers it won't happen.

Just to add to the above, fwiw, the Confessions has its titanal placed where the K108 has its cutout. Slight reduction in torsional rigidity I suppose?

[Sylvan]

Thanks Waxoff. Yes, Ti Frame vs Band is the Volkl nomenclature I believe? And your assumption is correct re torsional rigidity, at least with respect to on snow feel. That, combined with the slightly rounder flex I believe is what yields the increase in accessibility, which is not a term I normally would use in a positive sense. Another ski that nailed this combo IMO is the B97. Not the stiffest stick out there, longitudinally or torsionally, but weighty for its category (leaving Bode vs C117 aside).

When on em (C117), one ski I was thinking a bit about, was a slightly more stable, slightly straighter 192 R11, mounted back (due to the flatter tail, extra 100 grams and longer Ti band). Comparisons are dangerous though as we all have different preferences.
One day I hope to find a 196 Bode on sale, for now though I have a few skis I’m amped to get out on more often. Cheers!

[fomofo]

I skied these about half my days this past season, and in anything soft, from a couple inches up to full on deep, chewed up crud they were fantastic - love em!



Snagged a few summers ago for $40 from a guy who was emptying out his storage shed. Aside from the nasty delam they were in pretty good condition. Mounted some new bindings, and "fixed" the topsheet with sanding and black Shoe Goo. ( LoL! ) And a little more sanding once set. Holding up pretty good so far.

[gaijin]

I have that ski. The OG Gotama is the most legit ski of my entire life. It has recently been replaced by the M102, which I consider to be the Gotama 2. And it was only replaced because the M102 was cheap to me. The M102 is better in every way. Metal. Carbon. Rocker. 3D sidecut. But sometimes I wish it didn't have carbon, or the metal. Just the wood, fiberglass, and the rocker profile/shape of the M102 would be enough. I think that's the Blaze 106.

It's funny that I just bought some old, cherry FKS 155s with the intention of putting them on my M102s. But now I'm thinking I should just put them on my Gotamas, sell my M102s, and start over for that genre while I still can. Nobody is going to buy my Gotamas, and they ski nearly the same... minus the rip-ability of the M102. Those do shred.

The OG Gotama and the new M102 are these strange Jack of All Trades, Masters of None that they don't really fit into quivers anymore. Amazing at everything, but hard to pigeon-hole. They're also hard to sell, because I want to keep them. I know they work at everything and I'll have them forever. Both would be best fitted with a Pivot/Cast. That's a lifetime rig right there.

But then you're forced to ski the same ski forever. And buying new skis is fun.

Let's simplify your life. If you want a one-ski quiver for the next 20 years, you should buy an OG Gotama, an M102, or a Blaze 106 and Pivot/Cast it. Done.

[Benneke10]

I've wanted a ~90mm longer-radius volkl touring ski for daily use (fast weekday tours usually in good Utah snow) and steeper objectives. I recently got a BMT 90 177 here that I was excited to use, but I also happened to just come across another discontinued Volkl touring ski, a Rise High 88 in 170 (VTA 88 Lite shape with damper construction). The skis have pretty similar sidecut, but the Rise High 88 has much more camber and a longer effective edge than the longer BMT.

Which ski should I mount? Obviously the BMT 90 is a better shape for me, as I prefer a more rockered ski but they weigh 1400g per ski compared to 1070g for the Rise High 88. If I didn't already have skis I like a lot I'd go with the BMT, but I already have Dynafit Beast 108 which ski almost as good as BMTs and weigh 1500g per ski, and let me use skimo race bindings which are would be somewhat questionable on the BMTs considering their H-pattern mount situation. If someone wants to buy the BMTs send me a message...

[kid-kapow]

i would 100% mount up the BMTs unless the main criterion is weight, at the cost of survival skiing going down. I would rather go heavier on the ski - while still light - and save weight on the bindings, so they are still capable. Those 300grs and the damper construction should make for a helluva difference - both going up and going down.

I would also mount whatever binding you want on the BMTs. In fact - I would be much more trusting of mounting anything on them than either the 88s depicted or VTAs. I would not be terribly surprised if the 88s core is made up of the same material that is outside of the H on BMTs, or perhaps more realistically - if their cores are not terribly dissimilar. There is a reason that BMT costs a lot more than 88s/VTAs, and that reason is six layers of carbon (and thicker edges/bases) - not a fancy wood core. BMTs are plenty sturdy.

I am not saying that the 88 is not a great ski for its use - I am guessing that they are - but few touring skis rival any BMT ski in its segment for performance imho. BMT fanboy for sure, but they are great skis.

(I think it is kinda funny that most of the lighter skis so in vogue now are really kinda what the BMT was along, even if BMTs make it there through a fancy layup and not just by a lighter everything.)

Too bad that Covid made carbon so expensive. I firmly believe more people should be on BMTs as they make you a better skier, but they are just soooo expensive nowadays.

And while the BMT90 is great, BMT94s are freaking fantastic. Just saying

[Norseman]

... BMTs considering their H-pattern mount situation.

H zone is Marker marketing bullshit. There is no structural difference in that area. Even within the H zone you may find the voids in the core. Mount whatever you want on those and use good glue with upside-down cure.

[Norseman]

BMT94s are freaking fantastic. Just saying

Yep, amazing skis. Top five fave ever fo sho