Anyone really psyched about their Hok style skishoes?

[Spiny Norman]

Hoks, BD Glideright (sic), LLBean Boreals.

Some deals on CL but I don't recall anyone here thinking they are the bees knees.

Anyone get beyond "The are ok for what they are."?

Thanks

[Maxwellian]

I have some of the BD 147s I found on deep discount. I think they could be really fun in tight trees with a lurk or tiak pole to get super backseat. Only got a few outings in less than ideal conditions, so did not get the hang of them at all. I think they take a lot more skill than most of the marketing around them suggests.

[Inspiredcapers]

The highlight of the Hoks for me is the quality time and memories I’ve made with my wife when we’ve been out shuffling around with them (mine are 145’s, she has 125’s). Her favourite memory regarding Hoks is yours truly heroically crossing a snow covered log laying over a creek and ending up in the drink when things got ‘technical’.

We’ve hit some deeper snow on slopes with them and quickly learned how easy it is to get unbalanced- also learned the lurk is a practical tool for this ski. They’ve greatly diminished my use of snowshoes due to their versatility.

Good write up on a longish trip with Hoks…
http://telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?t=3046

[lowangle al]

I've never skied Altai skis but my wide scaled Voile skis work great as a snowshoe for tromping around the woods. I don't think I'd like the glide of those short skis with attached skins. The Kom would be more versatile IMO.

[Krummholz]

I got the 145 Hoks about 8 years ago. I’ve never put on snowshoes since. I’ve found them way more versatile and enjoyable, I just got a pair of the Tao, basically a Hok in 165 with some side cut. Tao is more downhill based than the Hok, but is not based on a downhill ski like the Kom.

[smax]

The Whitewoods Outlander is a similar and inexpensive option. We live in a community on 1k vertical hill. The fish scales don't work too great for going up in the steeper parts of the neighborhood, but are great with some old skins. I keep them in my car in case the snow is so deep we can't make it home. They're great for 10 degree or less playing. Definitely worth the ~$350 over snowshoes any day.

Bought some of the BDs, but haven't been on them yet. It'll be interesting to see how they climb. skinbased.com look interesting too. Tempted to try their 160s or the Voile Ultravectors in slightly steeper terrain.

[lilcliffy]

The Hok is fantastic-
I use it primarily for winter forestry fieldwork and farm/woodlot maintenance-
but, I also use the Hok regularly for child-centered family outings- the stability and grip of the Hok allow me to shuffle along in deep snow and steep terrain, with my hands free to pull/push and lift children and associated sleds/pulks.

I also have an austistic child that would not be able to join us skiing without a Hok + universal binding.

The Hok is however tuned for soft snow- it is very poor on icy, refrozen, consolidated snow.

[riel]

Hoks, BD Glideright (sic), LLBean Boreals.

Some deals on CL but I don't recall anyone here thinking they are the bees knees.

Anyone get beyond "The are ok for what they are."?

I really like my Hoks.

They are not skis. They do things that would be utterly impractical with skis.

I use my Hoks to skishoe hiking trails, which are often too steep and narrow to ski, at least at my skill level. They are great for trail maintenance too, because they are slower, easier to control, and more maneuverable.

I also use my Hoks to clear sledding trails for the kids, when the snow is deep, and to pull them (and their sleds) back uphill.

They fill a niche in my "winter footwear" section that skis and snowshoes don't cover.

[fatskinning]

(Ouff, did not expect to write such a long reply for my first post here, but maybe someone will find the following information useful)

To answer the questions,
Yes I am really psyched about them and yes I'm way beyond "they are ok for what they are"

Here's my story (and some ski reviews lol),

My first pair was some OAC WAP 127, I wonder if I ever used my snowshoes again after trying that

Got some OAC 147 with 3 pin bindings and hard shell tele boots shortly after, started using them more and more for cross country skiing and backcountry touring, I haven't used cross country skis since, and for backcountry/touring less and less my telemark setup

with 3 pin bindings and hard boots, I think the concept of those is simply amazing, they will never excel at anything but will be good at everything

At 6'1 (190lbs) I've always wanted longer ones for more stability, speed and 'maybe' a bit more grip for going up

This is when everything changed for me, I got a pair of OAC XCD GT 160, and I was disappointed, these skis did not float as much in powder (I would even say they are sinkers) and had less grip going up, should have known, they are XCD skis after all

The year after, OAC came out with the XCD BC 160 - that was it, right? still 160, much wider, better sidecut, more camber, proportionally larger skin area, etc... These are absolutely the worst skis there can be, they are good at nothing and I mean nothing. We are very very far from "a ski that can do everything pretty well", they don't go up (no grip whatsoever), they are way way too stiff, kick and glide could be good with that much stiffness, but no, the width makes them very unstable etc...

Meanwhile every once in a while I come across people with Altai Hoks (145cm), they always have more grip on the way up than OAC people and seem to have as much fun going down, I know they have the KOM also, a longer ski with fish scales, and after seeing the videos of Lo-Fi, temptation is high but unless I get to try them first, I don't want to risk another buy and be disappointed... after all, these are still XCD's

I want WIDE, maximum FLOAT and MAJOR GRIP, honestly speed is not that important for me, and having a skin on steep downhills trough trees I actually kind of appreciate lol

So I decided to make my own, bought a used pair of women's powder skis (Rossignol S7 168) and before pulling out the router, I played around with 3 to 4 stick-on cross country skins per skis to figure best placement and surface area and it turned out pretty awesome, at this point I'd say I was very close, a bit more gliding resistance on flats but just a bit, I ended never using the router just leaving the stick-ons, - this was good enough

The year after, wanting to improve on the concept of WIDE, FLOAT, MORE GRIP, and now looking for less resistance when gliding, I got a cnc machine, built a jig, bought Line 110 women's powder skis, quality skins and the result is now exactly what I've always wanted

With those, touring is awesome, I don't have to put on or take off skins, I can now climb pretty much everything others climb with full skins and have a blast going down especially in deep powder with a very light setup

But wait, Altai skis just came out with the TAO, 165, fairly large and that reputation of being the best at climbing, so I was not able to resist, I received them last week, and was only able to try them for 30 minutes. Initial impressions are: amazing build quality, very light, grip was equal (with last Saturday snow conditions here in Quebec) to the Rossi's, not as much float and a little harder to turn but it's too early to tell.

Shorter and wider skis with permanent skins that can glide well, that are longer than regular skishoes, that are not XCD's...
How about calling this FATSKINNING !

Here's a picture of some of the skis mentioned. I've since replaced the stick on skins on the Rossi's but these are still glued on the base directly without being carved.