Thanks to Cripple Creek Backcountry for sponsoring this post. They’ve got skis of all shapes and sizes to fulfill all your ski touring dreams.
Full rockered 122mm waisted backcountry skis (Volkl BMT 122) may be going out of style, but sure were fun in deep and surfy Andes powder. Caveat is that a chair lift helped haul those behemoths to the start of this tour in Nevados de Chillan. Photo @ajmirabito
Shrinking waist sizes, mellowed rockers, focus on versatility
Unlike the majority of political climates in the world, it appears that we are finding middle ground and coming to the center on many ski shaping theories. Historically, 3-pin and older telemark bindings and boots limited the backcountry ski shape and size. Locked heel AT skiing, particularly with the advent of the tech binding and lightweight yet powerful AT boots, allowed skiers to push around big rockered planks and open up the throttle and turn shape. Did we go too far with it? Current releases would say so. Here’s a quick look at the current trends in touring ski shapes.
Waist sizes
Many brands seem to be tightening the belt a shade on the wide end of their touring lineups to the 105mm-110mm range. Fine by us. Anything above that has a host of tangential issues — sheer mass, skin weight, skin friction, etc. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a fan of big skis. I even experimented with a tech binding on an original K2 Pontoon (130mm underfoot) last season for lift assisted tours. For big touring days and maximum powder harvesting though, that 110mm top end is more than enough for my slashing needs. We don’t see a plethora of narrower (sub 90mm) planks hitting the market either. More of a depolarizing towards a median waist somewhere just under 100mm. The most popular slot in most manufacturers quivers seem to be that do it all 97-ish ski with mellow tip rocker and some early rise in the tail.
Some manufacturers are ditching the fat end of their lineup. The fattest ski of the Black Crows’ Freebird touring line, the 115mm waisted Anima Freebird, was replaced by the Ferox at 110mm. Perhaps others will soon be following suit.
Rocker vs. camber
The Anima to Ferox switch also exhibits the trend in rocker reduction. The Ferox is actually one of the more traditionally shaped fat skis we’ve seen released in some time.
Faction experimented with the uniquely rockered Prime series for a couple seasons, and are moving away from that this season. Faction Primes had more tail rocker than tip, making for a supremely pivotable ski. Lack of available tail power, along with a high price tag, probably did it in, though I will say I enjoyed the ease with which they skied.
DPS, venerable purveyors of rocker, released reduced rocker siblings for the Wailer line or even replacements (the Wailer 99 became the 100) with their C2 shaping. The goal here is more contact length (13% more in the new 110 compared to its sister, the 112 RP2).
The new C2 chassis Wailer 110 (right) with over a centimeter less tip rocker, as compared to the Wailer 112 Alchemist (left).
Rocker, albeit mellowed, is here to stay in the backcountry ski world, with fully rockered options still being released. Pivot ease in variable conditions and lowered input requirements from the boot make rocker great for wilderness skiing in softer-than-alpine boots. I have put a lot of time on the mellow yet fully rockered Dynafit Beast 108 over the past couple of winters. It is such a fun ski, though I will say I have to re-learn a bit of ski technique when the cambered skis come out for mountaineering season.
Taper
The difference between the widest part of the tip and tail, or taper, is an interesting ski stat rarely discussed. The uber popular Navis Freebird, as well as the Camox, are some of the most tapered touring skis, having a 20mm difference from tip to tail, versus the 10-15mm taper typical of the majority of skis out there. Is this taper a factor in the green machine’s popularity? I would say so, mainly due to versatility.
20mm of ‘taper’ in combination with a very normal rocker profile makes for a great ski. If you are reading this blog, please finish then go skiing.
Full sidewall, less carbon than most, and minimal tail rocker give the Navis Freebird great firm snow performance. Soft snow performance is retained by reducing the surface area of that otherwise traditional tail, allowing the tail to sink a bit more in relation to tip between turns (planing) and for getting the tail around mid turn (pivoting). Consider the aforementioned Pontoon, the most goofy and powder specific shape ever. It goes 160-130-120 tip to tail for a whopping 40mm of taper.
We will see if other brands adopt this shaping strategy– combining hardsnow performance with more taper.
