Welcome to Louis (Lou) Dawson's backcountry skiing information opinion website and e magazine. Lou's passion for the past 45 years has been alpinism, climbing, mountaineering and skiing -- along with all manner of outdoor recreation. He has authored numerous books and articles about
backcountry skiing and is well known as the first person to ski down all 54 of Colorado's 14,000-foot peaks, otherwise known as the
Fourteeners! Books and free back country news and information here, and tons of Randonnee rando telemark info.
All material on this website online magazine is copyrighted, the name WildSnow is trademarked.. Permission required for reproduction, electronic or otherwise.
This includes publication and display on other websites by whatever means. PLEASE SEE OUR COPYRIGHT and TRADEMARK INFORMATION.
Backcountry skiing is a dangerous sport. You may be killed or severely injured if you do any form of randone, randonnee and randonnée skiing. The information and news on this website is intended only as general information. While the authors and editors of the information on this website make every effort to present useful information, due to human error the information, text and images contained within this website may be inaccurate, false, or out-of-date. By using, reading or viewing the information provided on this website, you agree to absolve the owners of Wild Snow as well as content contributors of any liability for injuries or losses incurred while using such information. Furthermore, you agree to use any of this website's information, maps, photos, or binding mounting instructions or templates at your own risk, and waive Wild Snow its owners and contributors of any liability for use of said items for backcountry skiing or any other use. 
Amazingly light, but with rocker and the design features we expect for 2012–not to mention made in America. Pretty cool.
Tested some great skis at Loveland last week, but no Voiles were present. I guess the skis I tested that were most similar (though somewhat different) would have been either the BD Justice or the Dynafit Stoke. What I’m discerning from skiing the newest skis is that rocker designs, coupled with multi-faceted sidecuts, handle hard conditions much better than some earlier iterations (like with the Justice). I’m guessing the Vectors are no different. Other skis I skied are: BD Verdict, K2 Coomback, and Dynafit Broad Peak. They are all amazing skis with widely divergent applications in mind. The Sidestash was a high-speed bulldozer that was the stiffest of the lot and rode like speed was the order of the day. Fantastic ski, would be unreal in soft snow. The Verdict was similar. Loved the new sidewall/metal sandwich construction. Super versatile. The Coomback felt similar but lighter, likely a quiver-of-one for the backcountry afficionado. The Broad Peak was unbelievably light, super quick, and super skinny: a long-touring wonder. Perhaps one of the coolest aspects of the ski demo was the bindings offered. There were Marker F12s and Griffons, Dynafit Verticals, and even the cool Plum Guides. Rumor has it Glen Plake uses ‘em. Anyway, they looked and worked quite slickly. The whole ski demo was a great success–even if it was a crazy whirlwind of a day.
Lou, would I be a 170 or a 180 in a Vector? I am 5’10″, 185 so that would point me toward the 180. But I will only be using these in spring and summer conditions making short turns in the backcountry, so I am wondering if I can go 170 to save weight? Or would the short 170 length combined with the rocker compromise my fore/aft stability too much? In anything deep I and soft I will be on my DPS w112s. Thanks.
I’ve been skiing the 180 Voile Vector BC and after handing them around to a few friends of a variety of skills and ability levels it is clear that you should not hesitate to go long with these skis. I’ve been loving the Vector BC as a Dynafit Spring Mountaineering tool, long low elevation cascade approaches are perfect without skins on the BC. Skiing the fun stuff is no different with the pattern base once the snow gets soft of the pitch gets steep. Awesome tool!
I got a chance to ski tom’s 170 vectors today. Groomers and some beat up, crusty, firm off piste. They did fine on the groomers but it was hard to balance fore/aft in the beat up snow. I will go with the 180.
Over the past few years I’ve experimented quite a bit with how short I can ski with lots of rocker, tip rise, and tail rise. The need to use a longer ski is usually pretty obvious, especially in the case of a ski with a twintip style tail such as the Vector. So, Harpo, yeah, I’m confirming your take. Lou
So does a heavier person help dampen a light weight skis “chatter” potential on hardpack/crust ? Does a lot of rocker plus light weight make for extra vibration on that type of surface?
