Charger Love....

Telemark Dave wrote

 
I think Darkside Shamen has the 171's.   They would be crazy fast turning woods skiing machines, that's for sure.  

TD

Yes I have the 171's, but I see a new pair of 181's Vector BC's sitting in my living room waiting to be mounted
The rocker profile on Voile skis, allows them to turn like a ski that is 10-15cm shorter. I love the size of my Chargers for their ability to turn through tight trees, but that shortness definitely affects the kick and glide.

Thread coming soon: Vector Love

Darkside Shaman wrote

Telemark Dave wrote

 
I think Darkside Shamen has the 171's.   They would be crazy fast turning woods skiing machines, that's for sure.  

TD

Yes I have the 171's, but I see a new pair of 181's Vector BC's sitting in my living room waiting to be mounted
The rocker profile on Voile skis, allows them to turn like a ski that is 10-15cm shorter. I love the size of my Chargers for their ability to turn through tight trees, but that shortness definitely affects the kick and glide.

Thread coming soon: Vector Love

FKNA!.   Now maybe a certain someone will have to split his disdain between two threads.

Oh, and thanks for escalating the ski quiver envy.  Just when I was content...

N+1..... And/or S-1

TD

Telemark Dave wrote

Oh, and thanks for escalating the ski quiver envy.  Just when I was content...

N+1..... And/or S-1

TD

I'm sorry, I am a gear whore and I know I have a problem...

Dark Side - Why the Vectors?

PeeTex wrote

Dark Side - Why the Vectors?

I wanted something narrower under foot for longer distance tours. I love the chargers, but I should have bought the 181's.
I'm thinking of selling my chargers, and I may see a 181 non bc Charger if my future...

Darkside Shaman wrote

PeeTex wrote

Dark Side - Why the Vectors?

I wanted something narrower under foot for longer distance tours. I love the chargers, but I should have bought the 181's.
I'm thinking of selling my chargers, and I may see a 181 non bc Charger if my future...

Got it. I have a super light touring ski w/o scales and only 80 underfoot. The Vectors may be better for me as well since I have no issue with a narrower ski in pow - decisions decisions.

If 80 works for you, great.  Moving up to the Vectors will be even better.  It's insidious however... Once you go fat, you'll probably only go back to remind yourself of how it used to be.  
I'm talking about off track skiing, backcountry, woods, schwacking, thicketeering, pow yoyo sessions, etc.  

I had been thinking about getting a ski like the Madshus Epoch for exploring the Catskills, but found this thread and am now on the Charger bandwagon.

Now, I've just got to figure out 171 or 181.  I'm 5'10" and 145-150. Think I'd like the quicker turning 171s on the downhill, especially since I'll be a beginner telemarker and probably won't be flying through the trees. Concerned the 171s could be an issue going up or on flat or rolling terrain. Will ski almost exclusively on untracked snow so maybe slower kick and glide which Darkside Shaman mentioned is not a big deal.

If any Charger experts have thoughts about sizing for a lightweight, happy to hear them. Thanks!

I'd go 181, you won't regret the extra length for floatation in the natural snow.  Like snowshoes.  And they'll turn fine. You don't have to do telemarks just because you're on freeheel equipment - parallel, stem, jump, tree turns - they're all valid tools in the backcountry. Have fun, and welcome to the Charger fan club.

Oh, and don't rule out the Vector BC, it actually might be a better choice for everyday exploration.  Being narrower means it would be happier in mixed snow, or hard icy mank.  (Not that anyone wants to ski in the woods in those conditions, but it is a reality)

Thanks for the 181 suggestion. Contemplated the Vector, but I'm a fair weather snob and don't see myself getting out when the snow isn't soft. Which I acknowledge doesn't leave too many days for exploration in the Catskills.

Good luck.  Remember, there's no "best before" date on skis.  So no worries if they don't get used a lot. At least that's how I rationalize adding skis to my quiver.

Td

Getting some cold feet on the Chargers or Vectors, at least the BC version. Some reviews say the scales present too much drag to be useful on slightly low angle returns, they say you'd be better off with skins you can take off. Any thoughts?

Ha!  I'm calling b.s on that.  You would notice the drag if you took them on groomers - that's NOT what these skis are about.  There is no discernible drag when you're  skiing in fresh powder of any depth, even very low angle grades.

 But sure, go ahead and buy the non BC Charger, and some skins.  I guarantee that any time you'll save on the downhills will be totally negated by a very large factor when skinning in on an approach.  Skinning is slow. Yes you still need skins with the BC version for any climbs over 20 degrees.  But you won't need to take them out of the pack for the 5 mile ski in.  Or back out.  You don't have to read between the lines to figure out the intent of the Voile BC skis.  Yes, they have limitations, and you have to compromise - they aren't  the holy grail.  But for some of us, they certainly are the next best thing.  

TD

Ok ok, just asking

I sincerely apologize if that sounded a like a bit of a overblown rant. (Ya it was...)

Fish scale skis do glide noticeably slower than normal base skis - on hard pack/groomed ski area snow, or say, in tracks - if you're comparing track set XC skis. But it's pretty insignificant once you get into natural snow and unmanaged terrain. A Rando racer wouldn't be very happy on said skis, but for someone who wants to maximize their fun, and make the most of every little stash of snow on even the smallest of hills, they fit the bill.  

TD

I was wondering if you were a planted Voile rep

I wish!
I paid retail for my Voiles. No pro deal, no bro deal, not even a "nice guy" deal.  I can't recall the last time I did this, I'm pretty opportunistic about any possible savings on ski equipment.
<sigh>

TD

Oh, and as you can guess, I don't regret pulling the trigger.