Here we are on top of a Chicago Peak outside of Telluride, CO. We made a bench, snacked on some snacks, and are waiting for corn to soften before putting the 94 C2s to work. They excel in the high speed, big turn arching, corn skiing environment quite well.
We are all familiar with the conceptual backcountry Quiver of One: one ski that can do it all, the jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none. What about adding more specialization by adding a second ski? Is that worth the added complexity and cost of another touring setup? I split the 20/21 winter season in between two skis: the DPS Pagoda Tour 112 RP and 94 C2. I chose the two skis to experiment with the efficacy of a Quiver of Two while also testing a few of the new Pagoda Tour skis from DPS.
The Pagoda Tour series debuted in Fall 2020. I wrote about the construction and shapes for the Pagoda Tour series in detail here. In general, DPS added more advanced manufacturing processes and created unique, unconventional ski designs to make an innovative touring ski.
I tested the DPS Pagoda Tour 112 RP and the DPS Pagoda Tour 94 C2 for the full 20/21 season to get a holistic take on this Quiver of Two pairing. Each ski performs exceptionally well for its intended purpose. The 112 RP is a soft snow powder boat and the 94 C2 is a hard snow mountain tool. When paired together, they more competently cover the course of snow conditions throughout a winter season. Let’s look at each ski individually, then speak to how they complement each other as a Quiver of Two.
DPS Pagoda Tour 112 RP
Product Overview
DPS claims the following about their Pagoda Tour 112 RP: “Transform the skin track into a powder escalator with the award-winning 112 RP shape.” The 112 RP is designed to be the quintessential powder touring ski – a wide, surfy, and playful powder ski shape and profile with a lightweight construction.
I consider there to be two types of wider backcountry skis: powder touring skis (like the 112 RP) and freeride skis. Powder touring skis are big and light. They’re designed for powder wiggles and have a high surface area-to-weight ratio (with a lot of surface area in that equation) to stay on top of deep, fluffy snow. Comparatively, freeride skis are big and heavy. They’re designed for fast, aggressive skiing and have a stable robust construction to help reduce deflection and handle high forces (created from arching turns and jumping off of things). Powder touring skis and freeride skis are both wide skis, but intended for different applications. The DPS Pagoda Tour 112 RP is a great powder touring ski, but not a great freeride ski.
Design Highlights
The 112 RP has a uniquely tapered five-point shape and playfully rockered profile. That design lends itself to a modern, pivoty style of downhill skiing. The short turning radius makes it easy to disengage turns, turning carves into slashes (slarve cough cough). The huge tip rocker and mellow tail rise help these already wide skis float even better in soft snow.
The 112 RP is different from other powder touring skis because it pairs a surfy shape/profile combo with a lightweight yet damp construction. The Pagoda Tour line has a pour-in sidewall that is continuous around the perimeter of the ski. It also has two layers of the vertically laminated core material. This (plus two layers of carbon fiber) is a lot of construction to fit into the ski’s modest 1550-gram mass. Other similar powder touring skis don’t handle non-powder snow nearly as well as the 112 RP, and I presume it’s due to the advanced and fancy construction.
Shape and profile highlights for the DPS Pagoda Tour 112 RP. Mute graphics make it/you look under the radar and cool, right?
Well, if the 112 RP is great at powder touring, what is it bad at? The 112 RP doesn’t ‘charge’ or ‘huck cliffs’ or ‘rail turns’ as a freeride ski would (for an example of comparison, a great backcountry freeride ski is the Faction Agent 4.0). The 112 RP has a lower-than-freeride speed limit, and that’s a good thing. It’s intended to, and ideal for, low-to-medium speed powder skiing where rooster tails of pow pow are to be thrown in the air with each turn. Maybe the angle of the slope is below 30°. Maybe you’re not in a gnarly ski film on an Alaskan spine. Those are just fine circumstances for most of us backcountry skiers. What the 112 RP has that its freeride brethren doesn’t is enough pep in its step for multiple laps in the backcountry. Freeride skis are just too heavy for big days in the mountains.
