Black Diamond Efficient Series — Part 2 — The New Skis

19 Responses to “Black Diamond Efficient Series — Part 2 — The New Skis”

1. Kirt Brown January 9th, 2010 2:27 am

   I saw a picture of the Hansen Apex Ski Boot. I swear it is a knock off of a boot that Dynafit made in the 1970’s or 80’s. Could you ask at Dynafit if anyone remembers the boot and if there is a picture of it? My recollection that it was the same concept. If you find it, it would be kind of neat to Post a picture of it. Thanks Kirt Brown

2. Lou January 9th, 2010 6:46 am

   Kirt, I’m thinking of testing out some of those Apex boots, possibly by replacing sole block with a Dynafit compatible sole block.

   http://www.rockymountaingearguide.com/buyersguide/apex/index.htm

   Various people have tried the exoskel boot over the years. Paul Ramer for one. The problem was the older style skis that required more boot. Now, with skis that turn so easily, these exoskel boots might end up being very popular.

3. L.A.U. January 9th, 2010 4:02 pm

   I am disapointed. A 100mm ski is too fat for many snow conditions. Not versatile enough and a true pain when skinning up on hard snow traverse. Too wide for steep terrains most of time as well…..
   Radius is ok at best for the Drift, way too low for other models. Same thing as has for the width, you need a radius wider than 20m for skinning up and skiing steep terrains in a proficient way.

4. Tom Foster | Skiing Accommodation January 10th, 2010 1:05 am

   Awesome to see BD finally dropping the weights! That’s the main reason I have shied away from their skis so far. I mostly tour and weight makes a huge difference. Trab, Goode, and Dynafit have been leading in this category. Kudos to BD!

5. nick January 10th, 2010 1:10 pm

   I held up a pair of the Aspects the other day and they are indeed incredibly light!

   L.A.U.- I used to think that 100mm was too much for some conditions, but I’ve come to find that with a little practice, that size works fine for just about anything, and is obviously incredible in powder and variable conditions. That said, this ski seems to be intended as a backcountry powder ski, not a steep spring couloir ripping machine.

6. Fernando Pereira January 10th, 2010 11:37 pm

   @L.A.U. I have a pair of 100mm Karhu BC 100s that I’ve skied on everything from hard spring conditions to deep powder to piste. They are nimble for skis that wide. They are outstanding in powder, by far my favorite skis for powder tree skiing. And they hold an edge on all but the hardest conditions, although naturally I like a somewhat stiffer and narrower ski for hard conditions. The BC 100 is relatively old design (5 years?), so I’d expect BD to benefit from design and materials advances to make an even better ski of that type.

7. Ben W January 11th, 2010 10:12 am

   Why do they have so much sidecut? The dimensions look awful. I expect they’ll be incredibly inefficient on steep traverse, and hooky in variable snow. I agree with nick that a 100mm waisted ski is quite manageable for skinning once you’re used to it, but the huge tip and tail on the Drift will constantly push the center of the ski (and the bit of edge and skin that should be doing most of the gripping work) away from the snow. The wider the ski the more pronounces this effect becomes. I think a 138-110-123 skis would probable skin AND ski powder better than the Drift.

8. Lou January 11th, 2010 10:23 am

   Not sure I’d use a 100 waist ski as a daily driver, mostly because of the massive amount of snow weight they pick up while breaking trail or even following a powder skin track. But they do make skiing powder incredibly easy… I too have to wonder if that much sidecut is necessary. It might be what makes them much nicer on hardpack, but I don’t see how it would help in powder. Like any ski, they are a sum of their parts and time will tell if they become a game changing classic or just another interesting plank.

   Main thing that excites me about this whole iteration of BD is that they’ve trimmed some fat while making an effort to provide skis that ski well. Doing this is a much tougher engineering challenge than just making good skiing skis and not worrying about weight.

9. Phil January 11th, 2010 11:43 am

   Lou,

   I bought the Manaslus [178cm] last year with Vert Sts and love the set-up….here are my questions: How does the BD Aspect or even the Coomback compare to my Manaslu skis in differing snow conditions? Do they ski the same lenghts? I am looking for a second set of skis is why I am asking since as a Ski Patroller at a small area here in NE Oregon my Manaslus are eating **** on small rocks due to lack of snow…when and if the prices come down this spring I want to buy a second set-up…

   Thanks…Phil:::

10. Ben W January 11th, 2010 1:49 pm

    I use DPS Lotus 120’s (140-120-125) for powder tours. The tip rocker is subtle but starts very early. I find that I have less snow build up on the Lotuses than on my 99mm waisted skis, because the long tips (and width) make them plane up naturally. Skinning in deep, heavy snow with traditional camber fat skis, however, can feel a bit like walking in deep mud.

