This article was first published by .
The Scores (out of 10)
- Crud Performance: 7
- Responsiveness: 7.25
- Stability at Speed: 7.25
- 贵濒辞迟补迟颈辞苍:听6.75
- Playfulness: 8.5
- Forgiveness: 7.75
- Versatility: 8
- Quickness: 7.25
The Specs
- Price: $800
- Lengths: 172, 179, 186
- Dimensions: 131-98-119
- Radius: 18 (179cm)
- Weight: 1,515g
- Level: Intermediate to Expert
In a Nutshell
- Pros: Playfulness, Versatility
- Cons: Crud Performance, Flotation
For those skiers who prioritize the descent over powering uphill, the Vision 98 lets you bring resort playfulness and agility to the backcountry. 鈥淭here鈥檚 not much this ski doesn鈥檛 like,鈥 said tester Luke Larsen, who grew up racing in Utah鈥檚 Cottonwood Canyons. 鈥淚f you鈥檙e willing to add a little weight to your backcountry setup to have a ski that drives like your resort ski, this is your machine.鈥
Related: Ski straps are an important backcountry safety tool. Here鈥檚 how to use them.
This ski had the highest playfulness rating of any contender in the backcountry group and the second-highest score for forgiveness.
While the Vision 98 is on the heavier side for this category, owing to its maple core, the stacked aramid (similar to Kevlar), carbon fiber, and fiberglass build give it enough damping to save some energy in your legs on long, chunky exits in variable conditions. Skiers looking to get into more-severe mountaineering lines, with no intention of resort or sidecountry skiing, may want to look for a lighter setup.
Related: See how the Line Vision 98 stacked up against its competition
According to testers, the social backcountry enthusiast who is more about chasing fun snow with a relaxed group than ticking off extreme lines or mega-big days will appreciate a Vision quest the most. The majority of testers said they wouldn鈥檛 think twice about taking this ski to the resort regularly as well.
Overall, we were impressed by how smoothly the Vision 98 skis, which is the added benefit of that extra weight. It punches up, and we鈥檇 ski this on just about any terrain or snow that wasn鈥檛 excessively steep or deep.