Tip and tail profile
Ski shapers have been bringing the widest part of the tip and tail away from the ends of the ski for awhile now. In theory this makes for smoother turn initiation and exit, with a slight decrease in power. I think we’ve reached the max of that. Too far back and you lose much of the effective length that you are dragging around.
The DPS Wailer series has long been the poster child for this “elf-shoe” or 5 dimension shaping. The aforementioned C2 shape brings the widest part of the tip and tail back out towards the ends in addition to the reduced rocker.
Fairly different tip profiles between otherwise similarly sized skis- Volkl Katana V-Werks and DPS Wailer 112 RP2.
Turn radius
The turn radius spectrum is huge, and not trending in any particular way, it seems. My quiver is also all over the place ranging from 17m to 26m, though a 18-20m available arc seems to be the go to for those backcountry GS turns.
In general, the fatter and more rockered ski, the longer the radius. The purpose-built steep skiing Black Crows Solis is an exception. These 100mm waisted boards rock a 25m turn radius in order to prevent that jerky feeling when only the tip and tail are hooking up on a vertical wall. There’s not a lot of terrain in our neck of the woods for testing, our few steep drops that actually hold snow are too far out for a 1950 gram ski. I would love to spend some time in Cham on them though.
About as steep as it gets in good old CO. Still welcome terrain for GS turns on the medium sized 18m turn radius on my Tour1 Wailer 106s.
It is a great time to be a backcountry skier. There are so many manufacturers big and small, willing to play with shaping. Whether you methodically milk every hard earned turn out of a pitch or like to alter turn shapes and speeds, there is a ski shape out there for you. We are excited to see what brands have in store for the future, and will be reporting on next season’s skis soon.
23 comments
Long live the big fatties. Perhaps it’s a matter of what snowpack zone a person primarily skis in, but the advantages of truly fat skis outweigh any drawbacks for most of the true winter snowpack skiing season in our zone up in NW British Columbia. The trusty fully customized first gen K2 Darksides that are my daily driver for inbounds and backcountry skiing rarely see a snow condition that present compromises. The benefits are aplenty. The bigger snowshoe offers greater consistent float for breaking trail in deep snow or double penetration snow and this increase efficiency over a skinnier, lighter ski. In stiffer, deeper ski pen snow, narrower 115ish waisted skis just don’t plane, surf or pivot as well; they feel like cookie cutters. In the same conditions, all is ops normal for the Darksides. In melt freeze breakable crust conditions, they stay on top where skinnier skis punch through more of the time. The increased surface area allows for a damper, more smoothed out steamroller ride in hard crust conditions where the snowpack has been surran wrapped over all the macro and micro terrain features and this encourages a more pleasant, civilized skiing experience. Etc….etc…..
Between my Voile V6 and V8, I ski the former nine times out of ten. The latter comes out really only on the softest of days or if I go lift assist (or if I lose the V6 somewhere knock on wood)
Love my V8s! After reading this article though, I’m giving up hope on a V10 coming out anytime soon…
https://www.voile.com/voile-hyperdrifter-skis.html
Good post and follow-up – I’ve kept my Darksides in my “active” quiver for a couple of years now, I keep finding myself going back to that ski for so many different reasons. It keeps surprising me how versatile it is.
Luckily for Gary this is Wildsnow and not TGR, but for those of you with Radicals mounted up to your 02′ Spatulas he did not mean to call the Spatula “goofy” he meant “innovative” I assure you. Sadly as Colorado skiers we have no use for a tool as specialized and awesome as the Spatula.
hope this doesn’t signal a lack of future options. Maybe I should start stocking up. Light fat boards are a godsend if your’re lucky enough to ski where they shine.
1. breaking trail, as swissiphic mentioned above. when it’s deep, the advantage of float far outweighs any disadvantage of extra weight
2. on those same deep deep days, they let you ski the (perhaps only) safe low angle stuff without getting bogged down. Had enough days back in the day when the only skinny ski option was double poling straight downhill in 28 degree angle crotch deep snow. Much better to make turns, fatties let you do more of that.
3. early season. best “rock ski” ever – they let you float above the rocks, and above the tip-catching tibia-snapping buried deadfall.
4. don’t bet your life on it, but floating fat skis do stress buried weak layers just a little less than skinny sticks digging way down in there.
We agree again Buck!
#1 YEAH! Width plus a tall tip for the win at trailbreaking! My Vapor Floats at 117/189 (and the lightest skis made) are the BEST snow shoes ever made, hands down!
#2. Low angle performance! My most recent tour, bottomed out of the turntable slopes, then a quarter mile of super deep snow to descend to the creek crossing. Wound have been walking down that very low angle stuff if I had 105 underfoot!
#3 The tips on my Floats are 1 1/2” taller than the rocketed Wailers or Voiles. It looked weird when I first saw them but I’m totally sold on the safety aspect!
#4 Yup!
#5 (to continue) Acceleration and braking. Especially in the trees, I love being able to pick up speed as a glade opens, then dump that speed quickly as I approach a tight spot. Slarving a turn or two is first method and works best in shallower powder. Driving weight foreword to get the tips well down into the deep snow is one alternative. This was my go to back in the days of 205 Hexcel Sundances. The large rocketed tips provide a pretty good brake however, even though you’ll never get ‘em as deep!
#6 Another alternative/advantage with the wider skis is being able to shift weight more to the outside ski without burying it and tripping. I use this to shorten turn radius and drive that one ski deeper for braking. This tactic, I use more in open spaces and higher speeds. Those higher speeds are a true blessing of wider and longer skis. Ya’ just not gonna get the same thrill on skinny 170 somethings!
#7 EFFORT! Although there are conflicting aspects here. I’m convinced that, overall, my legs keep far more strength in reserve on a longer, wider skis out touring. Even on a broken skin track, a wider ski gives a more stable platform to balance on, allowing those little twitch muscles to relax more. Most speed control aspects take less muscle effort than shorter, skinny skis.
#8. Following/flowing with varied terrain: One of my skiing partners, I’ll call him Mr Turns, had always toured on old short skinny skis – 70cm or so. He could ski short radius turns in the fall line flawlessly, like magic in any snow condition. He would do really well down scrappy terrain with crowding obstacles. But the disadvantages of those skinny skis was quite obvious to me, especially considering that his skiing skills are well beyond mine or most we ski with. We harped on him for years to get wider, modern skis. He finally did.. Although he has had some difficulty adapting, he’s now a whole different skier, on a second pair of modern skis. ‘Tis a thing of beauty to see him make medium radius turns, following the twists and turns of varied terrain! He was never really “stuck” in the fall line, just on skis that performed best there instead of performing well in all manner of turns!
Great to see the defense of the wide planks here! Funny I expected a backlash about my lack of discussion of narrow offerings… @Rudolph I love the goofy Pontoon shape- the ability to drive it forward or land forward in deep pow like you are skiing a groomer is unreal. But give me a motorized assist and a big boot for the McConkeys. Spent plenty of lift time on a 195cm 120mm waisted ski as well in my patrolling days. I think we will see a slight return to the larger shapes as materials continue to improve strength to weight ratios. And they aren’t gone by any means, just seeing a reduction trend. FYI my quiver currently goes from 97->130 with 3 skis 110 plus (goofy pontoon still on the rack).
We may not bury a 2′ snow stake every storm here in CO, but we do ski powder snow from October until June, and often with our infamous depth hoar making early season feel like a wrong side up 3 foot dumper. Width and rocker are your friend here too. Totally agree with Buck that early season/rock boards should be one of the fatter of the quiver for insulation from lurking hazards and low angle noodling.
I do think the trail breaking advantage of size is eventually offset by fitness, but also is made mute by a breaking rotation with partner(s) or multi-lapping a skin track. Hard to beat that feeling of surfing and then the ability to launch tidal waves of snow up in front of you. No argument here with downhill advantage, though trading waist size for rocker retains some of that feel.
As steep as it gets? Seriously?
Operative word being ‘about’, but yeah as far as sustained pitch goes. This is the X-rated couloir on the north face of Sayers Benchmark. Sustained low-mid 40 degree pitch with a high 40s roll in the middle. There are only a handful of high 40-50 degree pitches in the state that come in.
Meant to add a “+” in there, couple of handfuls of high 40s-50+ degree pitches out there tempting the CO ski mountaineers.
In this land of persistent deep layers fatter skis with deep rocker lines make skiing sub 30 degree trees MUCH more fun. They accelerate quicker and will make a greater variety of turn shapes at low speeds Come spring when the snowpack consolidates I pretty much put them away. Narrower skis are plenty maneuverable on steeper terrain and less work going up hill.
I’d also add that there are excellent, highly versatile skis that have lots of tip and tail taper. DPS wailer 99 and 112 aren’t on the list. They also have a ton of rocker and sidecut. As a result they are easy to turn and make it near impossible to bury a tip but also hooky and unpredictable at speed. The effects of any one dimension of a ski can’t be interpreted independently of the others.
This is a spot on comment, BENWLS. Low speed planing and turning is important and burying tips in the backcountry is no-good. I’d add to your ski list- the Voile V6 has had a -20mm taper for years, with solid rocker profile. It skis amazing and is almost immune stuffing tips, even for this mediocre skier, forward leaning skier. The rocker, the skinnier tail, the overall flex of the ski, makes for an amazing versatile and safe combination that is downright silly fun to ski. I can take them down tight east coast tree lines or open them up in bigger mountains. Solid and smooth, they are my favorite backcountry specific skis for all these reason. Voile gets it!
@ Benwls
DPS are actually making skis with better dimensions now, but yeah those Wailers were ordinary skis in anything but powder or smooth corn.
I’d argue that the best backcountry ski in the past 5 years was the ZG108. It’s not as demanding as some would say. It has the sidecut for steep firm snow. You can go pretty damn fast and they won’t fold. They aren’t quite as user friendly as more modern shapes in deeper power, but they’re more than capable. It’s reliable, predictable, and the ski I’d reach for more often than not…although I’ve found the Wildcat Tour 108 to be a great alternative if you want something a bit more playful.
Great post!
I am flummoxed with the recent trend to reduce the rocker and lengthen camber in this particular class ski. It does little to add to the backcountry skiing experience. Reducing the Shmearability Coefficient and the pivoting ability seems counterintuitive when we are confronted with tight spaces and variability in the snow while touring. I want every available tool to get me through whatever traps may be waiting for me in uncultivated terrain. For example the 17/18 Camox Freebird was a really nicely balanced ski with a decent snowshoe up front (for lack of a better word) and a wonderful rock/cam/rock combination with a nice tip-to-tail taper. It was mild and well mannered and planed easy and shmeared well. In 18/19 and onwards BC reduced the rocker and lengthened the camber. Sure, the radius went down from 18 to 17 but this really only becomes apparent, or means anything really, when carving up the groomed. The loss of rocker reduced the pivoting ability, something that I find important especially in northern New England where I really enjoy a 90-ish waist but am confronted with super tight trees, roots and branches hovering inches below the snow surface, and so on. Don’t get me wrong, I like some camber for inbounds skiing and firm days, but if I wanted more, longer camber I’d get an inbounds specific ski.
This lengthening of the camber and reduction of rocker on this class ski makes sense in terms of who the actual, and very large, target market is: people who would like the cachet of calling themselves an “AT skier” or what-have-you but rarely wander beyond the sidecountry, and mostly ski inbounds or skin uphill. The longer camber improves the inbounds experience on manicured snow and makes for a happy customer.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this, but to re-engineer the ski to make it more inbound friendly does not necessarily make it a better touring ski.
Incidentally as another example, I recently purchased a pair of BC Ova Freebirds sight unseen for springtime corn in the PacNW, New England, etc. I wasn’t expected much rocker, but I was certainly shocked at how low rise the tip was in general, a full centimeter less than other skis in this waist width, combined with a forward mounting point (for easier turn initiation since there is little rocker). I would be very wary wandering into the backcountry with this ski for fear of stuffing a tip in a surprise pocket of rotten corn or hooking the tip under a branch. That being said, it’s a fun ski for the groomers! (The titanal mounting area is also very small, a standard tele binding won’t fit in it, and moving any AT binding aft would quickly run out of re-enforced area… making it a coin toss if someone wants to mount them back and run the risk of pulling out). Again, it’s sold as a touring ski, but it really is an inbounds skin-up ski-down on manicured slopes ski. They do ski really nice (I mounted them almost 5cm back! and they still ski nice), so I’m keeping them, but as for as backcountry skiing goes I see them as a trip hazard. A higher tip would make them more ideal.
A touring ski in this width is well served with generous and balanced rock/cam/rock, taper, and high tips to get over obstacles and manky snow. Some ski makers are resisting the call to reduce rocker and add camber. Thank you and chapeau to them! I find that the size of the softgoods department at a ski company can be a fun indicator as to whom they are actually catering too.
Hi Chuck thanks so much for the detailed comments. Interesting take on the Camox which lines up with my experience, I have a pair of them and am struggling to fit them in to the quiver. I bought them to ski with an Alien RS in the spring time but found them to be a little too burly for the boot. Then all of a sudden they are over powered with a bigger boot. The one place they actually shine is- trenching on a groomer. I think a mid weight touring boot like F1 is probably they way to utilize the ski, but it sure would benefit from some more early rise.
Fun ‘study” on the softgoods department vs ski design correlation, can you elaborate further? I’m assuming the bigger the clothing line, the less backcountry savy the skis?
And for the rocker reduction resistance (RRR?) movement, check out the little Utah company WNDR skis. They give the option for a generous rocker-camber rocker- profile or full rocker for each ski. I am testing a pair of the cambered 110s currently and will have a review mid January.
Just to add to your comment, I started skiing the redesigned Camox Freebird with a F1 boot this year and so far it’s been a match made in heaven. It’s a ski that doesn’t do anything great, but can get your through whatever you encounter. I’ve never been one to buy into the mythical quiver-of-one idea, but for a touring ski this is pretty darn close. I prefer a more traditional camber even on my fattest of resort skis though so perhaps it is just user preference. Of course, this boot works well with most skis in this size range and there’s a reason so many people have ditched their beef boots in favor of the F1s.
Chuck! A great, detailed post on a ski I have greatly enjoyed in the BC over the last few years. Now as I digest your detailed post I am reminded of the 80s and my setup back then. It consisted of a Rossi GS ski with Silveretta 404s, or it’s predecessor and Dachstein rear entry AT boots. At one point I even mounted up a pair of vintage Hexcel skis with the Silverettas and what an advantage I had on the skin up. But at the end of the day we learned to dance with who brung us and not overthink the skis…just enjoy the BC and not fret the details my friend! BUT, I am fretting the details and going back to a ski in the 88 to 90 under foot range as I like the quicker turning ski and it still works well in the variable crud…
This matches with what I’ve been using over the last years, for sure. I’ve got some of those weird shapes in my hut – but I haven’t taken some of them out for two years. I’m really starting to feel like all I need is a light ski with a slight rocker at around 100, and a short, cambered ski at around 82 that is as light as I can get it. With those two choices – I’m going to almost always have a great day – and I don’t have to maintain 8 pairs of skis and make a ton of decisions about which ones to grab.
Even boots – which used to be even more of a minefield – have gotten simple. There is enough power in a TLT to drive even bigger-ish skis for me, and they are so light I can take them on the longest tours too. I’m slowly retiring everything else as they wear out, and I’m not finding myself wanting to buy anything else.
And then there is splitboarding, you ride a 125-137 waist “ski” ever day based on your foot size and never think to change up widths for different snow conditions. Unfortunately for many boards are made too short, and of course they don’t release either, so there’s that 🙂
Minor nit pick… the DPS Wailer 100 (Alchemist and Powderworks-Tour versions) and 112 have RP shaping, not C2. The Wailer 110, Wailer 106, and the Cassiar line have C2 shaping. The limited edition Powderworks Wailer 100 C2 from a year or two ago had C2 shaping. They are orange, not yellow, no longer produced, but a few are still floating around for sale. Yes, their naming conventions are confusing now. More to the point, great article about the shaping trends! My favorite DPS skis for a daily driver are the Cassiar 95s, with C2 shaping. Pretty trad ski, nice strong tail, supportive and snappy.
I see very little discussion on impact of width when touring – particularly long traverses on firm snow. The wider the plank, the more uncomfortable a traverse becomes. For multi-day trips I think 95mm is probably at the upper end of the spectrum. Something like the Black Crows Orb Freebird seems to be a good balance between uphill & downhill for touring.
Comments are closed.