Ultimate ADK BC ski?

[Fisheater]

I own a pair of S-112, not my favorite ski, but I spent plenty of miles on them. They are easily hot waxed with glide wax just as you would wax an alpine ski. The only difference is to have a sheet of paper towel at the ready. While the wax is still liquid, give a wipe to the scales.
I found that this method offered better overall glide, prevented snow sticking well, and did not cause a reduction in grip.
I am currently not skiing any waxless skis. However quite a few guys on Telemark Talk are using polar Nordic kick wax as a glide wax. They report it also improves grip on scales. I do use polar grip wax as my glide wax on all my waxable skis. I believe using Swix Polar as my glide wax, I get better performance from my grip (kick) wax, and I get excellent glide. Well unless the temperature drops into the range where Polar would be an effective kick wax, which is single digits. At those temperatures I scrape tips and tails, and nylon brush the base.

[MrKawfey]

Yup, that's exactly what I have done so far. I hot wax the tips and tails at the beginning of the year and rub on some glide wax when I go out. So far I have not experimented with any kick wax.

I'm a real novice when it comes to waxes. Of course I would love to get something that glides forward better but also helps climb better. You know, like magic.

These skis glide just ok, and they climb just ok, but given a choice, I think delaying the point at which I have to put the skins on would be preferable even if the glide suffered a bit.

[montcalm]

Those skis actually climb and glide pretty good as far as waxless skis go. There are better ones (like the ones in the OP) but they suffer from (lack of) glide. Those feel like XC race skis compared to the Voiles.

I think it really comes down to your objective (pun intended ). If you are mainly breaking freshies and/or climbing and descending, you'll be better served by a ski like the Objective, or any true Alpine camber + rocker setup with scales. If you want to do long tours that don't have many technical sections - think intermediate to advanced XC skiing, then there are better options.

Personally, I just carry kicker skins most of the time as they give me enough extra grip not to get stuck down in a gully somewhere, but I try to avoid using them. If I can just use the scales and do a little zig-zagging, this is my preference. It usually works out about the same in terms of time meaning I go a little faster on the lower angle than a more direct route (if you're super fit, way better to go straight up) but mainly to avoid fussing with skins.

Generally for XCD I'm dealing with runs of 100-300' vert, so not huge. That's why I prefer less dinking around between going up and down. If I was climbing 2000', I'd probably just put the skins on and suffer for one big up, as the climbing ability from skins is unmatched.

[montcalm]

Some more experiences from the S Bounds:

- I used these on some pretty long XC tours when I was breaking trail. They were great for this, plus any hill I descended I could make pretty reliable turns.

- I used them for skiing sledding hills to glades. They were great for this as long things weren't too firm. Firm snow or ice, they don't work well at all. I started to struggle a bit with them in steeper glades - some lack of technique here, but they were a little more resistant to coming around that I would have liked.

- I always skied these with leather boots. With a light plastic boot, you could probably push the DH performance a bit more.

- The XC trails I used these on in the Adirondacks were rated as "intermediate" by the DEC like the Hudson River loop, they were great. I could ski stuff like this with either a longer XC ski, or these S Bounds, but the S Bounds do a little better when you're breaking trail and are more fun and reliable descending.

Bottom line - they are a versatile ski but I wouldn't push them to lift served and when skiing on packed trails they show their weakness in touring.

[montcalm]

I also tried the S Bounds with a couple different binding setups.

I started off with 3 pins just flat mounted on the ski. That was fine.

I then got curious about how these might be with NNN-BC so I mounted them up:



I skied them like this for a bit, but what I found was there was really nothing to gain. They didn't tour any better with NNN-BC and they were similar on the DH provided the boots were similar. I decided those NNN-BC bindings would be better off on another set of skis, so off they came again.

I then mounted the same bindings I had originally but used a medium riser. I mainly did this so I could remount on the same fore/aft position as they were previously but I wound up really liking this the best. The riser really had no detrimental impact on touring (for my style) but it did make the skis a little more responsive.




