Update from the XCD Knights

[lowangle al]

[quote="MikeK"]CR - I think you actually said it best a while back. Not sure where the quote is or if it was even on this forum, but you said something like the Karhu/Madshus skis were "more like obese XC skis" and the Voile skis were more like Alpine skis.

I think there is more to it than design, like the rocker. I think it has to do with construction. I think there is more to the $200 price difference than market forces like supply and demand. I think they are higher quality skis and it shows in there performance. If this were not the case why wouldn't a manufacturer build a ski that matches the vectors performance that they could sell for $380 rather than $580.

To sum it up the guides and annum type skis are constructed more like xc skis and and they are able to price them at the upper end of xc skis. The vectors are constructed more like dh and the cost reflects this.

I don't know why they wouldn't be considered xcd skis, unless only crappy skis fit that bill. Another thing is that my old double camber waxable skis ski so much better than any of the more modern waxless skis I've tried in the last ten years. I don't know how anyone can learn on those grabby shitty flexing things. If you can't get it, it might not be you, it's the skis.

[MikeK]

I agree with what you are saying, that's why I don't see these 'ultra-wide XCD' skis as being XCD skis. They just wind up as some ultra-fat, cheap wanna-be XC ski.

No doubt the Vector is properly designed and built ski, especially for dh.

See the thing is, when you get down to the skinnies... it's all about weight. And I've conversed with others about this but I feel there is a difference between a Fischer, a Rossi and Madshus ski in terms of quality and construction. Yeah they are all cheap sledding hill skis. That's what XCD is! But they have to be tough enough to take a beating in the wild. I ski over rocks, logs, sticks, dead animals, and sometimes snow with mine (not so much this year). They keep going. I paid no more than a couple hundred bucks for any of them, so I don't Ptex the bases. If I gouged them down to the core I would to keep water out, but I could care less what the bases look like. I know as soon as I fixed them I'd be hitting another rock, log or root in thin cover.

I haven't skied an XCD ski that has any semblance of damping to it. I mean there is a little difference between the manufacturers, but they all twang like guitar strings when you pop them. They ain't made for hard snow. The snow is your damper.

They gotta be light or you'll be wrenchin' your flimsy leather boots everywhere trying to control them on the slightest incline. It just so happens Chinese wood, air, Ptex, and fiberglass happen to give the lowest weight to cost ratio in today's economy. So that's what they are made of.

Metal edges... bah. Don't need 'em most of the time. They are more like those ding strips you put on your car doors. Keeps the rocks you are bound to hit from ripping into your base down to the core. If it's icy out they help, but you'll still be sliding around a lot more than you would on a big, heavy, damp, stiff ski. They work on that shit. That's why all the resort skis weigh a ton and have metal, basalt, rubber, aramid, whatever damping sheets in them.

I don't get how they'd be more grabby though... I mean wouldn't the vector's scales grab? I have crashed more than once because of that though.

Flex? I think they all flex pretty damn nice. All a bit different. The double camber ones are pretty funky. But you don't buy a double camber ski for xcD generally. It's more of just a track set ski with edges and a bit more forgiving double camber.

So far as we can tell, if you want a Voile quality ski for XCD, buy an Asnes. Altai might be up there too... don't know but they look nice. I'd rate Fischer next, then Madshus, then Rossi. And the Rossis get the job done.

[MikeK]

Preference, but I like my edges better now that they are all dulled out from being gummy stoned to death.

With leather boots, I don't like grabby. Grabby usually means I twist my ankle, lose my balance and fly onto my face.

Honestly the BC is never like it is at the resorts. Resorts out here turn into glaciers. They build up this giant base of snow that keep getting soft and refrozen over and over. They chew up the top surface a little with the groomers to soften it up but by midday, at the places I used to dh ski, it was usually pretty wiped. Turns into granular moguls with patches of glare ice in between.

Worst I think is when you have really hard ice hiding under a lot of fluff. We get that, and my edges don't cut into it. They just skid right over it.

Usually what I do is just take a ski down a notch if it's hard and crusty. Something that would normally be easy for me becomes intermediate to difficult. Something that is difficult becomes downright scary, so I just stay away.

Even so, as long as not glare ice or that rock hard, man made resort glacier, even the detuned edges dig in.

When you need them, they are awesome... but a lot of times, despite the reputation of the east, the snow is soft enough I don't think you really NEED them. All my skis have them though and they certainly do take the brunt of the damage - steel is a lot tougher than Ptex. Also I'm not skiing fast or aggressive like on-piste. Rolling terrain - moderate slopes...

[athabascae]

So far as we can tell, if you want a Voile quality ski for XCD, buy an Asnes.

