or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Looking for a Tree Ski

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 

Hi!

 

In the market for a new ski. I'm hoping for something that can rip tight deep/steep trees in Western Canada.

 

What complicates this is that I would also love something that can lay out big, wide, fast turns in open bowls. And so, at 6'1", 195...

 

1) Are these qualities necessarily opposing, or is there a ski that can nail both? Shorter skis being better in trees, longer skis being more stable in the chop/deep at speed, etc.

 

2) Any ski recommendations?

 

Thanks.

post #2 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionlager View Post
 

Hi!

 

In the market for a new ski. I'm hoping for something that can rip tight deep/steep trees in Western Canada.

 

What complicates this is that I would also love something that can lay out big, wide, fast turns in open bowls. And so, at 6'1", 195...

 

1) Are these qualities necessarily opposing, or is there a ski that can nail both? Shorter skis being better in trees, longer skis being more stable in the chop/deep at speed, etc.

 

2) Any ski recommendations?

 

Thanks.

 

Yes

 

SJ

post #3 of 14

Look for a ski more on the stiffer side given your size... one ski I've been curious about is the current 110mm underfoot ON3P Jeffrey, after seen how burly and well build my Billy Goat is the Jeffrey also got my attention. It's wide enough to work on deep, a not too long radius, stiff to charge in open spaces as far as "reviews" go, twin tip which will help you in tight tree spaces!

 

I'd probably look at the 186cm at your size...

 

I have no experience with this ski, my recommendation is based on some reviews and some info I've read about the ski, so take it with a good grain of salt!

 

If you are planning on buying now/summer it would be good to let us know what skis have you been skiing and what sizes as well as skis that you had demo time liked/disliked!

 

Next year Line Supernatural 108 seems a really nice choice as well! Sorry I can't help much other than speculate!

post #4 of 14

I haven't skied the Volkl Gotama, but extrapolating from the performance of the Shiro, it might work for what you need: both skis have very long front and back rocker but not much splay and no camber (so the ski is flat for a couple of feet under foot, and has slight rocker for a couple of feet on each end. The way this works out, is that the full rocker makes the ski pretty maneuverable (My Shiros are also mounted +3 since volkl has a pretty rearward mounting point).  But a reasonable stiff body and moderate sidecut make the ski work on groomers and open fresh - one you are going fast enough to get the ski up on edge, the rocker doesn't really matter any more and you can carve a turn. Actually, the shiros do what you describe but at 119 under foot they are a bit wide for your only ski.  If I didn't have a narrower ski I'd go for something like the Gotama.

post #5 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
 

 

Yes

 

SJ


I love it:D  My other question was is it more for powder days or for more firm conditions, as that makes a big difference for me too.

post #6 of 14

shorter skis will actually be harder to turn as you will be in the snow more....and will be less stable.

 

for your size and weight....

 

out right powder day or days after powder day if your tree do not get skied much. fatter/longer skis will float easier and more speed and there for be quicker and more nimble with more speed range than smaller skis. Reverse camber and sidecut add to the nimblness of the ski

 

193 Nordica Radict(if you can find it)

189 K2 Pontoon 2

196(or 186) on3p pillowfight

186 Volkl 2

196(or 187) Praxis Protest

 

 

basically anything big than you think you need for snow that will never find bottom on. do realize a ski like the On3p Pillowfight is going to get off the bottom in even 6 inches of snow faster than a smaller ski.

 

powder skis with some all mountain ability these skis will almost have the float of the above with some better ability on harder/packed snow

 

193 volkl shiro as mentioned already

188 Rossi Super 7

191(or 186) On3p billy Goat

193 Nordica Helldorado or Patron

 

basically my theory is western trees are open, and unless you sliding sidewyas though them longer/fatter skis are more nimble than short/sknnier skis. 

post #7 of 14
I'm looking for the same ski! Of course it's all a compromise and the skis I loved the most for quick turning didn't do it for me at speed in the open and visa-versa. Shorter/softer skis with rockered tails worked better for me in tight places and longer/stiffer skis with traditional tails felt better at speed. In the end, short turns were my priority and I went with some 4FRNT Devastators (108 under foot, reverse camber with matching side cut). Very quick in the soft snow, felt pretty good making relatively fast turns on the groomers too. Making quick turns on harder snow is more of a challenge and not their forte, but they work. I also really liked the K2 Shreditors and Salomon Rocker 108. They both felt fairly nimble, but still allowed me to have fun on the groomers.
Edited by lloydd - 5/1/14 at 3:54pm
post #8 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by lloydd View Post

I'm looking for the same ski! Of course it's all a compromise and the skis I loved the most for quick turning didn't do it for me at speed in the open and visa-versa. Shorter/softer skis with rockered tails worked better for me in tight places and longer/stiffer skis with traditional tails felt better at speed. In the end, short turns were my priority and I went with some 4FRNT Renegades (108 under foot, reverse camber with matching side cut). Very quick in the soft snow, felt pretty good making relatively fast turns on the groomers too. Making quick turns on harder snow is more of a challenge and not their forte, but they work. I also really liked the K2 Shreditors and Salomon Rocker 108. They both felt fairly nimble, but still allowed me to have fun on the groomers.

Renegades? Are you sure... renegades are 122 underfoot!

post #9 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfa81 View Post
 

Renegades? Are you sure... renegades are 122 underfoot!

 

 

I think the old ones were narrowers...

post #10 of 14
Sorry, long day, 4FRNT Devastators. Never been on the Renegades.
post #11 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by lloydd View Post

Sorry, long day, 4FRNT Devastators. Never been on the Renegades.

Heard it's very good charger and crud ski! 

post #12 of 14
Yeah, I really love them. I tried out 15 or so skis in that class and the Devastators were my hands down favorite. There were a couple skis that were better in tight places and a couple that felt better at speed, but none of them were as good at everything as these.
post #13 of 14
Thread Starter 

Great stuff, thanks for the replies. I'm currently on a 182 Black Diamond Zealot (110 underfoot). It floats pretty well and it's snappy, but lacks a bit of stability in the fast deep/choppy stuff. I figure the 192 would have been a better fit, but that seemed like a hell of a lot of ski at the time.

 

@Josh Matta

Thanks, I hadn't thought of it that way. I will certainly be leaning towards something 186+ this time around. I'll also do some reading on ON3P and 4FRNT.

post #14 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionlager View Post
 

Hi!

 

In the market for a new ski. I'm hoping for something that can rip tight deep/steep trees in Western Canada.

 

What complicates this is that I would also love something that can lay out big, wide, fast turns in open bowls. And so, at 6'1", 195...

Missed that last time.  For deep snow that can turn fast, I would buy a ski with a lot of tip rocker.  Will that stop you from big, fast turns in open bowls????  Not really.  A 192 TST has a bunch of tip rocker, so maybe you go with a ski like that.  In your shoes I would really look at the Praxis GPO or RX.  http://www.praxisskis.com/big-mountain  Both of those skis will rock your world if your a pretty good skier.


Edited by liv2 ski - 5/2/14 at 5:41pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion