or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Every Day Ski for a Two Ski Quiver
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Every Day Ski for a Two Ski Quiver - Page 2

post #31 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Zest View Post
 

How is a 90~mm ski not good for a foot of snow?

 

Can you ski 90mm in a foot of snow? Sure. Are they "good"? The answer to this is pretty much self evident to most who have skied a modern powder ski in its element.  90mm is not even close. 100mm is not even close. 110 is not there... 115 is getting warmer... You get the idea. :D

 

Have you ever skied a modern powder ski in powder?

post #32 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

 

Can you ski 90mm in a foot of snow? Sure. Are they "good"? The answer to this is pretty much self evident to most who have skied a modern powder ski in its element.  90mm is not even close. 100mm is not even close. 110 is not there... 115 is getting warmer... 

 

The OP has a 117 ski, Spin, so he's got that covered.  

If he wants to ski his 90 in a foot of fresh, cool, but he has the 117 if he wants to have more fun in it.

 

For a 2-ski only quiver, I like the idea of an 85-90 ski on the narrow end and a 110-120 ski on the wide end.  I have GPO for the wide side myself, but if it were me looking for the narrow end, I'd try the Elan Amphibio 88.  I find it intriguing, but I haven't been able to try one yet.

post #33 of 56

In the past year I've skied on a foot of fresh snow with an 88mm ski and a 98mm ski... on days I was not on my 110's or 116's, of course.

 

88 - damn, I wish I had something wider so I could open up these turns and let it rip.  Attempts to do so were lacking.

 

98 - woohoo!  This is why this is my car ski.  Whatever the conditions, bring it on.

 

For me personally, it's a major difference.  At my size (5' 11" / 170 pounds) I feel like 95mm or so is a major threshold difference in terms of float and true versatility.  Experiences will vary, of course.

post #34 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skierish View Post
 

 

The OP has a 117 ski, Spin, so he got that covered.  

If he wants to ski his 90 in a foot fresh, cool, but he has the 117 if he wants to have more fun in it.

 

For a 2-ski only quiver, I like the idea of a 85-90 ski on the narrow end and a 110-120 ski on the wide end.  I have GPO myself, but if it were me looking for the narrow end, I'd try the Elan Amphibio 88.  I find it intriguing, but I haven't been able to try one yet.


I was responding to Lemon Zest. 

 

Personally, I'd go wider than the bulk of the discussion. The Automatic is reasonably similar to the GPO - which I also ski. If I were building a quiver I'd take a wider first approach. As in I'd build from the middle ( like the Auto ) up and then fill in down. And I personally have no interest in anything materially less than 105 or so.  But I get the general drift in the thread. And why.

 

Like I said - I was simply pushing on the question that was asked by Lemon Zest.

post #35 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayT View Post

 

For me personally, it's a major difference.  At my size (5' 11" / 170 pounds) I feel like 95mm or so is a major threshold difference in terms of float and true versatility.  Experiences will vary, of course.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
 

Like I said - I was simply pushing on the question that was asked by Lemon Zest.

 

Yeah, yeah, I know.  I guess I was trying to offer some devil's advocacy for the 90ish ski a bit on behalf of LZ maybe.

 

I want a narrower ski on a firm day, and let's face it, if it unexpectedly dumps hard throughout the day, we would all still have fun on the 90ish ski if that's all we had with us.  That said, I totally agree I would much prefer the wide ride for freshies.  Maybe OP wants a 90-100 ski that will do a foot of fresh in a way that is more fun than most if he left his 117 at home?

 

This is why 3 ski+ quivers are necessary!

post #36 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayT View Post

 

For me personally, it's a major difference.  At my size (5' 11" / 170 pounds) I feel like 95mm or so is a major threshold difference in terms of float and true versatility.  Experiences will vary, of course.

I respect this.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
 

 

Can you ski 90mm in a foot of snow? Sure. Are they "good"? The answer to this is pretty much self evident to most who have skied a modern powder ski in its element.  90mm is not even close. 100mm is not even close. 110 is not there... 115 is getting warmer... You get the idea. :D

 

Have you ever skied a modern powder ski in powder?

