An interesting touring option from Voile

[Eluder]

Any body touched these? they even come in small sizes for the ladies.

Voile Drifter

http://www.voile-usa.com/Merchant2/m...duct_Code=5000

[asbvt]

Bump because I'm curious too....

[Shorty_J]

I'm going to check out my local MEC next week to give them a look... hopefully that have them in stock.

[bio-smear]

The look like they'd be great from the shape. Last year's pre production models had a horrendous topsheet, like tiger stripes or something. But these, while similar, are more wood grainy, which is better.

[bovine]

I was handling some of these puppies today in Bentgate Mountaineering. They are really big! The skis looked good though as a super fatty- pretty light too for their size.

[DAFTC]

posting to be able to find this...

so I can add a review when I've had mine out some...

pretty psyched at this early hint of winter in NoCo!

[snoop]

I fondled a pair over the weekend. They are huge but very light. I was a little skeptical about the weights I saw posted since some of their skis that have smaller dimensions were around the same weight or heavier but they are super light feeling. They have a nice shape but I was a little bummed they didn't have as much tip rocker as I was looking at them as a possible replacement for my rossi s7 with dynafits. The weight difference would be nice but even with their fat dimensions under foot I dont know if they would ski deep snow as well. They also dont have much in the way of tail rocker, I thought I had read they did but not much if not any, so they might not have that loose feeling the s7 has. I think for a lot of people they will be exactly what they are looking for as far as a big fatty with rocker but still able to cover some ground on longer tours.

[Shorty_J]

I had a look at these skis today at my local MEC. The absolutely are a huge ski (at least in the 192 size), and I had a bit of a laugh because they made the Insane look like a small ski, and it was just a few years ago that I thought THAT was a huge ski.

I thought the rocker profile was actually pretty amazing in terms of what I am looking for in a rockered ski. Actually, I wouldn't call it a rocker so much as an early rise tip (i.e. there is NOT a long section of the ski behind the tip that is only seperated by 1cm or less a la K2's new offerings). It was a very gradual and subtle increase in angle from the contact point to the tip over maybe 25-30cm. It has a tapered tip and tail profile. It is very light, and fairly soft in the tip and tail with medium stiffness under foot. I'd say a little softer than my Coomba's (but I didn't have them right next to me for a comparison). I totally disagree with the above poster that these would not be good in powder... I think they would be IDEAL in powder due to the dimensions and the soft tips, but they would likely suffer in heavier crud. A very intriguing ski for deep days in the b/c, but I'm not sure it would stand up to the rigours of resort skiing.

Also of note, if I remember correctly, there was a sticker on the skis indicating that they were not suitable for use with tele bindings. Probably due to the thin and lightweight construction... you'd likely rip the bindings out due to only having 4 screws to connect you to the ski instead of 8 with most AT bindings.

[sfotex]

Also of note, if I remember correctly, there was a sticker on the skis indicating that they were not suitable for use with tele bindings. Probably due to the thin and lightweight construction... you'd likely rip the bindings out due to only having 4 screws to connect you to the ski instead of 8 with most AT bindings.

They also make them with inserts for tele use.

[Amphibious1]

Went into Voile to play with these and they are definitely a big ski. Pretty exciting really. The shape is really close to what I'm looking for in a b/c setup. The only problem is, the 192 has a ton of surface area to handle in the b/c on less than ideal days, and the 182 may/may not float the way you want it to on ideal days. Any thoughts, Really wish they had it in a 187, or so.

Also, any thoughts on how dynafit, fritschi, etc. would be able to drive such a wide board.

[DAFTC]

My 182s are currently awaiting a set of jondrums' plates and a bit deeper base in the BC...though no complaints about Oct/Nov. powder days so far!

I'm psyched on these. I'm pretty confident my dynafits will be fine for how I want to use them (powder tours, no big hits) given my experience w/the bindings so far, the folks on here using them on other big boards (see various threads), and what I'm guessing will be the fairly turny nature of the ski's shape (I can second Shorty_J's take on the rocker/early rise). If I want to ride a few chairs then the Barons can go on. Can't see any reason why Fritschi's wouldn't work if you're into those.

The made-in-SLC/price/size/weight ratio was what sold me on these. In hand, w/the new BD split skins and ST's, this feels like an awfully light setup for its surface area. For my size and typical snow conditions it's hard to imagine the 182 not having enough float. Seems like deflection in cruddy snow is more likely to be an issue than sinking those tips. That said, I deliberated between it and the 192 for awhile. It did seem a little bit weird to me that they're 192-182-172-162(!) and not something like 196-188-177-167, though it's not really a big deal. Ultimately I choose the shorter b/c a lot of my tours involve a decent amount of time in fairly tight trees and I wanted to err on the side of maneuverability. Hopefully I don't lose too much in wide-open bigger-arcs, but I guess I won't mind too much if I'm "forced" to get in a few more turns after hiking...