Field Test
I tested the 112 RP throughout the season from mid-November to early March. They were my soft snow daily drivers and shook me with how fun they made powder skiing (which is already fun!). A particularly outrageous powder outing was with my friend Gavin in local below-treeline terrain. We left the trailhead with it snowing well over 2 cm/hour and plenty of fresh snow already on the ground. Our day was spent voraciously skiing as much powder as we could while attempting to stay dry in the stormy weather, stay fueled to make sure we could stay out as long as possible, and keep all of the fresh snow out of our open-mouthed, laughing, smiling faces. It was the best day of powder skiing of my life (so far). The 112 RP was a huge player in this story because my legs felt fresh all day. We could race uphill, transition with fury, frolic through waist deep bliss, eat a snack, and repeat the process. This day was the affirming example of why powder touring skis rock. My legs would have been dead if I was on a heavier ski, but I needed every millimeter of underfoot width provided by the 112 RP for the depth of the downhill skiing.
Here’s a photo of the 112 RP product testing powder safari. Few photos were taken; too much powder.
I recommend to size this ski big because of the generous tip and tail rocker. Less of the ski is in contact with the snow, so it will ski shorter than perceived at first sight. Through the season, the 112 RP reminded me of two different skis: the now discontinued La Sportiva Vapor Float (117 mm underfoot) and the Voile Hyper V8 (115 mm underfoot). These are other prominent powder touring skis with similar shapes/profiles to the DPS powder boat. However, the Pagoda Tour has a much more robust construction compared to these models. This will make the 112 RP more competent in not-powder snow and make the ski more durable. For such a lightweight touring ski, these things can handle use/abuse. I have skied them 60+ days this season with negligible base/topsheet damage and the profile has fully maintained its contour. I’m impressed with their durability enough to make a note of it here and commend DPS for building a more robust ski at the expense of a few grams (but still keeping it at a relatively light weight).
Additional Thoughts
The DPS Pagoda Tour 112 RP delivers when they say it will ‘transform the skin track into a powder escalator.’ It is one of the best powder touring skis that I’ve been exposed to. It’s lightweight and provides a shape and profile to complement playful powder skiing. The 112 RP is for the human-powered powder skier that has a more playful than aggressive skiing style and wants something that is light and lively.
Here are the 112 RP’s at work: slashing and carving in boot top powder. I was impressed with the dexterity and tight turning of these skis while in this narrow couloir.
Metrics
Available lengths (cm): 158, 168, 178, 184 (size tested)
Dimensions (mm): Claimed: 140-112-127; Measured: 140-113-125
Claimed Sidecut (m): 15
Mass (g): Claimed: 1580; Measured: 1592
Mount Position (mm): (1840/2)-777= + 143 (very rear-mounted)
(equation = ½ total length of ski – measurement to boot center from the tail. + means its rear-mounted, 0 means its center-mounted, – means its front-mounted)
Construction (bottom to top): UHMW polyethylene base, prepreg carbon fiber, the vertically laminated core of ash, paulownia and aerospace grade foam, another layer of vertically laminated ash, another layer of pre-impregnated carbon fiber weave, HDPE mounting plate, textured polyamide topsheet
Shape: Spoon-shaped tapered tip, short turning radius, tapered tail
Profile: Big and long tip rise, shallow camber, medium tail rise
Recommended Binding & Boot Pairing: The Salomon MTN is a simple yet robust binding option for this powder-touring ski. The Atomic Backland Pro, Dynafit TLT8 Expedition, or Scarpa F1 LT (depending on the shape of your foot) are all appropriate compliments to the 112 RP with an MTN binding. This ski/binding/boot pairing would create a powder touring rig that weighs under 3500 grams per foot (but who’s counting right?).
MSRP: $1,299 (!)
