Steep and deep backcountry Nordic ski

This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web. We have fun here, come on in and be a part of it.
User avatar
MikeK
Posts: 3516
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 2:12 pm

Re: Steep and deep backcountry Nordic ski

Postby MikeK » Mon Feb 20, 2017 2:08 pm

Fair enough...

User avatar
Woodserson
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:25 am
Location: New Hampshire

Re: Steep and deep backcountry Nordic ski

Postby Woodserson » Mon Feb 20, 2017 3:24 pm

LC

I'm not too far away from you as far as environmental factors go. Similar terrain, similar woods, similar snowpack qualities, though you get far more it seems. I would seriously consider the Objective BC if I was in your shoes. If it's what we think it is, it'll get you out there easily (light!) and it will turn awesome in a wide array of snow conditions that we usually get, and it can possibly take different boot weights depending on skills and conditions. Without having skied any of those, that's how I would solve this particular problem.

User avatar
fisheater
Posts: 146
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:06 pm
Location: Oakland County, MI

Re: Steep and deep backcountry Nordic ski

Postby fisheater » Mon Feb 20, 2017 10:59 pm

Connyro,
If I am reading correctly you seem to prefer the V6 over the Vector. I have never had the opportunity to handle either of these skis, or even see one up close. The one thing I think would be a plus for the Vector is that has a much straighter. Based only on my S-112's being a bit squirrelly on the k&g, my thought is the Vector would be better on the k&g. Is the V6 that much better on the downhill? Perhaps the extra sidecut is not that bad on the way in? Or, is the V6 better if the surface turns into something breakable? And, what length are you skiing the v6?
I also have looked at the BM website. I can't figure how much of a riser the Spike has. I would think a bit of riser would help turn over such wide waisted skis.
I'm not buying now, but this type of ski is what I wish I was using more. I should be looking at a 70 mm waxless , I really like my USGI's, I really never had enough snow long enough that wax didn't work well. So it has been lean for snow in the lower mitten for the second year in a row, but I appreciate anything additional you care to share about the skis I might not need, but sure would want to ski.
Thank you

User avatar
connyro
Posts: 643
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:46 pm

Re: Steep and deep backcountry Nordic ski

Postby connyro » Mon Feb 20, 2017 11:14 pm

fisheater wrote:Connyro,
If I am reading correctly you seem to prefer the V6 over the Vector. I have never had the opportunity to handle either of these skis, or even see one up close. The one thing I think would be a plus for the Vector is that has a much straighter. Based only on my S-112's being a bit squirrelly on the k&g, my thought is the Vector would be better on the k&g. Is the V6 that much better on the downhill? Perhaps the extra sidecut is not that bad on the way in? Or, is the V6 better if the surface turns into something breakable? And, what length are you skiing the v6?
I also have looked at the BM website. I can't figure how much of a riser the Spike has. I would think a bit of riser would help turn over such wide waisted skis.
I'm not buying now, but this type of ski is what I wish I was using more. I should be looking at a 70 mm waxless , I really like my USGI's, I really never had enough snow long enough that wax didn't work well. So it has been lean for snow in the lower mitten for the second year in a row, but I appreciate anything additional you care to share about the skis I might not need, but sure would want to ski.
Thank you

Personally, I don't prefer one over the other. Both seem to perform similarly in BC snow. Both K+G the same too. The BMD 3-pin has considerable riser which DOES help with leverage. The V6 is better for tracked out stuff like at Bohemia from time to time but both Vector and V6 do the job well. I ski Vectors in 180 and the V6s in 183. You can't go wrong with either one, and I suspect the Objective will be similar.
"he SHOULD have learned a lesson from the MASTERS of Eastern Bush Skiing....Snicker" -Teleman
"your problem is that we wrote the book on this stuff....Hey you all can pay and we will teach you" -Teleman

User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Steep and deep backcountry Nordic ski

Postby lilcliffy » Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:14 pm

lowangle al wrote: If you were willing to spring for the Vector or Kom I don't think you would be disappointed either.

Well- I have been leaning towards a ski in this class for some time...But- the introduction of a ski like the Objective causes me to pause and re-consider...The Objective is significantly narrower and lighter than bigger skis like the Vector/Kom...

I hope the 15 km is the roundtrip distance of your tours, otherwise you won't get many laps. But you are a lot younger than me.

The distance depends on the destination- could be as much as 15kms one way in order access a particularly remote ridge...I have plenty of hills and ridges with 200-300m vertical within 5kms of a parking spot though.
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Steep and deep backcountry Nordic ski

Postby lilcliffy » Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:22 pm

STG wrote:lilcliffy:

When I use to ski in avalanche terrain in powder/soft snow conditions, I used the Madshus Guide. I think it is an amazing, light-weight ski that feels more like a single-cambered cross-over ski (telemark/alpine touring). You are already set up with the equipment to do the kind of skiing you want.


Yeah- you are so right...I guess it's perhaps lusting after trying something different...Plus my Guides/Annums are of length- 195cm- to make them somewhat distance oriented...

Just looking at a focused, turny, up and down ski for the Northeast woods. This setup would definitely sacrifice Xc efficiency for climbing and downhill performance. And much of the best lines require skiing very tight lines through steep forested glades.

