This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
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.
I am looking for opinions on the choice of Voile skis length. I have the longer Objectives 178 Cm but they do feel short and I need a pretty steep slope to enjoy them in deep snow. Does anyone know how they compare in term of float ability with 177 Hyper Vector or the 184 one? I have the opportunity to get an Hyper Vector BC but I need to be sure before I pull the trigger. The GAS fever is still going strong and I kind of “need” this last ski to “complete” my quiver... as if a quiver is ever complete
More forgiving, easier to turn, more float for deep snow. A dream machine.
The Ultravector is more of a do-it-all tool. It's fantastic ski, but are you going to be needing the stiffness and support of this ski, in steep icy couloirs? Since you want deep snow performance, get the V6. Get the Hyper if you want it light. Trust me.
I think you are at the high end of the weight range for the 177 but I'm sure they'd work. I have the 177 hypers and they ski pretty much like the original 170 vectors which seem short for your size. I think I'm going to replace my 170 vectors with the longer version of the Ultravector.
so what I'm sayin is that the 177s will work but may not be optimum for you. The longer one will also work but may be more ski than you need. I would say that if you are comfortable on longer (185+) skis of similar or greater width go with the long ones. If this is going to be your biggest and widest ski than you may have better results right out of the gate with the shorter ones.
Woods I thought about the V6s, but ultras I'm thinking of getting need to be my main K&G ski too. I assume the ultras will tour better than the V6, do they? I have some Voile Insanes and some Charger BCs for deep days or tree skiing but when the chargers wear out I think the V6 BC will replace it, unless they come out with a V8 BC.
More forgiving, easier to turn, more float for deep snow. A dream machine.
The Ultravector is more of a do-it-all tool. It's fantastic ski, but are you going to be needing the stiffness and support of this ski, in steep icy couloirs? Since you want deep snow performance, get the V6. Get the Hyper if you want it light. Trust me.
Hi Woods, you are mentioning the UltraVector but I mentioned the HyperVector. Would your opinion change? Is there a big difference between the Uktea and the Hyper.
The thing is that the “deal” would be on a Hyper not an Ultra.
I think you are at the high end of the weight range for the 177 but I'm sure they'd work. I have the 177 hypers and they ski pretty much like the original 170 vectors which seem short for your size. I think I'm going to replace my 170 vectors with the longer version of the Ultravector.
so what I'm sayin is that the 177s will work but may not be optimum for you. The longer one will also work but may be more ski than you need. I would say that if you are comfortable on longer (185+) skis of similar or greater width go with the long ones. If this is going to be your biggest and widest ski than you may have better results right out of the gate with the shorter ones.
Hi lowangle Al,
The widest ski I have is the Objectives and if they were longer they would be much better, I think. I am ready to trade some longer turning radius for more stability with longer ski. Although the Objectives are really fun on less snow, the thing is that for the touring part, any ski shorter than more or less 185 feel short. My guess is that with à longer and wider ski I should be able to better enjoy part of the hill that are not as steep... I am lucky to have my son who now can use my skis and boots so I don’t feel that bad buying gear... and also, it is really useful when friends come visit... they say they are entering a ski rental store when they come skiing at our place
Hi Woods, you are mentioning the UltraVector but I mentioned the HyperVector. Would your opinion change? Is there a big difference between the Uktea and the Hyper.
The thing is that the “deal” would be on a Hyper not an Ultra.
Same ski, one lighter, one heavier. I'm just throwing around names and using them interchangeably. No reason for the Ultra vs the Hyper other than the weight. They probably ski-feel a little different but otherwise, same ski.
Woods I thought about the V6s, but ultras I'm thinking of getting need to be my main K&G ski too. I assume the ultras will tour better than the V6, do they? I have some Voile Insanes and some Charger BCs for deep days or tree skiing but when the chargers wear out I think the V6 BC will replace it, unless they come out with a V8 BC.
I have no experience with the Ultravector, just the old Vector.
V6 is dreamy, but I'm not doing any K&G on it. No way.
The hyper is the same ski with a lighter core, well worth the extra 100 bucks IMO. They aren't covered by Voiles warranty but can be fixed for a fee if you pull a binding. They had problems with pullouts with certain active bindings. My guess is that if you didn't pull a binding on your objectives and don't have a history of pulling bindings you will be OK.
Woods I thought about the V6s, but ultras I'm thinking of getting need to be my main K&G ski too. I assume the ultras will tour better than the V6, do they? I have some Voile Insanes and some Charger BCs for deep days or tree skiing but when the chargers wear out I think the V6 BC will replace it, unless they come out with a V8 BC.
I have no experience with the Ultravector, just the old Vector.
V6 is dreamy, but I'm not doing any K&G on it. No way.
V6 sounds really cool but I kind of want my skis to be able to do an approach of a few kilometers without taking hours to get to the sweet spots. I find the Objectives not too bad to get to the sweet spots despite being so short and the fun I can get out of those skis is worth the extra work... but I guess that they are way better at that than the V6?
