pyramid tent features

voile objective vs vector

I don't think you will have to be a freak to appreciate these. And when Id moved on to scaless skis but my buddy still had his scales, Id be forced to wait for him to catch up instead of just cruising. Perfect Northeast touring ski in my opinion, with plenty of applications elsewhere (hut to hut in CO, etc.). The ski itself is obviously not an XC ski, but the range of motion on the pins is such that it kicks and glides stupendously. Slimmer and lighter than the Vector BC, but both wider and lighter than the old karhu guides/madshus annums, they are 5lbs for the pair at178cm, 117x84x102. Slowshoeing, lift access, your recent park footy, mountaineering & non-snow wilderness adventures, not here. I'm in no way affiliated/sponsored/or paid by Voile. Get Backpacking Light news, updates, gear info, skills, and commentary delivered into your inbox 1-2x/week. Ive found that the skis Ive owned for a while now offer more grip than before, probably due to my appreciation of good craft beer. by MikeK Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:04 pm, Post As soon as you take the time to put your skins on once or struggle up one small hill without them, fish scales would have paid off. Voile ultravector bc owner here.

I was out at a hut the last few nights and on the approach up it is was raining. Wild Snow has the only pre-release take Ive seen here. Please be mindful of our values and boundaries and review our Community Guidelines prior to posting. I also found that the scales slowed me down more often then they sped me up on deproaches.

I also XC ski and I continue to think that this ski really tours comparably to a XC ski. Have them mounted with 22 designs lynx Telemark bindings. I suspect that Vector is similar, though probably a little better in deep stuff and less on the flats. Id like a less side cut ski to complement my v6 BC and Ultravectors BC but the Objective is too short for me. As for backcountry traverse, I recommend getting these really short. After skiing all the other brands I've listed above, I have just come to feel that they are the best brand for my style and preferences in a ski. And if you are reading this Im super excited about your upcoming tents. If I had fish scales there were have been no such problem. I use TLT 8 boots. It is a trade-off though, as Serge said; going down tends to be a bit slower. Serge Ive learned that I can almost always predict where someone skis by their opinion on waxless skis skiers in California and the Pacific northwest generally prefer them (except for the folks who go straight up and straight down), skiers from the rockies and the east coast generally dont. Just the fact that they are 20 cm shorter than what most of us skied will make them easier to learn on. I really want a pair. You dont need something that wide to enjoy powder, and if you fixate on a wide ski, you may end up too tired to ski well on your descent. I probably wont bring skins on future traverses and not using them at all on my last 3 even while having them. I am interested in using them (or something alike) for multi-day trips where I may habe to carry them as well some time, so lightweight shoes with soft sole would be very important. It's just the best ski in its category. As mentioned, they are easy to turn. I have also skied them with the Scott Orbit. If you happen to be on the heavy end of things (for that ski) than you will have great grip going up (and be a bit slower perhaps, going down). I think it will go a long way in promoting xcd skiing compared to the xcd stuff available since the advent of plastic boots and dh oriented skis. Al - this could be your chance to get back under 10 lbs! Gonna put them to the test at the Bob Open in a few weeks. Tempting to think I could leave them out of the pack. UPDATE: Ok, so after a few months on the Objectives, I can only say that this is the best BC ski ever. I also havent noticed my rock skis glopping more than my pristine skis. Ive personally skied on nearly all of their skis over the last few years and have nothing but positive things to say Voile makes a bunchof fairly light, predictable, durable, fun, and inexpensive skis to suit a variety of skiers needs. With rocker on a short ski, much of the surface will be on fish scales. If you do want a nice pow ski with fish scales, Dan, check out the voile hyper vector bcs. If I could afford to Id ad a pair of scaled skis to my quiver, I might, but Id be pretty selective about what trips I used them for and careful to preserve the bases. Yeah, Ill just add my experience too. I find spring conditions too variable to want to deal with that. Thus far, I have skied it in the Adirondacks, White Mountains, and Tetons. I've heard that people feel like they're a lot slower on the descents - have you noticed that? Most of the time Ive been going up or down, rather than kick/glideing on level ground. It kicks and glides like a champ. Even if youre just doing powder laps the fish scales are still so handy to have for flat sections, rolling logging roads, long approaches etc. That said, the 178 tracks well when touring despite being a little short, and still floats fine.

