• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Gear Looking for 92mm, easy, forgiving AT Ski

Slim

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Posts
2,971
Location
Duluth, MN
Anyone have any suggestions for a touring ski in the ~92mm width (160-170cm length) that is on the softer, more forgiving side to ski?
A touch of rocker and taper in the tails tails would be nice to help release the tails when they are caught in deeper snow.
 

Mike Rogers

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Posts
753
Location
Calgary
My partner, Liz uses the Moment sierra for her 9x waisted touring ski. It isn't a touring specific ski, but it's pretty light.

The 162 version measures 95mm at the waist. The triple camber should improve edge grip, and the mustache rocker is pretty forgiving. They weigh 1500g/ ski....so not the lightest, but many people will find the weight manageable. A little extra mass helps with rough snow too!

 
Thread Starter
TS
Slim

Slim

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Posts
2,971
Location
Duluth, MN
Thanks @Mike Rogers . 1500g/ski is higher than what I was looking for, but not the end of the world.
This would be for my wife, who skis a 170 K2 Fullavit 95Ti. (1600g/ski). That ski suits her very well. For a new touring ski, I was looking for something sort of in the same style. That Moment looks nice, but I do think more tail rocker than what I gad in mind, and definitely don't want/need a twin tip for this.
I suspect the long tail rocker of the Fullavit contributes to lack of grip in certain situations (kick turns), because you basically don't have grip on that part off the ski.
So I was thinking of something with just a touch of tail rocker to help release the tail in heavy/grabby snow, but with the camber extending further than on the Fullavit, for better grip while skinning.
Two I had looked at were the Voile Hyper V6, and Atomic Backland 100/98 but they are on the wide side, so was wondering if anyone knew of something a bit narrower.
 

Crank

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Dec 19, 2015
Posts
2,623
You are describing my old G3 Saintes withe 93mm waist and a bit of early rise. Not sure if G3 has an equivalent ski now. Seems like they have gone fatter and have a 94 that may be a bit stiffer.
 

Cheizz

AKA Gigiski
Skier
Joined
Aug 15, 2016
Posts
1,958
Location
The Netherlands
The old Salomon Lux 92 perhaps? It comes in 161 or 169. According to EVO, the 161 weighs 1505 grams per ski. That's the 2018 version

One other options:
Black Crows Orb Freebird @167 - 1400 gr
 
Last edited:
Thread Starter
TS
Slim

Slim

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Posts
2,971
Location
Duluth, MN
Yeah, I was thinking more in the 1000g-1400g/ski weight class. We don't ski downhill very fast, and she has her current skis with Shifts for that anyway. This would be pure touring use.

@Cheizz , That Orb freeboard is exactly what I was looking for, as long as they are not too stiff.
 

Analisa

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Posts
982
+1 on the Lux, or the Pandora 94 and Blaze 94 are pretty comparable. A lot of friends I help land on those 3 since they're also always a compelling price. The Pandora 94 is probably the most demanding of the 3, but definitely still forgiving overall.

Lighter, I'd look at the Talkback 96, the Voile options, or G3 "Swift" series (in shorter sizes/softer flexes for smaller skiers). The DPS Pagoda 94 C2 has also been on my radar since I've been really pleased with the Alchemist Wailer 112s for a soft snow setup, especially as a ski that can be driven when I'm confident and steered from way in the backseat when I'm not.

I'd skip the Backland 98. Incredible ski for the weight, but friends who bought it as a lightweight replacement for their 102 FRs or the purple version 102 say it's not the same ski - needs a more forward stance and isn't as forgiving. Almost like a middle ground between the Traces & Talkbacks and the more demanding Zero G line.
 

Cheizz

AKA Gigiski
Skier
Joined
Aug 15, 2016
Posts
1,958
Location
The Netherlands
I haven't been on the Orb Freebird myself. The regular Orb is quite forgiving compared to other ~90 mm skis. I did try the Camox Freebird and it is very gentle. But to me, all lightweight touring skis seem very bendy. Except maybe the carbon-only resonance skis. but the Orb Freebird is not like that.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Slim

Slim

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Posts
2,971
Location
Duluth, MN
This question was inspired by our recent spring skiing trip to Cooke City (https://www.skitalk.com/threads/cooke-city-mt-yellowstone.23419/).

We have a pair of 163 Fischer Hannibal 94 skis, that both my wife and my 13 year old can use. Since this was a family trip, my wife used her Fullavits 95 (with Shift bindings), and my oldest daughter used the Hannibals. (Both my daughters and my wife all wear 24.5 boots).

In the firm, spring conditions, the width of the Fullavits wasn’t necessary, and the deep tail rocker, combined with the slightly longer length, made kickturns hard.
Of course, most of all, the weight was a drag on the uphill.

So I was thinking I could go a few different directions, with some new AT skis for her.
We want to do it all, but we don’t ski fast in the backcountry, so definitely favor low weight over high speed stability.
This also means we need somehting that is maneuverable at slow speeds, and in tight terrain.

We also tend to be fairly risk averse.

So things we have on the wish list would be:

Mid season low, low angle powder skiing (favors lightweight, long, wide, soft/rockered skis).
Spring Touring (favors lightweight, short, skinny skis)
European Hut-to-hut traverse (favors mid width, lightweight, capable in variable conditions)
Easy ski mountaineering (favors short, lightweight, easy to turn skis)
Canadian backcountry lodge trip (favors one of the above depending on location/time)


One option would be getting another allrounder type ski, somehting 90-100mm wide.
The thing with that is that it is very similar to the Hannibal we already have.

