EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › First foray into FREERIDE skis. Suggestions? (I'm already overwhelmed looking just at Volkl)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

First foray into FREERIDE skis. Suggestions? (I'm already overwhelmed looking just at Volkl) - Page 2

post #31 of 55
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

Chill about the skis. They're a great all-purpose ski that you'll love in tight spots. And 177 is fine. I weigh 165 and ski that genre in high 170's. The AC40's (which I owned) I skied in 170 cuz they were beefy wide carvers. The Kendo is something different.


Your binding is fine too. All good.


Boots: First, if you want to hit a lot of bumps and trees, and weigh what you do, why are you looking for a 120-130+ flex boot? That range is great for carving turns on ice or in gates, but seriously, you'll murder your shins in the bumps. Suggest something in the 100-110 range. You can go a bit higher if you choose a cabrio design like Dalbello or Full Tilt. But the kind of terrain you seem to want to open up will reward a boot with more ability to absorb shocks, flex forward as you change speeds, not transmit every tiny body movement directly to the ski tip. Second, don't choose a boot based on the forefoot fit. Go for a secure, snug ankle and heel pocket, plus sufficient instep height. A good fitter can always adjust the front half of the boot to fit your foot. 


Good bootfitter is a must.


FWIW, Full Tilts have a great, comfy yet secure fit (for me, anyway) and you can adjust the flex with easily changed tongues.  The flex tongue also helps cushion your shins.  The models with active footboard realy help absorb shock from bumps as well.  Also, they make it easy to replace parts, so you should be able to keep them in good shape longer.


post #32 of 55
Thread Starter 

I went to a small custom boot fitter today who specializes in custom foot beds.  


He took me out of the 25.5 and said I'm good in the 26.  

Seemed relatively neutral as to what flex I wanted.


His boots aren't at the absolute lowest prices,

but they include adding custom padding inside the boot 

(something they charge $125 for if you bring in your own boots).


He had a 2011 Salomon X-3 120 flex for $525.  

Add another $245 for the custom foot beds.

Told him that was out of my budget, but if I could find a way to do it, I'd be back.


and he called me back later in the day.

he said he found a new pair of Salomon Falcon CS 90 flex boots that a client who was sponsored by Salomon had left him.

he offered them to me for $300.

and again, add another $245 for the custom footbeds.


Is that too good a deal to pass up?

I've wanted footbeds for a while, and this guy is supposed to be the best.

Is that a good deal on that boot?  would i be ok in 90 flex.

I'm thinking yes, yes, and yes.  But I'm biased, I like new gear.



Keep in mind the last store I went to wouldn't mount my bindings using my existing boot (6 year old Vento)

they said the heel was too worn down.









post #33 of 55

So...... choosing the right flexing  boot is not a function solely of any one factor.  It is not just related to weight, height, ability, etc.  Rather, choosing the right flex requires consideration of a multitude of factors such as: range of motion in the ankle, style and terrain preference, weight, personal preference and ability.  I list range of motion first because it can be very important.


As to boot choice, Ventos are rather different than the Lange.  Curious to move from one to the other.  Seek out a very reputable fitter, and start again.

post #34 of 55

I've gone up and down and back up the boot flex range over the years.  I did some internet searching and discussing this very topic, and after all the  discussions I came to the conclusion that stiff boots were better.  Experientially, after being talked into a soft 100 Flex boot, skiing them for a couple of years and now, after doing some work on an old pair of race boots, I"m rocking the old stiff boots once again, and they seem to work better.


You could probably do fine with a 110 or 120 Flex, but a 90 Flex is just way too low, unless you weigh 90 lbs.


Make sure, whatever you get, that the boots grips your heel and ankle like you stepped deep into some gumbo mud.

post #35 of 55
Thread Starter 

Lemming, I fit myself in a Vento a while back.  Bootfitter says it was too high volume for me.

He likes me in the Salomon because it fits the ankle and heel better, and he said he can adjust the front of the boot.

I tried on a bunch of boots, and I think my foot liked the Lange the best out of the box.


Ghost, JayT & Beyond,

I looked up my old boot and its listed as a 95 flex.  So, truly I prob have no idea what a stiff boot is yet,

but I do feel my skiing has gotten exponentially better since I bought the Ventos, and that at least a slightly stiffer boot is in order.

