Xplore bindings on larger skis

[Rodbelan]

Je connais pas vot'e gang mais si vous skié le Mont des Allemands (la ou la photo a ete prise) ou bien le couloir de l’est au mont valin p-e on s’est croisé deja…

Mais je demeure an Alma et je ski surtout le mont apica dans le tit parc.

Au plaisir de se rencontrer cet hivers p-e…

Ouais cet hiver, je n'enseigne pas à l'UQAC... Mais j'ai toujours rêvé skier le Mont Apica. Je skie déjà plein de spots dans le parc entre Québec et Chicoutimi. Il me manque d'explorer la route du p'tit parc...

Sérieux, si on revient au topic, les gars te disent «dis lui d'essayer!» ... Mais ton gars n'a peut-être pas de temps à perdre avec ça... On est pas tous mindé dans cet espèce de quête absolue. Quand on voit qu'une solution proposée est en réalité une façon d'étirer l'élastique au max, de faire de la recherche & développement en mode extrême, ben, moi je dis restons pragmatique...

[Tom M]

Hi everyone,

A friend of mine wanted to get himself the Xplore + Voile Objective BC kit. He’s 6ft tall for about 200lbs.

Since the longest Objectives at 178cm are a bit short for the float he’d like (we can get a lot of snow up here around les monts valin) he was looking at mounting them on the Ultravector, the V6 or the Kom 174

Has anyone seen these bindings mounted on skis this large? I haven’t found any information so far on the internet and the guys at my local ski shop didn’t know if it had been tried yet.

With one of the stiffer boots like the Alfa or the new Fischer and the stiffer XP flex, it could work in ideal snow conditions I suppose but I’m worried about control when they aren’t so ideal (heavier snow, crust et al)

The kit wouldn’t be for resort skiing nor anything really steep in the backcountry.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts/views/ideas

I know this is an old thread, but I wanted to do an update to my previous post. I just mounted up a set of Voile Hypervector BC skis with the Xplore binding and had the opportunity to test them out today using the Alfa Free boot on soft snow and they worked great. I picked up the 177 cm length and the total ski weight with the Xplore binding is 6.86 lbs (3.1 kg). By comparison my Objectives @178 with the Xplore come in at 5.92 lbs (2.7 kg). They look huge and are the widest skis I’ve ever owned and 4 cm longer than my Hyper V6’s. Long story short, they ski very much like my Objectives and I had no problems with control. It felt like I was on a surfboard on top of the snow and I know they will be a blast right after a big dump of snow. I think this answers the question that many have asked, if it would be possible to ski a wide long ski with the Xplore in soft snow with the Free boot.

[Stephen]

@Tom M, curious if there would there be anything to the idea of switching the bindings between the HV and the V6?
Or, do you think the way you have it now is the best mix of binding and ski?

EDIT
It seems like the Voile product descriptions might back that up?

V6
ALL MOUNTAIN
INTUITIVE / SURF-LIKE

HyperVector
ALL MOUNTAIN & MOUNTAINEERING
DIRECTIONAL / CARVING

I know you’re using different bindings and boots, but do you feel any difference between the V6 and HV?

[Stephen]

Dang, this thread now has put a vision of Hyper V6's and Xplores in my head. Hopefully it will go away.

I guess it didn’t quite go away — it just morphed from V6 to HV.

[Tom M]

@Tom M, curious if there would there be anything to the idea of switching the bindings between the HV and the V6?
Or, do you think the way you have it now is the best mix of binding and ski?

EDIT
It seems like the Voile product descriptions might back that up?

V6
ALL MOUNTAIN
INTUITIVE / SURF-LIKE

HyperVector
ALL MOUNTAIN & MOUNTAINEERING
DIRECTIONAL / CARVING

I know you’re using different bindings and boots, but do you feel any difference between the V6 and HV?

@Stephen I love my Hyper V6 / Switchback x2 / T2 combination. It is not lacking in any way for my steep and deep use, so that was not the reason why I picked the Hypervector over the Hyper V6 for an Xplore combo. I picked the Hypervector just because I was curious about the ski. I've only had one outing on the Hypervector, so take this as an initial impression, not a full evaluation. The Hypervector and the Objective feel very much like the same ski, but that may be due more to the fact that I ski the Objective with the Xplore and Free as well, and you know what a great combination that is. My V6 T2 is amazing, but as I've said in the past, trying to compare an active plastic boot system to the Xplore system is a bit silly as they feel like two different sports. My T2 V6 combo is overkill for many of my outings and I always try to ski the lightest set in my quiver that is capable for the tour of the day. This winter has been a very unusual winter in that we have had tons of soft deep snow. The Objectives have been great in these conditions, but I thought the time was right to see what it would be like to ski the Xplore system in deep powder on a wider ski. All 3 skis (Objective, Hyper V6, Hypervector) turn so well in soft snow that I'm not sure I could recommend one over the other. Both the Hypervector and the Objective are touted as a better choice for hardpack, but I would pick my T2 setup for those conditions, not because of the ski, but because I'd have better edge control with a plastic boot and an active binding. I know this won't help those who are struggling with the decision as to which ski to pick, but for soft snow, I don't think it really matters, maybe pick the one with a color scheme that appeals the most.

