Free 2-Day Shipping on Orders Over $50* - Ends Today

Description

Fat, light, and tireless.

In the backcountry, you can go from untracked blower and windbuff to manky mush and death balls in the same day. You have to be armed and ready for all of it. The fully rockered Volkl Nunataq Ski, the fattest backcountry-specific ski Volkl makes, gives you float in pow but plenty of edge-to-edge grip on the sheltered aspects of hardpack. You can thank the Extended Low Profile for that; the smooth, gradual rocker is paired with a matching flex and sidecut for full, uninterrupted edge contact when you need it most. The lightweight construction won't weigh you down on the hike, top to bottom, dawn 'til you tire out your buddies. And the Vokl Skin Pin system, which lets you snap Vokl skins on and off in a flash, will have you hitting fresh lines with this Outside Magazine Gear of the Year award-winner before they are.

  • Full rocker profile
  • Power/Tough Box construction
  • Multi-layer poplar and beech wood Core Light
  • Notched tail
  • Volk Skin Pin attachment system

Share your thoughts

What do you think of the

Volkl Nunataq Ski

? Share a...

Write a review

No file chosen

Rather attach a photo from another website?

Rather attach a photo from your computer?

    Add a:
  • Share a photo
  • Share a video

Familiarity:

Only jpg, jpeg, png, gif or bmp files please.

Submit Cancel
Now review from the App. Download

Here's what others have to say...

5 5

Solid all around touring ski

  • Familiarity: I've used it several times

5'10" 175-180 lbs. 178 Nunataq mounted with tech bindings. They run long compared to most other skis. They are pretty much the same length as an older pair of 181 Voile Chargers. I'm happy with the length at my size. Used roughly 8 days so I'm fairly familiar with the ski by now.

This is an excellent all around touring ski that does everything pretty well. It's a good mix of traditional and new. It's got a full length sidecut (no taper) and a fairly rearward/traditional mount point, but the full rocker keeps it maneuverable and loose enough to be fun. No problems making quick turns in the trees in pow.

It skis well in powder. I haven't had it in mega deep snow but in 2 feet or so of pow it performed well. It holds a solid edge in firm snow for its weight and girth. It's fairly stable as well at speed and in weird snow (for a touring ski), which I attribute to the full rocker and long sidecut radius. Fun on groomers for a touring ski. Felt reasonably damp. Pretty lightweight, just a hair under 4 lbs for a single ski (1790 g per ski on my scale). There are lighter skis nowadays but few have the versatility of the Nunataq. Durability has been fine. No problems. Hit a few rocks and just have superficial scratches on the bases.

Although technically fully rockered, the rocker is pretty subdued and they're essentially flat underfoot, which makes them good on the skin track too. I haven't noticed a difference compared to cambered skis on the skin track. Nice.

I guess one complaint would be that the tip doesn't have a lot of splay (it doesn't rise far off of the surface), and it would occasionally dive under fresh snow on the skin track. But I didn't have any issues with the tips diving while skiing, so it's not a big deal.

Excellent do-it-all touring ski with a bias to softer snow.

These do not come with skins, is that correct?

Responded on

That's correct. You have to buy the skins separately.

5 5

Crusher

  • Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

Great ski. Light and stiff, will ski anything and make it feel good. Tho a little fat for ski mountaineering, they get the job done. And they just dominate fast turns, short turns, powder, ice, all of it.

5 5

Great ski

  • Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

Great downhill performance for a reasonably lightweight touring ski.

What is the weight on these bad kittens?

Responded on

Weight: 7lb 15 oz / 1786g (178 cm)

That's 3lbs, 7.5 oz per ski in the 178cm length.

Best Answer Responded on

I think you made an mistake:
(7lb 15 oz)/2 = 3lb 15.5oz per ski

5 5

Backcountry Powder's worst nightmare

  • Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

Light but as strong as an OX - the Nanutaq plays the boundary of being light for the tour, but built for the down.

I've been referring to them as Volkl's backcountry version of the Mantra - given they ski differently - this ski shreds in the soft snow like a mantra, and does surprisingly well when the crust and bullet snow sets in.

So light they make my touring partners jealous.

Because of their weight they bring those long off major objectives, where you need a SKI (not some twig randonee set up) within reason.

These do work. Both on the uphill and the downhill.

Hi
can anyone comment on mounting position....

Hi
can anyone comment on mounting position. I've mounted 178's on the line they feel along way back and the mounting line is a lot further back than my gotama's has nayone tried 1cm forward?

Responded on

I have the Kiku's (same footprint as the nunataq and gotama) and felt the same way about the mount position. Actually needed to switch bindings from another pair of skis anyway, but remounted 1cm forward and feel like they are just more maneuverable now. More versatile all mountain.

Responded on

Hi Phil, How tall are you? I am trying to decide between the 178cm or 186cm. I am 182 and 90kg. Also what mounting position did you end up using and how was it? Thanks

Responded on

Nic. I've got the 178 an been on them for two years. Durability will be a bit of an issue as I'm in the market for a new tour set for the spring season. Despite ascents being easier with the 178 I would have gotten the 186 could I do it over again. The bigger ski will do better for your weight and height. I'm 5 11 and 175 and always felt like I'm on ski that had to be rode with grace and care or it was over the handle bars I went. Its great for climbing up though and fit nicely on a backpack as they don't hang down as low when strapped to the side. My mount position is 2 cm forward. Phil's short tail feeling might have something to do with the full rocker in the ski despite how slight it is. If it matters I live in the PNW and ski the North Cascades regularly so we do have a bit of a heavier snow pack traditionally.