On my Objectives, I decided to add the cable binding, so I used Voile 3 pin cable "traverse" binding - basically that riser setup above but with a cable option. I don't use the cables much, but I like them when I do. I have this setup on my old Tuas and I like it a lot.

[stripperguy]

Gentlemen,
I only briefly looked at those Fisher S Bound skis...as you might know, I'm a BC downhill guy on AT gear.
I am God awful slow putting on and removing my skins.
I just looked at my favorite back country spot and I think the steepest section of my usual skin track is around 20 degrees.

So, two questions for Mr eater of fish and montcalm:
1. Do you think those S-Bounds can handle a 20 degree climb? In those steeper sections, there is no room to herringbone, and I surely don't want to stop and add skins or even mini skins.

2. Do you think those skis would be capable of the downhills? I might use them for lift served as well, but either way I would primarily ski powder, trees and bumps, in all sorts of terrain.

[montcalm]

Hope this helps:

1 - No. The S Bounds will not handle 20 degrees. Maybe 10-12 before you need to use the edge. The Objectives might be able to get up over 15. These are really rough guesses, I never actually measured the pitches on these things, and of course, with scales it varies with snow type.

2 - No. They won't take hard skiing in bumps or beat up crud. And definitely don't have the stiffness/edge hold for hard snow. The Objectives would do better, but they are still a little on the frail side i.e. I wouldn't hammer bumps with them. Voile makes two different layups now (not for the Objective, but for their bigger line skis), the Hyper and Ultra.

I don't have any direct experience, but the little I know from when these were released and what the reviews were, they'd probably do everything you want.

https://www.voile.com/voile-ultravector-bc-skis.html

Or you can get them with a smooth base:

https://www.voile.com/voile-ultravector-skis.html

Hard to say if the scales would make your climb...

[montcalm]

Some more info SG:

https://blisterreview.com/gear-reviews/2013-2014-voile-charger-bc

That guy claims he can get up 20±1 degrees with those Chargers, depending on conditions (still need to carry skins). They aren't made anymore with scales, but they'd probably be pretty close to the Ultravector above in terms of climbing performance.

As everyone says though, the scales suck on groomers and flat run outs. It's true, they certainly don't coast like flat bases and especially on packed stuff. I don't ski patterned skis at resorts, so I can't really say much on it.

[MrKawfey]

I'm not exactly going to disagree with montcalm, but maybe elaborate a bit more:

1) No, but let's be honest about 20 degrees. When most people brag about the angle of a run they skied they are actually quoting grade, not angle. Even then there is an awful lot of exaggeration involved as well. This topic could be a long contentious thread all to itself. 20 degrees straight up is pretty steep. HOWEVER, in the link in montcalm's last post, the guy says he could climb to 20 degrees which is about where he needed the heel riser. I think I use my lifters a bit lower than that, but it's probably in the ballpark.

2) I think there is a BIG difference between montcalm's 98 s-bounds with Teleg-gear and my 112's with AT gear. I can ski the 112's at a resort on anything with no problem. If you were skiing next to me, you wouldn't know I was skiing anything different (aside from the noise from the scales). I know I am skiing something different as they feel and handle different, but you wouldn't.

I'll elaborate more later, gotta go shopping for a bathtub.

[montcalm]

I'm not exactly going to disagree with montcalm, but maybe elaborate a bit more:

1) No, but let's be honest about 20 degrees. When most people brag about the angle of a run they skied they are actually quoting grade, not angle. Even then there is an awful lot of exaggeration involved as well. This topic could be a long contentious thread all to itself. 20 degrees straight up is pretty steep. HOWEVER, in the link in montcalm's last post, the guy says he could climb to 20 degrees which is about where he needed the heel riser. I think I use my lifters a bit lower than that, but it's probably in the ballpark.

2) I think there is a BIG difference between montcalm's 98 s-bounds with Teleg-gear and my 112's with AT gear. I can ski the 112's at a resort on anything with no problem. If you were skiing next to me, you wouldn't know I was skiing anything different (aside from the noise from the scales). I know I am skiing something different as they feel and handle different, but you wouldn't.

