- Joined
- May 31, 2018
- Posts
- 716
Tongue in cheek title aside, I’m aware that there is active debate about whether anyone needs wide skis on this site. That said, I own quite a few wide skis and I actually got to use them this year in their intended conditions despite high pressure dominating weather west of the Mississippi due to a combination of planning and luck for some inbounds days combined with cash outlays to heli ski operators.
Here are some thoughts on the fat skis I’ve used this year for some helicopter accessed runs. My hope is that this information is useful to someone (e.g. here) because there really aren’t a ton of reports I’ve read about typical heli conditions and optimal tools for them. I am happy to comment on some powder skis I like more for inbounds things if anyone cares.
About me: I’m a large person at 6 ft, 220 lbs and would self classify as a strong lifelong amateur in terms of ability. My general style was memorably described by a guide on one of these trips as a “freight train” after I double ejected on a steeper and firmer than expected roller into a fully aerial front flip so I am definitely on the "power" side of the spectrum. For powder, I tend to prefer skis in ~190+ cm lengths (or the longest available length of most models).
A note on conditions: I ended up flying in a helicopter to ski for 5 days this season, 1 in the lower 48 and 4 days in Alaska. Snowpack was broadly comparable between the locations and my groups primarily skied medium density settled powder with some faceting (faceting more so in Alaska, less the single day). I would describe the snow as nice and supportive, but to get the weightless feeling I can sometimes access in very deep inbounds (24 inch+) powder I often needed to be going fast because the snow was not inherently “light” feeling.
Terrain was mellow because of avalanche hazard combined with high alpine terrain both places. By mellow, I mean that I routinely ski higher consequence terrain inbounds than anything I accessed out of a helicopter this year. My understanding is that trying to ski “movie” lines that are substantially steeper than I accessed requires better luck with weather than I had and possibly a different group set up.
With that out of the way, here are the skis I used for the heli days.
Ski #1 – ON3P Cease and Desist 189 cm ; Binding: STH2 16
I used this one for the day in the lower 48. The shape is basically a scaled up previous generation ON3P Billy Goat with a slightly lighter core and the ON3P Billy Goat is a powder ski I really like using inbounds so I had high hopes. The most impressive attribute of the ski was that it offered truly incredible flotation even at my height and weight. I couldn’t get far enough forward to sink the tips, even at modest speeds, in the consolidated pow. This is not true for me of the narrower Billy Goat where I have to be conscious of my fore aft balance at the start of a run.
The other very cool thing about the Cease and Desist is that it is easy to break free and pivot. The runouts from high alpine bowls for this day often went through somewhat tight natural forests and I never felt tired from needing to reposition the ski to avoid the trees. Also, if I wanted to throw in a sideways drift for fun while skiing open terrain it was easy to accomplish.
However, there is a bit of a paradox in that while the Cease and Desist felt very agile in certain respects it also felt “clumsy” or “boxy” and had some issues tracking in straight lines at high speed. To explain that a bit, the clumsiness/boxy-ness I’m referring to is a less extreme version of the feeling I get trying to use similarly wide skis on hard pack where engaging the ski into a turn would make it push back pretty hard on my boot. For the Cease and Desist in these conditions, I hypothesize the feeling came from an interaction of the exceptional float the skis offered with the somewhat dense snow and occasional crusts or other funkiness in the natural snow pack. Basically, I think the skis were a bit floatier than I would have preferred for this snow consistency.
The issue I perceived with straight line stability, I think, came from a somewhat too soft flex where I occasionally got some deflection. This was a less systemic problem than the apparent clumsiness and I’m not totally certain how much it may have been influenced by natural snow pack variability or operator error.
Ski #2 – DPS Koala 119 189 cm ; Binding: STH2 13
These are a very stiff twin tip that weighs a lot. For skiing chop inbounds (I tried them in resort on a powder day before Alaska), this seems like it could be a magical combination if you have a lot of room to let them run. I was also optimistic about how they would handle more variable conditions in Alaska because I often find I like to have some extra mass in my skis for that.
My particular pair had some issues with the tune that are hopefully being remedied this off season. I also had problems finding a balance point on the ski that let me keep the tips up without pushing me into the back seat. This is possibly related to the mount point for the ski at -6.45 cm from center and I think the stiff flex exacerbates the control problem that created for me.
At present, I am hopeful that the tune will make me feel more comfortable on them next year. They have enough promise I’m willing to keep trying to figure them out, even though I didn’t like them much this year.
Ski #3 – DPS Lotus 124 Alchemist 191 cm ; Binding: Pivot 15
This was, for a long time, Blister Reviewer Paul Forward’s favorite Alaskan pow ski. Now that I’ve taken it heli skiing, I completely understand why he rated it so highly and it was definitely by far my favorite of the three skis for that application. I am quite sad that DPS seems to have significantly changed the shape of the ski when they updated it to have a “Pagoda” core.