I have skied modern fat powder skis in their element and it's not self-evident to me. The fattest ski I own is a Helldorado which I do very much love, but my 100mil Mantras will ski waist deep with just as much proficiency. I learned to ski powder on 89mm skis and to be honest, while they don't have as much float they are far more suited to actually skiing proper powder technique than ultra fat boards. But for a foot of powder? 90 is plenty and even if it weren't, he has his 117's take out.

post #37 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skierish View Post
 

 

This is why 3 ski+ quivers are necessary!

 

Some might disagree. But to this, I say  Amen! :D

post #38 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Zest View Post
 

but my 100mil Mantras will ski waist deep with just as much proficiency. 

More to the point, how often do you ski waist deep powder? Versus say 6"?

 

And to forestal the inevitable reply from someone about smoothing out chop or my background with modern fat skis, yes I do, and how much width do we need for that anyway? If it's just a float equation, then something in the low 100's with rocker prolly does the trick at normal speeds for me. If you're 200 lbs, then say 115. My 2014 Super 7's are more ski than I need for real world powder or chop, even though they're fun. I have some 122's that have seen snow once after a year and a half, and that was just for the experience, not the conditions. Despite being taken to various mountains in various places for various trips. Seriously, when I see folks on 115's when it's snowed 3" back here and gotten cut up in two hours, it smells like duty, not perfection.

 

The smoothest ski I've ever been on in bad chop (say 8"), BTW, was a 178 Stockli SS, 89 mm. Modern GS skis aren't all that bad in heavy crud either, although you better stay on them if you value your knees. 

 

But yeah, quivers rule, and why stop with three? If you're  not approaching double digits, you're wasting your time skiing. ;) 


Edited by beyond - 1/20/15 at 5:58am
post #39 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skierish View Post
 

 

This is why 3 ski+ quivers are necessary!

 

Only 3?  Small thinker.  I believe the minimum is 4 maybe 5.  No 6, yeah that's it an even 1/2 dozen!  Then I would be happy.  But of course I would be happier with that 7th pair.  On and on it goes!

 

Ski on!

 

Rick G

post #40 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
 

 

The answer you are looking for is in the linked thread below. 

Thanks PhilPug and raysteng for that thread. It sounds like I'll definitely be demo'ing the NRGY 100. One thing that I forgot to mention was that it seemed like I was getting bumped into the backseat sometimes on the Bonafide when charging through larger bumps. Maybe the compliance of the NRGY 100 will help out with that.

 

Another nice thing about the NRGY 100 is that hopefully I can pick one up at the Starthaus Blem sale!

post #41 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickg View Post
 

 

Only 3?  Small thinker.  I believe the minimum is 4 maybe 5.  No 6, yeah that's it an even 1/2 dozen!  Then I would be happy.  But of course I would be happier with that 7th pair.  On and on it goes!

 

Ski on!

 

Rick G

So to address the quiver questions/comments- I would love to have more than 2 main skis but it's not feasible for me. I am on the road for work 11 months out of the year, so I can carry 2 skis with me at most. Most of my ski trips are just on the weekends, so I make my best guess at the conditions based on the forecast and bring the most appropriate ski with me. If I am going for more than a weekend then I will have both skis (everyday ski and powder ski), otherwise it's just the everyday ski.

 

Now that I think about it more, I'm inclined to stay in the 95 to 100 mm range because if the forecast ends up being wrong in a good way (more snow than predicted), I'd like to have a bit wider ski. I haven't found this width to be a chore in trees or bumps either. 

post #42 of 56

Hey, I understand what you are saying.  I was just being my silly smart assed self.  :D  I do own 4 pairs of skis and all are used.  But 2 are race skis for my race league.  The other 2 are kind of what you are doing.  My narrower 81 underfoot eastern all mountain and the other is my 98 western all mountain ski trip ski.  So if I were to quit racing tomorrow, I would probably sell at least one if not both pair of race skis and stick to more versatile 2 ski quiver.

 

Another suggestion if you are thinking 90ish is the newer Blizzard Brahma.  Has the beef of the Bones with the shorter radius sidecut of the Bushwacker.  Just a thought.

 

Good luck.

