Short vs long skis for powder?

[Stephen]

It's important to mention that speed also affects floatation on powder, which was not discussed much earlier. The faster you go, the more floatation you'll experience.
…

@JB TELE, you mentioned that you ski on the slower side, but like CIMA is saying above, some speed, and the pressure that develops in the turns, will help the Hypervector work the way it was designed to work.

But, the fact that you ski slower, that the Hypervector is targeted for firmer conditions, and is more “directional” than “surfy” doesn’t mean it wont be fun in powder for you!

I skied that ski one day and had a lot of fun (with Xplore and Alfa Free).
Here is a link to that.
When this was filmed, I had been skiing this kind of equipment for about 1.5 years, so I’m not that great.
Also, the snow is not nearly as deep as what you’re thinking, but would still have similarities.

.

[Manney]

My question wasn't really about flotation.

Understood. But it’s the elephant in the room… the key attribute that defines how a ski supports a skier in powder. So it needed to be placed up front so that the other attributes can be examined in descending order. Otherwise, it keeps popping up and driving the discussion back and forth.

There’s a lot to be said about tip width and rocker that will start to address how a ski deals with powder. On hard and irregular snow surfaces, early rise will cause a lot of chatter. Not so in powder, where it can be helpful. So that’s one thing you may wish to consider.

Most skis with a wider nose feature a fair amount of side cut. This helps turning but you need to watch the area of base and the stiffness of the ski under foot.

Some tail width is nice too, especially for novice skiers who tend to ski in the back seat (lean against the mountain… a natural beginner’s mistake). Taken to extremes, this can affect release. The net effect can sometimes reward bad habits that are hard to lose later on. If you’re already past this, then it’s one less thing to worry about.

Avoid the radical parabolic shapes that are marketed to death. Yeah, they’re “rad”, “cool” etc. Bit not the best for developing any kind of precision and control. Limited directional stability and all that.

Weight? Not a huge issue one way or another unless you’re on hard piste (heavier is better) or climbing (lighter is better). Since you haven’t specified either of these, something in the middle will work just fine..

Definitely want a ski that is reinforced under the binding area. Metal is best because it holds a thread.

[Tom M]

Just as a point of reference for the above video, the Objectives are 178 cm and the Hypervectors are 177 cm. I'm barely 172 cm tall and I think Stephen is around 191 cm tall. Most of my early decades were spent skiing Europa 77's and 99's @ 210 cm length. The shortest skis in my quiver are my V6's at 173 cm. I have a good friend who skis the Hypervectors in the 164 length. He is a bit shorter than I, but very lightweight. You can see him working them very well in super light powder (red jacket and pack) in this video. I'm skiing the Objectives / Alfa Free (blue jacket) in this video.

[JB TELE]

They do seem like they are more intended for all around or firmer conditions, which makes sense in the context of modern ski design. same with the objective. But I don't see anyone making 90mm waist width powder oriented skis. It sounds like length is based more on personal preference and I'll just have to figure it out for myself.

I did see Tom M's video. I've been watching a lot of his vids dreaming about winter coming.

Tom, I've seen you ski the hypervectors with alfa frees. Can you imagine any issues (other than less flotation) with skiing them at a shorter length? Or am I just overthinking things? I'm 173 cm tall.

[fisheater]

JB, it is about more the square inches under foot, it is also about flex. Flex is variable by not only your weight, but also by energy.
The ski needs to flex, so it seeks the surface, but if it flexes too much it will slow the ski and sometimes plow the snow. If a ski plows, it will not release without input from the skier.
Skiing powder is much different than skiing non-3D snow. Skiing powder requires you to point skis downhill. You greatly reduce edging, keeping the skis pointed downhill. If you try crossing the fall line, you will stall. If you pull your skis up, (not jumping) and point the skis downhill, you may be able to pull it out.
It is not about the ski. The Atomic Powder Cruise was a remarkable innovation. It was billed as THE helicopter skiing powder ski. It was straight, as much less sidecut than a modern ski. It was mid 80’s mm underfoot. It was incredible! A Vector at mid nineties underfoot is a dream! There are better skis today, but if you are having difficulties skiing powder on a Vector, it’s not the ski.
Find a mellow slope that you are comfortable pointing the skis downhill. Feel the skis sink into the snow, and the feel them rise up. As the skis rise, unweight and change leads. It would probably be easiest on a slope you really don’t even need to turn at all. Just feel the up and down through the 3-D snow. It’s the basic of powder skiing. Once you get that part the rest is relatively easy, but it’s a process.

[JB TELE]

JB, it is about more the square inches under foot, it is also about flex. Flex is variable by not only your weight, but also by energy.
The ski needs to flex, so it seeks the surface, but if it flexes too much it will slow the ski and sometimes plow the snow. If a ski plows, it will not release without input from the skier.
Skiing powder is much different than skiing non-3D snow. Skiing powder requires you to point skis downhill. You greatly reduce edging, keeping the skis pointed downhill. If you try crossing the fall line, you will stall. If you pull your skis up, (not jumping) and point the skis downhill, you may be able to pull it out.
It is not about the ski. The Atomic Powder Cruise was a remarkable innovation. It was billed as THE helicopter skiing powder ski. It was straight, as much less sidecut than a modern ski. It was mid 80’s mm underfoot. It was incredible! A Vector at mid nineties underfoot is a dream! There are better skis today, but if you are having difficulties skiing powder on a Vector, it’s not the ski.
Find a mellow slope that you are comfortable pointing the skis downhill. Feel the skis sink into the snow, and the feel them rise up. As the skis rise, unweight and change leads. It would probably be easiest on a slope you really don’t even need to turn at all. Just feel the up and down through the 3-D snow. It’s the basic of powder skiing. Once you get that part the rest is relatively easy, but it’s a process.

