Voile Charger

[mainer]

I've got a few days on my new pair of Chargers, so I figure I know enough to give them an honest review.

Ski: Voile Charger 191cm.
Binding: Axl, mounted at recommended line.
Me: 175lbs, 6'1", 9 years skiing tele, prefer skiing trees and whatever soft snow is available.

So far, I have two days of lift served skiing on the Chargers. Conditions have included groomers, powder, soft bumps, crud, and wind packed powder.

On groomers, the Chargers are surprisingly capable. No problem making turns or getting edge grip. They also feel confident at speed, with no real noticeable chatter. This might be different on a day with icy conditions, but so far so good!

In soft snow, this is my favorite ski I have owned. They ski anything soft with absolute confidence while still being fun and easy to turn, even at slow speeds. Despite the name, I haven't found that the ski needs to go fast, but it is sure able to. They are equally fun doing quick turns and popping off soft bumps, swinging turns of all sizes in untracked powder, or pointing them down the fall line and letting them run through big GS turns in tracked-out crud. I really think they are about the perfect balance of friendliness and ability to rip, all while being nice and light for touring. In the 191 cm length, they are also still manageable thanks to the rocker in the tip.

I will say that a ski with a slightly tighter turn radius might be a little friendlier in real tight trees, but that, like all things, is a trade off. All in all, this is one of my favorite skis I've had the pleasure of riding and (I think) an excellent choice for the backcountry! In fact, I don't think I'd have a problem owning only this ski.

[lilcliffy]

Very cool and very interesting to read your perspective.

That is quite a backcountry ski...It is way fatter and waaay more capable than anything I would have toured on in big-mountain country in the 90s...The technology has advanced so much- much lighter, fatter, and with that fully-rockered tip, it allows a more forward mounting position in the backcountry.

[mainer]

All I can think of every time I ski on one of my fat, rockered skis, I can't get over how much of a game changer it really is. The skis I started on were cambered and real skinny, by comparison. Skiing fat skis is almost an entirely different sport!

I really think this ski is about perfect for a "touring for turns" type of rig. You could go lighter by going with a skinnier ski, but the float is really nice on the Chargers. I skied them in comparison with some Voile V6s this weekend and found that while the V6 still kept the tips up in deep snow, it did not remain as level (fore and aft) as the Charger did. This resulted in less glide on gentler slopes. That said, the V6 is also an awesome ski, just with a slightly different skill set than the Charger. I think if you had a pair of each, you'd be pretty happy!

[lilcliffy]

Yeah- I don't ski enough extreme terrain at this point in my life to justify them.... (Not that I am unhappy- I am perfectly content with my Nordic BC touring at this point )

What boot and binding are you using? (forgive me if you already stated that above)

[mainer]

I'm skiing them with Axls (using the medium setting) and Scarpa T1s.
I think they'd be fine paired with a T2 or comparable boot. The Switchback X2 would be another suitable binding, but I don't think I'd use the normal Switchback. Maybe in a shorter length.

[fisheater]

[quote="lilcliffy"]Yeah- I don't ski enough extreme terrain at this point in my life to justify them.... (Not that I am unhappy- I am perfectly content with my Nordic BC touring at this point )
Lilcliffy,
300 meter hills seem like a lot of room to let them rip. Of course maybe a set of Koms in 162 would be better. I can honestly say that I wish I really needed a set of Chargers.

I look forward to your continued reviews, Mainer. Thanks for sharing.

[lilcliffy]

I'm skiing them with Axls (using the medium setting) and Scarpa T1s.
I think they'd be fine paired with a T2 or comparable boot. The Switchback X2 would be another suitable binding, but I don't think I'd use the normal Switchback. Maybe in a shorter length.

Lots of power then. Makes sense- it may be light- but it's still a BIG ski.

[lilcliffy]

300 meter hills seem like a lot of room to let them rip. Of course maybe a set of Koms in 162 would be better. I can honestly say that I wish I really needed a set of Chargers.

Well- at this point in my life I primarily ski from my doorstep. The most vertical I can easily reach from my doorstep is in the 150-200m range. The closest lift-served- Crabbe Mtn, 50kms away- is only 260m vertical. 300-500+ verticals, in the Central Uplands, are a good 50-100kms away. With my responsibilities at home, 5-20km tours, through the hills, out my backdoor suit me just fine.

That being said- I do see a set of Koms in my future...

[fisheater]

Hey Mainer, How do the Chargers tour compared to the V-6? They seem big, but that used set resurfaced. I do not need a ski like this most of the time, I really don't need a V-6 or Vector either. However, it would be nice to have a deep pow touring ski to tour for turns . Besides I don't mind hearing some ski stories, if you feel like sharing.