Originally Posted by Josh Matta
so what lengths?
No 193's. You'll dig the 177's. I'm a bit heavy for the 177 90, but the 177 100 skied very nicely even for a fat old guy like me.. Enough so that I have a pair coming... Well balanced fore and aft (I always start demo run #1 with pivot slips and a modified falling leaf, then into brushed short turns, to carved shorts, to fast GS arcs, then back down to open parallel or one ski skiing ), excellent edge hold and solid engagement at the top or the turn. Good energy but not squirrelly at all. Easy to release as well. Again, rock solid at speed just like the vids look. It doesn't feel like a 100. While we didn't have the usual PNW chunder to fool around in, there's nothing telling me that they would work absolutely fine in more challenging 2.5 dimension snow. I might want to up size to a 185 for myself, but for all condition and terrain teaching, the 177 should be fine. If the 177's ski a bit short in crud for me, I'll sell and do a 185. In the end, it feels like a very balanced and versatile ski for our region.
The 90 is a fun ski. Good edge grip, likes to bend into shorter arcs, and should make a great bump ski. I felt the 177 skied a bit short for my weight (205) and the tip engagement on cleanly carved arcs a bit vague compared to the 100, but certainly not terribly so. Phil's review of the 90 is very much in line with the opinion of folks I skied with. I'm probably more enthusiastic about the 100 all in all, but there's going to be a bunch of Soul 7 skiers that will pick up the 90 and really love it in firmer and bumpier conditions. IMHO, both should sell well. Personally, I prefer the 100 to the Bonafide, but I'm probably one of the few who doesn't really dig the Bones. I wouldn't be surprised to see both of these skis in the metal winner circle in next fall's ski publications.