So, @lilcliffy, when you mention the Voile Objective, do you see that as an AT ski (with AT bindings and boot)?lilcliffy wrote: ↑Tue Apr 13, 2021 11:52 am...
As far as a BC Nordic Touring ski that has some decent downhill performance- to me there are three categories:
1) Old-School Telemark skis: long, narrow, low-cambered, round-flexing. (Example: Asnes Nansen- this is the only ski I can think of that still fits this criteria.)
2) XC skis tuned for steep terrain: long, narrow, camber and resistance underfoot- but rockered and/or flexible shovel/tail to facilitate turning (Examples: E109; Eon(M62); Ingstad; Combat Nato; Fischer 78; etc.).
3) So-called Hybrid Nordic Touring skis: Nordic touring skis that have a lot of the geometry and features of AT skis (Examples: FT62; Rabb 68; Fischer 98/112; Madshus Epoch(M68)/Annum(M78); etc.)
On the subject of #3 category above ("Hybrid" skis)- after more than 20 years using this class of skis- I have kinda given up on them as everyday touring skis. I find I am never really satisfied with any of them. They basicly suck as XC skis, and they are really not that great downhill skis either- at least not compared to a fully-committed modern AT ski. My point is that if you are seriously considering skis like the examples listed above in #3- I would strongly recommend you consider modern AT skis as well. For example- I am not convinced that a Fischer 112 or Madshus is any more efficient as a XC ski than a modern AT ski and the difference in downhill performance is massive. There was a time that these "hybrid" designs had the Nordic Touring benefit of being much lighter than AT skis- this is no longer the case. Heck- a Voile Objective BC weighs LESS than a Madshus 78...
My continued interest in hybrid skis is purely a function of passion and the desire to support passion. What I mean is that I bought a Falketind 62 for the fun of trying it and supporting a ski manufacturer's passion project. To be completely honest I find the FT62 fun in ideal conditions- otherwise I am currently not thrilled with it.
... If you really want a "backcountry" ski that is an efficient XC ski- but manageable in steep terrain- then I still think a XC ski that is tuned for steep terrain is the best choice (category #2 above).
If you want a downhill ski- then look for a downhill ski- and widen your search to include modern light AT skis.
And, would you see the Objective being in your Category #3, if paired with NNN BC and leather boots?
Just curious what your thinking is on that.
I think, along with others, I’m feeling the same as you do about the FT62.
And, similarly happy with the Ingstad for XC and XCd in 3D snow.
On the Objective, I have been overall very happy. Yesterday was a mixed bag.
10 miles, 2,000 vertical.
Transformed / spring snow.
Snow temp varying above and below freezing.
On the flats, when the snow was slightly soft, great speed / glide, mediocre tracking.
On the flats, when the snow was frozen (and snowmobile tracks all over the place), great speed / glide, terrible tracking, not fun, but al least fairly fast.
On the down slopes (turns), when the snow was slightly soft (untracked slopes), good glide, good edging, great fun.
On the down slopes (turns), when the snow was frozen (untracked slopes), no edging, no control, no fun.
On the down slopes (ski out), when the snow was frozen (and snowmobile tracks ALL over the place), great speed / glide, terrible tracking, slightly scary, not fun.