I'll elaborate more later, gotta go shopping for a bathtub.

1 - I'll agree with you there. 20 degrees is a pretty typical NY black run at a DH resort. I don't tend to climb straight up that - but I have, even steeper actually - not 100% by choice, but obstacles forced me to do so. I put skins on.

2 - Some difference, yes. I could ski those skis with better bindings and plastic boots, and they'd be easier to edge, but it wouldn't change the fact that they are a pretty light, not-so-stiff ski with a fair bit of camber and not much damping. That makes for a not-so-fun ride on groomers, especially if you're used to skiing a heavy ski with metal in it. I Alpine ski as well, although not in a few years now, but quite a few years in before I put it aside. My last resort skis were very heavy, very damped, and had a lot of shape. I thought they were good on groomers, but I hated them in everything else i.e. crud, bumps, trees, etc... But anyway, the point is people gain certain expectations based on what they have skied and their technique. Tele definitely slows me down and limits me, but in fact a lot of it is self imposed. The fact of the matter is I can go ski stuff no one else is even looking at, and have a blast doing it. That's the magic of skis like S Bounds or Objectives. If I want to ride lifts I'd honestly rather ski a pair of rentals as they really do perform better for groomers. It's hard to find one ski that can do everything well. JMO from owning lots of skis

[montcalm]

Just to elaborate on some of my telebabble and relate it to Alpine resort skiing.

These are my old Tua Heliums:



An AT ski from the 90s. As you can see, pre-parabolic craze. Still really light. A touch heavier than my S98s, but about the same weight as the 112s. Dimensions similar to the 98 but a touch more waist and a touch less in the tips and tails.

I have a simple cable binding with a riser on them.

These can be skied anywhere at a resort with decent boots. I've used a boot called a T2 in the past. For Alpine guys, it's a 3 buckle, light boot similar in flex to probably like a beginner Alpine boot, but with a decent cuff height.



I've skied both the T2 and leathers at a ski resort back to back. With the leathers I'm working hard even on a green run Put those plastic boots on and suddenly you're a pro. Much more like skiing rental Alpine skis.

Those old, light skis hold an edge well enough though. They are a touch stiffer torsionally than the Fischers and have a lot less camber. The camber is also much softer. The Tuas also have thick edges that are easy to tune. Not-so-much the case for S Bounds. Actually, tuning edges on any waxless ski is not easy. But at any rate, those Tuas aren't gonna feel great at 35+mph and you'd probably snap 'em in the bumps if you're an aggressive skier. Carving - not gonna happen. Powder - meh, they work, a little weird. Crusts they suck.

But that's why we've progressed to wider platforms with better tips and tail shapes, more tuned sidecuts that aren't necessarily parabolic, and stiffer, lighter carbon layups.

I can't tell SG what to do, but I tend to get the feeling from his pics and descriptions what and how he is skiing, and I don't think I'd push the S Bounds to that level. I also have a feeling of what he is currently on, and going to a ski like the S Bound would be a big jump in a different direction. A ski like the Ultravector, while not a great resort ski, certainly is tuned for ripping hard in powder and variable BC conditions. There are a ton of skis out there more on the end dedicated to backcountry hard rippin' and there's some that are more tuned to sidecountry/resort skiing. SG is currently on the latter. He might appreciate a bit less weight and some scales, but I'm sure he'll feel the compromise in how they ski.

[MrKawfey]

Struck out on the bathtub, inventory problems abound!

Anyhow, I think between montcalm and me, there is enough info to get a pretty good idea of what's possible. But here's an attempt to summarize (if I mischaracterize feel free to straighten me out):

• Of course there is no "ultimate ADK BC ski", it all depends on what you want to do.

• More specifically, there is no one ski that does everything "the best". There is always a tradeoff somewhere.

• I have 0 tele experience and only a little true XC experience.
  I am (in the essence of full disclosure to be helpful and not immodest) an Expert+ downhill skier.

• The S-bounds are my first and only true BC ski and as such, I am not advocating that you buy them over the Voile's. Simply sharing what I have experienced.