DPS Pagoda Tour 94 C2
Product Overview
DPS portrays the Pagoda Tour 94 C2 as such: “The 94 C2’s footprint allows for a variety of turn shapes; from sidecut-perfect carves to short radius windshield wiper turns, you’ll feel at home aboard this versatile backcountry specific ski.” This member of the Pagoda Tour family is a mountain tool: a utilitarian instrument for mountain travel on snow. I intended to use the Pagoda Tour 94 C2 as a hard snow ski in contrast to the soft snow 112 RP. I wanted the 94 C2 to be a stable and reliable ski for:
— Frozen, variable, challenging conditions
— Timing corn skiing
— Technical skiing where edge control and security are paramount
— Ski traverses where weight savings is important
Fortunately enough, the 94 C2 has performed confidently under all of the listed conditions.
Design Highlights
Highlights of the Pagoda Tour 94 C2.
The amount of tip and tail rise in this 94 mm ski is atypical, and that makes the Pagoda Tour 94 C2 unique for its size. The added rocker provides better floatation in deeper snow and easier turn engagement when on hard snow.
This ski performed with predictability and reliability. Those nouns aren’t sexy or flashy ways to describe a ski and that’s exactly what I was looking for out of a ‘mountain tool’ type of ski. The 94 C2 promotes safe, confident, easy skiing, ideal for technical terrain, variable snow, and long days out [when legs eventually get tired]. It handled fine in deeper snow conditions with the tip and tail rocker (it has more rocker than usual for a 94mm waisted ski). But, if there’s a chance of deep snow for a tour, I typically to opt for a wider ski.
Field Test
A memorable day on these skis was spent touring up a local classic with my two great friends Sheamus and Morgan. The morning started with a refrozen, ice rink-quality skin track. We eventually broke through tree line into an alpine basin that had a microwave radiation quality of heat and accompanying sticky snow. We then bootpacked up the approach couloir and scrambled over a rocky ridge to reach the entrance of our desired descent. The way down started as powder, led to an icy choke, was preceded by variable powder runnels and firm bed surface, then eventually finished in a few thousand feet of planar, surfy, FUN corn skiing to the valley floor.
Did you notice anything about our day out? I didn’t mention the ski’s performance once and that’s the ideal scenario for a ski during a big mission. I don’t want to be bogged down with the ski’s weight while on the skin track or in the bootpack. When skiing down, I want to focus on snowpack conditions. I want a ski that works in the background at making big tours feel easy – both up and down. That’s exactly what the DPS Pagoda Tour 94 C2 has done throughout this season. It’s an undercover mountain tool that performs in a variety of terrain with predictability. It’s something I can trust to carry me up and glide me down.
Doing some sunrise testing of the 94 C2s in chalky conditions.
With that field testing anecdote in mind, I have a few more points to address. The Pagoda Tour construction makes this ski lightweight, but not ultralight. The added weight makes it more stable when things get chunky and allows for less deflection and better skiability compared to UL (ultralight) 90-100 mm equivalents (like the Movement Alp Tracks 95 or the Fischer Hannibal 96). The Pagoda Tour is 100-200 grams heavier than the mentioned UL touring options, and I appreciate the added weight in exchange for the added downhill confidence. The most similar ski to the Pagoda Tour 94 C2 is the Salomon MTN 95. They are both light, but not too light. But side-by-side, the 94 C2 features more durable construction, more tip, and tail rise, and a stiffer flex pattern. This gives the DPS ski a high upper-speed limit and more soft snow competence at the same weight as the MTN 95. There are obviously other 90-100 mm options that I’m curious to engage in discussion about in the comments below. If interested in the 94 C2, I would size it from nose height to top-of-head height. Size close to your nose height for weight savings and better dexterity in tight terrain. Size to close to the top of your head for more stability at high speeds and more float in deeper snow.
Additional Thoughts
The DPS Pagoda Tour 94 C2 is not a flashy ski. It’s reliable, versatile, and dependable. It’s a quality skinny all-season touring ski recommended for the all-season backcountry traveler who prioritizes edge-ability over float-ability. It’s great in hard snow conditions, and gets by better than most other 90-100mm waist-width skis in powder conditions because of the atypical amount of tip and tail rocker.
