or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › The jury is still out on the V2 Chubb
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The jury is still out on the V2 Chubb

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
What is this? The addict calling to question a Volant? Well I finally got my V2 Chubbs mounted, and had some appropriate conditions to test them in and, well, they kinda sucked.

Now, I haven't given up on them, as I think the glitch is in the mounting position (mine were mounted at the factory center mark), but they were relatively unwieldy compared with my '01 Chubbs of about the same length (my '01s are 188s, my V2s are 187 by my measurement though they CALL them a 185). Methinks the problem is how ridiculously far forward the center mark is, and how long of a tail this leaves. I'm going to move them back and try again.

Now, I will admit freely that the V2s carved impressively on the hardpacked runout, and I did enjoy this, but I bought them for powder and deep crud, and in crud the were twitchy, while in powder I couldn't find a happy medium between pitching forward as the tips dove, and falling into the backseat. The tail length really hung me up in soft moguls. I don't like having to wrestle with my skis, and I had a difficult time finding the sweet spot. I gave them a day and a half to behave as they were mounted, and now I'll have to tinker with them a bit.

Maybe I shouldn't have lusted after the wider post-American Chubbs, well the jury is still out.
post #2 of 26

Same here...wierd

Strange coincidence that you just posted this. I had my v2's out for the first time yesterday at wolf creek w/ knee deep powder and chop. Mine are 175's and are also mounted at the factory center mark (with the marker's you sold me actually )

These are my first pair of fat ski's, and I'm still very much a powder/soft newbie, so I have nothing to compare to, but I was thinking exactly the same thing - too much tail, mounted too far forward. These are the longest ski's that I have, but didn't feel any longer at all until I looked back and realized how massive the tail was.

I've also been working on trying to stay out of the back seat, especially on steeper pitches, but the tips kept diving unless I conciously had my wieght a little bit back.

Aren't powder skis supposed be mounted a bit farther back to give you more float up front? I swear mine are almost mounted dead center of the ski, like a pair of twins for the park.

I'm definately considering getting these re-mounted. I was super impressed with how they performed on groomed/hardpack for such a wide ski, but I think I was actually happier w/ the performance of my new Hot Rods in the deep, though the chubbs definately float better (when the tips aren't diving).
post #3 of 26
187 cm?

Remind us, how much do you weigh?

The '01 Chubbs were soft-> bigger sweet spot.
post #4 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by comprex
187 cm?

Remind us, how much do you weigh?

The '01 Chubbs were soft-> bigger sweet spot.
Yep 187. Just a shade shorter than my 188s (I DID measure them).

I'm around 190 in the raw. My '01s are noticably stiffer than the V2s (also more so in the tip than my '00 Ti Chubbs and '95? Chubbs), in both the forebody and tail. I have my '01s about 1cm back from the toe mark.
post #5 of 26
VA - I feel for ya on the new V2 Chubbs. They really aren't the same beast at all. The V2s are much stiffer (almost as stiff as the FBs) and they suffer from the same "too far forward" midsole mark as the FBs (there are quite a few threads about this). I mounted my FBs back about 15mm and they're much better, but I probably could have gone back 25mm. For me they're just a bit too stuff to really excel in the deep stuff. I actually enjoyed my Stormrider DPs (91mm underfoot) more than the FBs for a powder day. I'm also at a loss as to what to do with my FBs - I'll probably give them one more shot and then I may unload them at the end of the season. I have my heart set on a new pair of Elan M999 skis (now those are definitely good powder skis).

P.S. I just re-read your post above and seems that you're saying the V2 Chubbs are softer than the '01 Chubbs. That would really surprise me cause that's not what I noticed hand flexing them in the shop (unfortunately the old Chubbs weren't the length I wanted).
post #6 of 26
Hey VA....glad you finally got out on the new Chubbs - but sorry to hear it didn't go quite as expected.

I had the same experience at first with them (which I think I mentioned to you - and didn't I recommend mounting back ) but then I came to like the mounting point. Yes keeping the tips up in low angle pow was always a bit of a chore but when hauling arse on steeper stuff that extra tail is $$. The tail is rather soft and by having more tail like that it gives the ski more stability to handle high speeds in soft snow. I came to like them in untracked and I found them very good in tracked out pow and pow bumps but as I got better they became not quite stiff enough (especially the tail) for mankier snow or spring conditions.

Just ignore that lovely sound of wobbling sheet metal, open them up and stay low and see if you come to like them as is....if not I don't think it's an issue to drill the plate a third time...

...and fwiw - my favorite skis have all been skis I didn't like the first day....a ski that let's you hop on and instantly have the sweet spot won't take you anywhere...know what I mean??

...best of luck man!!
post #7 of 26
I've skied about 20 days on V2's and about 15 were Powder Days- IMO the V2 is a great soft snow ski but doesn't work well for high speed turns on hardpack. It also depends upon a person's weight and ability, the V2 seems to be more of a 7-8 skill level ski whereas the FB is more of a level 9-10 ski. V2 is more forgiving...FB is more punishing.