Paul wrote a lot about why he thinks the Lotus 124 is a great ski. He both heli skis much more than I have (or likely ever will) and is more articulate. I am not going to try to fully recap the great things about the ski for heli skiing, but I will try to give some context to what I thought was uniquely excellent about it for this application compared to all powder skis I’ve used inbounds or out.
The best part of the Lotus 124 for me was the degree of control it created. At speed, the ski tended to dig the tail in while plaining the font out. This position made it super easy to push into the tips of the ski and arc across the fall line into whatever turn shape I wanted to access or simply go straight down. They weren’t quite as easy to drift as the Cease and Desist at low speed, likely because the Lotus has a much more “normal” side cut profile, but at the same time it was never a struggle to slarve or slide the Lotus with a bit of speed. I can’t think of too many weaknesses in consistent pow or pow with occasional sun and wind crusts, but I don’t think it floats quite as well as the Cease and Desist. While I could imagine wanting more float than the Lotus offers in exceptionally deep dry powder, I don't have any particular reason to think the Lotus 124 would be a "bad" choice in epic conditions. Rather, I feel I can't know whether it would be the "best" choice given my experience with the skis so far.
I did use the Lotus once inbounds on a 12 inch pow day with some wind loading to see how it felt before getting dropped off on a mountain top. The snow inbounds was much lighter than what I was skiing out of a helicopter and provided a more normal way of assessing float for me because I have much more experience skiing limited depth light pow inbounds than extremely deep but consolidated pow out of bounds. The Lotus 124 floats very well, perhaps unsurprisingly given it's dimensions, in light snow. I would need to spend more time skiing this kind of snowpack to be definitive, but I would say the float is as good as you would expect for a 124 underfoot ski with a big shovel. It also handles tight spaces well because it is so light it's very easy to pivot around at my height and weight.
Last, the Alchemist core is definitely impressively damp for its weight, but I don’t think the Lotus would be a first choice for inbounds chop or crud where I would much prefer something like the Koala (even with balance point issues I have had there). I do agree with what Paul said about the Lotus carving surprisingly well for it's width, so if that were more important for your inbounds pow ski than soft chop I could see a case for it.
A brief note on other people's skis, almost all of the other guests were on K2 Pon2oons available from our hosts. I never felt particularly tempted to try the Pon2oons out. The Pon2oons seemed relatively soft and I think are more optimized for making powder and crust easy to ski than high speed performance.
Here are some thoughts on the fat skis I’ve used this year for some helicopter accessed runs. My hope is that this information is useful to someone (e.g. here) because there really aren’t a ton of reports I’ve read about typical heli conditions and optimal tools for them. I am happy to comment on some powder skis I like more for inbounds things if anyone cares.
About me: I’m a large person at 6 ft, 220 lbs and would self classify as a strong lifelong amateur in terms of ability. My general style was memorably described by a guide on one of these trips as a “freight train” after I double ejected on a steeper and firmer than expected roller into a fully aerial front flip so I am definitely on the "power" side of the spectrum. For powder, I tend to prefer skis in ~190+ cm lengths (or the longest available length of most models).
A note on conditions: I ended up flying in a helicopter to ski for 5 days this season, 1 in the lower 48 and 4 days in Alaska. Snowpack was broadly comparable between the locations and my groups primarily skied medium density settled powder with some faceting (faceting more so in Alaska, less the single day). I would describe the snow as nice and supportive, but to get the weightless feeling I can sometimes access in very deep inbounds (24 inch+) powder I often needed to be going fast because the snow was not inherently “light” feeling.
Terrain was mellow because of avalanche hazard combined with high alpine terrain both places. By mellow, I mean that I routinely ski higher consequence terrain inbounds than anything I accessed out of a helicopter this year. My understanding is that trying to ski “movie” lines that are substantially steeper than I accessed requires better luck with weather than I had and possibly a different group set up.
With that out of the way, here are the skis I used for the heli days.
Ski #1 – ON3P Cease and Desist 189 cm ; Binding: STH2 16
I used this one for the day in the lower 48. The shape is basically a scaled up previous generation ON3P Billy Goat with a slightly lighter core and the ON3P Billy Goat is a powder ski I really like using inbounds so I had high hopes. The most impressive attribute of the ski was that it offered truly incredible flotation even at my height and weight. I couldn’t get far enough forward to sink the tips, even at modest speeds, in the consolidated pow. This is not true for me of the narrower Billy Goat where I have to be conscious of my fore aft balance at the start of a run.
The other very cool thing about the Cease and Desist is that it is easy to break free and pivot. The runouts from high alpine bowls for this day often went through somewhat tight natural forests and I never felt tired from needing to reposition the ski to avoid the trees. Also, if I wanted to throw in a sideways drift for fun while skiing open terrain it was easy to accomplish.
