EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Twin Tip Ski for a guy in Cincinnati
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Twin Tip Ski for a guy in Cincinnati

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 

Hey guys, I do most of my skiing at perfect north, just a small hill/mountain in indiana.  I go out west about once a year and probably showshoe another time.  I have outgrown my starter skis and am planning on getting a twin tip ski to play around on.  I also want to get into some park skiing.  I have been looking for something that can float on some nice powder out west as well as handle the junk we have here, including ice.  Also I would like them to be able to take on moguls.  Any suggestions?  

 

As it stands now, I am between K2 Kung Fuja's and Icelantic Pilgrims.  Does anyone have experience with either or both?  I am getting a great deal on both of these ski's and so I am looking at them predominantly.  My only concern with the Fuja's are that they might be too wide.  Both are this year's model for what its worth.  If suggesting alternatives, know my limit is around $400.  Thanks for the help guys!

post #2 of 24
Thread Starter 

bumping... anyone?

post #3 of 24

Hi, uncunc. Can we get some specs on you? Skier level, height, weight, etc.

post #4 of 24
Do park folks use fat skis?
post #5 of 24

I ski the Pilgrim...and at Perfect North.  I am really happy with them.  They ski pretty darn well in moguls and are a pretty decent all around ski.  They don't provide much float for me but I am 240 lbs.  The only word of warning I have on the Pilgrims is that its likely the factory tune will be off.  The bases on both my pilgrims and the Keepers I had both needed to be ground flat.  After that they ski great.

 

post #6 of 24
Thread Starter 

i am 5'10 210 but trying to lose weight.  i would say i am intermediate-advanced.  I can ski anything at perfect unless its straight ice or 3 feet moguls like they have when they build up snow.  out west i can do a good amount of blacks, so take from that what you will.  

 

as for if park skis are fat, not really sure as i am just now looking to get into skiing the park.  

 

pretty cool to see another guy from perfect.  do you have any experience with the kung fujas as well?

post #7 of 24

I've never tried them but my guess is that they would be a better soft snow ski but not as good on hard snow.  

post #8 of 24

In reading your initial post, my first thought was that you are asking one ski to do a lot. I still tend to think that.

 

However, if you are looking for the ever-sought-after one-ski quiver, I am tempted to advise you to go with something like the Line Prophet 90s or 100s, the Völkl Bridges, or something along those lines. Those should hold pretty well on hard-packed snow and allow you to carve pretty solidly while still having the option to play in the park. At your size, I don't think that the skis in the mid-90s range would give you much float in powder. But, on the other hand, if you go larger, you may have trouble handling them when you want quick turning and carving options. 

 

Another small piece of advice: stay away from anything with too much metal if you're looking to play in moguls. You want softer tails as well as maneuverability.

 

My general thought: go with something in the mid-80s to mid-90s and use them to your heart's content in every condition except for really deep powder. If you are out west and get a huge dump, thank Ullr, and demo some fatties. 

 

 

post #9 of 24

Also, if this thread picks up any speed, it might be of interest to you:

http://www.epicski.com/t/110037/line-prophet-98-90-vs-volkl-bridge#post_1428580

post #10 of 24
Thread Starter 
Sorry about not being back to this thread in a while. I appreciate your guys help. So the heavier you are, the wider underfoot you need for flotation? So then my question becomes, is a 102 underfoot too much for the conditions I usually ski? Hard pack/icy. Also, as far as bindings go, is the schizo bindings from marker really worth it?

And when/where are the best end of season sales online? Should I wait till march or is this as good as the sales get?
post #11 of 24

I know Bud Heishman has a pair of 184 cm 2011 Blizzard The One's Twintips(Bullseye design) that have been skiied for less than one day a lot has been said about how well they ski in the forums. I just bought a pair of the 2012's from him and he was great to work with and you can't beat the deal he is giving. Under $400. Good Luck!

 

http://www.epicski.com/t/109205/wtb-used-blizzard-the-one-177-or-close-to-it (offer from and contact info for Bud can be found here)

 

post #12 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by ucunc156 View Post

Sorry about not being back to this thread in a while. I appreciate your guys help. So the heavier you are, the wider underfoot you need for flotation? So then my question becomes, is a 102 underfoot too much for the conditions I usually ski? Hard pack/icy. Also, as far as bindings go, is the schizo bindings from marker really worth it?
And when/where are the best end of season sales online? Should I wait till march or is this as good as the sales get?


It kind of depends on the ski and the skier but more than likely 102 mm underfoot is a little wider than I would go for a daily driver in the midwest.  I did have a pair Gotama's that were 105 underfoot that skied pretty well every day but I would look for something closer to 90mm,  If you get out west and catch a big storm you can always rent a pair of fatter skis.  

 

I had a pair of schizo bindings that came with a pair of Hellbents that I had and they were nice but I would never pay the premium they ask for them over the regular griffon or jester bindings.

 

I'd start looking now.  A lot of places are discounting stuff now because of it being a down year but more than likely the bigger discounts on skis won't be until March and beyond.  The downside of waiting is having trouble finding what you want and in the right size.