While I generally prefer the FB's versatility, the V2 has an effortless powder sweetspot...That remains my weapon of choice for the deepest days
post #8 of 26
Thread Starter 
On Sunday night I finally remounted my V2 Chubbs (at -20mm), and we promptly got some new snow on Monday night, so I gave them a real trial.

The snow was very dry fluff, but was loosely sitting on really cold-hardened crunchy crust, which was difficult to get an edge to bite into. The V2s suffered greater deflection than my '01 Chubbs when charging this difficult pairing of snow types, but when I found some drifted powder, they allowed me some of the sweetest turns of the year.

The -20mm mounting position was much better than the factory boot center mark, but in spite of mounting them back they still have longer tails than my '01 Chubbs in the same length*.

The V2s will be my big powder day skis, but they won't be taking over the crud killer role in my quiver, they weigh about the same as my '01s, but have a broader surface area to receive the impact of crud, and since there is more area taking the hits that crud inflicts, they don't give as damp a ride on difficult varried terrain.

* here's the '01 and '04 (V2) Chubbs base to base, notice the "185" V2 on the left vs. the 188 '01s on the right:
525x525px-LL-vbattach496.jpg
post #9 of 26
VA - I'm not seeing what you're trying to show in the picture.
post #10 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler
VA - I'm not seeing what you're trying to show in the picture.
Left ski looks marginally longer to me, even though I think it was supposed to be 2cm shorter. . . :

Mollmeister
post #11 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by mollmeister
Left ski looks marginally longer to me, even though I think it was supposed to be 2cm shorter. . . :

Mollmeister
The ski's chord length is meaningless - all that counts is the contact length and you wouldn't get that from a picture of just the ski tips.
post #12 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler
VA - I'm not seeing what you're trying to show in the picture.
All I'm pointing out is that they're longer than the advertised chord length, they are just as long as my 188s. I understand that the characteristics of the ski are less related to chord length than contact length (and even more to the construction/flex), but that is not a measurement the manufacturer uses to refer to the ski.
post #13 of 26
Thread Starter 

The verdict is in

Well, today I skied the V2s in some quality fluff, and the quantity was such that the long time locals were grinning from ear to ear. My verdict on the V2 is that it is a GREAT powder ski, but I think it will sit unles there is a fair accumulation of snow, as I have better skis for less than stellar conditions.

I love these skis, they turn quick in the trees, and float well on deep drifted powder, but they are not the devestating crud ski that the final form of steel capped Chubbs are, nor do they have the edge bite on icy patches either. I am pleased as punch to have them in my quiver, and they will be my powder day choice.
post #14 of 26
See Dan ski- see Dan grin! My bro skied the Chubbs(185) all week in powder and crud and loved them. New motto- no worries, just Chubby it!
post #15 of 26

Vindicated by the Volant Jury!

Glad to hear the Volant Jury has returned a verdict in agreement with my post (in this thread) from a month ago

I find it quite interesting how different the V2 is compared with the FB which are identical in all dimensions. I ski both, although the FB is my everyday ski. The V2 is a great soft snow/powder ski... Period (and that is it). The FB excells in virtually everything else- Crud, groomed, etc but doesn't have that "effortless powder sweetspot" of the V2.

It has sure been a Chubb kind of Millennium
post #16 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Lomond
Glad to hear the Volant Jury has returned a verdict in agreement with my post (in this thread) from a month ago

I find it quite interesting how different the V2 is compared with the FB which are identical in all dimensions. I ski both, although the FB is my everyday ski. The V2 is a great soft snow/powder ski... Period (and that is it). The FB excells in virtually everything else- Crud, groomed, etc but doesn't have that "effortless powder sweetspot" of the V2.

It has sure been a Chubb kind of Millennium
I've had two additional days on the V2, in progressively deeper snow (I actually hit a shot today that was crotch deep), and now I'm seriously loving them. I have now also skied them in soft crud, and they performed admirably, they charged the irregular, soft, but heavier and slightly setting up, piles while maintaining a really smooth stable platform to stand on.
post #17 of 26

V2 Chubb Impressions after 3 Days

I just skied a new pair of 185 V2's and I really am starting to enjoy them. I'll write up a review later, but I wanted to add to this thread.

Setup: Atomic Xentric 88mm binding bases w/Race 14 bindings. Bindings are set so the 2nd position from the front is boot centered, allowing bindings to be set back up to 20mm.

Conditons: 3 storm days in the last week at Mt Rose (Highest Base in the Sierras. Next to Reno, NV). Fresh knee deep powder, steep (45-55 deg) 3 day old powder, light and heavy chopped up powder and crud.

Other skis in quiver: I bought these skis new on eBay ($ 199) to replace a pair of Volkl G4 188's that felt like a two 2X4's to me. I needed something to fit in between my 179 K2 Public Enemy's (A really good, all mountain ski) and my 193 Atomic Big Daddy's. Dynamic VR27 Slaloms 165, Volkl P60 GC 178, etc...

