Forgiving mid-90s touring ski

[Benneke10]

I put a lot of time on the Voile Hyper V6 and Volkl BMT 94. The Voile is lighter and floatier, the Volkl is damper, has better edge hold and is much more predictable in bad snow. I try to avoid using the Voile in no-fall terrain and it would not be my choice for a volcano, but it gets a lot of use as a daily driver in the Wasatch.

If I had to replace the BMTs and get a touring ski I can rely on in all conditions in all terrain, I would go Heritage Labs and get the BC90 or BC105. The 105 weight penalty over the 90 isn't that big so if you're OK with ~1600g then its worth considering. This would normally be the end of my post, but they are sold out for the season and you might want something shorter than 177.

Another option worth considering is the Dynafit Beast/Free ski. I owned the Beast 108 (the yellow ones with a kiss of camber), used them on everything from 10k pow days to PNW volcanoes in summer. They meet all of your criteria, and are probably the most backseat friendly skis I have ever used. I only got rid of them because of quiver overlap, and as I got better at skiing started to prefer longer skis (I had the 173, they ski short and I'm taller than you). They replaced the Beast skis with the Free and Radical skis but they share a lot of design characteristics and I would expect them to ski similarly. A bonus is they can be found dirt cheap, here's an example: https://www.powder7.com/Dynafit-Free...4aAplLEALw_wcB

I've heard great things about the Faction La Machine Mini, worth looking into those as end-of-season closeout sales start.

I briefly owned the Atomic Backland 100 and demoed the Bent 100 and think they are both very over rated. Despite sharing the same shape, the Backland has a super stiff punishing tail that requires a forward stance, and the Bent 100 is much friendlier. My issue with the Bent 100 is that it has some of the worst edge hold of any ski I've used. Maybe it was just an issue with the pair I had, curious about others experiences.

[jacob_dbu]

I dunno, I think the Wayback 96 is fairly forgiving in the PNW for volcanoes etc. It is stiff enough to edge but also smearable and with the pintail it does ok in pow. The 98 is more of a "beginner" ski from my understanding.

From what you're describing wanting, though, I think the Vision would be okay. More of a center-mounted rockered ski. Some of my buddies use it for volcanoes and like it. It's not my style, personally, I prefer a traditional mount (never have got along great with Line's offerings).

You’re right, I guess I should caveat. I don’t think the Wayback 96 needs to be as stiff as it is. It’s a fine ski, but it just feels plain boring to me is all. And the mount is so far back.

The tail is so flat which is nice for kick turns but skiing out through heinous trees just isn’t as fun as it could be with a little tail splay. But…I know that’s the whole point of the ski design.

[Skip Dooley]

I would go with the Volkl blaze 94 or rise 96. I have the rise 98s, and they are forgiving and very fun. Of course, if you can find BMTs, then there you go. But, the other two are attainable.

[skiNphish]

Anyone have thoughts on the Ripstick 96 for this use case??


Sent from my Pixel 7a using Tapatalk

[Perlhammered]

Slightly wider than you're asking for, but 4FRNT Raven hits all your other requirements pretty bang on.

[MottN]

No real specific suggestions. But super light and stiff is the perfect combination to make an absolutely horrible ski. As you look at lighter skis look for something with a softer flex that won’t get deflected off of every little snow imperfection. I really wish ski companies would figure this out, but so many skiers buy skis based on an in store hand flex.

Agree with this.
You can get a very forgiving ski while still being very light by not having something overly stiff. I skied the Fischer Hannibal 94 for a number of years and I still somewhat regret not getting the 96 when I replaced it a couple years ago. Its very light (~1300g) ski and extremely forgiving partly because it has a fairly soft flex. I am fairly light at 165lb @6'2" though...someone a fair bit heavier might find it to easy to overpower something like that.

The reason reason to go to the heavier end of the touring is to get something that handles variable and poor snow more aggressively...which still might be what you want, but you don't have to go there to get something pretty forgiving.

[skiNphish]

Slightly wider than you're asking for, but 4FRNT Raven hits all your other requirements pretty bang on.