 

Rick G

post #43 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickg View Post
 

Hey, I understand what you are saying.  I was just being my silly smart assed self.  :D  I do own 4 pairs of skis and all are used.  But 2 are race skis for my race league.  The other 2 are kind of what you are doing.  My narrower 81 underfoot eastern all mountain and the other is my 98 western all mountain ski trip ski.  So if I were to quit racing tomorrow, I would probably sell at least one if not both pair of race skis and stick to more versatile 2 ski quiver.

 

Another suggestion if you are thinking 90ish is the newer Blizzard Brahma.  Has the beef of the Bones with the shorter radius sidecut of the Bushwacker.  Just a thought.

 

Good luck.

 

Rick G

No offense taken! Ideally I would have a 4 or 5 ski quiver myself, but right now it just doesn't make sense for me.

 

Blister did a review on the Brahma where they compared it to the Bonafide (both skis were 180cm). From the review: "The 180 Brahma, on the other hand feels stiffer through the tails, and its groomer / carving performance does blow me away. The price of that performance is that it is not as forgiving in moguls as the Bonafide (despite the Bonafide’s increased width)." Based on that I think I would go with a Bonafide over the Brahma, because I'm valuing mogul/tree skiing greater than groomers.

 

I plan on keeping my E98's as early/late season skis, so I'll still have something that I can carve on.

post #44 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by spchin24 View Post
 

No offense taken! Ideally I would have a 4 or 5 ski quiver myself, but right now it just doesn't make sense for me.

 

Blister did a review on the Brahma where they compared it to the Bonafide (both skis were 180cm). From the review: "The 180 Brahma, on the other hand feels stiffer through the tails, and its groomer / carving performance does blow me away. The price of that performance is that it is not as forgiving in moguls as the Bonafide (despite the Bonafide’s increased width)." Based on that I think I would go with a Bonafide over the Brahma, because I'm valuing mogul/tree skiing greater than groomers.

 

I plan on keeping my E98's as early/late season skis, so I'll still have something that I can carve on.

To be honest I have not had a chance to ski either the Brahma or Bonafide, but have other Blizzards.  I know from reviews that both are highly regarded.  Ironically, my western all mountain ski is the E98, a very versatile ski in its own right.. Sometimes the grass isn't always greener.

 

Rick G

post #45 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by spchin24 View Post

So I demo'ed the Bonafide today at Snowbird. I racked up ~28k vertical feet of skiing on it, so I feel like I got a pretty good impression of the ski.

Likes:
- Much easier to smear turns in bumps and trees than my E98
- Comparable dampness/stability to my E98 
- Less demanding to ski than my E98

Dislikes:
- Edgehold is not as good as my E98 on firm groomers (it felt like the tails washed out a lot easier)

I can see why the Bonafide is the benchmark ~100mm underfoot ski. It did everything well, with an empasis on trees and bumps. I think I'm willing to give up the edgehold of my E98 in exchange for the maneuverability of the Bonafide in trees and bumps.

From other reviews that I've read, it sounds like the NRGY 100 is a toned down version of the Bonafide. Has anyone skied both of these skis (Bonafide and NRGY 100), and if so, would you agree with that statement?

Thanks again for all the help, the suggestions in here are great!

No, it's a toned down version of the E-98/100 and retains the excellent edge hold on firm snow. I'm not a big Bonafide fan, but I like both the Rossi and Nordica 100's.
Edited by markojp - 1/27/15 at 5:44pm
post #46 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post


No, it's a toned down version of the E-98/100 and retains the excellent edge hold on firm snow. I'm not a big Bonafide fan,mount I like both the Rossi and Nordica 100's.

 

How would you compare the NRGY 100 to the Bonafide in bumps and trees? If the NRGY 100 retains the edgehold of the E98 but is better off-piste and in bumps, I may have found my ski.

 

I'm planning on demo'ing the NRGY 100, but that won't happen until I go to Jackson Hole in March.

post #47 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by spchin24 View Post
 

 

How would you compare the NRGY 100 to the Bonafide in bumps and trees? If the NRGY 100 retains the edgehold of the E98 but is better off-piste and in bumps, I may have found my ski.

 

I'm planning on demo'ing the NRGY 100, but that won't happen until I go to Jackson Hole in March.