Impressions: After a couple of runs, I moved the bindings 2cm back, but eventually moved the bindings back to the stock position. I am really starting to enjoy the ride, and I'll keep the bindings in the stock position, for now. I found them to work well in all of the conditions, especially the crud and chopped up conditions.

However, I can see why they are not universally liked. To me, they require a very PMTS, or horizontal technique. Initiate a very early edge change and work on the top of the turn instead of the bottom half. These are NOT the skis to use with a vertical or traditonal powder (ie jump turn) style. Think of riding a road race motorcycle as opposed to a moto-cross bike.

Dislikes: Weight: I still haven't figured out how to keep snow from sticking to the metal top sheet (I'm using car-wax, Rain-X, etc...). With the Atomic bindings, they can get really heavy with some wet Sierra stacked on type. But, truthfully, I only notice it when I pick them up.

Edges: I put put a 3 deg side-edge tune on them after the first day, and can really notice the difference on the groomed. I think the stock side-edges were a pathetic 1 or 1.5 deg.

Speed: Well, they aren't as fast as my Bid Daddy's. And I couldn't keep of with a couple of guys making Super-G Turns through the powder on K2 Made in AK's.

Summary: So good so far. As long as I keep em turning and keep the speed below Mach numbers, they are fun.
post #18 of 26

V2 Chubb

I have been skiing Volants for years. I think they are the best ski out there still. I purchased some new PowerKarves in 2000 and still love them. I bought some 180 95' Chubbs 2 years ago. I absolutely loved them. I broke them this season. Anticipating something like this might happen I bought brand new 185 V2 Chubbs on ebay for $100 last year. I finally got them mounted just before my old chubbs broke. I took the V2's out and was sadly disappointed. THey are not the Chubbs we know and love. THese are instead Atomic's take on a Chubb. THe are stiff, heavy and solid. After 10 days on them in all conditions and locations ( powder, crud, moguls, trees, hardpack, etc..) the only place they seemed to be acceptable is the hardpack.
I eventually sold the V2's to a friend who is a strong expert that is 6 '2" and 220 lbs. He finds that they are a handful but very solid. Im a stong expert that is 5'9" and 160lbs so now I see why I was struggling.
I have tried a lot of skis lately looking to replace the old chubbs. No luck. I ended up by a pair of 95's in good shape and am very happy with those. They will probably suffer the same fate as the other chubbs and break so I think I will look at trying the M999 as a replacment.
The V2's are a beautiful and solid ski but not really a Chubb except for the name on the ski.
post #19 of 26
Thread Starter 
The V2 definately has a different feel than that of the steel capped Chubbs, but I have noticed that when pushed, they have the same sort of uber-dampness. The stainless steel feel IS there with them, but the sweet spot was decidely different that it is for the steel-capped ones.

Of course The 185 is really a 188 (from tip to tip), and for someone 160#s I can imagine they might be a bit much, unless one was an exceptionally agressive skier. I'm 6'4" and 190#s, so the "185" is a good size for me.

I really can't understand how the V2 could be considered stiff, it has a really soft tail, and though the forebody is stiffer than the old school Chubbs, it still is a really buttery ski overall.
post #20 of 26
IT's funny how different people can view the same ski soooooo differently.

I can see how some skiers would hate the V2 chubb's forward mounting line....but I can also see how mounting back would take away from the performance of the ski (mainly because the tail is too soft)...I found it to have surprising edge hold for a floppy noodle of a ski and I thought they performed better in chop than in untracked (probably from the pure weight of the ski)...get low, open them up, they won't let you down in most conditions!! I'm only 175lb and was on the 185cm so maybe that has something to do with my experience...

For me, the V2 chubb would have been quite sweet if it just had a stiffer tail...

Hey VA are they growing on you any more?
post #21 of 26

Maybe I'm seeing things, but

that '01 looks like someone pranged it.
post #22 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-EastCoaster
Hey VA are they growing on you any more?
I think they are the bomb, but I've relegated them to the over-five inches-of-new slot of my quiver, I have better sticks for the shorter snow conditions.
post #23 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by comprex
that '01 looks like someone pranged it.
Mayhaps it seems so, but there is no bendage, the '01s just have a different flip to the tip.
post #24 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by volantaddict
I think they are the bomb, but I've relegated them to the over-five inches-of-new slot of my quiver, I have better sticks for the shorter snow conditions.
I completely agree. This past Saturday night was a great storm which yielded 9-14 inches fresh on Sunday morning. The V2's have such a big sweet spot that the turns were effortless all day... At 4 pm, I stopped skiing only because the lifts closed:
post #25 of 26
Have any of you yanked the Atomic 2-part plate and put something else in its stead?
post #26 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by comprex
Have any of you yanked the Atomic 2-part plate and put something else in its stead?
I haven't and see no reason to do so. The mounting/riser plate works great. It was easy to drill without worrying about drilling through the ski. There is however a thin layer of transparent plastic (a pain in the ass cosmetic affectation) on the surface which pulls away from the rest of it when you start to turn the screws in, a minor headache, but easily surmountable.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › The jury is still out on the V2 Chubb