I could just go to a shorter Annum or S-112. I am interested in the experience of others on wider more downhill-oriented skis. The Annum/S-112 has been the widest ski I have ever considered for backcountry XCD skiing in my region...Just considering wider alternatives.
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Steep and deep backcountry Nordic ski

Postby lilcliffy » Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:37 pm

lowangle al wrote:IMO all skis are Nordic skis once you put a Nordic binding on them. Single camber skis are mounted either way today.

Agree- that is why I would consider skis that are not marketed as "Nordic".

I also don't think it's the width of a ski that makes them harder for touring, it's the weight. More surface area can actually give you better glide and a better kick. I think the fastest I've ever gone on nearly level ground doing a K&G was with my biggest ski, free pivot binding and a big plastic boot. It felt like a freight train.

I assume you are speaking of flotation in bottomless dry, fluffy powder here? All things being equal there is no downhill kit that can compete with a XC kit in a XC context....The Finns will use up to 300cm XC skis in order to XC in very deep snow- these extra-long skis are typically no more than 70mm wide....Flotation can trump glide efficiency...but I find it can sometimes be an illusion...For example, I can easily convince myself that my 195cm Annums are faster powder XC skis than my 210cm Combat Natos, because the Annums float noticeably higher than the Combats...But- if I actually time the difference on a loop in the same snow condition- the Combat is at least as efficient as the Annum in deep snow. HOWEVER- point the two ski down a powder slope and it is a very different story.

Was out on a long XCD tour in steep terrain with a group on Sunday- we were short one set of lighter Nordic boots- so one of us had to use his Telemark kit with full-length skins. Although he loved the steep descents- we left him in the dust when XC skiing- it was brutally inefficient compared to the BC-XC kits...

Back to my OP- I am specifically looking at a kit here that willingly sacrifices XC performance for downhill performance in the Northeast backcountry.
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Steep and deep backcountry Nordic ski

Postby lilcliffy » Tue Feb 21, 2017 2:52 pm

STG wrote:
Yeah your right. I am assuming more width means more weight.


Not sure about this in my context...

LJ's testimony regarding the Objective as an XCD ski suggests that I could probably get away with BC-XC tech if I chose a ski as light as that...Which would make a long approach that much more efficient as well...

And with a fully-rockered tip, I would suspect that the Objective would plane just as efficiently as the Vector at downhill speeds...
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Steep and deep backcountry Nordic ski

Postby lilcliffy » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:18 pm

connyro wrote:The conditions and terrain that you describe are very similar to what we have here. IMO, the best setup for the type of skiing and terrain you describe, the Voile V6 BC with BMD Spike 3-pin/Excursions. I prefer a stouter binding, so I like the SBx2, but I have no problem getting decent K+G with the free-pivot. You may be surprised at how well these skis and bindings tour once you get used to them and get the right K+G technique. The Excursions are surprisingly flexible and comfortable for touring and provide just enough power to command those skis. I feel that the V6 BC/Vector BC tour about as well as the Guides, but blow the Guides away for turns and climbing. We'll do 10+ miles/several hours on this setup, mostly touring for turns to/in steep, deep, low vert hills.


Not so sure about the XC part- I think that it likely depends on boots and bindings...What I mean is- I have no doubt that a ski like the Vector is just as efficient as the Guide/Annum with a Telemark boot-binding- BUT put a XC boot and binding on the Guide/Annum and it is a different story. My limited test of the Vector BC suggests that it is worth the XC sacrifice in order to enjoy the greater climbing and downhill performance. I certainly agree with you- a ski like the Vector blows the Guide away in terms of climbing and turning!!!

Very interested in this- why the V6 as opposed to the Vector?

And- as far as the free-pivot- I am seriously considering a binding like the switchback in this skiing context after our discussion last year...Until I understood that the there was still a metatarsal flex in free-pivot "tour" mode, I had always dismissed a free-pivot for any context other than extended climbing...BUT- in a context where I am willing to sacrifice XC performance- the convenience of quickly switching between free-pivot and downhill mode is very attractive in the context of low vertical yo-yo skiing.
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
lilcliffy
Posts: 1095
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

Re: Steep and deep backcountry Nordic ski

Postby lilcliffy » Tue Feb 21, 2017 3:31 pm

MikeK wrote:I've really been holding my tongue here, but I would say what is holding you back from going Objective + NNN?

Think about when you'll want to hit this terrain... likely after a big powder dump? A long ski and climb will be much nicer with NNN boots and you'll have that floaty feel on the down... It'd probably be comparable to skiing your Annums but lighter...

This is a VERY good question...Having trouble considering anything else...And strongly considering a relatively short Nansen with NNNBC for when the snow is not so soft and forgiving...

Scales for either though - you may need to use skins sometimes, but I'd guess it's probably nicer to use the scales and resort to a skin here or there rather than to HAVE TO wax or skin, and have to deal with wax on a near flat ski that will wear off very quickly, and not glide that well to boot.

Still unsure about grip wax versus scales...The conditions are excellent for grip was more often than not...
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry


Return to “Telemark Talk Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 13 guests