Yeah, if I got a fat ski (maybe next year) I'd probably think pretty hard about a shapely, lightweight 188 cm Asnes Storetind (103-68-93, 2250 grams) with super teles and excursions.

I could imagine having a lot of fun doing laps or day tours in the White Pass with that setup.

But: Is it an XCD ski? Would the Knights approve? Do I care?

[video][/video]

[lowangle al]

I think the grabbyness comes from the stiff camber combined with the scales but it's a mystery to me. I just know it makes it more challenging to ski well. Most of my experience has been with double camber so I guess there are better flexing xcd skis out there. My wife has a pair of alpina cross terrains that aren't too bad. I think my point was that a better quality ski with a smooth base and some kick wax would make a difference.

As far a leather boots they shouldn't be too floppy, you need a good stiff boot if your goal is to make turns. Maybe making turns isn't your goal. When I started out I wanted to learn the turn to be able to negotiate difficult terrain as apposed to turning for the sheer fun of it. Looking back on that now it seems about as dumb as only having sex to have a baby.

[MikeK]

Storetind: Gotta be honest, it fits the current regs as far as I know. If I had one would I ski it XCD? Doubt it. To me that's a BC carving ski. It has almost the same dims as my last resort pair but with a little rocker. A ski like that would probably be awesome with like TTS or something ultralight like that. Or maybe even just pins/cable with plastic boots. I just don't see doing much XC with a ski like that. Straight up, straight down.

I don't think it's really made for bottomless (not wide enough, too much sidecut, not enough rocker), but out east, it would probably work pretty good for slide skiers and the like most of the time. We almost always have some kind of base or the snow has fairly high water content.

[MikeK]

I think the grabbyness comes from the stiff camber combined with the scales but it's a mystery to me. I just know it makes it more challenging to ski well. Most of my experience has been with double camber so I guess there are better flexing xcd skis out there. My wife has a pair of alpina cross terrains that aren't too bad. I think my point was that a better quality ski with a smooth base and some kick wax would make a difference.

As far a leather boots they shouldn't be too floppy, you need a good stiff boot if your goal is to make turns. Maybe making turns isn't your goal. When I started out I wanted to learn the turn to be able to negotiate difficult terrain as apposed to turning for the sheer fun of it. Looking back on that now it seems about as dumb as only having sex to have a baby.

My Glitts were the grabbiest on the dh of any ski I had. Double camber, waxless. You have to pressure the shit out of them to make them even wanna turn, and you're right, that scale pattern wants to stick.

The "1.5 camber" and single camber ones I don't notice it. I think the scales got better in recent years too. The Fischer ones aren't grabby at all. And the ones on the Madshus skis seen pretty smooth even though they have the grabby section in the middle (the pattern changes from tip to mid to tail).

Modern boots are different that the Norwegian welted ones. The 75mm ones aren't as stiff, but they sure seem to work good. The NNN boots go from slippers to pretty damn stiff. NNN + Slipper = THE WORST IMO. Tried it a few years back and thought it was the binding. Binding + boot. Whole system matters.

[Johnny]

I'm amazed to see that after all these years, the XCD concept is still not clear for most people. I think that's why, after several years of radio silence, the Knights are back and more active than ever to clarify this and protect the XCD dogma. I can definitely feel the Knights resurgence and the reason behind it.

Should you care about whether your skis and boots are XCD? Should you care about whether you're doing telemark or XCD? Absolutely not. Fun is the only thing that matters. You're not a hotter skier because you're doing the XCD thing instead of just telemarking.

Please understand that while the Vectors are not currently approved as a XCD ski, it has not been proven yet that it couldn't be so.

Al, your Merrell Ultra boots have two big buckles. According to the XCD Council, those are not cross-country shoes, but leather telemark boots. Nothing wrong with that, but that is not XCD, and that's where the council draw the line.

I understand you're having lots of fun with them on the vectors... And that is super-cool! But for the Vectors to be approved as a XCD ski, it would have to be proven that people can ski it downhill with XC shoes. Without any buckles or cables. We still haven't seen anyone doing this yet.

XCD = XC gear: Leather shoes, no buckles, no cables, no plastic. Just fun.
Telemark = Everything else. Just as fun too.

[MikeK]

What about the cuffs and buckles on boots like the Svartisen?

No different in concept than the buckles/cuff on XC skate boots. I was pretty sure the council was clear on that!

[lowangle al]

Maybe my boots aren't the ultras because they have no buckles. I've switched to my recent find of lace up asolos I hope they qualify.

So if I send in video of me skiing the vectors with leather and pins would the Knights reconsider? I'll need help with posting it though.