Here is a screen grab from an upcoming video (scheduled for my YouTube channel in March) where I was skiing my Objectives @ 178 on some very light fresh powder. My ski partner was skiing his HyperVectors in AT mode. He is much lighter than I in weight, but it looked like he was floating in space. You can see that my skis are buried. The powder was as light as a feather so I wasn't bogged down at all, but I kept wondering what it would have been like on a wider ski. You will have to wait to see the video, but you will see what I mean when you watch him ski. I may have jinxed myself, maybe we won't have the same conditions again this year, but who knows. If so, I'm prepared.

[lilcliffy]

The Hypervector and the Objective feel very much like the same ski,

This does not surprise me- I have compared both skis in the shop (I have never skied either- though have skied the original Vector ski)- they have the same camber-rocker-flex profile- the Objective, Ultravector and Supercharger all have Voile's "early-rise camber"- as opposed to the "hybrid rocker" profile-flex of the V6 and V8:
https://www.voile.com/blog/do-i-want-th ... id-rocker/

The UV has a significantly longer effective edge than the V6, and does not have the open rockered tail of the V6-
the V6 has much less effective sidecut- despite that the V6 has a shorter turn radius!

Very cool that you got a chance to try this class of ski with the XP system and the Free boot Tom- supere coole!
Now you just need to pull that binding off the V6 and do a back to back test of this XP setup- UV vs HV6!!

Being a serious nerd about all of this-
I personally think Telemark bindings on the UV and XP on the V6-

Both the Hypervector and the Objective are touted as a better choice for hardpack, but I would pick my T2 setup for those conditions, not because of the ski, but because I'd have better edge control with a plastic boot and an active binding.

Regardless- your report confirms what I have suspected- in ideal conditions, there is no reason why one could not use ultralight BC-XC/XCD boots and bindings (NN-3pin/NNNBC/XP) on a ski as wide as the V6/UV (i.e. ~100mm). If/when I buy a V6- I will seriously consider the XP binding on them- as I will only be using them in ideal conditions in my local backcountry touring...
Thanks again!
Gareth

[lowangle al]

I put a lot of miles on earlier this winter with wide skis and leather boots with good success. In good soft snow conditions I found the limiting factor to be tracking while touring rather than downhill performance. For this reason I would recommend the ultra vector over the V6 because it is more directional.

[lilcliffy]

I put a lot of miles on earlier this winter with wide skis and leather boots with good success. In good soft snow conditions I found the limiting factor to be tracking while touring rather than downhill performance. For this reason I would recommend the ultra vector over the V6 because it is more directional.

My "thumbs-up" did not show up!
Thumbs-up!

[bbense]

I went down this rabbit hole about 20 years ago when 80mm was a "fat powder ski". I even found a pair of Alpina 5000 NNN/BC boots and the old super loop base plate for NNN/BC. When conditions are soft and light , you can ski anything with anything, but the more the mismatch in power between boot, binding and ski the smaller the window of usability gets.

I did get some Alfa boots and xplore bindings this winter and so far I'm really liking them on skinny skis like my old Madhus Glittertinds. The Alfa is the first system boot I've seen in a long time that passes the "hand twist test". If you can twist the boot easily in two hands it doesn't have enough torsional stiffness to telemark in hard conditions.

The xplore system address all the flaws I found with using NNN/BC for telemarking in typical backcountry conditions. I'm looking forward to getting back out on skinny skis and meadow skipping.

[Stephen]

… , you can ski anything with anything, but the more the mismatch in power between boot, binding and ski the smaller the window of usability gets.

I love the concept of wide with light, but would sure hate to turn the corner and run into a traverse across windslab with that setup (100mm skis).

Right now Objective + Free + Xplore has been fun the one time I have been out on that (previously setup for NNN BC and Guards — which was also fun).
Crazy idea would be to add inserts to my Hyper V6 so I could also mount the Xplore, as well as the Meidjo they are currently set up for.