“Best” Telemark Ski for Rockies and West Coast

[Stephen]

I didn’t want to hijack @bornaginalpiner’s East Coast thread:
https://www.telemarktalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=4685,
so am starting this one.

Early days for me in this arena.
Been skiing lighter XCD NNN BC and leathers.
Recently bought Voile V6 BC / TX Pro / Meidjo 3 setup, but would also like a non-traction pattern ski for firmer snow and resort.
Not fixated on resort, but know I will ski that sometimes, so something that works for tour and resort.

There are SO MANY choices, it mind-boggling.
An easy choice would be stick with Voile and go with a Vector.
There is the recommendation on the East Coast thread of the Elan Ripstick 88.
Reviews mention that being a good East Coast ski.
Wondering if that translates to the West?
And then there is the whole issue of waist width.
I can see the 88mm range being good for resort — better edging, quicker edge to edge.
Wondering if the 96-100 range would still work, or ruin that?

This isn’t very cohesive, but any thoughts to get the ball rolling are appreciated!

[Montana St Alum]

The range of stuff that works well out here (Utah) is huge. This might be an area where 2 skis with some overlap would make sense.
My younger son skis Big CC and Little CC with days at resorts as well. He's on a pair of 4FRNT Hojis in 187cm (Meidjo and Tx Pro) which would be ridiculous for someone my age and size, but he rips.

I really like my Blizzard Rustler 9's and 10's and that runs 92mm and 102mm respectively. That covers 90% of the days. For big days I really REALLY like the Dynastar M Free 108.

If I had to pick one ski to try to make work as a single ski quiver, I kind of wonder how the M Free 99 would be. I like the 108 so much that I think the 99 could replace the Rustler 10 with some crossover to the 9 as well.

In fact, my 172cm Rustler 10's are getting a bit long in the tooth. I may replace them with the M Free 99 in a 171.
Though fairly stiff, my understanding is the M Free series is titanal free. The M Pro line has the metal layer.


Of the skis I currently have, I'd pick the Rustler 9's in a 172.
But, for my style and conditions, for now at least, I'm sold on a fairly stiff rocker-camber-rocker, somewhat symmetrical design. Floaty in powder with a tail that releases easily with quick energy on groomers due to the reduced running length.
I think the Voile's have that sort of shape. My sense is that they are a bit softer flexing.

I have a pair of skis that are 84mm underfoot for set up bump days which we sometimes get, but I might retire those. At this width the boot tends to contact snow on really tight carves and I'm not inclined to put risers on them. Out here, the conditions are more forgiving and generally softer than back east, so I'm beginning to think anything under about 85 underfoot would be a real specialty ski.

[joeatomictoad]

This might be an area where 2 skis with some overlap would make sense.

Another pair for the quiver?... a solution that's always en vogue.

[Montana St Alum]

This might be an area where 2 skis with some overlap would make sense.

Another pair for the quiver?... a solution that's always en vogue.

Yeah, it's the old "N+1" is the right number, with N being your current number.

[Stephen]

This might be an area where 2 skis with some overlap would make sense.

Another pair for the quiver?... a solution that's always en vogue.

Yeah, it's the old "N+1" is the right number, with N being your current number.

This is hilarious and perversely true!
Belongs in the TeleWiki Section.

But seriously, offer up some more opinions on skis.

[Montana St Alum]

Another pair for the quiver?... a solution that's always en vogue.

Yeah, it's the old "N+1" is the right number, with N being your current number.

This is hilarious and perversely true!
Belongs in the TeleWiki Section.

But seriously, offer up some more opinions on skis.

It is hilarious.
I wish I could claim to be the genius that came up with it!

I believe it was Archimedes and I believe the full quote was "Eureka! N+1!".
He may have been talking about slave-girls. Those have become exorbitantly expensive.

[Montana St Alum]

I've been waiting for a credible deep dive into the Dynastar M-Free 99 and it's here:
https://blisterreview.com/gear-reviews/ ... -m-free-99

The thing I love about the M-Free 108, besides its ability to engage warp drive on powder days without tiring me out, is its ability to completely shrug off deflection on powder day afternoons, once the chop arrives.

My Rustler 10s tend to get deflected and though the new R10s have been beefed up, apparently they still have that characteristic.
https://blisterreview.com/gear-reviews/ ... rustler-10

The R10 at 172 has a 16m turn radius and the MF99 is 15m at 171.
Mount points are within 3mm of each other, somewhat forward (-7.5 MF99 and -7.2 R10) which IME tends toward a poppy, energetic design.

So overall I'm motating toward the MF 99 as an R10 replacement.

[Montana St Alum]

Still impressed at how well the Rustler 9 carves a nice tight turn.

[joeatomictoad]

West Coast skiing?...
Any ski where the manufacturer is in Austria (not necessarily an Austrian brand ski),
AND
90'ish + underfoot

Skis design is pretty good right now, just need a manufacturer with good quality control.

[DG99]

I long ago decided for west coast, best to have something at least 95 mm waist width and rocker tip. To tackle deep soft snow, heavy or difficult stuff, off-piste or backcountry.

Also, reasonably light for uphill. But if also at the resort probably not a very light ski, which could be sketchy on choppy, icy, high speed, hardpack etc.

Voile Ultravector or SuperCharger perhaps. I also really like Fischer Rangers, heavier and more resort oriented though.