Brian, it’s not so simple. Too many different factors interact. A heavier person will find a given ski to perform differently than if a lighter person is on it, but whether that involves less vibration of the ski would depend on the model of ski, and so forth.
Heavy guy opinion on ski chatter: technique, not light ski weight, results in deflection or ski chatter of a given ski, at least until one skis harder than the ski is capable eg design for shape, flex, stiffness, and torsional characteristics.. A heavy guy overpowers a ski sooner than a less heavy person, but conversely bends and turns a ski with less input if using proper technique. When a ski is overpowered then one can cause chatter and deflection. Torsional rigidity and flex characteristics play into deflection and chatter. The tune of your edges will play into deflection and chatter. The leverage or ‘power’ of your boot is as well a factor.
Smooth carving results from matched skis and boots, the proper ski for hard or soft snow, proper edge tuning, but first and foremost- technique.
Thanks for the feedback, Lou and Rando. I guess for my height, I’m not a big person and I’m sure my technique can be improved. I’m looking at skis that have width and rocker (maybe more tip only?) and that cut back on the weight. But I think I’m more seeking responsiveness than a real need for less touring weight.
So, 2 thumbs up for this ski as a powder ski? Are the tip and tail really soft?
I’d call the total ski to be on the softer side, but I don’t flex out the tip or tail as being noticeably “soft” in comparison to other skis here at HQ next to my desk.
I’m sold. thanks Lou!
Hi Lou,
Do you think this ski is designed for aggresive skiing? Could it be used at a resort in all conditions? Or is it just made to be a lightweight touring ski to cover a lot of ground? I live in Nelson BC and am looking for a light set up that can still rip the steeps at Whitewater.
Also my skins are cut for 90mm skis, would they still do fine on these 96mm Vectors? I would get the 180 ski.
Thanks!!!
Mike, I’m not a big fan of forcing lighter weight backcountry skis to be resort skis for other than moderat use, so my answer would be, please don’t ask that question (grin).
I would want wider skins myself, but it depends on type of skin tracks and your style.
Lou
VECTOR TESTING Sadly, we have ideal ski testing conditions here right now. Uphilling at closed resort, 4,000 vert on Vector yesterday. Ice and man-made stripe of death, along with wind blasted breakable crust on upper reaches. I’ll admit, I was wondering if I still knew how to ski after flailing my way down. Anton, where is he when I need him (grin)?
But yeah, same conclusion as Anton in his review
http://www.wildsnow.com/5377/voile-vector-ski-review/
These are really good skis. If you don’t mind rocking something fairly narrow, I’d put them in the top tier of modern planks for human powered vert. Especially in terms of weight vs performance, and multi-condition versatility.
As for how they tour? Yeah, any rockered or tip rise ski can take some getting used to as to skin grip, especially on rough packed trails or traversing. But I’ve tested rockered skis extensively now, and don’t feel this is any sort of deal breaker. You get used to it, and anyone doing extensive skinning in weird or icy conditions should be bringing along ski crampons anyway.
Did you get a chance to test the BC model? I was thinking that ski would be a great option for the Gore Range and knocking out long approaches to steep couloirs. What maximum slope angle do you think the fish scales would be able to climb?
Frankly, I’m not interested. Perhaps someone can chime in?
^ This has been discussed/argued at great length elsewhere.
IME, fishscales, in suitable conditions – not dry powder or ice – will climb acceptably (when good technique is used) up to about the gradient where one would use the lower of the Dynafit heel elevator heights. It is most unlikely they will climb anything steeper without lots of switchbacking. If the snow or the skier’s technique is not suitable the angle that can be climbed comfortably will be less. Note: I have not skied the Vector BC, but these observations have applied to a number of other skis used over many years.
Basically, if you want to climb anything steep you will need skins, whether you have fishscales or not.
Are skins compatible with the Vector BC fish scale bases? Wouldn’t the gaps between the scales reduce the holding power of the glue on the skins. What wax product should be used o;n the fish scales to prevent icing?