 

If you are still interested in the Pilgrims I might be able to let you try mine depending on what size boot you have.

post #13 of 24
Thread Starter 

awesome, well i am a size 31 boot.  i know its big and clunky so it probably wont work.  glad to know your opinion on the schizo.  i can get a pair of mark griffons for 150, should i just get those now and figure out the skis later?

post #14 of 24

I ski the 2009/10 Fujas, and I absolutely love the ski, you can throw is at anything and it does a great job. I use mine (the 95 width version) as my everyday,all conditions ski,

post #15 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by ucunc156 View Post

awesome, well i am a size 31 boot.  i know its big and clunky so it probably wont work.  glad to know your opinion on the schizo.  i can get a pair of mark griffons for 150, should i just get those now and figure out the skis later?


Holy cow, a thirty one boot? Yeah you probably should be in the 90 range for park so you don't boot out. You should take your boot to some skis and look how much it sticks out over the side. In a narrow ski, you'll need a lot of lift I would think. It wouldn't be a bad question for the boot guys as to how it influences your ski choice.

 

Park skis are not fat and don't have a lot of sidecut btw.

What do you mean by park? Do you want to do rails too?
What do you ski on now? - length, width

 

The Pilgrim has more shape. 19m vs 21m k2 in 179

 

post #16 of 24

So you wear a size 14 shoe?  If not then your boots are likely too big. 

 

As far as skis go, I'd agree with DSloan and stay somewhere in the mid 80's to mid 90's so the skis will work ay home and out west.

 

Mike
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ucunc156 View Post

awesome, well i am a size 31 boot.  i know its big and clunky so it probably wont work.  glad to know your opinion on the schizo.  i can get a pair of mark griffons for 150, should i just get those now and figure out the skis later?



 

 

post #17 of 24
Thread Starter 

actually boots are 30, i just checked.  i wear a size 12 -12.5 shoe but have wide feet.  I tried on smaller sizes, like my friends 28 and they were incredibly uncomfortable on me.  i got a looser pair because i would rather a looser boot and be comfortable out there than a proper fitting boot and have my feet feel terrible in 2 hours of skiing.  as far as park, i dont plan on doing anything too crazy, its just something thats interested me that i have wanted to try just to keep things fresh while at perfect north.  as for right now, i am on my starter ski set, an old pair of rossi Roc X's that are 170 and 72 on the width im pretty sure.  Its in terrible shape at this point though but was great for learning on.  

post #18 of 24
Thread Starter 

wish i could get my hands on some 09/10 fujas.  my only worry with the new ones is that they are too wide at 102.  95 is much more usable i feel.

post #19 of 24

I definitely can't adjust my bindings enough to accomadate a boot that big.  I would suggest going to see a good boot fitter as most shops in the area are just boot sellers.  I spent a day with JDoyal in Chicago for my last pair of boots and couldn't be happier.  It was worth the drive.

post #20 of 24

Would be a good idea to see Doyal.

Of the two skis you've suggested, the pilgirm is probably better suited for midwest. Then the issue becomes length. I can't imagine you'd ski it in a 179 in the midwest  but you could.  So see, right there your hope of going all country - ie west is diminished as you'd want longer in the west. DSloan is right, you're asking for a lot. Frankly you'd be better off with something in the low 80's, even 70's for there. Even if you went used and cheap.

cstreu1026, what length do you ski the Pilgrims in  there?

post #21 of 24
Thread Starter 

i would get the 169 pilgrim.  what is the reasoning behind a longer ski out west?  i understand thickness but i am confused on why i would want it longer as well.  and next time i am in chicago i will make sure to check out doyal.  i am just so comfortable in the boots i am in currently that i dont want to change.  what is the downside of having boots to big?  lack of stability especially in the bumps?

post #22 of 24
Thread Starter 

also cstreu, i see your a chemist.  my friend who i always ski with at perfect just got his phd in chemistry and im finishing up my last year in chemical engineering.  maybe we can meet up at perfect some time?

post #23 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

Would be a good idea to see Doyal.

Of the two skis you've suggested, the pilgirm is probably better suited for midwest. Then the issue becomes length. I can't imagine you'd ski it in a 179 in the midwest  but you could.  So see, right there your hope of going all country - ie west is diminished as you'd want longer in the west. DSloan is right, you're asking for a lot. Frankly you'd be better off with something in the low 80's, even 70's for there. Even if you went used and cheap.

cstreu1026, what length do you ski the Pilgrims in  there?

I ski the 179's.  I use to ski shorter front side skis but I've adjusted nicely to longer skis.  I was actually sorry that I bought the Gotamas in 183's in stead of 190's
 

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by ucunc156 View Post

also cstreu, i see your a chemist.  my friend who i always ski with at perfect just got his phd in chemistry and im finishing up my last year in chemical engineering.  maybe we can meet up at perfect some time?

I'm out there bright and early just about every Saturday and Sunday.  I'm going to try to get a few weekday evenings in the next couple of weeks too.  You friend is braver than I am.  I intend to back to get my masters but it won't be in chemistry.  My wife is actually a chem e and just finished her masters in materials in December but she decided that was far enough.  
 

 

post #24 of 24
Thread Starter 

i was out there on saturday.  pretty great conditions imo.  

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 › Twin Tip Ski for a guy in Cincinnati