 

Be sure and try the Motive 95 while you are here.  PM me and I will help you with the demos.

post #48 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by tetonpwdrjunkie View Post

Be sure and try the Motive 95 while you are here.  PM me and I will help you with the demos.

I think the motive 95 and Nrgy 100 would be a very interesting back to back demo. Skied my Nrgy's this past Saturday in spring like conditions (very firm a.m. north facing groomed stuff for one lap, and a lot of lovely big corn bumps late morning, and some rotten mank in the afternoon. Fun ski! Both the E and N-100's like to be skied tip to tail and rolled up on edge early. The Bonefide can do this as well, but for those who like a stout-ish ski than can be pivoted/twisted through bumps and trees, the Bonefide is still probably your choice.
post #49 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post


I think the motive 95 and Nrgy 100 would be a very interesting back to back demo. Skied my Nrgy's this past Saturday in spring like conditions (very firm a.m. north facing groomed stuff for one lap, and a lot of lovely big corn bumps late morning, and some rotten mank in the afternoon. Fun ski! Both like to be skied tip to tail and rolled up on edge early. The Bonefide can do this as well, but it also can be pivoted easily , so for those who like a stout ish ski than can be pivoted through bumps and trees, the Bonefide is still probably your choice.

How would you compare the NRGY to the Bonafide? It sounds like the NGRY isn't as easy to pivot in trees and bumps, or am I misunderstanding?

 

Also, what do you mean when you say the ski likes to be skied tip to tail?

post #50 of 56
If you come from a race or ski background that favors early edge engagement above the fall line, and the path of the ski that the tip follows the tail (more carve, contolled arc) vs. pivoting/twisting your feet to turn, then you will likely prefer the N or E-100 to the Bonefide IMHO. As I said, the Bonefide can tip and rip, but it also can be twisted/pivoted easily from the middle whereas the N and E-100 dont respond as well to pivoting... they want to arc. they arent 'slarvey'. I like leading the ski down the hill rather than standing in the middle. No big deal either way, just a preference. I've skied the N100 in a bunch of bumps and trees. Soft'ish, so it's easily bent into the arc I wantt
post #51 of 56

^^ Which is why the Bonafide is a better off-piste ski IMO.

post #52 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
 

 

Some might disagree. But to this, I say  Amen! :D

 

I'll go one step further and say a 6 ski quiver is a necessity.  However to answer the OP's question more specifically since I have had time on nearly all the skis mentioned I'd go with a Kastle FX94.  If he doesn't want to spend that kind of money I'd go Bonafide.  I owned the Soul Riders and they weren't my thing.  However I am not a fan of Nordica skis in general.  Owned the Steadfast as well and didn't care for them either.  The Rossignol E series are a great skis as well.  I just prefer the Kastle's to everything.  Then my next favorites are the Bonafides.

post #53 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayT View Post

^^ Which is why the Bonafide is a better off-piste ski IMO.

Your mileage obviously varies. Nothing wrong with that.
post #54 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post


Your mileage obviously varies. Nothing wrong with that.

 

No.  If I was going to be on the groomers all day I'd take the E-98/100.  If I was going to mix it up a bit more I'd take the Bonafide.  They are both *great* skis.

 

Haven't skied the NRGY so I'll leave that out of it.

post #55 of 56
For the record, I've spent probably 80% of my mileage on the Nrgy off piste. I'm just not a Bonafide guy, but I know that the majority of the 98-100 buying public will prefer the Bonafide over pretty much anything else.

Two skis this very scratchy season have been the Rev 85 pro most of the time and the Nrgy 100 for 4 or 5 days.
Edited by markojp - 1/28/15 at 3:34pm
post #56 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post
 

I'll toss in the Kastle FX94, because it's so silly versatile, both in terms of terrain and in terms of demand. Touch more flex than the Bonafide or E100. They'll sing if you ask them, but assuming you're high intermediate and up (meaning not backseat), put up with your relaxation mode if you don't. Strength are tough bumps, tight places including trees, and variable snow. Predictable and silky smooth at speed but OK with poking along. If they have a weakness it's say a 8/10 on ice. But still better on that than most 90-something skis. 

^^^^^THIS^^^^ +1

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 › Every Day Ski for a Two Ski Quiver