Watch the Tarptent Dipole Review Premiere on YouTube: Backpacking Light community posts are moderated and here to foster helpful and positive discussions about lightweight backpacking. Why cant this be edited? Some of you have been hoping for a skimo/XCD hybrid ski for backpacking style trips in winter, and it looks likeVoile has just produced a new contender. Real reviews by real skiers. For powder skiing, I badly wish all my powder skis had these fish scales. Dredging this thread up from the past Dan how did those Objective BCs work out for you?

That is not the only time you can get glop. You can get by without them if you happen to misjudge the situation, but it gets pretty tiring if you backslide a lot, and are forced to push a lot with your arms, or break trail and make a lot of additional turns. But where fish scales really shine is when you are going up and down, up and down, several times. For the numbers people out there my 2017 Objective skis in 171cm with SuperLite bindings weigh about 5.5 lbs/pair. It's a very light ski, and also reasonably stiff for its weight. Im second guessing getting DPS for my next pair of powder skis because the fish scales are so awesome. Mech. I did not, because of the pattern. Reviews only please, questions can be posted as replies but new threads looking for opinions should be posted to the main Telemark Talk Forum. I imagine if they werent my only skis and I skiied a lot less in them it wouldnt have been such a problem, but there is no good solution once they get scratched up since you cant resurface the scales. The ski seems like another good offering from Voile. Well I managed to find that late season deal. I know people who pick out a non-rockered ski in the Spring, but they didnt have the option of using something so light. I have the Objective BCs with Fritschi Xenics. I live in the Northeast and wanted a ski that would be good for some technical skiing AND a long approach. (107-74-94 if I remember correctly), "And if you like to risk your neck, we'll boom down Sutton in old Quebec", TELEWIKI - The Telemark Skiing Wiki Knowledge Base. With Scarpa Aliens, Voile Objective BCs and light tech bindings Im at 5.0 lbs per foot. I did a 4 day hut trip last winter on this setup. The fish scales are all you need so you can normally leave the skins behind. I figured toggling back and forth between ski techniques depending on whether I was inbounds would likely make me sloppy on both days.

This ski 10mm THINNER would basically be the Rossi Bandit XX/Big Bang.

Anyone with more experience than I have any thoughts on how they may perform vs the XCD skis? Their website seems to indicate that they do have rocker in the tail. Thanks for your perspective on this - I've had my eye on a pair for long mountain traverses (Sierra High Route, Wind River High Route) as it does seem like the scales would save time over skin on/off transitions even if you're fast at it. Maybe its conditions related. Interesting to hear about Maxiglide. If youre in rolling terrain and constantly going up and down, others will go so much faster on the downhill portions that they will net out ahead of you. For ski trails. Thanks, Dan. We pay for our membership. Softer skis with more curvature: a bit slower, but at least you can turn on them. Let us know what you think. But even here its very rare that Im on a slope where I wont glide with fish scales but would without them Ive never felt like my fish scales werent gliding on a surface where I expected regular skis would. She's too much of a powder skier to ever agree to something as skinny as the Objective (which is a mistake on her part), but I think she could easily spring for a Vector BC after watching my basically sing with joy on approaches, while she slogged on skins. I think it really varies depending on where you are relative to the skis. I wish everyone would get into doing fishscales. Sometimes the exact same terrain that you did a week before with fish scales requires skins in different conditions. Including some additional info for people that come across this post in the future. Stickers. The scales slow you down on flats, no question. I have a pair now and like them as well. I really dont care about speed when Im using those skis, so less weight and better grip suits me fine. No one races in them (because waxing is faster) but there is a market for areas like the Northwest. That said, its pleasant. Its good to have a pair of skins to take the inevitable abrasion from the not snow, unless you want to spend all day taking your skis on and off. Or, a short approach with mellow skiing. The Objectives arent nearly this rockers, but I expect the shorter effective length will be a real asset in rugged terrain. Im a pretty good skier, but on a breakable crust those hugely cambered Karhus with minimal sidecut are a major handful. I also want to second the recommendation of Maxiglide. Skin wax is pretty essential for some trips where glopping can become an issue. You should really check out the Madshus Epoch or Annum. Is it pretty flexible if you try to bend the tip and tail up? So, when it hits ice, it doesn't get floppy, but it does get a little chattery, with some deflection. My first pair of BC skis were voile vector bcs. Compared the Karhu Guides (181cm) that these replace, they are much lighter (1900g vs 2800g), 2mm wider and hopefully far easier to handle, with more sidecut and rocker instead of huge camber. I have various skis with fish scales, and they are great. As for efficiency, certainly fish scales add some amount of drag, so if your descent is purely downhill then they wont help. (Sidecountry, snomo, cat & heli bumps) sometimes accepted. So we switched to the much lighter NNN-BC. So I love them. Was so much lighter than my cohorts. Eventually, my wife needed to put skins on her skis to tour out when the pitch dropped off. It's lighter than the Kom, lighter than the Annum, lighter than the Helio Carbon 88 and lighter than the S-Bounds 112. The only time Ive use skins with them is to add more drag, when Im skiing downhill through super tight bush/alder/willow.