    I agree that it’s great to see BD get into making lightweight skiing gear, as it a market that could use more competition. But I wish they modeled the new line on the dimensions of their existing models, rather than creating new shapes best suited to skiing groomers.

11. Lou January 11th, 2010 2:17 pm

    Phil, I’d definitely give the BD skis a shot. But I’d really need a lot more time on them to give a good direct comparison. I may try to do that in February. Would be fun to get a Coomback, Manaslu and Drift or Aspect and get a couple of guys switching between the different models. Remind me in February — I’ll bet we could make it happen.

12. Randy February 14th, 2010 10:22 pm

    Lou,
    How does the Drift compare to the Havoc as far as ride? The Havoc is a great ski for technical terrain- is the Drift as snappy?

13. Randy February 14th, 2010 10:23 pm

    Lou,
    Actually meant to ask about the Aspect verse the Havoc- similar ride? As snappy in tech terrain?

14. Lou February 15th, 2010 7:36 am

    Randy, I’d say the Aspect is less snappy. They very different. Aspect is more of a mellow ride, in my opinion.

15. Randy February 15th, 2010 11:14 am

    Thanks Lou. I saw that the turn radius for the Aspect was shorter than the Havoc- thought it might mean a quicker ski.

16. Lou February 15th, 2010 12:13 pm

    Depends on what you mean by “snappy.” I thought you meant that it rebounds quickly when flexed… Aspect is definitely easy to turn. In terms of “quicker,” I don’t know… it’s pretty supple so that might make it have a less “quick” feel even though It’s got a different radius.

17. Randy February 15th, 2010 1:57 pm

    Thanks again Lou- I enjoy a quicker turn initiating type ski, which is sometimes at odds with BC skis. The Havoc has been a good compromise for me to date. Perhaps I’ll give the Aspect a try anyway.

18. nOrm February 28th, 2010 11:31 am

    I got to ski the 186 Drift yesterday at The Big LePowSki event. First, big thanks to everyone who made this event possible. It was really fun to meet so many diverse and interesting people, and the feel of the event was really genuine rather than some slick marketing strategy.

    I liked the Drift. I could see and feel how BD has evolved some of the designs from the 2010 skis. I currently have a pair of 175 Justice with Dynafits set up for powder touring, and I like them, but they don’t really carve turns, and the tails seem to just disappear (soft, tapered, and short).

    The Drift seems to address this with similar tip and tail width and a more pronounced sidecut (10mm less at the waist). This allows them to rail at high speed on hard snow, which feels sketchy on the (shorter) Justices. The early rise tip is awesome (similar on both models), it seems to plane above the snow surface effortlessly on both the skin up and the descent. The tail of the Drift feels much stiffer and wider than the Justice, and it looks like a new design that leans back toward traditional tails (similar across the whole efficient series).

    I would have preferred to demo the 176 length as it matches my own skis, but the 186 were a lot of fun in the variable in-bounds conditions. They didn’t seem especially light to me, but that was likely due to the length and the bindings (Fritschi). I didn’t get to tour on them, so I can’t comment on how the sidecut may effect steep traverses, but they do turn really nicely.

    I’ll give the skis two thumbs up with a big smile. For some, the Drift will be a happy medium between super fat, powder only boards and more traditional designs.

19. David March 30th, 2010 12:14 pm

    Question about Rossi Altibirds: With little experience BC but eager to get into it, I’m wondering if the Rossis will be too soft for BC and lift-served 75/25… I grew up skiing and racing, (20 years), but have fallen out of it for ~10 years… More or less taught myself to tele two years ago and went and bought the Rossis, but changed my mind and am looking at Dynafits and Garmonts. (Haven’t even unwrapped the Rossis yet.) Sorry for the off-topic post… Love your site!!

Got something to say?

Name (required)

Email Address (will not be published) (required)

Website

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail

Speak your mind

Anti-Spam Quiz: Which is warmer, winter or summer?

Due to comment spam we moderate most comments. Please do not submit your comment twice -- it will appear shortly after we approve it. Once you've had one comment published, your comments will be pre-approved and appear immediately if you're using the same computer and not blocking browser cookies. NOTE however that ALL comments with one or more links in the text will be held for moderation no matter what, again for spam prevention.