• With a good boot and fixed heel, you would be fine skiing anything at a resort with these skis, but as montcalm implied, why would you.

• I've used them at the resort as my kids were learning because it's fun and different and makes things "interesting". Skiing moguls in crud on a black diamond in the "leather" boots with the heels locked on these is "very interesting". But doable. The same run in my Scarpa AT boots is truly a no-big-deal.

• Compared to my Rossi E88's and Atomic boots, these feel like toy skis at the resort. I would guess that ONE of the Rossi's with binding weighs more than both Fischers with bindings AND my soft boots combined.

• I bought the Fischers because doing BC laps with my resort skis means ALWAYS using skins. I hoped that the lighter weight and scales would reduce the effort, get me more glide and reduce the skins on/off game (Like stripperguy I am SLOW at this too)

• I also bought the Fischers because they were cheap and on-sale locally. Not because I concluded they were exactly what I wanted.

• If you are really going UP I doubt you will find a ski that completely eliminates the need for skins.

• If you are touring (which is more my speed these days) I love the improved glide over skins and the reduced weight. But they are not XC skis. And I still can't leave the skins at home, so there are always moments where you weigh side-stepping or switch-backing or hiking vs pulling the skins out. Just fewer of them.

• In the BC, like montcalm implied, the conditions and boots will make as much or more of a difference on the down than the skis.

• So, I don't know what you are skiing now, but I think for BC laps you will really see a huge benefit in the UP from a waxless base BC ski. You MIGHT even be able to avoid using skins, but you'll still need to bring them.

• Going down with AT boots and locked heels, these will not perform as well as other skis that are more downhill oriented but not so far off. It's certainly not going to turn into survival skiing. But conditions will dictate.

• Just a single point of reference, I have not been to Tuckerman's since I bought these skis. But I have thought a lot about what my setup would be. I'm sure I would not want to ski the headwall with these even if I carried my downhill boots. But I'm not sure I wouldn't either. Because, man! would I love to ski UP to lunch rocks on these in my "leather" boots.

[MrKawfey]

Also, just to address your more specific usage:
Trees: Depends on the snow, they are light and maneuverable and I love that in the trees.
Bumps: Depends on the snow, they are light and maneuverable and I love that in the bumps. But if you get in the backseat or get out of line, they are NOT forgiving. Better to hit the brakes and reset than to try to recover.
Powder: Depends on the snow (you see a trend here), I've yet to ski them in true fluffy sick-day type powder, but in slightly deep wet or heavy snow, or breaking crust, you will be fighting with these skis much more than a heavier, stiffer ski.

For me, I think the trade-off was worth it. Are the Voile's better at all of this? Maybe, probably. But the important point is I think the type of ski is worth it.

[MrKawfey]

Also, wik, I keep putting "leather" in quotes because I don't think either of my soft boots (the Bates or the Salewa's) are actually leather. They are some textile of the synthetic variety.

Also, Also wik, all this talk is making me itch to get out! Just not quite enough snow on the trails behind my house yet.

[stripperguy]

Thanks, guys.
FWIW, that 20 degree number, I picked off the rise and distance from a USGS topo map of the specific section where the usual skin track is the steepest. I need to use the highest riser step on my Fristche Free Ride bindings. Depending on how slick that track gets, I have slid backwards with my skins in the past.
My only ski boots now are some Scarpa or other, a dedicated 4 buckle AT boot with a high cuff and stiff forward flex (120 IFRC). I can ski lift served with them all day anywhere and they work well for me.
I still can ski any terrain in any condition, but most definitely prefer powder, trees and bumps, in that order. As far as lift served goes, if all there was to ski was groomers...I would stop skiing.

I still have a pair of Rossi Scratch's, mounted with 2 ton Marker AT bindings, that I machined fish scales into the bases. That didn't work at all.
So I was hoping I could find a fish scale bottomed ski that had big mountain performance, and something a bit wider than my 84 Watea's, to handle breakable crust a little better.

After looking at the skis in your links above, I don't have much hope.
I guess that's fine, I'll practice getting better at applying and removing my skins!