In practice, skins stick fine to pattern bases, whether positive or negative. In very wet snow I suppose they *might* let go a little earlier, but I’ve never noticed any difference. (If the snow is all that wet then skins aren’t going to stick well to a flat base either.)
There are a few choices to prevent the scales icing:
1. Hot wax whole ski and brush scales before the wax hardens
2. Crayon on any glide wax (even sunscreen often works in an emergency)
3. Use paste wax
Basically, I’ve never found any extra problems with using skins on a pattern base than with a smoth base, but YMMV.
Lou, anyone…
Just wondering if you might be reviewing the rossi bc 125, similar to the vector bc, but billed as a nordic board so i’m having trouble finding out if its very skiable. If anyone out there has tried this ski lemme know. I’m looking into something like this for longer approaches but not wanting a noodle for shred time.
Thanks
Nope, no plans for that.
The BC125 has had positive comments at the telemarktips forum, but note that there is a limited range of sizes available; it might be worth your while to look there. If you want long skis it will not suit.
I’m interested in the vectors. Any opinions about skinning with tail rise? I’ve heard anywhere that grip is better with flat tails, but I could be wrong. Any Info?
Thanks!
I feel no noticeable uphill grip differences when skinning with Vectors vs Hi5′s or Dynafit Guides. I feel better forward glide with some skis but that is a function of the skin itself.
Hi Lou,
I own a pair of bd kilowatts 174′s. I want more of a mountaineering ski and will demo the vectors tomorrow. How different is the vector from the kilowatt? I have fritschi diamir freerides on the bd’s and am considering Dynafit radical st and Dynafit One boots. I want to do a western hut link up next winter but am a north eastern based skier with eyes on Katahdin and western or bc ski tours. You are the man by the way as if u did not know ! Ski on!!
Tx in advance.
Dave
Hi Lou,
Would love your input on…
I own a pair of BD kilowatts 174?s. I want more of a mountaineering ski and thinking of narrower waisted Dynastar Cham 87′s or Voile Vectors. How different are these from the kilowatt? I have fritschi diamir freerides on the BD’s and am considering Dynafit Radical ST’s and Dynafit One boots as have demo’d both and love them. I want to do a western hut link up next winter but am a north eastern based skier with eyes on Mt. Katahdin with a long slog in and western or bc ski tours. You are the man by the way as if u did not know ! Ski on!!
Tx in advance.
Dave D.
Hey Dave, thanks for the kind words. Last time I skied Kilowatt it was a WAY different ski than something like a Kastle 87 (which I’ve skied on quite a bit, and love.)
Put those Dynafit One boots on a Kastle 87 with tech bindings, and you’ll feel like you can rail the hard pack and bounce through the crud and powder. They are quite the beautiful ski.
I’ve not skied the Cham 87, I’ve gotten good reports on it AND it won Alpin magazine review. That is huge. It’s become kind of a cult ski but probably deserves it. Since Alpin gave the Kastle honors for being an “all around” winner. I’m pretty sure the Kastle is lighter.
Not sure we’ll be testing the Dynastars, the company was not very helpful. But that’s the way it goes with real ski tests, since we keep the ski for a while and do lots of testing, not all companies have the resources to loan us skis for more than a few hours as they can do with magazine reviews.
Kastle 87 scores 86 on our surface vs weight indexing, which is same as skis such as La Sportiva Lo5 and is above average in weight, though still light enough for efficient touring since our sale is biased to the lightweight end of ski weights. Where it’s good in weight is in the weight vs length index where it scores an 8.5 which is the same as a K2 Wayback and a bit better than Lo5. Overall weight of a 177 Kastle 87 is 1504 grams, which again is a good “average” weight spec for a backcountry ski. In other words, with Kastle 87 you get excellent downhill performance with reasonable weight. While Dynastar has made it tough for us by not supplying some evaluation skis, I did gather some weight info and as far as I can tell the Cham 87 is heavier than the Kastle. Alpin review indicates this as well. Worst thing about Kastle is the black color, which ices quite easily.
Lou