I'm now convinced nothing over 120, maybe 110, or even 100.  But 90 seems a move in the wrong direction. 

Although, I wonder how the flex ratings on the Salomons compare to the Technicas.  

I've been told they differ across brands.  






post #36 of 55

Stiffness also is more than fore-aft flex...lateral stiffness matters more, in some cases far more than forward flex. For example, Full Tilt and the Dalbello Kryptons are much more even flexing fore-aft than overlap boots, but the lower shell comes up high and is relatively stiff, so the edging power transmission is typically greater than overlap boots with a comparable flex rating.  You are correct that flex ratings are not standardized.  Use them as a comparison of flex within a brand, not across brands.


Fore-aft stiffness does two things.  First, it transmits your forward pressure from your shins to the tip of the ski faster, allowing you to initiate turns with more power.  This is especially helpful on a stiffer ski, and used to be critical before shaped skis because turn radius was created by bending the ski.  Now, a softer, deeper sidecut ski will pull itself into its arc once tipped on edge, so a lot of power to the tip isn't as necessary.  Lateral power is key because you do more of your steering, gripping and adjustment of turn radius through lateral movements.  


On shaped skis, we pressure downward and laterally on the ski more than forward. To be able to finely adjust your position and pressure in this way, flexion at the ankle is critical.  Too stiff a boot means limited ankle flexion, resulting in poor balance, inability to absorb terrain changes, and imprecise control of the ski and your turns.  Symptons are edge wash out, skidding, "squirelly" ski feel, and foot shin pain.  Flex problems aren't the only cause of these, by far, but can manifest in these ways.


Lastly, good fit isn't just the right flex and shell shape.  Proper positioning in the boot will be as important to fit and performance as anything.  Making sure the forward lean of the boot is appropriate will make the difference between you being to ski all day, or half a day (e.g., too much forward lean means you are basically doing wall-sits all day..not easy to maintain), whether you are balanced and able to ski all terrain athletically, and being in pain or not.  Lateral position will affect your balance and ability to recover and react quickly to terrain differences.


When you sit down with a bootfitter, they should not begin by shoving your feet in boots. A good fitter will look at you first.  Your feet, how you stand, range of motion in you ankles and knees, alignment of your lower legs, etc.  They will select one or two shells that may best follow your foot shape, then look at your foot and stance in the shells only.  They may make adjustsments to the shell alignment, then...maybe, if you don't clearly need shell work, they may try it on with the  liner and an appropriate footbed in the boot.  Then, once they feel okay about the fit parameters, they should put you through some balance exercises to check fore-aft and lateral positioning in the shell.  If they don't follow a similar process to this, go somewhere else.

Edited by Lemming - 9/10/11 at 5:39am
post #37 of 55

+1 to what Lemming said.  Any bootfitter who offers you a boot that you haven't even tried on yet, you probably want to avoid.  When it comes to skis and bindings, find the best deal that you can, when it comes to boots, find the best fit that you can.  Remember, you're going to spend many, many hours with your feet crammed into these things, so you don't want $150 to be the difference between a great fit and a mediocre one.

post #38 of 55

Also, $125 for "padding"???  In 10 years of fitting, the only boots I ever really padded were those someone brought in that were too big or totally the wrong shape, and they couldn't make newn boots happen right then.  If the boot fitter is padding your boot at the outset (and charging you for it?!?!), something is wrong.  Maybe if you have legs like Skeletor, but even then I wouldn't be charging you....


This is not the same as a custom liner.  Get an Intuition liner.  If you don't need it to stiffen your boot, get the "Luxury" version, which is what comes stock in the Dalbello ID liner boots.  The fit, warmth and ease of entry with the Intuition is worth every penny.  Save yourself the $245 on custom footbeds and get some ALINEs.  $60, and functionally better than customs once set up proper.



post #39 of 55
Thread Starter 

Thanks for all that boot info.  

Everytime I think I have a handle on this, I get more good input that gives me a slightly different perspective.


I think the last guy I saw is a good bootfitter, and is all about the custom foot beds.  He said a lot of his clients have foot issues, or vertebral issues, knee issues, etc that necessitate his services, but he also thinks the average person could benefit greatly with the better foot alignment he can give them with his footbeds.

Clearly, from your post, Lemming, a good bootfitter need not be someone who also makes/ believes in the value of custom footbeds.


I'm now curious to seek out a reputable bootfitter who doesn't emphasize/sell footbeds, in a smaller shop, and see what they have to say, see what boot they would put me in.


To clarify, JayT, the bootfitter offered what he said was basically the same shell that he fit me for earlier in the day.

I was fit to the Salomon X3-120, and the boot he called me about was the Salomon Falcon CS.  Similar shells?  Albeit very different flex.

He was trying to accomodate my budget b/c i didn't pull the trigger on the $800 boot setup.


And, Lemming, he doesn't charge for the padding if you buy a boot from him.  ($125, which is what he would charge if you walked in with your own boots and asked him to pad them. Certainly quite expensive, and I don't know how often someone buys this service "a la cart" like that.  From his explanation its a comfort based padding where he puts some extra cushion where your bony protuberances come in contact with the boot, and pads for some veins and nerves. ) 


I searched the forum and found a thread on the custom foot bed bootfitter guy I went to.  Super nice guy, Lee.  









post #40 of 55

Understood.  But to be clear, I do NOT believe that a footbed is not important.  A good fitter is absolutely right to start there, just like you start building a house at the foundation, not the sheetrock. 


Aside from the ALINE, custom is far better IMO for most people than an off-the-shelf or no footbed. Until the ALINEs came out I would nearly always build custom footbeds for every customer.  For some with unique foot issues, it is still absolutely the only way to go.  For many people, though, the ALINE is functionally better.  Most custom footbeds lock up the midfoot.  They are stable, but limit the dynamic action of the midfoot that is actually important in the range of motion we use in ski boots.  As we flex forward at the ankle, the outside of the foot (5th met) drops relative to the medial side of the foot, setting up the arch of the foot.  With a rigid footbed along the 5th met, it can't drop.  High school physics tells you the equal and opposite reaction is for the arch to flatten, pronating the foot (the very thing the footbed is trying to prevent).  The ALINE provides support where it works, dynamic movement where it's needed.


And nope, not affiliated, just a fan of products that work. This is just my experience, don't take it as gospel or law.  Good bootfitting is at times as much art as science. No one perspective is right.  You are wise to get as many as you can, then go with the things that makes sense to you and feel good.   If a custom footbed is what works for you, it is worth every penny.  For me, ALINE footbeds and Intuition liners transformed my ability to ski all day, in all temps, in comfort, strength and confidence.  I have moved away from highly-modified, super stiff, super precise race boots, and am enjoying my days much more.  Do I occassionally miss my Dobermans with lace-up liners when skiing solo, very fast, on steep, icy groomers?  A little... but on the 10th consecutive run without needing to unbuckle my boots on the chair on a -20 day with warm toes, well....not so much.  If I were still racing, I would retain them for race days (but I still moved from my custom beds to the ALINEs....HUGE improvement in my balance), but that's it.  


Lastly, if given the option of using a great bootfitter who relies on custom footbeds, or a good one who uses the ALINE, I would go with great.  If the custom bed works, you are that much farther ahead.  If it doesn't, it won't take much money to get an ALINE instead, and you will still have a boot that was otherwise fit properly.


Good luck!

Edited by Lemming - 9/11/11 at 5:12am
post #41 of 55

Regarding the custom footbeds:


The boot has to fit on the top, on the sides, and on the bottom.  Maybe the Aline will fit you on the bottom; a properly built custom foot bed will fit you on the bottom.  Some people may need custom foot beds due alignment and structure issues; some may not. In my opinion, the only question is WHICH custom foot bed to get; extremely high forces present in very aggressive high speed skiing would suggest the need for more support than that required with forces usually seen in normal recreational skiing.  However, it's not my opinion nor that of some other poster on the intertubes that matters; the GOOD boot fitter working with YOUR FEET should be the one to judge.  

post #42 of 55

I tried A-lines in my new Intuition Luxury liners last year and the whole setup was just painful.  I finally removed the A-lines, re-cooked the Intuition liners and fitted them without a footbed at all.  After that skiing was more than just fun and my boots were incredibly responsive.  That was my experience with A-lines and it is very possibly different from the experiences of others, but it shows they aren't for everyone.


I would encourage you to look into Full Tilt and/or Dalbello Krypton boots.  Some of them use Intuition liners which are really fabulous when you get them fitted right.  I would personally be very reluctant  to deal with a bootfitter who talks about adding padding to boots he is trying to sell you.   If the boots need padding  to keep your feet from slopping around, they don't fit.

post #43 of 55

mtcyclist is absolutely right, no footbed is right for everyone.  My father can't use the ALINE footbed, and is most happy with his superfeet corks.  A couple things, though...first, they must be set up properly.  If they aren't, they don't work out as well.  Second, I found placing them UNDER the Intuition liner (and molding the liner on top of them) works better for me.  This can be done with any footbed and Intuition set up.  The advantage is that the footbed sits on the stable platform of the bootboard, rather than on top of foam where it can shift.  It also makes for a very warm environment, as the foot is surrounded by the liner foam.


Again, take all of the information you can find, run it through the food mill of your experience and come out with what works best FOR YOU.


post #44 of 55

I started using ALINES two seasons ago.  Wow, what a difference it made for me.  I felt like a totally different skier. 

post #45 of 55

For a freeride experience try a pair of Spruce 120's:

120 tip to tip, twin tips


7.6 turn radius


They are a blast.


Edited by shortydude - 9/12/11 at 10:39am
post #46 of 55
Thread Starter 

I totally get the complications around footbeds. The Alines sound interesting, definitely a more dynamic solution for the foot.  I wonder how well they would get my specific foot into better alignment, as opposed to just lending it a more general type of support for the position its already in.  And you make some excellent points, Lemming, for all the benefits of a custom footbed, no matter how flexible the sole, I can definitely see how it would restrict midfoot movement, dropping of the 5th metatarsal etc.  Precisely because the footbed is good I can see how it could develop into a crutch.  Custom footbeds are supposed to be flexible enough to allow some movement, but they also need to hold one's foot into that more aligned position -- difficult to do both.  Also interesting to me is how shifting one's foot position would play through the rest of the body, on one hand lending it more support, and also shifting it, and shifting bodies is a tricky business which can sometimes cause some discomfort.  And then when you aren't in the footbeds your foot would go back to its original position because its the footbed, not your own muscles and tissues holding your arch, centering your talus, etc etc.


I'm heading to another bootfitter who isn't as known for footbeds, as much as for bootfitting to see if I get yet another perspective.

From his analysis, and the understanding I've already gained, and my budget I'll try to finally select a boot.  Then I'll return to the issue of custom footbeds or not.


Mtcyclist, I think the padding he was talking about isn't like that padding you use when the boot isn't fitting right.  Not sure if that makes sense exactly.  It certainly wasn't the kind of padding you go in for because the boot is too loose here, so you drop in a little material here and there to shore it up.  He looked at my foot and said, we could put some extra padding here based on your specific foot and how this boney protuberance is going to jut out, and some extra here where this major nerve goes through, remove some here so as not to restrict bloodflow b/c on your foot this is where the vessel is etc etc.  Anyhow that was my take on it from his explanation.  I only explain this because I've referenced this bootfitter's name and I don't want to misrepresent his work or badmouth him in anyway, as he seemed very nice, more than competent and fair.  Of course, you'd have to go see him to make your own decision as to his expertise, this is just my understanding after meeting with his briefly.  He does come highly recommended based on references from this site.


The intuit liners sound very interesting as well.  Glad to have the heads up on those.


There really is so much to think about.


just to name a few:

  specific shell, for your leg shape.

  forward flex of the boot

  side flex

  boot liners




I think I'll go to VistaPrint and print a card with the URL for this thread, so if anyone ever asks me about why I selected 'this or that' in my setup, I can just hand them the card and they can read about the whole decision making process.  ;)







Edited by skimoguls - 10/28/11 at 9:35am
post #47 of 55

Just because I am going for some kind of record on single thread, forum-noob word count, here is a description of the balance excercises I use to test positioning.  These also help diagnose fit issues.

First, standing in both boots with feet a little less than shoulder width apart, straighten your legs so that your knees are locked without lifting the heel of the boot off of the ground. Now, notice what happens. If you fall on your face, your boots have too much forward lean. Weight should be on balls of feet, heel should be unweighted but touching, or just hovering over the footbed. You should feel balanced, springy and solid. Now relax, bend your knees. Weight should now feel evenly distributed across the foot, with most concentrated under the mid-foot. Does your heel immediately bear weight, or drop some distance before it hits the footbed? If it drops, you need one of two things (or both). If your weight with knees locked was on your toes, or you fell on your face, you need less forward lean. If your weight w/ knees locked was on the balls of your feet and you felt relatively balanced, you need to put a heel lift in the boot to bring the footbed up to meet your heel.

Have a friend hold a plumb-bob next to you, against your shoulder (roughly in the middle of your body from front to back). With knees slightly flexed, shins touching the front of the boot, center mass should be over the mid-foot. With legs straight, knees locked, center mass should be over the ball of the foot.

Next, find something about 1 foot or so high to jump off of. Standing on top, jump off and land centered over and evenly on both feet, flat on the boot sole. Did your toe go BANG? If so, double check the shell fit...probably too long.

Lastly, standing on one foot, jump up and down landing and taking off as flat on the sole as possible. Do this 6-7 times rapidly on each foot. Pay attention to your foot inside the boot. Does it move a lot? Is it coming off of the footbed and falling back down a lot, or just weighting and unweighting? Do you fall over? If so, which way?

Use these simple exercises to get your boots set up so that you can do these exercises without feeling off balance or tentative. Not all boots can be easily adjusted for forward lean (kudos to dalbello for building so much adjustment into the kryps), so you may have to get creative. You can use the "canting" (actually cuff alignment, not true canting) bolts on some boots to actually straighten the cuff.

For example, I have stupid fat calves, so I had to bend back the rear of the upper cuff on my Dobies to get my fore-aft position right. Think about it, the thicker the calf, the more acute the delta between tib/fib and foot.

Get this right and you will have more energy, less fatigue on the hill, and feel more hero-like than a six pack of red bull can ever accomplish. Provided, of course, the buckles are on the outside......

Hope this helps.

post #48 of 55
Originally Posted by shortydude View Post

For a freeride experience try a pair of Spruce 120's:

120 tip to tip, twin tips


7.6 turn radius


They are a blast.


Fruitbooting isn't skiing.

post #49 of 55
Thread Starter 

Ok, based on the latest bit of advice, after visiting quite a few shops, I found a bootfitter that I really liked and trusted.

Had to wait until he got his full line of boots in, its a smaller shop, but got fit today, and decided on the Dalbello Krypton Pro ID.  

He gave me a couple other options that all fit pretty well, but they didn't feel as right as the Krypton's.

I really liked the liner, I love that middle buckle how it snugs the heal back, and I love the ability to modify the boot.

I'm going to have a great time fine tuning these things as the season goes on.

The price point was too painful to buy it in the shop, so I waffled, and left without anything, 

but I'm going to call first thing in the morning and pay for them over the phone to have him hold them for me.


Thank you for everyone who gave their input.  I've found this thread extremely helpful.

I thought I was just upgrading my skis, but needed bindings to mount them, and then new boots (as the nubs

on my old boots were too worn to get them mounted.)  I sold my AC40s on craigslist to recoup

some of what I've spent, but I'll still be eating PB&J on the lifts this season and will have

to put off quite a few other purchases until I get my budget back in order.


Here's the summary of my upgrade:

AC40's (170cm) ---------------------------------------> Volkl Kendo (177cm)

came w/ system binding ---------------------------> Marker Griffon

Technica Vento 10 w/ superfeet  ---------------> Dalbello Krypton Pro ID w/ custom footbeds.






post #50 of 55
Thread Starter 

I was fit to both the Lange RX120s and the Krypton Pro boots,

I chose the Pros based on testaments to the liner and was on my way to buy them after my last post

but I found a screaming deal on the Langes, so I switched last minute to the Langes.  

Both boots fit well, they were the last two boots I was choosing from after starting with more than a couple,

but with the screaming deal the Langes they were half the price of the Krypton Pros.  Couldn't pass that up.


Still need to go in for the footbeds, I've got an appointment for next week.


