Introduction - OAC XCD 160 Sliding Snowshoes

OAC's new sliding snowshoes aim to combine cross country skis, telemark skis and snowshoes. I have never owned a pair of skis. Who then in my position isn't interested in investing into a single pair of skis, that would be suitable for the forests of southern Finland and the fells of lapland?
Here's a taste of things to come.

[@Dumptruck70]

Thanks for sharing. I like the concept of the shorter ski to maneuver easier off trail. The fact that you can pop them off and already be in hiking boots also seems advantageous. At least for most of my touring.

[@jariperho]

Thanks. Nowadays I use the OAC Kar 147 skis which are even shorter and a little bit wider. Very maneuverable. The universal bindings are great and very fast.

[@Dumptruck70]

@@jariperho I’m a heavy guy, weighing in a bit over 90kg. Occasionally I’m carrying 20kg do you think they can handle the weight? Also I just moved to Espoo, did my loud American voice scare the snow away? Lol

[@jariperho]

@@Dumptruck70 I don't think that would be a problem, but I'm sure the folks at OAC can answer your question.
I hope we'll get more snow here in Southern Finland. ✌

[@NorthFromHere1]

Jäätävän hintaisia tällaiset! Eipä noita tietysti tarvitse varmaan kuin yhdet elämän aikana ;)

[@jariperho]

+North From Here Suksien hinta on tosiaankin aika korkea. Säästöä tulee toisaalta mahdollisesti sitä kautta, ettei tarvitse ostaa monoja, erillisiä nousukarvoja, vahoja, useita paria suksia ja niihin siteitä eikä loppujen lopuksi edes lumikenkiä. Suksien kestävyys on vielä vaakalaudalla eli pidetään sitä silmällä.

[@juhokotiaho9640]

+Jari Perho Itselläni on kolmas talvi menossa samaisilla suksilla (X-trace pivot siteillä) eikä ole ollut mitään ongelmia. Kovaa käyttöä on ollut metsässä ja tuntureilla. Leijahiihtokin onnistuu hyvin eli kantit pitää kovallakin hangella. Karvan pituus on mielestäni sopiva. Ahkionkin kanssa pitää jyrkemmissäkin ylämäissä. Luistossa häviää hieman esim. normaaleille voideltaville tunturisuksille, mutta paremmalla luistolla (eli lyhyemmällä karvalla) pito olisi luonnollisesti huonompi. Olen laittanut karvattomalle alueelle säännöllisesti normaalia luistovoidetta, koska pohja sitä selkeästi kaipaa.

[@jariperho]

+Juho Kotiaho Kiitos kommentista ja kokemuksiesi jakamisesta. Itsekin kävin pienellä porukalla vähän aikaa sitten Lapissa näiden suksien kanssa. Hiihto sekä ahkion veto sujuivat aika mukavasti. Aivan jyrkimmissä nousuissa karva ei ikävä kyllä enää pitänyt. Kaverilla oli toisissa eräsuksissa myös EA-siteet ja huomasimme yhdessä, että siteiden ketteryyden tai joustavuuden takia haarakäynti ei yksinkertaisesti toiminut melkein ollenkaan. Olisi ollut parempi ottaa sukset pois jaloista ja kävellä. Luistossa nämä sukset vähän häviävät normaaleille suksille, kuten mainitsitkin, mutta sitten toisaalta pääsin nauttimaan umpihangessa hiihtämisestä ja pystyihän näillä laskemaan aika kivasti rinnettäkin.

[@jodooxq]

Do you still use the OAC 160 skis? What's your verdict after a few years with them? Pros and cons... Is an ordinary mid weight hiking boot the best or could a BC Ski boot actually improve stability? Have you kept the universal bindings? I like the idea of shorter wider skis but I'm not loving the bindings...

[@jariperho]

Yes, I still use them from time to time. The only real con I've stumbled upon is finding a suitable glide wax. Liquid waxes just don't seem to work, so they could glide better. I've also kept the universal bindings and use an insulated winter hiking boot. I don't see any problems with the bindings. I think it's great that I don't have to buy skiing specific boots.

[@jodooxq]

@@jariperho I just watched a whole video on waxing waxless skis. I didn't know you had to. Maybe the liquid wax will work better in conjunction with a well prepped base? Would you take the OAC 160 on a ski tour going from hut to hut or are they just for bushwacking and a bit of fun?

[@jariperho]

@@jodooxq You don't really have to wax them, if you don't want to. Your pace on flat ground with these is closer to snowshoes than actual skis. Waxing would help on the downhill though. I had the OAC 160s on a multi-day ski hiking trip where we all pulled sleds. I had to work a ever so slightly harder to keep up with the rest of the group on normal skis. I had zero wax and the base was super dry. Waxing would have helped with this. The integrated skin on the other hand gave me much better grip, so I had it easier on the uphill. I was also able to go on deeper snow, do some telemark skiing and explore the forests. If you're ski tour requires speed and you're going on a prepared ski track, then these aren't the best choice by any means.

[@jodooxq]

@@jariperho No I suppose there isn't a one ski to rule them all unfortunately... But I think speed is overrated even when going from hut to hut. I prefer to take the road less travelled and the OAC 160 seems like a good trade off between length, width and weight. Almost a Jack of all trades.... But I saw you on a pair of OAC 147 as well. How do they compare?

[@jariperho]

@@jodooxq I myself can't go too fast anyway, or else I'll start to sweat, so speed is also a non-issue for me. Better go slow and stay cool and dry.
The OAC 160s are definitely a Jack of all trades, master of none. If you could choose only one pair, I'd also consider the new OAC XCD GT 160 UC which has the new Unicoat base. It accepts liquid waxes much better.
The OAC Kar 147 UC that I have tried are more closer in nature to snowshoes than skis. It's a very relaxed, slow-paced experience. The integrated skin is huge, but even that doesn't beat the aggressive crampons from modern snowshoes for traction, if that's what you need.

[@iloliemi1858]

Sopivatko lumilautakenkien kanssa

[@jaegpsde3877]

Sopivatko lumilautakenkien kanssa?