However, there is a bit of a paradox in that while the Cease and Desist felt very agile in certain respects it also felt “clumsy” or “boxy” and had some issues tracking in straight lines at high speed. To explain that a bit, the clumsiness/boxy-ness I’m referring to is a less extreme version of the feeling I get trying to use similarly wide skis on hard pack where engaging the ski into a turn would make it push back pretty hard on my boot. For the Cease and Desist in these conditions, I hypothesize the feeling came from an interaction of the exceptional float the skis offered with the somewhat dense snow and occasional crusts or other funkiness in the natural snow pack. Basically, I think the skis were a bit floatier than I would have preferred for this snow consistency.
The issue I perceived with straight line stability, I think, came from a somewhat too soft flex where I occasionally got some deflection. This was a less systemic problem than the apparent clumsiness and I’m not totally certain how much it may have been influenced by natural snow pack variability or operator error.
- Verdict – I think I would like the Cease and Desist in lower density deep soft snow where the flotation would be at a premium. I suspect it would be an excellent choice for BC style terrain looking at ski movies filmed there, but for me in these conditions it was good and not great.
Ski #2 – DPS Koala 119 189 cm ; Binding: STH2 13
These are a very stiff twin tip that weighs a lot. For skiing chop inbounds (I tried them in resort on a powder day before Alaska), this seems like it could be a magical combination if you have a lot of room to let them run. I was also optimistic about how they would handle more variable conditions in Alaska because I often find I like to have some extra mass in my skis for that.
My particular pair had some issues with the tune that are hopefully being remedied this off season. I also had problems finding a balance point on the ski that let me keep the tips up without pushing me into the back seat. This is possibly related to the mount point for the ski at -6.45 cm from center and I think the stiff flex exacerbates the control problem that created for me.
At present, I am hopeful that the tune will make me feel more comfortable on them next year. They have enough promise I’m willing to keep trying to figure them out, even though I didn’t like them much this year.
- Verdict – TBD, trying to keep an open mind. Maybe I don’t like forward mount points in powder?
Ski #3 – DPS Lotus 124 Alchemist 191 cm ; Binding: Pivot 15
This was, for a long time, Blister Reviewer Paul Forward’s favorite Alaskan pow ski. Now that I’ve taken it heli skiing, I completely understand why he rated it so highly and it was definitely by far my favorite of the three skis for that application. I am quite sad that DPS seems to have significantly changed the shape of the ski when they updated it to have a “Pagoda” core.
Paul wrote a lot about why he thinks the Lotus 124 is a great ski. He both heli skis much more than I have (or likely ever will) and is more articulate. I am not going to try to fully recap the great things about the ski for heli skiing, but I will try to give some context to what I thought was uniquely excellent about it for this application compared to all powder skis I’ve used inbounds or out.
The best part of the Lotus 124 for me was the degree of control it created. At speed, the ski tended to dig the tail in while plaining the font out. This position made it super easy to push into the tips of the ski and arc across the fall line into whatever turn shape I wanted to access or simply go straight down. They weren’t quite as easy to drift as the Cease and Desist at low speed, likely because the Lotus has a much more “normal” side cut profile, but at the same time it was never a struggle to slarve or slide the Lotus with a bit of speed. I can’t think of too many weaknesses in consistent pow or pow with occasional sun and wind crusts, but I don’t think it floats quite as well as the Cease and Desist. While I could imagine wanting more float than the Lotus offers in exceptionally deep dry powder, I don't have any particular reason to think the Lotus 124 would be a "bad" choice in epic conditions. Rather, I feel I can't know whether it would be the "best" choice given my experience with the skis so far.
I did use the Lotus once inbounds on a 12 inch pow day with some wind loading to see how it felt before getting dropped off on a mountain top. The snow inbounds was much lighter than what I was skiing out of a helicopter and provided a more normal way of assessing float for me because I have much more experience skiing limited depth light pow inbounds than extremely deep but consolidated pow out of bounds. The Lotus 124 floats very well, perhaps unsurprisingly given it's dimensions, in light snow. I would need to spend more time skiing this kind of snowpack to be definitive, but I would say the float is as good as you would expect for a 124 underfoot ski with a big shovel. It also handles tight spaces well because it is so light it's very easy to pivot around at my height and weight.
Last, the Alchemist core is definitely impressively damp for its weight, but I don’t think the Lotus would be a first choice for inbounds chop or crud where I would much prefer something like the Koala (even with balance point issues I have had there). I do agree with what Paul said about the Lotus carving surprisingly well for it's width, so if that were more important for your inbounds pow ski than soft chop I could see a case for it.
- Verdict – Really excellent choice for Alaskan heli skiing. Not sure if that would translate to the current version or not. While the Lotus 124 is an excellent out of bounds powder ski (I could easily imagine side country laps some place like Jackson or short tours on my pair in addition to helicopter or snow cat powered laps), I don’t necessarily think it’s the best choice for inbounds days. In fact, I own at least 3 skis I would prefer for all but a handful of inbounds powder days I have ever experienced.
A brief note on other people's skis, almost all of the other guests were on K2 Pon2oons available from our hosts. I never felt particularly tempted to try the Pon2oons out. The Pon2oons seemed relatively soft and I think are more optimized for making powder and crust easy to ski than high speed performance.
).