Went into Voile to play with these and they are definitely a big ski. Pretty exciting really. The shape is really close to what I'm looking for in a b/c setup. The only problem is, the 192 has a ton of surface area to handle in the b/c on less than ideal days, and the 182 may/may not float the way you want it to on ideal days. Any thoughts, Really wish they had it in a 187, or so.

Also, any thoughts on how dynafit, fritschi, etc. would be able to drive such a wide board.

[Shorty_J]

Unless you're huge, I think the 182 will be fine for the backcountry. If you want to charge hard and go fast, you probably don't want a ski this light anyway... so why not save a little weight on the uphill and add some manuverability with the shorter length. I'm sure you'll get plenty of float... it's a pretty big ski.

Just my .02

[jamesp]

Unless you're huge, I think the 182 will be fine for the backcountry. If you want to charge hard and go fast, you probably don't want a ski this light anyway... so why not save a little weight on the uphill and add some manuverability with the shorter length. I'm sure you'll get plenty of float... it's a pretty big ski.

I pondered this for a while..the other side of the coin is the 192s are still light enough for touring & the extra length might be nice for the odd powder day at the hill. Hopefully they're not too long for me, will see once there's a little more snow on the ground.

[Shorty_J]

Good point, jamesp. I'd be curious to hear how they handle resort crud and tighter spots... report back with your findings, if you don't mind.

[Eluder]

DAFTC you should post a rocker shot of these please.

[Shorty_J]

DAFTC you should post a rocker shot of these please.

You (DAFTC) should include a pic of the tip shape as well. I really like the tapered shape... I think it would do very well in crusty conditions.

[ulty_guy]

I was actually looking at these on telemark pyrenees the other day thinking that they looked pretty sweet. I really like the Volkl Sumo and the dims aren't too far off with a bit more early rise....interesting....

[jamesp]

these are the 192s..

tip profile




tail


tail profile


the tail rise/rocker/whatever-you-call-it is minimal, virtually non-existent compared to the tip.

Good point, jamesp. I'd be curious to hear how they handle resort crud and tighter spots... report back with your findings, if you don't mind.

yep will do

[Core Shot]

Lotus 120??

[TheDon]

......A very intriguing ski for deep days in the b/c, but I'm not sure it would stand up to the rigours of resort skiing.

Also of note, if I remember correctly, there was a sticker on the skis indicating that they were not suitable for use with tele bindings. Probably due to the thin and lightweight construction... you'd likely rip the bindings out due to only having 4 screws to connect you to the ski instead of 8 with most AT bindings.

I wonder if they would be burl enough for a pair of dukes? Thoughts/impressions?





Images from:
http://www.voile-usa.com/Merchant2/m...roduct_Count=0

[TheDon]

Curiosity got me...I called them, they said a duke could be mounted on them for sure.

[TeleThor]

Lotus 120??

From the specs, the Drifters don't have nearly as much of a pin tail as 120s. 13mm difference from waist to tail compared to the 120s' 5mm difference.

I'd maybe liken it to a slightly slimmer lightened up Maven w/ less rocker. Maybe...

[nhtele]

Mounting point thoughts (192)?

Gonna mount with Dynafits and ski with Titans.

I'm 160#, so I'm thinking right on the factory line.

[DAFTC]

Drifter's not really what I'd call a pin tail...not reverse sidecut even with the fun shape.

Claimed turning radius is MUCH shorter (192/25.4 & 182/23) than the 120 (190/46 178/39). Can't say for sure how that translates to feel, but you can imagine it means something...they don't feel particularly soft in flex.

Sorry about not posting rocker pics, somehow missed that. Adding a few shots to show that it's really got what I'd call a fairly traditional camber (which should be good for skinning); red topsheet (06/07) 184 mantras for comparison. Seems like a normal depth (~14mm) on the underfoot portion.


I was also just looking at the mount point (dynafits/barons). Seems a little far back. Might give them a call. Will report anything useful.

[DAFTC]

Mounted at +0.5.

FYI, on mine the boot center mark sticker wasn't perfectly parallel (by a combination square and ruled centerline) and was slightly different between skis. I remeasured both skis from tip/tail for my boot center mark. Otherwise pretty happy w/the mount.