or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 2015 Blizzard Latigo Skis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2015 Blizzard Latigo Skis - Page 2

post #31 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by semajosa View Post

6'2" 230lbs ... skiing groomers, trees and powder in BC.

Maybe if you bolted two together side by side and then skied with a pair on each foot?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by semajosa View Post
 

Wow. Thanks buddy. So helpful.

 

Fair enough. I was a little snarky I guess. 

 

My point was that if I weighed 230 and were skiing trees and powder in BC - assuming "BC" means British Columbia - I think I would go about three categories floatier. I.e., something north of 100mm, not a 77mm ski heavily oriented toward packed snow. Now if you're skiing groomers 90% of the time, then that's different.

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #32 of 45

Yes, BC = British Columbia. If you have a recommendation it'd be cool if you just made it next time.  I'm prob 50% groomed, 25 trees, 25 powder. 

post #33 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by semajosa View Post
 

Yes, BC = British Columbia. If you have a recommendation it'd be cool if you just made it next time.  I'm prob 50% groomed, 25 trees, 25 powder. 


You don't know it yet, but qcanoe wasn't being snarky, he was merely showing you his special brand of acceptance; why, just reading his post brought me back a decade to the Dodge Tomahawk: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Tomahawk ...I imagined your quad Latigos with an elaborate suspension system that kept not one, but TWO inside edges of 'outside ski' on the snow... Plus, the necessary stack height would have made you quicker than a thing that is really quick!

 

It goes without saying that if your heart is set on the very capable (I am among those who have been on it and think it is a 'better Brahma") Latigo, then the 184 is your money maker.  All lengths ski a bit short, I can't see you on a 177 that skis like a 174/5...

 

As far as the ski that is for you, I cannot begin to guess (sure I can, but I'd be better served with a dart board than a keyboard at this point): If you want to kill it on the groomers, and then be a rock star on a deep day, then 2 pair of skis would serve you better: something Latigo-y (or slightly stronger: say, a Magnum 8.5 Ti 181cm)  plus something 115ish underfooty-with-a-spine like a Line Influence 115/Helldorado, or maybe something a hair narrower like the El Capo.

 

Your size and ability presents a cool challenge to find the right answer, you'll find no shortage of folks here that will take up the cudgels to philosophize with you.  Thumbs Up

post #34 of 45
Semajosa,

I would have to recommend going a little wider myself even if you were skiing 50% groomed if you are wanting this to be a one ski quiver. If you want this as your hard snow ski and have others for the deeper days then go for it.

I spent a little time in this ski in the spring and loved it but would definetly reach for my Kabookie or even the Bushwacker or Brahma if there was anything over 6" of snow. The Latigo will handle it very well in comparison to older conventional skis but it will wear you out fast.

I'm also TMAC4718 by the way, needing to change my username.
post #35 of 45

Helpful info. Thx...looking at slightly wider options now. 

post #36 of 45

Wider Latigo?  It's called the Brahma.
 

post #37 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by semajosa View Post
 

Helpful info. Thx...looking at slightly wider options now. 

 

Get the Brahma.  I own a pair in 173 and love them.  I also own the Bonafide in 173 and the Cochise in 177.  I love the Blizzard flip core line.  I was considering the Latigo but I gravitate towards the wider skis.  I just get more confidence out of the wider skis and don't feel I am giving up much turning improvement.  The narrowest ski I own is the Kastle LX82 and that ski is absolutely a blast.  I owned the MX78 and didn't like it anywhere near as much so I sold it.  The Brahma is so much fun and really is confidence inspiring.

post #38 of 45

You could dance on a 184 stable and very quick. Metal makes this ski a suitable choice for you ON GROOMERS and maybe 18 inches of any type of crud given your size. You could blast with quickness and power. Likely a stable ski at speed for you. Good in bumps. BC Trees. Maybe if the snow is not too deep.That's it.  Rossi says an FKS 140 or 180 would work with a 95 brake.

post #39 of 45


Maybe consider the Atomic Automatic 117 under foot. Great in Pow. Pretty versatile in crud but maybe too soft at your size if you aggressively attack. If you are a finesse skier then suitable. Cochise is a great ski.

post #40 of 45

Latigo/Cochise.

post #41 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmartini View Post
 


Maybe consider the Atomic Automatic 117 under foot. Great in Pow. Pretty versatile in crud but maybe too soft at your size if you aggressively attack. If you are a finesse skier then suitable. Cochise is a great ski.

 

I own both the Cochise and the Auto 117 and completely agree with your assessment.  My Auto is my alltime favorite outwest ski.  I dig the Cochise as well but it is to stiff to take in the trees.  If I was skiing bowls and steeps in open areas the Cochise would be my choice.  However if I was skiing that terrain and also throwing tree skiing in the mix I'd go Auto's.  So many great choices right now.  My quiver is so solid that I am extremely happy.  However I have 2 skis I am eyeing to add, Kastle FX84 and Atomic Auto 109.

 

Chuck

post #42 of 45

Thanks--You guys have given me a lot of ideas. I'm thinking I should just demo some of these on the mountain early on. Really appreciate the help and suggestions.

post #43 of 45

Chuck:

How does the Automatic 117 hold on firmer conditions. I have not been on mine yet and I was hoping less early rise with a pin tail would provide better hold on firm snow. In +12 inches of soft they should be super fun and playful. How about crud. Do they blast well at less than warp speed. My days of skiing crud and bumps with my hair on fire are over due to a significant reduction of hair. LOL

Thanks!

post #44 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmartini View Post
 

Chuck:

How does the Automatic 117 hold on firmer conditions. I have not been on mine yet and I was hoping less early rise with a pin tail would provide better hold on firm snow. In +12 inches of soft they should be super fun and playful. How about crud. Do they blast well at less than warp speed. My days of skiing crud and bumps with my hair on fire are over due to a significant reduction of hair. LOL

Thanks!

 

The Auto's hold an edge OK on firmer conditions.  If the snow is groomed and on the softer side of things they do an adequate job.  However for super firm iced over morning conditions they are less than stellar.  However when I am out west I stay out of shaded areas in the morning.  I also have a few other skis that work great in those kind of conditions such as my Kastle FX94's, Bonafides and Cochise so if I am going to encounter those type of conditions I leave the Auto's at home.  The Auto's do excellent in crud and bumps.  They are super fast turning skis but they just blast through the crud.  I personally feel there is no speed limit through the crud on the Auto's.  I'd say the only thing they don't excel at are super hard firm to icy conditions.  Hope that helps.

post #45 of 45

I just ordered a pair and will be skiing them in he NW--Spokane, Wa.  If someone wants to ride them.  Let me know

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion

Gear mentioned in this thread:

EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 2015 Blizzard Latigo Skis