Voile Objective BC Ski

This may be the skimo'est of skis. For those that love to walk, but dread skiing, for those out mainly for fitness.

I am 6', 166lbs, usually carried a 15-30lb pack, and bought this ski in 178cm length with the DPS phantom glide treatment. The ski is pretty soft, especially in the tail, and makes for easy skiing with the boots unlocked, and nice mellow powder turns. It does not inspire much confidence on windblown, icy ridges or at speed.

I have about 22 days on this ski, one in spring slush, and 21 in cold winter conditions. In the slush this ski was great. With the scales, the suction of the slush was not noticeable. The uphill traction exceeded expectation, with proper walking technique.

In winter, at lower angles (10-20⁰) walking in dry powder may require skins. On the downhill, this ski sucks some fun out of skiing. The scales slow things considerably, such that kicking and gliding on slight downhills is normal, especially on wind board or in powder. On cold gsnow, this ski can be very frustratingly grippy.

The scales offer surprising grip on the uphill, but disappointing grip on the downhill, even with the DPS phantom treatment. I noticed that the fun increased when I had the base ground, including scales, with no noticeable loss of uphill traction.

Maxiglide XC wax is very important for this ski. Without it, these skis will occasionally become glorified snowshoes. Because the uphill traction is so good, the base tends to be in the snow all day, requiring frequent waxing. Thus, the time gained from not dealing with skins is mostly lost waxing and removing ice from the base.

I moved to a similar "mid-fat" ski using skimo race skins as kicker skins for the flatter sections, and was much happier, and seemingly more efficient, also in rolling terrain, because I can better maintain momentum downhill and can skate on flatter terrain.

If you are going to be doing a lot of cross-country skiing with the occasional (steep) downhill, this ski is pretty sweet.

I used this ski to ski a relatively small section of the US Continental Divide. It was a good ski to head across the Red Desert. But I was glad to switch to a normal "mid-fat" ski with a classical kicker skin and climbing skin.

I'm deciding between these and the HyperVector BCs for a rolling-approach-steep-ski ski. Counterintuitively, it seems from reviews that the despite their respective waist widths, the HyperVector might be a better firm snow ski and the Objective a better soft snow ski. Is that actually the case? Which ski would do better on a firm 50 degree slope?

Hi! I relate to MJS's situation described below, and am curious what recommendations they were given by the SkimoCo Team. Thanks!

I'm planning to mount Ski Trab Garage Titan bindings onto my new Voile Objective BCs. Where should I mount the toe-pivot-point of these new bindings onto the ski?

(option 1) Mount the binding toe-pivot on the ski's balance point so that I can lift the ski level with my ski boot's toe.

(option 2) Mount the binding toe-pivot more forward of the balance point so that I have a more downhill stance on the ski?

What have you all done, and what considerations should I take into account?

I'm 145lbs and with a pack can come in at around 155. Which size should i go with? 164 or 171? What are the pros and cons of each size given my weight?

Long format question below:

I'm coming from a BC nordic background, daily driving a highly cambered traverse 78 and loving it for the infinite glide, the ski is mounted with an NNNBC boot and I have no issues (on good dry conditions that aren't too deep) linking tele and "parallel" turns in my soft nordic boot, can hockey stop on groomed nordic trails.

The skis side slip, side step, herringbone, climb on scales, and kick like a DREAM. One kick and the right wax and you're flying baby! I don't want to lose that, performance on consolidated snow is a must for daily skis and weekend tours alike.

Increasingly I've been going out for tours on more "up and down with some flat" terrain instead of what you might consider "rolling" forest terrain. I wax for the day, bring along a pair of kicker skins just in case, and usually ski about 10-12mi and 800-1000' of elevation change on a good day long ski. I usually do this without the use of my skins ("THANKS Fischer skis!")

What bothers me is that when I encounter sustained downhill portions in anything but light powder on top of consolidated snow I basically just snowplow and fumble my way through some smeary stompy turns. Add to that a narrow single track skier packed trail and I'm essentially just going to luge-it-till-I-lose-it and beef skis over ass against a tree.

Ski trails here in VT can vary from "ideal" conditions to skier packed powder to ice/refroze in the spring and early season. More often than not during the mid winter season they're very well packed powder and skied out and bumpy. The traverse 78 and NNNBC is basically at the mercy of the surface, deflected constantly, hard to actually drive in anything that's not 3" of dry powder on top of consolidated snow.

My issue is that I see folks on heavier touring set ups and they (honestly) look like they're basically snow shoeing for the majority of the day. Skin touring up, walking with a bit of glide on the flats, but they move so nicely downhill that I'm envious of their control.

