All purpose backcountry/bushwack ski

[Teleman]

Going bushwhacking....Get leathers....Nothing flexes like leather and nothing is more a part of your body....My opinion....and a few others...er....very few....TM

[MikeK]

Going bushwhacking....Get leathers....Nothing flexes like leather and nothing is more a part of your body....My opinion....and a few others...er....very few....TM

I'd agree - but the ski selection isn't necessarily conducive to such.

I'm not quite sure what the ideal bushwack ski would be... I know what I'd use, but everyone is different. Also depends on where you are bushwacking... I know some areas I wouldn't even want to deal with on snowshoes, let alone long, slippery sticks.

[lilcliffy]

I think the ideal true "bushwack" ski (i.e. for touring through very dense forest) is very short, fat and straight.

The Finns make skis specifically for this purpose (e.g. Karhu "Jakt" ski). This type of ski is common across Siberia as well. The alternative is snowshoes (which I use everyday for field work and cutting wood in the winter).

(interesting that ski technology did not develop in North America like it did in Northern Eurasia).

The Altai Hok is another example of a forest "bushwack" ski (I want a pair for field work). Most of the pictures and videos I have seen on this site are of skiers in cover that I would call truly "bushwacking".

The hemi-boreal forests of the Northeast are extremely dense. Personally, I keep my true "bushwacking" on skis to a minimum- picking strategic routes through open stands and glades.

Perhaps I am still a little confused as to the conditions that Derrick really wants to travel through. Derrick- are you going to be touring predominantly through dense forest?

Derrick- what length BC125 did you get?

As far as Teleman's comment about "leathers"- I agree- but perhaps only in deep soft, snow. If you go with a leather boot, I would expect you will quickly want a narrower ski for skiing on dense snow.

[ddg]

Derrick- what length BC125 did you get

I got the short ones. BC 125 in 165 cm. And I'm going with the more stout Scarpa T4 boots to ensure I can maneuver them on the hills. Found a very slightly used pair on kijiji. Anxious to try them out if they get here soon enough. Otherwise it's next year!

The Hoks looked very interesting, especially with the Universal bindings, but I wanted something more ski-ish, if you know what I mean. More controllable down hill. Although I have seen some people that can telemark on just about anything!

[lowangle al]

Lilcliffy I'm gonna add rocker to short,fat and straight. Not just for the down either. The tips are clear of the snow when sidestepping or herring bone up. My wife and I were just commenting on how Gaining elevation has never been easier than on our current set up. Vectors with t-2s and 3 pin hw. She was never a plastic boot fan until she got the vectors. We've been doing the same kinds of tours for a long time on all types of equipment and are mostly off trail and this is the most fun go anywhere set up we've found.

The ski is the ticket though, in the right snow you can get by with a lighter boot.

[lilcliffy]

Hey Lowangle Al,

The Vector- couldn't agree with you more! (do you have the Vector or the Vector BC?)

I have only tried these skis once (with T4 and 3pc bindings). Man- do they ever climb, float and turn. The turn initiation is just effortless. And you are right- the open tips facilitate all of that! (If I had more vertical in my backyard I would want a pair for yo-yo skiing) (once my kids get older- and I can travel more- I may be able to justify them! )

The other interesting thing is that the Vectors also have a fair bit of torsional strength (much more than the Annum/Guide and S-112). (I have no idea how they compare to the Rossi BC125- my sense is that the Vector has more edge strength.)

How do you find the Vector in downhill turns on snow that requires a lot of edge strength?

Consider writing a review!

[connyro]

IMO, the Vector BC is in a different class of ski than then Annum/Guide or the BC 125s. I've got all three around here, and the Vector out-climbs them all by a long shot. Vectors are also very good for breaking trail and traversing rough terrain. The tip floats to the top like no other ski I've been on.

The Vector BCs are a full-on alpine ski while I think of the Annum and BC125s as big wide XC skis, based on their construction and performance. I rode the Vectors (non-scaled version) mounted with Axls as well as Vector BCs with Switchbacks at a few resorts, both east and west, in conditions that range from rock hard ice to thick, heavy spring snow and they were excellent in that range of conditions. They have great edge hold for a light alpine BC ski. They also did well in crud and did not get thrown around as much as I thought they would.

[lowangle al]

I have both versions and like connyro said they carve well, but if hardpack is what you mostly ski, a longer skinnier ski with a smooth flex will feel better.

They do ski more like an alpine ski than the other xcd skis I've tried that felt planky. They are a different class of ski and well worth the extra $ if you can swing it.

[lilcliffy]

Your comments on the Vector resonate with my test drive of them.

IMO, if you really want optimum climbing/turning performance- then you want a dedicated telemark/alpine touring ski- such as the Vector.

I am not surprised you found that they had good edge hold. I was almost shocked by how strong they felt on edge- despite how light they feel...I am used to having to put up with a much heavier alpine ski in order to get that much torsional stability.

And YES- I also agree that hybrid skis, like the Madshus/Karhu XCDs (e.g. Annum, Epoch, Eon), the Fischer S-Bounds, and the fattest Rossi BCs (e.g. BC125); are really just fat, single-cambered xcountry skis.

My sense is that the BC125 would go all "noodily" if put on edge, on hardpack (I know that the Guide/Annum and the S-112 does!).

[Teleman]

Opinion....Thinkin the skis you speak of are primarily a down hill ski....They don't cruise the forests all that well compared to other kinds of skis.....Don't do well crossing water courses....Very slow in the flats....are slow on the downhill....They turn easily on the down....and go pretty well up....but are always breaking trail even if others have broken the trail as they are so wide....They are slow edge to edge and force one to become a port starboard balanced skier...typical of parallel....My opinion says they are good on the down but not so good for much else...TM