Yeah have thought about that one. Definitely interesting. A little weary of the forward mount (though could mount -1 from recommended). Anyone tried the WNDR Vital 100 (or 98). Blister seems to equate even the cambered version of the Vital and being somewhat similar to the Raven. Intriguing ski that seems to check most of these boxes too. Just don't know anyone who's been on them.

Sent from my Pixel 7a using Tapatalk

[DGamms]

I have owned the Raven, and I currently own the Line Vision 98 in a 179 and the older Vital 100 (reverse cambered) in a 183.

The Vision is crazy light for me at about 1400gm per ski. Noticeably lighter than anything else I own, both on the way up and the way down. The softer flex and rocker profile helps it feel less jarring on variable snow on the way down. But the extra 400 gms of mass and slightly stiffer flex of the Vital makes them more confidence inspiring at speed or in bad snow when descending. Both are very easy to ski at slow speeds, easy to pivot, and forgiving of centered stances (although the Vision almost requires it, can’t get too far forward on it).

If I had to choose one, I’d sell the Visions and keep the Vitals. But for a truly long spring mission without scary terrain, I will still ski the Visions. I just don’t do many days like that.

[yeahman]

Anyone have thoughts on the Ripstick 96 for this use case??


Sent from my Pixel 7a using Tapatalk

I think that would be an good option. Ripsticks are very light and the only conditions they don't handle well are shitfuck and deep chop, not a big concern when touring. However if Salomon decides to make an Echo 96 then that might be a better choice.

[cravenmorhead]

Huh, I find the Camox FBs to be pretty predictable in all but breakable crust. Anyway, a friend has the Dynastar M-tours and loves them for a do-everything mid-waist ski.

[skiNphish]

Huh, I find the Camox FBs to be pretty predictable in all but breakable crust. Anyway, a friend has the Dynastar M-tours and loves them for a do-everything mid-waist ski.

I don't find it to so much unpredictable, as quite demanding and punishing, but to each his/her own!

Sent from my Pixel 7a using Tapatalk

[grinch]

I had some camox freebirds. Not a terrible ski but not very versatile. Floated quite well for a ski that size but uninspiring on any variable conditions. The core felt like air when i drilled or screwed into them. Sold them. Current ski in that slot is a rossi alpineer 96(97 waist in my 177). I think its the same as the dynastar mtour. Not bad. Does everything pretty well and is quite light. Bases arent the fastest or most durable and i'd prefer a little more tail rocker. Spring touring skis need tougher bases. Theyll hit rocks, grass and dirt and i think a little tail rocker keeps them more versatile in a variety of conditions. I really miss my praxis yeti in this slot. I had the 172 yeti and i think its perfec. Im woodman 100 tour curiouas though. On3p bases are extremdly durable much like praxis but im noticing my buddies praxis slide thru sticky pow better than my on3p's. I tuned both our skis. Minor difference as theyre both proving way more durable than anything else. Sooo many rocks around here and theyve given us a lot of freedom and freshies

Sent from my SM-S711W using TGR Forums mobile app

[altacoup]

Slightly wider than you're asking for, but 4FRNT Raven hits all your other requirements pretty bang on.

If you want to own just one touring ski that can do everything. The Raven is the best ski out there imo. Literally skis everything well.

[skiNphish]

I think that would be an good option. Ripsticks are very light and the only conditions they don't handle well are shitfuck and deep chop, not a big concern when touring. However if Salomon decides to make an Echo 96 then that might be a better choice.

@yeahman do you tour in the regular Ripstick or the tour version? Why'd you choose the one you're on over the other (tour/non-tour version) in the lineup? Thanks.

Sent from my Pixel 7a using Tapatalk

[jacob_dbu]

If you want to own just one touring ski that can do everything. The Raven is the best ski out there imo. Literally skis everything well.

I have to disagree with this...it is an interesting ski but requires a specific technique of rolling your ankles to get the edges to engage. It's a good ski, but it has a very specific design philosophy. Also it doesn't float all that great, nothing like an ON3P of the same width. But again, that's its design philosophy.