Lange RX120s

Marker Griffon Bindings

Volkl Kendos



Never gets old reading about skis.  Totally addicting.

Nordica Steadfasts are one it looks like I overlooked.  Looks like a nice split between the Kendos and the Bridges.

Radicts, Bent Chetlers, or even the Hell Bents look interesting to have for the occasional deep deep days.

And then Atomic Atlas would be great to mount for tele, which I'd like to pick up while skiing with my three year old.

Blizzard and Kastle are two other brands I will find my way to demoing this season.  

Oh, so many skis, so little time.






post #51 of 55
Thread Starter 


The reviews are true.  These Kendos absolutely rip.

Thank you to everyone who suggested these skis.  Wow.


I've skied them 7 days in early season conditions, and I thought I'd give some feedback.

I'm sure I'll say absolutely nothing that those who are familiar with the ski don't already know.



Fast and stable at speed.

I don't think I ever felt uncomfortable at speed.  Clean, effortless change of direction.  Precise.

There was nothing in this ski that wanted to slow down.  Lay them on edge and they rip. 


Handles short radius turns very well.

Especially grippy on steeper terrain.  I found a steeper mogul run, a little icy in spots, no problem.

I could turn as tight as I wanted, and as stated in the ski magazine review the "edge grip was unassailable".

Feels like you have swords strapped to your feet and you are dicing up the terrain.  



There is nothing "buttery" about these skis.  Default for the Kendos are long smooth high speed slashes,

and with a little effort they will chop and dice as finely as you ask.   Amazing.


Its also clear to me that these skis would be great in up to six inches or so.




When it starts getting closer to a foot of fresh, I'd like to have something

more like a sailboat and less like a dagger.  


Next quest, the perfect complimentary ski for my Kendo.




post #52 of 55
Thread Starter 


Also, about the boots...

since I really appreciated all the feedback on my boot purchase as well 

I thought it would be nice to let you guys know how they feel after a week of early season skiing.


Excellent.  I'm extremely happy.



Lange RX120: The bootfitter narrowed it down to three boots, and i ended up going with the Lange RX120, as I had a special deal on it,

although it was a close call as I was really intrigued by the ID liner of the Dalbello Krypton Pro.


Mondo Size:  I hadn't mentioned that all the bootfitters I had gone to (maybe 5) had me in a 26.

My previous boots were a 27.  The last bootfitter I went to took out my insole and showed me how the lint had accumulated as evidence that my foot was sliding a lot,

he spent a good amount of time looking at my feet, asked me lots of detailed questions about how I ski, and left me in the boots for a good long time

letting me compare how different boots felt against one another -- he told me, after getting all that info that he thought  I would be happiest in a 25, so thats how I went.

really happy with that guy and my boots.


Custom Footbeds: I also got custom footbeds with him.

Mainly I've noticed that its kept my forefoot from splaying, so I didn't need the toebox banged out.

Also, I've noticed less lag time in applying my inside edge, as my foot isn't collapsing down, instead the pressure goes right to the edge.


Boot flex:  I've paid attention to the flex, as 120 is the high end of what I was going to do,

and on early season snow that flex feels good, as I'm mainly ripping groomers.

By the end of a hard day I do notice that I may be shying away from the front of the boot a bit,

maybe my shins are getting beat up a bit?  Maybe I'm just getting tired.  

i think I might take out the first pin to soften them up a bit just to test it out.

Interestingly enough when I'm on steeper bumps (what little there are) I feel I stay forward more bc the terrain demands it

and its at the end of the day going fast on groomers where I notice I shy away from the front of the boot.


After a week of skiing, on only one of those days were my feet uncomfortable,

and I rectified that the next day by making sure the tongue was in the right position,

I think the tongue was pulling the liner back and crushing my toes.

Pushing down on the tongue seemed to make more room in my toe box.

Haven't had that experience again, so I think thats what it was. 


i really love my new skis too, 

but i'm clear that a lot of their performance I owe to my better fitting boots.


I'm thoroughly convinced that sizing down my boot has been huge for me, (custom beds have also helped), 

and I would never had made that move without all the insistence on here to go to a reputable bootfitter, and

letting me know exactly what that meant i.e. how to know when I found one that worked for me, so, thanks guys.


The kendos go a lot straighter than my old AC40's, and seem to have all the hold and power, although in a different way.

They feel more nimble, more like they listen to me rather than the big rocketships that the AC40's were.

they are definitely more fun in the bumps too than my AC40's were, easier to catch air.

I have noticed the tail on the kendo's seems long, I find myself a lot more aware that I have a tail, I'm sure that it what gives this ski

a lot of its character, which I love.


Cheers!  and Thanks!

post #53 of 55



Your post makes no sense whatsoever.  You say that you skied the Kendo and found it "lifeless" on groomers and disappointing in powder.  Yet in the same breath say you chose the MX88, which was suddenly "epic" on groomers and "giggly" in boot deep POW.  


The MX88 and the Kendo are very similar skis, from their construction to their specs, and they are both designed to handle the exact same job, attacking the mountain 50% of the time on-trail and 50% off.  Sure the MX88 might be more refined and a tad more playful than the Kendo, but in the hands of a skilled pilot, both those skis would handle the same terrain equally well.  Yes the Kendo is a damp and powerful ski, but "lifeless" absolutely not!


From my own experience, the Kendo's are absolutely EPIC on groomers with no speed limit and ridiculous edge grip, while also being just as fun in 12+ inches of POW.  


I do think the Kendo's are too stiff with too big of a turn radius to have much fun in the bumps without working too hard (at least at 184), but they absolutely SLAY groomers, boot deep POW and crud.


I'm really scratching my head as to how you could have experienced these two ski's so differently?!



Originally Posted by FairToMiddlin View Post

+2 (or three or four) on the demo recommendation...


Your traipse across the Volkl line illustrates your confusion, it seems as though you could love or hate any of them.


I skied the Kendo this past year, it seemed lifeless to me, particularly on groomers, and not all that loverly in 12+ inches either.  That experience alone was enough to keep me from seeking any time on the Mantra, its big brother.  It sounds like you want something moderately exciting, your best chance of that with Volkl is probably the RTM 84, they seem Fischer C-Line-ish (read: Progressor 1000 or Motive 84-88).  Dawgcatching has some nice reviews of the 2011 Motive 84/Progressor 10 that might interest you. He's about 10 lbs. lighter than you, I'm about 10 lbs. heavier than you, same height.


In the end, I went with the Kastle MX88 (thanks, Dawg).  Wow.  It was sufficient in bumps, epic on boilerplate/groomers, and giggly in 12-18 inches of pow (no really; I literally found myself giggling... don't tell anyone).  If you want something a little softer snow-oriented than that, the Blizzard Bonafide at 98mm and sufficiently rockered/yet has traditional camber underfoot (I also skied that, it was fantastico) would be perfect.


I also skied the BBR, I thought it was lively, but had no ass in the tail; I didn't like it at all.  It felt like an auto-turn crutch for the advancing intermediate.


post #54 of 55

Though I haven't skied them yet, I just bought and had fitted Lange RX130.  I am coming from a 100 flex boot (Soloman Wave 9.0) and the flex of the RX130 doesn't feel much stiffer, at ;least not in the shop.   But what is nice is the progressive feel of the flex and the even weight distribution against the toungue of the boot while flexing.  No Lange Bang here.  You can also soften the boot's forward flex by removing one or both of the rear bolts and replacing with the supplied plugs.


I am looking forward to trying mine on the snow. 


Rick G

post #55 of 55

Those RX 130's will stiffen up a fair amount once you're out in the cold.  And I mean that in a good way.  They also have a very nice upright feel IMO.

Originally Posted by rickg View Post

Though I haven't skied them yet, I just bought and had fitted Lange RX130.  I am coming from a 100 flex boot (Soloman Wave 9.0) and the flex of the RX130 doesn't feel much stiffer, at ;least not in the shop.   But what is nice is the progressive feel of the flex and the even weight distribution against the toungue of the boot while flexing.  No Lange Bang here.  You can also soften the boot's forward flex by removing one or both of the rear bolts and replacing with the supplied plugs.


I am looking forward to trying mine on the snow. 


Rick G


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 › First foray into FREERIDE skis. Suggestions? (I'm already overwhelmed looking just at Volkl)