I don't want to trudge or shuffle, I want to glide, I just want a bit more sidecut and potentially a full heigh light plastic boot with a locking heal so I can actually commit downhill and control myself without just doing a 15minute long snowplow.

Would this be a good place to start given my experience with BC waxless nordic / XCD / light telemark touring? I have never really owned a plastic boot or locking heel binding so I actually don't know what that's like. Last time I downhilled at a resort I was 8 and it was West Virginia so does that even count?

Would love a recommendation for a setup. Is the OBC the one for me?

This ski opened up tour options I would never consider with just skins. Long, flat approaches are faster and more efficient. I kinda forgot how much fun kicking & gliding can be on its own too.

I was also pleased to find how well this ski turns. Even though it's narrow by today's standards it has shined in fresh powder up to 10", soft faceted snow, and even wind affected snow. I have not skied it in firm conditions, but I have the impression it's more of a soft snow ski.

As noted this ski is slower on low angle gliding descents. It does not skate nearly as well as skis without pattern either. Double poling & double poling with kick are good tools to have with these skis.

I have paired this ski with Dynafit PDG (gen 1) boots and Superlite 2.0 bindings. It's a light, capable set up that's brought me a lot of joy!

I was super stoked for the scaled versions of the Voile Objectives and was looking forward to easier trail skis out without having to put skins back on and or duck walk up short uphills.

Sadly to say the scaled version of the Objectives where extremely disappointing. Took them out for the first time this weekend after getting them mounted. On slope performance was good. What was disappointing was the trail ski out was so slow I came to a stop and my team members turned around to start looking for me wondering if I had fallen and hurt myself.

Going in I knew the scales would slow the ski down. But was not expecting that the scales on the skis would deem them un-usable for me. I cannot recommend this ski at all. It is also disappointing that this is not well documented anywhere on dealers or manufacture websites.

Hey Zak,

Thanks for the tip !
I'm actually hesitating with the Utravector BC in 177 which might be a better all rounder... (and I think ok with tele bindings ?). Anyone has an opinion on whats best ? Is the Objective in 171 really bad in deep powder ?

Hi,

I was wondering what would be the best length for me ?
I'm 5'10'' and 158lbs.

Plan is to use it as a backcountry ski with light tele / touring cable bindings, with slopes ut to 30/35 degrees..

Thanks for your help !

Faster Further Funner!
Coming from a world of Karhu Guides and Fischer S-bounds, when I saw the Objectives it was a "Finally!" Type moment.
An alpine ski with scales and built for modern tech bindings! A game changer. If you need bigger and fatter they've got that to. I ride a revelator bc for that ;) Just got out on my first tour of the season, awkward touring, a dozen turns, and a good ol' bushwhack. They handled great! They floated better than I thought for twigs and they were nice and light! Can't wait for the rest of the season.
Thanks to Skimo.co They mounted my vario 2's perfectly for cheap and the package price was a good deal. Lovin this store. Thanks for the goods.

This ski seems to run short (longest length is 178cm). There is no sizing guidance on Voile's website. For a type II skier who weighs 190 lbs what length do you recommend?

Hello. Are you going to be getting some more Voile Objective BC in 164 cm in stock?
Thanks

Such a great option with the patterned base! But would these skis hold up to the forces involved with telemark bindings (BD, for instance, specifies not to use tele bindings on their Helio skis because the lightweight construction simply doesn't allow for such forces). Would this be a foreseeable issue?

I've owned these skis since the first year Voile released them (16-17) and since then, have put through the wringer on everything from hut trips, day-long tours, "XCD"-style east coast skiing, short burst of steep skiing with long approaches skinning or hiking, glade laps, setting low-angle skinners on dawn patrols, and so on. Can't imagine a better ski for the jack-of-all-trades backcountry tourer who wants to do everything from hut touring to powder hunting. I recommend these skis, especially paired with a lightweight tech binding and a race-style boot, to anyone I talk to who is looking for an east-coast mixed conditions tool. Surprisingly, however, for a ski that is 80-84cm underfoot, it is definitely a soft snow ski and not a hardpack driver -- the drawbacks of having been tested around SLC, I suppose :-) The rocker gets the ski up and out of deep powder/chunder very effectively, but the soft flex and lack of full camber makes it difficult to edge on firmer snow. If you're between sizes, a bit more effective edge might help with carving, though yo'd sacrifice some kick-turn/hop-turn/on-the-pack functionality.

How is the flex on these skis? More exactly, how would it compare to the Voile V6. I telemark on the V6 173 cm but find them too stiff for my weight and style of skiing. I also own an old pair of Madshus Annums. I love the convenience of the BC base and softer flex, but the traditional camber just isn't very nimble. If the Objective offered a more buttery flex than the V6, they might just be my next ski.