Metrics
Available Lengths (cm): 157, 165, 171 (size tested), 178, 185
Dimensions (mm): Claimed: 129-94-109; Measured: 129-94-111
Claimed Sidecut (m): 18.5
Mass (g): Claimed: 1360; Measured: 1350
Mount Position (mm): (1710/2)-755= +100 (rear-mounted)
(equation = ½ total length of ski – measurement to boot center from the tail. + means its rear-mounted, 0 means its center-mounted, – means its front-mounted)
Construction: same as the Pagoda Tour 112 RP
Shape: Bulbous rounded tip, medium sidecut, tapered tail
Profile: Shallow tip rise, medium camber, shallow tail rise
Recommended Binding & Boot Pairing: A race binding with an adjustment plate is a great pairing for this ski. The Ski Trab Gara Titan, the BD Helio 145, or the Plum Race 170 would all be ideal binding matches. To match that lightweight binding, get a race/touring boot like the Scarpa F1 LT or Atomic Backland Carbon.
MSRP: $1,299
Shop for DPS Pagoda Tour 94 & 112 skis.
The 112 RP is for soft snow, the 94 C2 is for hard snow. Together they create a dynamic duo.
Slator Aplin lives in the San Juans. He enjoys time spent in the mountains, pastries paired with coffee, and adventures-gone-wrong. You can often find him outside Telluride’s local bakery — Baked in Telluride.
20 comments
How much firm snow performance do you think you give up with all that rocker on the 94? It seems like a significantly shorter effective edge than a more traditional (less rocketed shape). That being said, it seems like an excellent ski for “alpine variable” conditions like you found on your test day- I bet the weight and rocker make it much more pleasant in wind affected snow!
Gavin, the 94 C2 trades the top tier of firm snow performance for versatility. I was surprised how easy it was to ski the 94 C2. Easy to engage and release turns, easy to manage ‘alpine variable’ and easy to jump around in technical terrain. I think that was due to the shorter effective edge and damp, slightly-heavier-than-UL construction. It’s not as aggressive as something like the Blizzard Zero G 95 or K2 Wayback 96, but rather more laid back.
This is a great review! I just ordered the Pagoda Tour 106. Demoed them at Crows Feet in Bend, OR and was impressed by how damp they were for the weight. Construction seemed incredibly sturdy as well–those full sidewalls are legit. I’m planning on using them as a dawn patrol ski that can morph into a lift based crusher once the lifts open on softer snow days. Planning on putting ATK Raider 12s with the free ride spacers on them and using my Hoji Free 110s. Pretty cool they are made in the USA as well.
Gonna ask the question I ask about almost every ski review. Why on earth doesn’t DPS put a tail notch on, for skins? There is no downside to this, only an upside. Anyone not seeing this as a problem hasn’t skied much in moist conditions. I just don’t get it. Even the totally downhill focussed company J Skis puts a tail notch on their dedicated backcountry boards.
Eric, DPS reinforces the Pagoda Tour with an aluminum abutment in the tail, but doesn’t notch it. They designed their own tail attachment that they throw onto rebranded Pomoca Climb Pro S-Glide skins which interfaces really well with the Pagoda Tour tail. Over about fifty days with that ski/skin combo, I didn’t find any troubles. Nonetheless, I understand it’s frustrating to have tail clips fall off because of a rounded, non-notched tail.
That’s good. But I still don’t get it.
Some ski shops will cut a notch for you. Skimo.co will even put one in the tip for if you want to use a race style clip.
The 2-ski quiver rules! With the 1-ski quiver you’re compromising on everything except the most vanilla of conditions where just about any decent ski would do well; with two skis, there’s not really any condition that one of those skis won’t shine, or at least perform well, in… I guess except for the far ends of the spectrum (Japow and skimo or 10k’ days, I guess). Thanks for the writeup! For me, the BMT 90 has been doing amazingly well in terrible conditions with how damp it is, well worth the whopping 1400g (still lighter than the Baker SL of a decade ago)… and who’d have thought a 112mm ski would be insufficient in the deepest pow 15 years ago?
This a great detailed writeup. And keeping the quiver within the same brand/line typically makes it easier to switch.
Interesting that you only found great things to say about these skis. How much do they pay you?
