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
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1663
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

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

Postby lilcliffy » Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:02 am

lowangle al wrote: 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.

I am not sure that I can personally draw any conclusions when comparing such very different skis.

I am certainly not surprised that the Vector BC climbs better than any double-cambered ski. In fact I would have thought that the Vector BC would have beat the double-cambered time...This might suggest that lighter and more flexible leather boots actually compensated a bit for poor traction of the double-cambered skis?

Double-cambered skis do not climb as efficiently as single-cambered skis.
Single-cambered skis are easier to turn than double-cambered skis.
But- when the snow is supportive enough- double-cambered skis absolutely fly on the flats and rolling terrain.

As far as the touring performance of the Vector BC- wouldn't one have to compare it to a more similar ski (e.g. Kom/FINDr XCD) in order to draw any conclusions?
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

User avatar
lowangle al

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 917
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

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

Postby lowangle al » Sun Feb 18, 2018 1:43 pm

I don't think I came up with hard conclusions, more a generalization that wide and especially scaled skis aren't necessarily sluggish boat anchors. I was also happy that the T4s could hang with my leather boots as far as touring speed.

My kick that day was acceptable but not great, I think I've had better kick with a waxed double camber ski on that trail.

Gareth, I was out yesterday and came up with a trick that made touring with T4s better. I buckled the lower buckle over the plastic tongue like normal, but I put the upper buckle under the tongue. It allowed for better ROM for K&G and may help with your HWs. Give it a try.

User avatar
lilcliffy

Rank: XCD KNIGHT
XCD KNIGHT
Posts: 1663
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:20 pm
Location: Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada

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

Postby lilcliffy » Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:53 pm

lowangle al wrote:I don't think I came up with hard conclusions, more a generalization that wide and especially scaled skis aren't necessarily sluggish boat anchors.

I agree with you- and I certainly don't mean to give the impression that I think they are sluggish boat anchors- I don't. I just don't do myself any favors comparing downhill and xcountry skis.

I was also happy that the T4s could hang with my leather boots as far as touring speed.

I love the T4. It offers excellent touring flex and lightness for a Telemark boot. It remains my fav Telemark boot for backcountry touring- when distance is an important limiting factor. The T4 is certainly as light- and in certain cases lighter(!)- than many heavy-duty leather Telemark boots (it also more comfortable than a few heavy leather Telemark boots I have owned!) But again- it is certainly not as light and flexible as my leather XC boots- nor would I expect it to be.

The T4 is my boot for when "the tour serves the turn."
(I do love my heavy-duty leather Telemark boots as well- but I can push my skis even harder with the T4- especially the wide ones.)

My kick that day was acceptable but not great, I think I've had better kick with a waxed double camber ski on that trail.

There are skiing contexts where a double-cambered touring ski with a backcountry flex is the absolute best-performing ski. BUT- when climbing and turning are the pursuit- or the control point- downhill skis with downhill camber and flex- at least for me!

Gareth, I was out yesterday and came up with a trick that made touring with T4s better. I buckled the lower buckle over the plastic tongue like normal, but I put the upper buckle under the tongue. It allowed for better ROM for K&G and may help with your HWs. Give it a try.

Thanks for the tip Al. I am very impressed with the 3-pin hardwire- and, of course the T4.

My new Koms are the widest, most downhill-capable Nordic backcountry ski I have yet owned (they put skis like the Karhu/Madshus XCDs, and S-Bounds to shame- IMHO.) (Back in my days of big mtn ski-touring in the 90s- I skied on Alpine touring skis- with full-length climbing skins.)

I have much to learn and tweak- your tips are much appreciated.

Up to this point, the most girthy Nordic touring ski I have owned is the Karhu Guide. In the past I have taken my leather Tele boots with the Guide when I have significant XC skiing in the mix- I have taken the T4 when climbing and turning are the controlling factor. BUT- I have never been thrilled with the Guide as a downhill ski, to be honest- unless the snow is ideal- using a T4 doesn't make the Guide more torsionally rigid!

But- that was then- and this is now! My initial testing suggests that I need the extra support and leverage of the T4- over my leather Tele boots- in order to drive the Kom (the Kom is a lot more ski than the Guide- which is a good thing!)

Again- thanks for the tips- I have much to learn and much to tweak!
Gareth
The pursuit of XCD balance: cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry

iBjorn

Rank: XCD Pinhead
XCD Pinhead
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 5:21 pm

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

Postby iBjorn » Sun Feb 18, 2018 3:29 pm

lowangle al wrote: My conclusions were that the T4s although a little heavier toured as well as the leather boots...


Which version of the T4 do you have, the older with instant fit liners, or the newer with intuition liner? There is a big difference between them, the old liners are a much stiffer making them a much better boot for the downhill and the newer are softer and a much better for touring with better ROM and better K&G.

I have always loved the T3/T4 boot, been using them for almost 20 years and I am on my 6th pair, although the new version is a little too soft for the piste. Have tried a lot of boots through the years but always end up going back to the T4's. Been using them for everything from steep coliours and fast laps in the piste, to ice climbing and dry tooling, even used them for community cross-country races. For the moment I am cheating with Scarpa F1's, wouldnt surprise me if am back in T4s next winter again...

lowangle al wrote:[quote="greatgt.Guess the only thing I'm using all the time is the 20 year old ski poles....TM


My Gipron poles is now 26 years old, used them in the beginning with Scarpa laced leather/Tua Cirque/Riva. The poles have seen a lot of gear come and go, but they have stayed true. Have tried to replace them with carbon telescope poles twice, my first pair broke the first day, and the second pair after about 4 days, so the Gipron got new tips instead - they will serve me a few years more now.