For a long time now, fish scale classic skis have been available for expensive (super light, fast) cross country skis. Couldnt recommend this ski enough if youre interested in mixed touring. Reminds me vaguely of an East Coast all mountain resort ski from 15 years ago. I tend to go with a shorter ski if in doubt, as Im only out in the spring and on mostly firm snow, and I value grip over glide. Also, Im approaching this from the perspective of a downhill skier that also does traverses, rather than the perspective of an XC skier that wants to go beyond the nordic track. They wont be a substitute for true nordic skis, but for mixed-mountain touring they seem perfect. Sounds like these would be pretty nice. I just skied the Objective BC on a tour in the Adirondacks, skiing the Wright Peak ski trail. I know they both skied this particular model on their trip to AK this year where they skied theMooses Tooth. I dont know if youve skied rocker skis in anything but powder, but they definitely have their advantages in a range of conditions. The four buckle boot is a tad heavier, but I do not feel like I lost any range of motion. Without the skins, Id just be crashing through the trees.

Login or become a member to post in the member forums! What a concept! Theyturn easy enough on corn (like any ski) but really get stuck in a rut on crusty snow. I always use Maxiglide on my bases, and it makes a big difference when the conditions are ripe for glopping which around here is fresh snow that is relatively warm. I ski them with the G3 Zed and the Scott Cosmos. Without the rocker and the lightness of course. If I was doing mid-winter traverses on moderate terrain then waxing might be more appealing. Ill try to post up some thoughts in a few weeks after the Bob Open, but then again, I start a thru-hike 3 days later so that blog post might get put off until fall. Its a great ski for exercise off groomed trails. We like fish scales. by MikeK Sat Sep 24, 2016 8:43 pm, Post by lowangle al Sat Sep 24, 2016 2:35 pm, Post Better to stick with one type of form both days. With the right ski (not too fat, has a pattern) the approach is fun, with gliding and nice speed on rolling approaches. Part of the reason I went to a 4 buckle boot (with the Cosmos), was that a 2 buckle boot requires a more centered stance, which is a different form from my resort boots. by Woodserson Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:59 am, Post I went with Altai Kom ski, Riva 2 bindings, and Scarpa T3 boots. by Johnny Fri Sep 23, 2016 11:22 am, Post They are just a nice, nimble ski, that works well. I dont really see the appeal though it seems like a lot more hassle for a less reliable outcome even if it can be better in certain situations. That was a similarly versatile ski, though is designed for tele and did not have any rocker. I had a number of extremely frustrating days especially in the spring where these became basically unskiable. It has performed great on flats when kicking and gliding, and great on untracked powder. No need to convince me on the scales wouldnt take anything else for the Sierra spring. A Membership is required to post in the forums. We do NOT, ever, run them across dirt or grass. Absolutely slower on moderate descents if your whole base is in contact with the snow. Ive used some thoroughly beat up waxless skis, and generally I found the old beat up skis still gripped well, and did not collect more snow than the new. It wont matter much on deep snow, but might in the Spring or if you end up on a groomed area.

I have voiles, not scaled, but love them more than any other thing I've skied. Of course, skills, familiarity, conditions and terrain all make a difference. Both skis have full metal edges and both have Voile release bindings and heel cables. I presume the shorter ski + more side cut isnt as good/fast on flat, but I havent noticed much a difference. On a more serious note, its a ski with very little write-up, so I thought Id give my own thoughts to help others in deciding whether to buy.

Sitemap 15

voile objective vs vector