Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled 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
lowangle al

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 921
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby lowangle al » Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:45 pm

I did a ski yesterday starting at my local trail head on T4s and vector bc with HWs w/o the heel throws. I used to time myself on the uphill portion of this trail, it's 1.5 mi. with about 500' elevation gain. Twenty years ago 37 minutes was a good time and 33 minutes was the fastest time I remember. That was skiing on leather Merril Ultras with waxable Karhu XCD-GTs. I was surprised that I made it to the top in 36 minutes, but it confirmed my belief that it's not the ski that determines your speed as much as the boots. I consider the T4 to be in the same weight class as my Ultras as far as touring.

My conclusions were that the T4s although a little heavier toured as well as the leather boots and handled the downhill way better. It also confirmed that the vector bc is not a slow ski and it has decent glide.

anemic

Rank: XCD Pinhead
XCD Pinhead
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 5:39 pm

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby anemic » Thu Feb 15, 2018 2:55 pm

That is pretty cool Al! I am pleasantly surprised.
Call it Nordic Freeride

greatgt

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby greatgt » Thu Feb 15, 2018 3:34 pm

May be true for you but that doesn't compute with what this old boy has seen on the up down or all around...And they do wonders for some and that's real good but they are not particularly fast and certainly not when compared to cc skis of which many still ski...TM

User avatar
lowangle al

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 921
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby lowangle al » Thu Feb 15, 2018 3:48 pm

greatgt wrote:May be true for you but that doesn't compute with what this old boy has seen on the up down or all around...And they do wonders for some and that's real good but they are not particularly fast and certainly not when compared to cc skis of which many still ski...TM


I probably would have gotten different results on more rolling terrain. I would think the more climbing the less difference there will be.

connyro

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:46 pm

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby connyro » Thu Feb 15, 2018 4:14 pm

Same experience here LAA. Touring with steeper ups and downs, and the VectorBCs/lite plastic boots are somewhat faster. (and a HELL of a lot more fun!) On more rolling tours with mellow ups and downs, skinny double-cambers, wax, and light boots/nnnbc is way faster than Vectors/Excursions EXCEPT when breaking trail in deep snow: I would still rather have Vectors/Excursions for this.

User avatar
fisheater

Rank: XCD Pinhead
XCD Pinhead
Posts: 357
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:06 pm
Location: Oakland County, MI

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby fisheater » Thu Feb 15, 2018 6:43 pm

Al, are you still in PA, or are you in AK now? Either place 500 feet of vertical sounds like fun to me

User avatar
lowangle al

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 921
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby lowangle al » Thu Feb 15, 2018 11:08 pm

I'm back in Ak. where my local trails just got good. That 500' of vert is spread over 1.5 miles. I do laps on the best of it which is a run of less than 100'. I'm sure you have equally big hills in Mi.

Cannatonic

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2014 10:07 pm

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby Cannatonic » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:08 pm

sounds like a great tour to me. Leather boot advantage isn't necessarily weight, the flexibility of them can be more comfortable for touring. My aching foot bones need any help they can get. There have been different version of the Ultra, the ones I had were light, like beefy XC boots almost. The stiffer heavier ones are definitely like lead anchors, the current Alico Double is a brick.

greatgt

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby greatgt » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:19 am

For lace up, thinking the Ultra was..well...the ultimate....Feels like part of your anatomy....Been skiing different skis because the conditions change about every day....But the boots...er...truth be known been skiing my new "used" Snowfield 2....Merrill lace ups....and totally beat Andrews also....Guess the only thing I'm using all the time is the 20 year old ski poles....TM

User avatar
lowangle al

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 921
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby lowangle al » Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:52 pm

[quote="greatgt.Guess the only thing I'm using all the time is the 20 year old ski poles....TM[/quote]

Are they the double wrapped fiberglass Excells that came with big yellow baskets? I used mine for ten years too long because I couldn't give up on a pole that never let me down for all those years.


Return to “Telemark Talk Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests