The WNDR Vital 100 is fun and playful in some classic powder snow.
In the last few years we have seen more and more ski manufacturers dedicating their resources to backcountry ski design and production. The cutting edge of backcountry skiing is no longer delivered exclusively from boutique companies making gear out of necessity but now growing into the mainstream. The investment is paying off as the design and construction of light-midweight skis are also delivering on performance and exponentially growing access to the sport.
Largely absent from this development is an innovation in the materials used in ski construction. When I first heard about WNDR Alpine, a boutique ski brand partnered with Berkley biomaterials company Checkerspot, my alarm went off for corporate greenwashing. By using sustainable biomaterials, WNDR claimed to make more sustainable skis. Was it worth considering? Or was WNDR just trying to get in my wallet?
Using sustainably manufactured biomaterials in the place of traditional fossil-based oils does have the potential to be an innovative leap in product development. So I took a closer look at the WNR Vital 100, which joined the brand’s flagship WNDR Intention 110 for 20/21. In this review, the cambered version of the WNDR Vital 100 was tested along with the minimalist Black Diamond Helio 145 binding for a setup that honors WNDR’s vision for a light backcountry ski that showcases the use of innovative biomaterials. (Edit: A reader has pointed out that a full-featured binding would be more appropriate for this ski. This ski deserves an opportunity to be skied with a binding that features elasticity and play. Something like the Marker Alpinist, G3 Ion, Fritschi tecton, or Marker Kingpin would better honor the intention behind this ski.)
Materials construction
WNDR’s big innovation is the use of plant-based oils derived from microalgal cells over an industry-standard use of fossil-fuel based polyurethane. This algal oil shows up in a couple of places in the ski, in the stringers that run the length of the ski as well as a liquid poured sidewall.
This is a big step away from the standards materials list used by most ski manufacturers. Paulownia core? Carbon? Fiberglass? Aramid? TPU? ABS? Check, check, and check. So often it’s the same stuff reused in different branded packages. WNDR Alpine is betting big on biomaterials, under the guiding thesis that the use of biomaterials from microalgae will not impair performance, but improve it.
The Vital 100 features a full sidewall with a friendly reminder.
For the WNDR Vital 100, this use of biomaterials shines most brightly in the sidewall construction. WNDR Alpine describes this use of biomaterials as a “cast polyurethane that protects the Algal Core and delivers damping and resistance to impact over edge”. The use of this unique biomaterial also allows WNDR to pour the sidewall biomaterial into the mold and let it adhere into the porous aspen wood core. This innovation effectively creates an incredibly strong bond with the core and delivers a ski with great structural integrity. Functionally, the guiding premise of this ski implies that this construction of a durable and rigid sidewall will translate to supreme edge hold. (See more in Gary Smith’s review of the WNDR Intention 110)
I welcome any brand to push the envelope when it comes to using innovative materials and diversifying the supply chain. The fact that these materials are more sustainably sourced than the alternatives only adds to the excitement around the work that WNDR Alpine is doing. It can only mean good things for the future of skiing.
Shape
Out of the box the first thing that strikes me is the shape — a straight side cut and rounded tip and tail akin to a freeride ski. Looking at the sidecut there is very little change in width from tip to tail lending to a long 24 meter turning radius. This shape is common for freeride boards and typically points to a playful ski.
The shape of the Vital 100 points to a playful ski, but proved capable in more demanding settings as well.
This isn’t a big surprise, as WNDR Alpine is the product of Matt Sterbenz, the founder of 4FRNT Skis. The shape of the WNDR Vital 100 is reminiscent of 4FRNTs line of backcountry oriented skis, particularly the 4FRNT Raven or Hoji. Myself not being a person to seek out reverse-cambered skis, I found it welcome to have a 100mm waisted ski with that downhill, hard-charging pedigree and the option for a positively-cambered profile.
How do they ski?
With initial concern for corporate greenwashing, the question arises: do biomaterials provide a noticeable service in this ski construction? Or is it an innovation used to build hype around new plant-based materials? After some time on these skis I am inclined to say that performance is not at all hindered by the use of bio-materials but am still unclear if the overall performance is actually enhanced.
Hopping on these skis it becomes immediately clear how the weight is distributed. The weight is centered underfoot, providing an unexpectedly nimble moment of inertia. Despite the longer turning radius and more directional feel, the weight distribution of the ski still contributes to a playful feel.
The skis maintained a balanced, stable feeling in a variety of conditions.
Beyond this first-impression, dampening and stiffness become the focal point of the conversation related to the benefits of these new biomaterials. WNDR advertises the use of biomaterials with a capability to increase dampening and torsional rigidity. These two variables have also proved hard to describe while on this particular ski. There is nuance to the ski, it’s one that is definitely not soft but also not incredibly stiff. Perhaps that dynamic is due to the stark difference between tip and tail. The tip is relatively soft and dampens variable snow relatively well. At high speeds I did not find the sort of tip chatter that I would come to expect from a similar light-midweight touring ski. This ski does not achieve the level of dampness that an alpine ski could offer, nor would I expect it to in a light ski. In variable snow I noticed that this ski gets thrown about and requires a high degree of input to control.
(Edit: I do want to acknowledge a comment made by a reader that this could certainly be due to a mismatch between a lightweight and minimalist binding and an 1856 gram ski. A fully featured binding paired with this ski could improve the performance of the ski in variable snow.)
The tails, on the other hand, are stiff enough to provide a solid edge grip on hardpack. However, this strong sidewall is somewhat negated by the presence of a significant tail rocker that softens the tail release and reduces responsiveness.
While these skis can indeed hold an edge, that is not the full story when it comes to steep skiing. WNDR describes these skis as “a precision tool for situations where edge hold is paramount”. If the WNDR Intention 110s are the surfy boards for powder skiing, then the WNDR Vital 100 must be the lycra-wearing, couloir-skiing, always reliable, ski-mountaineering cousin. When thinking about consequential jump-turns in steep terrain I am looking for a snappier turn finish which I don’t quite get with these skis. A snappier turn finish that I would get in a ski with a minimal tail rocker. It seems as if WNDR has had a hard time letting go of the 4FRNT’s playful design principles in this ski that is supposed to be a “precision tool” in edge hold.
That leaves with a final question in talking about ski performance. What is this ski best used for?
Intended skier and use
The style of skiing that a positive-camber and reverse-camber construction delivers will cater to two very different kinds of skiers. WNDR Alpine offers their skis with both profile options. Personally, my style of skiing is more suited to a positively-cambered ski. The positive-camber helps initiate the turn with a little “pop” which is very useful when skiing steep terrain. But there are also those that are willing to forgo a long effective edge and look for playful performance in bottomless snow. For those folks you can find the reverse-cambered version of this ski.
The only issue is that I would not put this ski into the “powder ski” category. While other 100mm waisted skis can dip their toes into this category, there is not enough width in the tip or tail to really get that sort of floatation in bottomless snow.
The Vital 100 is a versatile addition to the quiver.
That being said, I think that this ski is more versatile than the way WNDR describes the Vital 100. I wouldn’t call this a “precision tool” but instead a durable hot-shot of a ski that can handle a variety of conditions and skiing styles. In my mind, this is a March/springtime ski equipped for a variety of snow conditions.
Weight and class comparison
Overall, WNDR Vital 100 falls neatly in the middle of its class of midweight, functional backcountry skis. This is not the lightest ski, but it makes up for that in performance. Two comparables that come to mind are the Atomic Bent Chetler 100 and the Salomon MTN Explore 95, although with a less defined ski-mountaineering shape and profile. (Edit: One of our readers accurately pointed out that there are other comparables in both in design and intention: The Black Crows Navis Freebird, Faction gent 2.0, Blizzard Zero G 105, Kaestle TX103, Dynafit Beast 98, and the Scott Superguide 95. All of which come in lighter than the WNDR Vital.)
Gripes
True to the playful history of the ski, the tail is rockered and rounded. While the tail does seem to be reinforced for the daily wear and tear of backcountry skiing, the rounded tail is just not conducive for a skin clip. I’ll probably take a file to the tail in order to carve out a little notch to accommodate my skins. For a ski that is supposed to be designed for the backcountry, this is a small detail that is clearly missing.
A tail clip notch is a helpful addition for touring skis.
The final word
For a company entering their sophomore year, the use of bio-materials is effectively functioning as an initial proof of concept. WNDR Alpine is showing that it can indeed use biomaterials in a ski without sacrificing performance. The innovations in sidewall construction with the biobased cast method have a noticeable and positive effect on sidewall strength and rigidity. This success with innovative materials leaves plenty of room for WNDR Alpine to continue evolving. I am eager to see how WNDR’s lineup of skis evolves over the next few years and what niches the company can fill in the backcountry skiing world.
SPECS
Available lengths: 169cm, 176cm, 183cm, 190cm
Weight: 1856g (183cm)
Ski Dimensions: 126-100-118 mm
Radius: 24 meters
Effective edge: 148.3 cm
Shop for Vital 100
Testing location: Aspen and Marble, Colorado
Snow Conditions: Powder, Piste, Variable Crud, Steep and Icy Chutes.
Skier Height/Weight: 5’11 – 150 lbs
Binding: Black Diamond Helio 145 mounted at center
Ski Boots: Atomic Backland Carbon and Dynafit Hoji Pro Tour
Aidan Goldie is a ski mountaineer and avalanche professional based out of Colorado. When he is not climbing and descending peaks in the American West, he is an outdoor educator, working with schools and nonprofits guiding groups through the Colorado wilderness. Follow his work in developing a more equitable mountain ethic: @aidan.goldie
11 comments
Thanks for the review. The weight makes this ski impractical for BC travel for me. For the same weight I can drag by K2 Coombacks with 104 underfoot. In comparison, the Kastle TX 98 and S. Mtn Explore 95 are 1,425-ish grams. I see your quiver includes Dynafit Beast 98 and Mtn Explore 95 can you expand by comparing and contrasting with those two skis?
Over the last decade of reading, I’ve always enjoyed Lou’s thoroughness and technical care within his reviews. I’m very confused by Aidan’s review and his attempt to categorize this ski. No offense to Aidan or WS, but I don’t think this review is acceptable to publish in its current state and needs to be rewritten. WildSnow owes its readers, its shop and its larger CCB brand the due diligence of higher quality, edited reviews that have substance and detail instead of magazine-style, ski, test reflections. My critique, again no offense intended:
“the WNDR Vital 100 was tested along with the minimalist Black Diamond Helio 145 binding for a setup that honors WNDR’s vision for a light backcountry ski” – It seems odd to mount a 1850g ski, with no lightweight intentions, with an ultra-light, minimalist binding with no dampening or elasticity features. I would expect a sizeable chunk of this skis intended audience to be inclined toward those features.
“a straight side cut and rounded tip and tail akin to a freeride ski. Looking at the sidecut there is very little change in width from tip to tail lending to a long 24 meter turning radius. This shape is common for freeride boards and typically points to a playful ski.” – Minimal sidecut, long radius and “freeride” shape all indicate and are elements of a directional, not playful ski.
Later, a contradiction to the above and double statement.
“Despite the longer turning radius and more directional feel, the weight distribution of the ski still contributes to a playful feel.” – Regardless of the contradiction, I don’t doubt that with Jason’s background they have designed a directional ski with more playfulness then the specs would indicate.
“WNDR Vital 100 falls neatly in the middle of its class of midweight, functional backcountry skis.” – This is among the heaviest skis in the 95-105mm backcountry category that aren’t intended for powder. There are numerous skis that a non-prosumer shopper would be considering that are 300-500g lighter. There are true resort skis that weigh the same or less (Kore 99/105, Ripstick 96/106, X96), not to mention many “50/50” skis. Unless the term “functional” is being used to disqualify lighter options, this seems like a massive stretch.
“Two comparables that come to mind are the Atomic Bent Chetler 100 and the Salomon MTN Explore 95.” – The BC100 is a resort ski, that while lightweight (lighter then the Vital!), lacks a “ski-mountaineering shape and profile.” The MTN95 is apt, but the real class comparison would include skis that mirror it’s design and intention: Navis Freebird, Agent 2.0, Zero G 105, V6, Down CD 104L, TX103, Beast 98, Superguide 95 and Freetour – all of which are lighter then the Vital.
“then the WNDR Vital 100 must be the lycra-wearing, couloir-skiing, always reliable, ski-mountaineering cousin.” – I’m not aware of anyone skiing a 1850g ski who would wear lycra or who would describe their firstly describe their pursuit/intention as “ski mountaineering.” The design, weight and marketing copy behind the ski point it towards an experienced, competent user who agrees to take on weight for performance improvement and the ability to push the ski to the point of precision. This is not the embodiment of lycra-clad, ski mountaineering Strava types (yes, I’m one of them…) who sacrifice weight and ski performance in the place of time/efficiency, skidding/chattering down terrain with decidedly less precision.
“The only issue is that I would not put this ski into the “powder ski” category. While other 100mm waisted skis can dip their toes into this category, there is not enough width in the tip or tail to really get that sort of floatation in bottomless snow.” – WNDR doesn’t use the word powder to describe this ski, nor is the marketing copy directed that way. Additionally, a majority of the the 95-100mm touring skis on the market have tip/tail dimensions within 3mm of the Vital, including the resort-oriented Bent Chetler100.
For what it’s worth, I read back through Gary’s review of the Intention 110 and while he described a 2000g backcountry ski as “lighter” and the listed spec weights were way off, Gary seemed to understand what he was working with.
Wholeheartedly agree. Except the part about the review of the Intention 110 and the specified weight being way off. The original 2019/20 Intention 110 was around 200g lighter in all lengths than the 2020/21. Disappointing because I was pretty tempted to order a pair of the 110 in 185 until they put on almost half a pound. Just too heavy to drag up hill at my age.
81611, Thanks for your feedback, no offense taken. I agree with your assessment. This was a hard ski to place in a box and I came up short. Your point that this binding and ski pairing is not a great match rings true. Upon self-reflection, I do believe I put too much of my capacity and excitement towards the materials side of the ski and not enough on performance. I will rewrite sections of this review with your feedback. If you feel inclined to do so, feel free to reach out to me and I will give you credit for your diligent critique of this review.
I appreciate the color coordination with of the bindings and the ski. On a side note, maybe if there was a template reviewers could fill out? It would be nice if they outlined background on the brand, the category the ski resides in, who the ski is for, what the best binding pairings are, and what snow conditions it would ski best in (for context, I live in the PNW and a ski that is great for our conditions might not be a good choice for a continental snowpack). Love the site! And appreciate the time it takes to put these reviews together.
Thanks for the feedback, Travis. We do have a loose template of points we always try to hit in each review, but they don’t always show up in the same order with the same attention. Something we’ll keep working on!
Aidan, just wanted to give props for accepting constructive criticism so graciously! I agreed with many of 81611’s comments, but enjoyed the review nonetheless and look forward to reading the revised version if you do update it.
One point where I disagree with 81611 – I think the Bent Chetler 100 is a decent reference point, since many use it as a 50/50 or even pure touring ski. Based on the specs it seems as though the Vital 100 might fill a similar nice. WNDR isn’t positioning it as a mountaineering ski per se. It’s too bad you haven’t had time on the Raven though, since that’s the most natural comparison and one that many readers are likely to be interested in.
Atomic Backland 100 seems to be a comparable shape albeit approximately 450 g lighter per ski. My 188’s are 1400g and 1429 g. The WNDR is a lot of extra weight move uphill.
Thanks to readers, and to Aidan, for some constructive thinking about this review. I’ve included some edits from Aidan, in parenthesis throughout.
Aidan—good effort on a tricky ski and with a demanding audience! You’re a pro, though, for rolling with it and giving the peanut gallery what they demanded!
We moved to Europe 18 months ago and a slightly warmer snowpack, less generous storms (compared to Canada and the old Colorado) has me wondering about bumping up from 1200g-ish skis to 1700g-ish skis….but then as you and some of the readers mention, you get into this weird kinda-light-but-not-really category….great skis to choose from, so I’m sure I’ll waste a bunch of time and effort trying to find my new sweet spot.
Anyway, just wanted to high-five you as a reader and a WS contributor for putting in some effort and redoubling those efforts on some elements of the piece. Good job, brudda! RC
We’re so appreciative of both Aidan and the WS community – one that has once again proved ready to think critically about product design, performance, and intended use for a given product!
For what it’s worth, we designed the Vital 100 as an agile, but hard charging touring ski. We wouldn’t call it a pure mountaineering ski, but instead think of it as a versatile tool that thrives in firmer snowpack, corn, and complex terrain in the high alpine. We most typically ski the Vital with Alpinists or Kingpins, and use it for anything from low tide continental snowpack to late season volcano skiing. Aidan’s descriptions of “capable in more demanding settings” and “balanced, stable feeling” ring true to our goals and experiences with the ski.
For anyone curious about the unique performance characteristics offered by the Vital’s sidewall, feel free to nerd out here: https://wndr-alpine.com/pages/wndr-data-2
Cheers,
Pep Fujas