Help me choose a new waxless backcountry ski

Another one to consider is the Alpina X Terrain. I think it fits in this category.

I wouldn't want to argue with the Rossignol rep, but my guess is that BC 125 means a tip width of (about) 125. Just as BC 110 means a tip of 110, etc.

I don't know about these specific skis, but I've been impressed with the speed of Fischer's waxless bottoms. I think Atomic uses the same scale pattern (I wouldn't be surprised if the same people in Austria supply both companies).

Another one to consider is the Alpina X Terrain. I think it fits in this category.

I wouldn't want to argue with the Rossignol rep, but my guess is that BC 125 means a tip width of (about) 125. Just as BC 110 means a tip of 110, etc.

I don't know about these specific skis, but I've been impressed with the speed of Fischer's waxless bottoms. I think Atomic uses the same scale pattern (I wouldn't be surprised if the same people in Austria supply both companies).

Some of the Atomics, Fischers, and Salomons are the same ski--IIRC the the Rainier, Rebound, and X-Adv 88 are the same with different graphics.

Steve, good point about the boot..  T4 for the Rossi? yeah, but just  -  I'll meadowskip the BC125 with Excursions, including laps, but also boot up with T1s for resort and sidecountry - much fun.   For the Vector BC, no way is T4 enough boot... 

About the BC125 base, I don't know, but I hotwax it as needed and seems to be receptive.  And it's considerably faster on low angle glides than the Vector BC.

Agree with BOF on CRS, but hey, it's about the turns..   

Good to know! I really want to reuse my t4's with Voile Hardwire 3-Pin Bindings. My wife wasn't too happy when I told her it was time to replace my touring skis. :

Would the T4 with the Voile bindings work with the Rossignol BC 110's?

Steve, good point about the boot..  T4 for the Rossi? yeah, but just  -  I'll meadowskip the BC125 with Excursions, including laps, but also boot up with T1s for resort and sidecountry - much fun.   For the Vector BC, no way is T4 enough boot... 

Pardon my ignorance, but could someone explain the whole "not enough boot" concept. I come from a cross country background, and get some of it. Obviously, you can't put a regular cross country boot on a heavy metal edged ski and expect to make good turns with it. The boot is too floppy, and the ski is too heavy.

But with these skis, they look to be about the same weight. More to the point, it looks like the Vector BC is lighter than the Rossignol 125. If so, then why could you drive a BC 125, but not a Vector BC with the same boot. What am I missing?

(thanks in advance)

IMV, whether a boot is "enough boot" for a ski is determined by 4 factors: ski width, ski stiffness, turnability (radius, rocker, etc.) and skier skill/style

The Vector BC and BC125 have roughly the same waist width

The BC125 has more camber and a longer camber pattern, which, in theory, would require more boot.

Vector is softer and has rocker tip, which, in theory, should militate in favor of less boot

Although I haven't skied either of them, I would think that a boot stiff enough and big enough to ski the BC125 would be sufficient for the Vector

ETA: For tele, add a 5th factor: activity of the binding

Good to know!  I really want to reuse my t4's with Voile Hardwire 3-Pin  Bindings.  My wife wasn't too happy when I told her it was time to replace my touring skis. :

Would the T4 with the Voile bindings work with the Rossignol BC 110's?

I ski T4s and Voile 3 pin w/cables on the S-bound 98s, and they are more than enough. T4/Hardwires with the 110s would be nicely balanced combination IMHO.