User avatar
lowangle al

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 917
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

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

Postby lowangle al » Sun Feb 18, 2018 7:02 pm

Hey Bjorn, my T4s are from last year and I love them. First off they are a half size bigger than my T2s, which I needed for touring. Second I found the lower cuff makes skiing, both up and down, feel more natural. Which makes sense because they feel more like a regular hiking boot to walk in. I'm glad I waited and ended up with the softer ones. They seem to be all the boot I would need with my vectors and I'm sure they would work with my 112 underfoot powder boards, in good snow anyway. They give me that solid connection between my foot and the ski that I don't get with leather boots.

It's hard to give up on gear that never let you down. That's how I felt about my Excell poles, but I think they were about 145cm and a pia in the bc for a guy with bad shoulders. I now have adjustable poles but maybe I should hack about 20cm off my old ones and get them back in action.

Good luck in your race on Tuesday.

Chisana

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 1:13 am

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

Postby Chisana » Sun Feb 18, 2018 10:46 pm

If you are referring to the old excel arctic poles with the big baskets, I used mine today. Tough poles. Handles now are mostly friction tape, and one basket has about had it. Replaced the other basket years ago with one I found at amh. On the lookout for another basket. My favorite poles, though I still use my bamboo poles a lot and also my ramer adjustables. I don't think any of these poles are less than 25 years old.

martin2007

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:23 pm

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

Postby martin2007 » Mon Feb 19, 2018 2:04 am

Hear, hear! I've a soft spot for vintage equipment in both summer and winter passions. I've a ridiculous quiver of poles that have stabbed their way into my basement and inevitably, after sitting for a few years in the rafters, get noticed, and get taken out for a ride or three. Amongst my current favourites are 40-year-old (and I'm being nice), bamboo standard issues made in Canada. And I didn't even know we grew bamboo in Canada! Ya never stops learnin'. Like everything old, bamboo poles are new again, and at the "top end" ain't cheap. Why do I like them? Not just to satisfy a contrarian streak, though that may partly explain it. They are lightweight, happen to be a nice length, about 125's rather than the 135's I spent decades track-skiing with. Yeah, I might be shrinking. I'm pretty sure I'm not getting any taller with time. They, the bamboo poles, look nice partnered with old wood skis which often accompany them. Admitted, that's a lame reason, but there's something irksome about partnering old wooden beauties with modern BD telescoping poles. Like paddling cedar and canvas with a carbon ,or worse, aluminum-shaft paddle. The telescoping BD poles are my go-to poles for all tele resort and most BC outings. I really like adjusting them for length, and do so fairly often depending on snow depth and other factors. I like the grips and hand harnesses. There's one thing, though, I really dislike about the BD telescoping poles. When poling on steep terrain I find the stiff, unflexing basket combined with the short distance from tip to basket a poor design. The pole plant is less solid, and on steep uneven terrain wants to skite across the snow when I'm already committed to an energy-sapping herringbone and depending on the pole-plant to support my forward motion and secure me from slipping backwards. Old-style poles, including my bamboos, stay planted as required on the steeps. I tried to find a BD solution that addresses this issue, i.e. a basket replacement made to make these poles work well on steep ascents. Seems no one else has this problem. Or the emperor has no clothes but no one wants to spoil the fun and mention it. And damn it, I paid more for those poles than the dozens of my old-school darlings put together! Apologies for attempting to hijack this thread...

User avatar
Woodserson

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:25 am
Location: New Hampshire

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

Postby Woodserson » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:10 am

lowangle al wrote:
Gareth, I was out yesterday and came up with a trick that made touring with T4s better. I buckled the lower buckle over the plastic tongue like normal, but I put the upper buckle under the tongue. It allowed for better ROM for K&G and may help with your HWs. Give it a try.


Going to try this today!

iBjorn-- if you want, old style T4 liners are still available on the Scarpa site in most but not all sizesl I ordered some to stand by as back-up. I tried the Intuition and it just wasn't for me paired with this boot.

User avatar
lowangle al

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 917
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

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

Postby lowangle al » Mon Feb 19, 2018 11:58 am

Chisana wrote:If you are referring to the old excel arctic poles with the big baskets, I used mine today. Tough poles. Handles now are mostly friction tape, and one basket has about had it. Replaced the other basket years ago with one I found at amh. On the lookout for another basket. My favorite poles, though I still use my bamboo poles a lot and also my ramer adjustables. I don't think any of these poles are less than 25 years old.
02 19 07_0776.JPG


Do you mean these? I picked up a spare pair for parts from Play it Again Sports. I'll see if I have one I can spare.

User avatar
lowangle al

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 917
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

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

Postby lowangle al » Mon Feb 19, 2018 12:17 pm

Martin, I wish I had an overstock of poles, I've been using one Lekki and BD pole for the last few years. I always use the BD one in my right hand because of that pole plant problem you mentioned. 125cm is the length I also prefer for most touring, but i'll go down to 115cm the steep and deep or variable snow when I get low.

I'm with you on the traditional gear too, although you can't beat modern skis and boots I miss those big baskets on old poles. I have so much traditional canoe gear if I die in the summer I'll feel like I've been around a lot longer :).


Return to “Telemark Talk Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest