EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 117mm Daily Driver..... am I crazy?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

117mm Daily Driver..... am I crazy?

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
So it looks like I am going to be retiring my 188 Moment Tahoes at the end of this season due to some nasty edge / delam damage.

I'm looking to pick up a replacement at the end of this season when things go on sale, and I have been seriously considering the Black Crowes Sevun. I demoed it for 2 days while in the alps earlier this season and really enjoyed it. It is a big chunk of ski at 117 mm underfoot and stiff.... The snow I was on was on the softer end, with wind effected snow the closest thing to ice I could find.

I'm curious if this bad boy will be manageable as my Tahoe (Kirkwood) daily driver?

Specifically I'd like to know what other people who have ridden a 110+ in similar conditions think about it. I know it will be fine in the soft stuff, its mainly the hard icy groomers we have had Jan/Feb the last few seasons that worries me.

I'm 6'2" , 220lbs. Ski more power based than finess based. Skiing for 15 years and would consider my self reasonably advanced. I have done some racing (gs / SG) and love to point it.
post #2 of 24
I would now consider my bent chetlers daily drivers. I never really like moguls anyway but they are good for everything else.
post #3 of 24

A 117 mm board gets old on hard snow.  Some of them are OK but it will always be a long way to go to get them up on edge and none of them are going to hold like the narrower skis.  For me, I've settled into that 105 range for a daily driver, mostly off piste.  Last year Liberty Helix, this year Cochise.  Both outstanding skis.  If the snow is hard I will always reach for something narrower as fattys just aren't fun on ice.  There are a pile of good 98's out there that make outstanding daily drivers on the non-dump days and hold pretty well on ice.  I'd say get the black crows, and a used 88-98 for the hard days.

post #4 of 24

There is a strong tendency among many skiers to buy skis that are best suited for the conditions that they like to ski the most which for most people means powder. Reality is that there are more non-powder days at most resorts most years than powder days.

 

So, imo a 117mm as a daily driver only works if you mostly drive on pow days and don't ski much between storms.

post #5 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanoT View Post

There is a strong tendency among many skiers to buy skis that are best suited for the conditions that they like to ski the most which for most people means powder. Reality is that there are more non-powder days at most resorts most years than powder days.

 

So, imo a 117mm as a daily driver only works if you mostly drive on pow days and don't ski much between storms.

 


This is kinda my worry exactly. I really loved the feel of this ski, but I know a lot of it also had to do with the conditions.

 

Based on the replies im getting it seems like this ski + another more narrow ski for the hard pack days is really what I need. Guess I need to start saving to build the quiver out!

 

Thanks for the input.

post #6 of 24

Where do you ski? If it snows a lot and the purpose of your skiing is powder then it's fine. I'm a weekend warrior and I find I still spend the majority of my days at Whistler on 122mm skis as I am either skiing resort powder or probably hiking/touring in the surrounding backcountry for soft surface conditions. I also have 108mm (Cochise) with alpine bindings for mixed/hard snow but I only seem to use them maybe 1/3rd or less of my days. If I lived in the mountains I'd add a GS race ski for ripping groomers but if the snow is that bad I'd rather just explore the backcountry for more exercise.

post #7 of 24

I've gone a little fatter over the past couple seasons.  I can still turn them and they hold on most well groomed, not glazed, hard ice surfaces.  Biggest reason I ski them is because all the cool kids have them.  Fact is they look really cool and I like that.  I don't ski anything over 99 underfoot anywhere, but even though 64-80mm is probably best for what I usually ski I just like to be on the cool looking 80-100 mm skis more most of the time.  I now save the skinny skis for NASTAR or a bump runs.

 

There, I said it!

post #8 of 24

Crgildart....did you just say you've gotten a little fatter over the past couple of years?  It's OK; lots of us are in that boat.

smile.gif

post #9 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by tch View Post

Crgildart....did you just say you've gotten a little fatter over the past couple of years?  It's OK; lots of us are in that boat.

smile.gif

Sounds like another boat in the Carnival Cruise quiver....

post #10 of 24

I'm quickly starting to use my r2-- 180cm @ 115mm underfoot-- as a daily driver in the Alps (Tyrol). 

 

They're surprisingly good on non-icy groomers. They're like magic in powder and trees. They're great in chalky, wind-worked, crust, etc. They're mediocre over really hard (refrozen), deeply-trench-ridden, snow because they get deflected. They're no fun on real ice (the clear/blue kind), but fine on really hard, packed snow. Not my first choice on big, icy, deep bumps, but wonderful on soft, medium-sized bumps.

 

It all depends on what you ski, how you ski it, and the particular characteristics of the ski itself-- not just the width. 

 

I also have a pair of Bones... that haven't gotten back on the snow since I got the r2.

post #11 of 24

i ski my ninthward rory silva pros that are 113 underfoot for errythang other than park

post #12 of 24
Hmmm, looks like NS is banning people again.
post #13 of 24

I didn't think they ever did that.

post #14 of 24

If your ski mms are wider than the length of your pole cms... you might just be a park rat!roflmao.gif

 

 

I really do need some shorter poles for bumps though...redface.gif

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

If your ski mms are wider than the length of your pole cms... you might just be a park rat!roflmao.gif


I really do need some shorter poles for bumps though...redface.gif

Park rat? I don't see lots of 110+ skis near the parks. They're mostly on people beeping and hiking a ridge to ski something steep and exposed and a couple thousand feet vert. per run.
post #16 of 24
Lol obvs I don't ski park on 115mm wide POWDER skis, I have 90mm wide PARK skis for that purpose
post #17 of 24

So 100 mm ISN'T "the perfect ski for everything" any more?????  Are you by any chance related to Ron Cole??

post #18 of 24

im about to pick up a pair of line blends that are 100 underfoot...i used to have a pair a few years ago but ended up selling them and regret it......i have demoed the soulriders (98 underfoot) before and yes i will say around 100mm underfoot is perfect

post #19 of 24

i prefer a slightly wider ski for park because its more fun......stop hating on me for the point of hating, you look like a butt hurt old man :)

 

one love

post #20 of 24

The word you want there is "sound" - "sound" like a butt-hurt old man", not "look"; can I have your 90 mm park and 115 mm powder skis?

post #21 of 24

sorry for autocorrect bro

post #22 of 24
Thread Starter 
Wow I ignore the thread for a few days and when I come back it is full of Win!

This place is better than TGR!
post #23 of 24

lol i know right

post #24 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAHRASTAFARI View Post

stop hating on me for the point of hating, you look like a butt hurt old man :)

 

one love

 

 

This, to me, is hilarious. Yes, indeed, one love. Ha. 

 

Keep winning.

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 › 117mm Daily Driver..... am I crazy?