Another option would be getting somehting longer and wider: >170cm, ~105mm wide.
If we put Vipecs on there, she could use them as an inbounds powder ski on deep days, and use them to tour during midwinter and especially during mixed resort/backcoutry trips out west.
Then, for spring trips, our oldest could use them: she has longer legs and younger knees, so kickturns and sidehilling on 105mm skis won’t be a big deal for her. My wife could use the Hannibals for that.

The third option would be getting something in the 85-90mm width, in a short length, for maximum enjoyment and ease of use in spring (skimountaineering) conditions.
 

Ken_R

Living the Dream
Skier
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Posts
5,775
Location
Denver, CO
Anyone have any suggestions for a touring ski in the ~92mm width (160-170cm length) that is on the softer, more forgiving side to ski?
A touch of rocker and taper in the tails tails would be nice to help release the tails when they are caught in deeper snow.

I would check out the Black Crows Camox Freebird. Should be well under 1400g. Fantastic ski that is extremely capable but still pretty easy to ski. I choose the Navis over it because I wanted to have more stiffness and support due to me being heavy + pack. (195 lb + 25 lb+)
 

Ken_R

Living the Dream
Skier
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Posts
5,775
Location
Denver, CO
This question was inspired by our recent spring skiing trip to Cooke City (https://www.SkiTalk.com/threads/cooke-city-mt-yellowstone.23419/).

We have a pair of 163 Fischer Hannibal 94 skis, that both my wife and my 13 year old can use. Since this was a family trip, my wife used her Fullavits 95 (with Shift bindings), and my oldest daughter used the Hannibals. (Both my daughters and my wife all wear 24.5 boots).

In the firm, spring conditions, the width of the Fullavits wasn’t necessary, and the deep tail rocker, combined with the slightly longer length, made kickturns hard.
Of course, most of all, the weight was a drag on the uphill.

So I was thinking I could go a few different directions, with some new AT skis for her.
We want to do it all, but we don’t ski fast in the backcountry, so definitely favor low weight over high speed stability.
This also means we need somehting that is maneuverable at slow speeds, and in tight terrain.

We also tend to be fairly risk averse.

So things we have on the wish list would be:

Mid season low, low angle powder skiing (favors lightweight, long, wide, soft/rockered skis).
Spring Touring (favors lightweight, short, skinny skis)
European Hut-to-hut traverse (favors mid width, lightweight, capable in variable conditions)
Easy ski mountaineering (favors short, lightweight, easy to turn skis)
Canadian backcountry lodge trip (favors one of the above depending on location/time)


One option would be getting another allrounder type ski, somehting 90-100mm wide.
The thing with that is that it is very similar to the Hannibal we already have.

Another option would be getting somehting longer and wider: >170cm, ~105mm wide.
If we put Vipecs on there, she could use them as an inbounds powder ski on deep days, and use them to tour during midwinter and especially during mixed resort/backcoutry trips out west.
Then, for spring trips, our oldest could use them: she has longer legs and younger knees, so kickturns and sidehilling on 105mm skis won’t be a big deal for her. My wife could use the Hannibals for that.

The third option would be getting something in the 85-90mm width, in a short length, for maximum enjoyment and ease of use in spring (skimountaineering) conditions.

Yeah I dont like skis much wider than 100mm for backcountry use. Mi Navis are 102's and I love them here in Colorado even mid winter. I got them in 185cm length to have a bit more support in powder and that worked out great. Wouldnt want a bigger ski, they would be a chore when side hilling / kick turning etc. Although in the right conditions one could even use 115mm wide skis here although most days they would be too much. Most people go in a tad shorter length for their backcountry skis compared to their resort skis to make them easier to handle. Regarding bindings, the simpler the better, up to a point of course. I still like to have brakes.
 

Analisa

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Posts
982
I'd probably skip the Camox Freebird. I'm not sure if it's something different in the shorter sizes, but both friends I know with the 166 haven't loved it. One just sold them tonight, who is also the girl who owns the old Backland 102 FR, new Backland 98, and also has had some burlier inbound skis in her quiver like the pre-2021 Santa Ana and Aura. She said they were a lot less maneuverable compared to the Backland 98s.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Slim

Slim

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Posts
2,971
Location
Duluth, MN
Thanks @Analisa , yep 166cm is about the length I am looking at, since my wife is 5’7 and my 13 year old is 5’11” (but a fair bit lighter weight)
 

FlimFlamvanHam

Putting on skis
Skier
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Posts
79
Location
North Vancouver BC
If going down a few mms in waist width to 88 is a consideration you can pick up a women's Salomon mtn Explore 88's in the size range you seek. ~1200g for a 161 and ~1250g for a 169.

Corbetts has both sizes their usual close to free pricing.

Great dedicated touring skis. Longish rise tip. Very subtle longish tail rocker (call it flat for a bit till camber starts to rise).
 
Thread Starter
TS
Slim

Slim

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Posts
2,971
Location
Duluth, MN
Thanks! @FlimFlamvanHam , that was one I was considering, especially after reading it is a bit less stiff than the Wayback 88
 

Cheizz

AKA Gigiski
Skier
Joined
Aug 15, 2016
Posts
1,958
Location
The Netherlands
Well, it doesn't exist yet. But have a look at this and then imagine an AT version of it...

 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top