This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web. We have fun here, come on in and be a part of it.
Thanks for thoughts,
I was dead set on Koms until I started looking at V6. I have a set of Charger BC that are too wide and too stiff for my uses.
The V6 seems to have a better rocker profile while the Kom tip is appealing. I'm going for the longer as I am chunky these days.
Which is lower camber of the two, that might influence my choice as with alpine skis I generally prefer low to flat or even slight reverse camber. But I realize a ski like this needs some camber to keep the fish scales from dragging.
Which is better at slow speed?
I just checked, camber is about the same on both skis.
I think the KOM is better at slow speed, as mentioned above, but I'm running a longer length V6 so that would make sense.
Al asked if the pattern was the same and I say yes, I should mention I don't have a BC V6, just a smooth V6 but my Objective BC pattern is the same as the KOM, standard fishscale.
Can you please post a Kom rocker profile pic? Base to base?
Thanks for all your input.
Here you go, bud. Sorry about the delay. I'm comparing these 174 KOMs to a 178cm V6. So not totally fair comparison but will give a good round about idea, right? Notice the tails-- there's a big difference in tail construction. Narrower proportionally and also deeper rocker.