Responded on

Hi Nic
I'm about the same height but closer to 85kg. I moved the binding forward 1cm and felt it skied better. I own 3 pairs of skis with similar full low rocker so I'm used to tail rocker. 2 cm's forward could give you that over the handle bars that Cecil is talking about.

any comparison to gotamas. there are...

any comparison to gotamas. there are supposed to be derived from that design, but they have flatter tails, which interests me.

Responded on

The Gotamas are a heavier, more all mountain and resort ski than these, the Nunataqs, which have a lighter, more backcountry specific skeleton. Though they share differences in construction and profile, they do have a similar footprint.

5 5

Bada** skis

  • Familiarity: I've used it several times

So far I've used these in multiple snow conditions. While incredible in the powder, these can easily handle groomed runs. Next up on these bad boys is some kiteskiing.

6ft 170lbs - 178cm

5 5

Bitchin sticks!

  • Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

These things are ridiculous! You can rip any condition with them, and rip hard.

At first, like another reviewer, I was leaning back in the pow and these guys dont play nice unless you get over them. But once you do, they are your best friend.

Just a warning- as fat as they are, your backcountry buds will want you to break trail, which they do quite nicely with the fat tips and rocker.

I'm 5' 6", 155 lbs, got the 178s. Love 'em!

Volkl Nunataq

Volkl Nunataq

skiing in VT powder, 178 Nunataq, Vertical ST. Great, floaty ski. Very light on the skin track with the Dynafit binding too.
Get a bit of speed, and the tips float right up in powder.

Responded on

Hey JayPeak Skier, how tall are you? I'm trying to determine the best size for me. Thanks!

Responded on

Phil M.
I am 6' 2" 190 lbs, but skiing tight chutes in Vermont I went for the 178 cm ski. Great ski, they seem to float just fine for me in Eastern powder..

5 5

Purchased for my fiance

  • Gender: Male
  • Familiarity: I've used it several times

Bought the Nunataq in a 178 length for myself and primarily skied them at resorts on the east coast with a few days touring in Michaux State Forest. The skis are light, edge awesomely for a wide ski; this has become my one "do it all" ski. Bought the Nunataq in a 170 length for my fiance in preparation for touring in the Utah Wasatch backcountry. We both toured just a few days ago and had a blast. These skis performed awesome inbounds at Snowbird and backcountry touring. Both skis are setup with Tyrolia Adrenalin bindings (16 me, 13 her). You can get a lighter ski/binding setup for ascending but the Nunataq with the Adrenalin bindings provide a stable, confidence for charging on the descent and work great inbounds.

Responded on

Hi Paul, how tall are you? I'm 5'8", 160lbs and I'm trying to figure out it 170 or 178 would be a good size for me. I like to have my backcountry/touring skis on the shorter end to save on weight and also for tight spaces.

Responded on

Hi Paul, How tall are you? I am trying to decide between the 178cm or 186cm. I am 182 and 90kg. Also what mounting position did you use? Thanks

Responded on

Hi, Paul - how tall and what weight is your fiancee? And what type of skier is she? I already have both the Auras and the Kikus but want the lighter weight of the Nunataqs for slackcountry, but someone told me the 170s ski more like a 176, which worries me.

5 5

Once you go light, you never go back.

  • Familiarity: I've used it several times

The Nunataq is my first legitimate touring ski. In the past I have used alpine skis with a touring binding and BD skins as my uphill means of transportation but now that I have tried the Nunataq- I don't think I can go back. Me and these ladies have only been out on a few adventures but so far I have really enjoyed the girth of these skis. I usually ski on a Katana, so getting used to a lighter ski has been interesting. However, I skied my first pow days of the season on these and they did not disappoint. I'm riding a 178cm, with a Marker F12, mounted at +2 from boot centre.

Responded on

Hi Nat,

May I ask your height and weight? I can't decide between 178 and 186cm. Did the ski seem to ski "short" or at the stated length to you?

Thanks, Mike H.

Responded on

I'm 160cm and around 68kg and I am an aggressive skier. I like the 178cm for touring. It doesn't seem short but it is a much lighter ski than I am used to throwing around.

5 5

Fun Fun Fun

  • Gender: Male
  • Familiarity: I've used it several times

Coming from traditionally cambered narrower skis, the Nunataq took a bit of adjustment. My backseat stance in powder (to keep tips up and initiate turns) just did not work with these fully rockered fat boards - they wandered and wiggled unpredictably. Once I got centered over the skis they came alive and did precisely what I desired. Within a couple runs I was laughing and amazed at the Nunataq's power, quickness, and precision in all manner of terrain. Best tight-tree powder ski EVER; also awesome at sweeping turns at speed - then just twist your feet and you have a gigantic faceshot for 50 feet! Quite good on crud and crust as well.

Have not tried them at the resort, and probably won't, since these are backcountry skis. Great for skinning and trailbreaking with the light weight and rocker.

Light construction means these probably are not the most durable skis out there - IMO best as a mid-winter deep snow machine. Let some other sticks take the early and late- season rock shots!

I am 5'9, 160, ski western powder in the back country; I have the 178s with Dynafits and Mastrale boots. Couldn't be happier with the gear.