Thanks for the advice!

Sounds like I need to learn better technique before forming an opinion on the best type of ski for powder.

[Tom M]

Tom, I've seen you ski the hypervectors with alfa frees. Can you imagine any issues (other than less flotation) with skiing them at a shorter length? Or am I just overthinking things? I'm 173 cm tall.

I don't have a lot of ski time with the Hypervector / Free combination. I mounted them up in mid-February 2023, mainly for use in deep soft bottomless powder. I've been skiing a remounted Objective/Free combo for the past two seasons, and it works very well. The Hypervector was more of an experiment to see if I could tell any differences between the two, as I've read so many glowing reviews of the Hypervector. Stephen and I skied both setups back-to-back on the same slope. They both were lots of fun. Soft deep snow is pretty forgiving with either ski, and my only concern with skiing a big wide long ski with the Frees is that the boot may not be supportive enough to give good edge control under more difficult snow conditions / terrain. It might be easier to unweight and hop a shorter ski in powder, but I don't really know, as I've never skied a downhill ski shorter than my V6's, which are 173's. My ski partner in the 2nd video likes to hop turn in powder, and you can see him doing it on his short Hypervectors. I'll have a better feel for the limitations of the Hypervector / Free combo after another season's use. My hope is that someone will develop a more capable lightweight downhill backcountry tele boot in the future (either Xplore or NTN) and if so, my long term plan would be to use the Hypervector with that boot and continue on with the Objective / Free for my XCD use.

[JB TELE]

Tom, I've seen you ski the hypervectors with alfa frees. Can you imagine any issues (other than less flotation) with skiing them at a shorter length? Or am I just overthinking things? I'm 173 cm tall.

I don't have a lot of ski time with the Hypervector / Free combination. I mounted them up in mid-February 2023, mainly for use in deep soft bottomless powder. I've been skiing a remounted Objective/Free combo for the past two seasons, and it works very well. The Hypervector was more of an experiment to see if I could tell any differences between the two, as I've read so many glowing reviews of the Hypervector. Stephen and I skied both setups back-to-back on the same slope. They both were lots of fun. Soft deep snow is pretty forgiving with either ski, and my only concern with skiing a big wide long ski with the Frees is that the boot may not be supportive enough to give good edge control under more difficult snow conditions / terrain. It might be easier to unweight and hop a shorter ski in powder, but I don't really know, as I've never skied a downhill ski shorter than my V6's, which are 173's. My ski partner in the 2nd video likes to hop turn in powder, and you can see him doing it on his short Hypervectors. I'll have a better feel for the limitations of the Hypervector / Free combo after another season's use. My hope is that someone will develop a more capable lightweight downhill backcountry tele boot in the future (either Xplore or NTN) and if so, my long term plan would be to use the Hypervector with that boot and continue on with the Objective / Free for my XCD use.

You might like the scarpa f3 and tts voile transit binding combo, if you can find an f3 in your size. I've heard great things about that set up for lightweight backcountry downhill skiing. Lighter and better range of motion than the T2.

[CIMA]

@Krummholz

I was still learning fore/aft balance when they porpoise without nose diving.

Many telemark skiers struggle with a nose-dive issue that often makes them the subject of ridicule among alpine skiers. To improve your technique, it may be helpful to review your posture in a video and see if you're slouching too much. Additionally, pay attention to your toes and check if they're pressing against the inside of your boots.

[Manney]

JB, it is about more the square inches under foot, it is also about flex. Flex is variable by not only your weight, but also by energy.
The ski needs to flex, so it seeks the surface, but if it flexes too much it will slow the ski and sometimes plow the snow. If a ski plows, it will not release without input from the skier.
Skiing powder is much different than skiing non-3D snow. Skiing powder requires you to point skis downhill. You greatly reduce edging, keeping the skis pointed downhill. If you try crossing the fall line, you will stall. If you pull your skis up, (not jumping) and point the skis downhill, you may be able to pull it out.
It is not about the ski. The Atomic Powder Cruise was a remarkable innovation. It was billed as THE helicopter skiing powder ski. It was straight, as much less sidecut than a modern ski. It was mid 80’s mm underfoot. It was incredible! A Vector at mid nineties underfoot is a dream! There are better skis today, but if you are having difficulties skiing powder on a Vector, it’s not the ski.
Find a mellow slope that you are comfortable pointing the skis downhill. Feel the skis sink into the snow, and the feel them rise up. As the skis rise, unweight and change leads. It would probably be easiest on a slope you really don’t even need to turn at all. Just feel the up and down through the 3-D snow. It’s the basic of powder skiing. Once you get that part the rest is relatively easy, but it’s a process.

Good post.

Sounds like I need to learn better technique before forming an opinion on the best type of ski for powder.

Yes! It’s the skier that counts most of all.

You’re looking for the best powder ski for YOU. Not anyone else.

Now that you have an appreciation of the design elements of a pow ski, go back and re-examine your technique and terrain. Take the first half of the season doing this. Time in thought and reflection is never a bad thing.

That will get you to a point where you’ll feel comfortable compromising on some design elements and unwavering on others. This “flex” (to pick up on @fisheater’s theme) will open your eyes to a broader range of possibilities which you can make work.