Rod – generally speaking, it’s hard to produce negative feedback for a high-end modern touring ski. Ski company’s do a good job at making skis that are fun to ski. If you are interested in negative feedback for the skis:
– The 112 RP can’t handle a freeride-style of skiing.
– The 94 C2 is more of a non-traditional rockered shape for a 90-100 mm width ski. This trades high-end firm snow performance for variable-snow versatility.
– The Pagoda Tour series is expensive (as mentioned).
Thank you for the critical feedback on the write up. Trying to limit the sale pitch nature of gear reviews is important, and something I’ll work on for reviews to come. DPS didn’t pay me or Wildsnow for this review.
No one pays WildSnow for reviews, Rod. They never have and they never will. We try to always balance reviews with negative points or suggestions for improvement, but sometimes we just don’t find them. If a company makes a good product and it’s used as intended and the reviewer sees the product live up to that intention, that’s a true review.
Two ski quiver for the price of three skis! Well written review though, thanks for your thoughts!
Mike – you’re right: they’re not cheap. However, in the past I have been swooned into choosing a less expensive ski that ends up falling and loosing its profile due to a cheaper and generally poor construction. I can attest to the durability of DPS skis – they hold up for a long time. Are they 50% more durable than the average touring ski for being 50% more expensive? That’s an interesting experiment…
Given the number of broken DPS ski’s I’ve seen on social media I would say no., although there is plenty of confirmation bias there as the most expensive broken things garner the most attention. It just strikes me as odd that nearly every other manufacturer skis sell for an MSRP of more or less $800 – is every one of them using shoddy construction techniques?
Mike, Wouldn’t say most brands use shoddy construction. The least expensive are Atomic, Salomon, K 2, you get the idea. Large volume Alpine companies that use existing molds for their Touring skis. And simple materials and construction. I have toured the DPS factory and every step is hand done with extreme attention to details. And they use top-notch materials down to the top sheet. Two full layers of Pre Preg Carbon, not a couple of “stringers”. Then the new Core for the Pagodas. It is a work of art, so many laminates, layers, and shaping with the unique pour in sidewalls. This gives the Pagodas an incredible amount of dampness for a light ski. As they write above, it is a bit heavier, but that makes for a still light ski that ski inbounds and through crud, like a much heavier ski.
Planning on moving on from my BD Route 95s to either these Pagoda 94s or the newer Black Crows Camox Freebirds – specifically due to prioritizing:
– Weight
– Rocker
– Slightly shorter Turn Radius
With the latter two being to counteract for variable snow conditions.
Anyone out there have experience on the new Camox Freebirds in variable snow? I love the sound of the review here, but the stats and overall impression don’t quite suggest the +50% cost is worth it for the DPS 94s.
I’ve skied a bit this winter on the (2019) BC Orb Freebirds. Liked the skis, it carves well on hard snow, lively, stable at speed, and floats ok on 6-8 inches of Eastern powder. Might take them to Europe when things open up.
What do you think of that ski for a 91 underfoot contender ?
My 178 cm Orbs, weigh 1500 grams a ski, 1800 gm with the ATK Crest 10 binding and a 95 mm ski brake.
Really like the Orb/ATK combo.
There’s a reason DPS skis are more expensive. They’re built using the best materials you can use in ski construction. Here’s a little indication. In a standard fibreglass ski there is approx $5.00 worth of fibreglass in the ski. In a pair of DPS skis (barring the foundation construction) there is $300 worth of pre preg carbon fibre.
Race bases with 22% graphite content, cost 3 times as much as the standard base you will get with almost all other brands, between 0-1% graphite. As mentioned previously the cores area work of art, the pour in sidewall truly unique innovation in the ski industry.
A fibreglass ski will start to break down around the 40-60 day mark. They start to noodle out. DPS carbon fibre retains it’s pop for the life of the ski. In the field of durability DPS has less than 1% warranty return rate. One of the lowest in the ski industry.
They’re built tough, they reward the skier and they ski like nothing else. I’ve been skiing DPS for 10 years and every time I get on a different ski they feel dead.
95mm (Fischer Hannibal) and DPS 112 Tour 1 are my quiver and I am really happy with this range.
Comments are closed.