You can pry my Bananas out of my cold dead hands :-) For Heldos, go to SJ :-)
DPS 112RP Issues - Suggestions? - Page 2
- 74 Posts. Joined 9/2009
- Select All Posts By This User
I just skied Tahoe conditions over the past week, but I didn't bring my 112RPs, instead I had my ZAG Slaps (seriously rockered tips and tails, flat camber). Nonetheless, I think there are some concerns that you should have considered.
- The Wailer 112RP does have a bit of a learning curve. It's not entirely like an S7 or a JJ - it's its own beast. Learning how to ski it properly on groomers goes a long way to understanding what you'll need to do in 3D conditions. Skis with as much tip and tail rocker as the 112RP demand a centered stance and even pressure distribution. On hard pack this becomes apparent very quickly.
- The 112RP's forte is not crud, but it can still handle the cut-up quite well. RP really does mean Resort Powder and it sounds like you missed the untracked stuff. If your very first experience on these skis was in crud I'm not surprised that you had some difficulty adjusting.
- The tune on a 112RP can be quite finicky, but it can be adjusted to suit different skiing styles. I dulled my tips and tails all the way back to the contact points. Note that I prefer "turny" skis, but even these can be a bit squirelly if left sharp all the way around.
- Mounting point greatly affects this ski. With such a short contact length it also has a shorter sweet spot depending on your skiing style. I ended up having to re-drill mine to get to a "happy place".
- The 112RP is not a soft ski, but you're a big guy. It may just be that the 112RP will only be a good ski for you when you have more opportunity to ski untracked snow. The idea is that this ski slays powder really well and is still competent enough to get you back to the lift in one piece.
Re: point 2. I really don't get RP, resort Powder. I ski Squaw, and powder lasts about 2 runs, then it's crud all day, which I love by the way. To say that the 112 is good for untracked but sucks in crud, means that it's not a good Resort Powder ski, where you need a ski that works all day on a powder day.
- 4,581 Posts. Joined 2/2001
- Location: Littleton, CO
- Select All Posts By This User
I have to say that the comment that the 112 is a great powder (untracked ) snow but not so good in crud makes me laugh. And it's called RP for resort powder.
I ski Squaw and we have untracked powder for a run or two, then it is crud. Not sure for what resorts the 112 is designed for.
I ski Katanas and the work great n powder, crud and grromers. I deomoed bothe the 99 and the 112 and I came back unimpressed. Too many faults for somewhat questionable benefits.
For example, both the 112 and the 99 hook at the tip. The advice from the rep was to detune them!!! with so much rocker??? Not quite sure why the truning radius is so short. You should be able to design a ski with a mid 20s turning radius that can make any shape turn, from very small (less than slalom) to wide open.
I am probably wrong, and I'll hear about it, but I think it's hard to beat the large R&D budgets of large companies (like Volkl). Also, I think DPS is trying to appeal to everybody (on the skill scale) and as a result, the skis are not stellar in any conditions, except perhaps untracked light powder.
Probably those with lighter snow to begin with. I started out with the S7s, decided I needed better crud performance, and bought the 112s. Unfortunately, I had only a few days on them here in Colorado, but they were perfect as "resort powder" skis. I was amazed at the number of turn shapes I could make, really. That said, it was winter (as opposed to spring), and the snow was cold and the crud wasn't too heavy.
I skied the women's version of the Cochise in Tahoe, and they were awesome; it wasn't particularly heavy snow at that time either, but I can see where it would excel where you are. The trees seemed to be spaced a bit farther apart there, too, which obviates that little turning radius of the DPS. I would be on a Blizzard (or something similar) for sure out west; as it is, I still want one, but it doesn't really make as much sense for CO Front Range skiing.