or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski for East Coast

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 

Just got back from demo day over the weekend at Blue Mountain (PA). Two that stood out the most that I enjoyed were the Brahma (173) and Latigo (170). The others I demoed was Atomic Theory (177) Icelantic Pilgrim (168) Salomon Threat (171). I only was able to do 3-4 runs on each but I liked the Latigo and Brahma much more than any other skis I've been on. I liked the Latigo a little more than the Brahma.

 

I don't really know enough about skis to determine technically why I like one more than the other so I was hoping you guys could be of a little help. I am 5'9 male, 150 pounds, 22 yrs old. Skill level is around 6-7 I would say. I'll be skiing on east coast for the time being. Mostly have skied on groomers only, a little bit of powder when it's fresh and not much off trail. I do plan on heading up to Vermont / Canada though. (Not sure of the type of conditions there, never been!) This year I will probably ski around 25 days. Thanks for any help.

post #2 of 29

The Latigo is narrower so it will transition from edge to edge a little quicker than the Brahma.  Overall edge grip on the groomers will be a little higher on the latigo due to the angles generated.  Brahma will be better in the loose stuff should you get treated to an east cost powder day.

 

Two of the other skis you looked at don't have a layer of metal and are not as stiff or have the level of rebound the Blizzards do.

 

You likely won't regret getting either they are both excellent skis, but it can't hurt to demo more intermediate/expert skis in the 75 to 85mm underfoot class.

 

post #3 of 29

This thread may be relevant: http://www.epicski.com/t/129605/the-most-important-ski-of-2015-blizzard-latigo-cheyenne

 

I think at your level and with what you'll be skiing, the Latigo will be a great option. I have skis that have a sheet of metal and a re 80 underfoot and I have found them to work well in pretty much every level of snow (from boiler ice to about 15 inches of new) I've received this season. Personally, if you're skiing smaller mountains and staying on trail I think a ski around 80 is a perfect daily driver for the east coast. And I don't think you can go wrong with the Latigo - I think it hits that sweet spot of stiff enough to carve on, but fun and wide enough to not be limited to arcing down anything as if it were a race course.

post #4 of 29
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the responses, what length would you recommend? I've only tried the LatiGo in 170cm but I guess the other option would be 177cm. I haven't skied with much over 173cm besides a few demos. Thanks.

post #5 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by xjjon View Post
 

Thanks for the responses, what length would you recommend? I've only tried the LatiGo in 170cm but I guess the other option would be 177cm. I haven't skied with much over 173cm besides a few demos. Thanks.

I would say stick in the 170 range for the moment. Based on skiing Mid-Atlantic, you don't need a longer ski, but you don't want to go too short either. I'd suggest taking a good look at the Icelantic SKNY. Its just like the Pilgrim you tried out, but its skinnier, so it'll hold better on the Pennsylvania Powder you'll spend most of your time on. I ski an Icelantic Nomad RKR in a 181 up here in Vermont, and I love the ski. Super well built, very responsive, and the Icelantic guys are a good crew, all the skis are hand made here in the USA. 

 

BTW, if you want to head north, here's the comparison- the Poconos are little, short, and icy. New England is bigger, longer, and generally less ice. Not always powder, but usually a lot more soft snow. Don't bother with going to Canada. Its a further drive, you have to cross a border, and most serious Quebecois skiers come down to Vermont to ski... serious Vermont skiers don't usually go to Quebec. That should tell you something. Any of the skis you have on your list now will do just fine in Vermont. 

post #6 of 29
Thread Starter 

Thanks a lot for the response. These are my first pair of skis so I have no idea what bindings would be suitable. Any suggestions?

post #7 of 29

Which SKNY? Icelantic now makes skinnier versions of almost all their models.

 

PS- Just held a pair of the regular-width Pilgrims in a shop. Whoa!  They were much stiffer than i expected. The Shaman SKNY had much more give, especially in the tail.

post #8 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigAirMass View Post
 

Which SKNY? Icelantic now makes skinnier versions of almost all their models.

 

PS- Just held a pair of the regular-width Pilgrims in a shop. Whoa!  They were much stiffer than i expected. The Shaman SKNY had much more give, especially in the tail.

 

I demoed the SKNY Nomad but only got one very short run in towards the end. Didn't have much of a opinion on them though.

 

I think I'll try to demo the LatiGo / Brahma a couple more times. Just a little worried that many people I've talked about the skis seemed surprised I liked the narrower ski more. Should I be worried about this? My favorite part about the LatiGo was how easy it is to go from edge to edge and I felt really comfortable going fast. I'm on the lighter side (150 pounds, athletic build) but I'm not sure if that would be an issue. I think right now for me it's between LatiGo and Brahma. Only thing that worries me is how surprised people seem to be when I bring up a narrow(er) ski.

post #9 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by xjjon View Post
 

 Just a little worried that many people I've talked about the skis seemed surprised I liked the narrower ski more. Should I be worried about this? My favorite part about the LatiGo was how easy it is to go from edge to edge and I felt really comfortable going fast. I'm on the lighter side (150 pounds, athletic build) but I'm not sure if that would be an issue. I think right now for me it's between LatiGo and Brahma. Only thing that worries me is how surprised people seem to be when I bring up a narrow(er) ski.

People are surprised because they have been brainwashed by the industry over the past few years that fat is the only way to go.  It's truly not, unless they are heavily rockered they transition slower, overall edge grip is less and they are hard on your knees.  Skis wider than 90 underfoot are fun in new snow, but if you like to carve they are lacking on the groomers.  If you like to slarve and skid around on hardpack, go fat, if you like to carve, skinny to mid is where it's at.

post #10 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by trailtrimmer View Post Skis wider than 90 underfoot are fun in new snow, but if you like to carve they are lacking on the groomers.

 

Tell that to my Kastle MX108's or 113 Nordica Patrons.

post #11 of 29

Amen.  I ski in NY most of the time and it's amusing to me to see these big fat boards all over the place.  Even in a season as good as this one has become, the choice is basically groomer or bumps, with a woods trail here and there.  The powder does not last long.  I am 5'9", 200 lb.  About a month ago I demoed the Brahma (173) and Latigo (177) at a local hill and for me there was really no contest.  I like quick turns, edge to edge quickness, zipping through the bumps...  I bought a pair of Latigo's on my way home that day and have been very happy.  I took them out to Utah for a week (where the conditions felt a lot like home this year) and had no regrets there either.  Fight the power!

post #12 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post
Originally Posted by trailtrimmer View Post Skis wider than 90 underfoot are fun in new snow, but if you like to carve they are lacking on the groomers.

 

Tell that to my Kastle MX108's or 113 Nordica Patrons.

 

Skiing Whistler and SLC's "Deep Pow, Trees / steeps, off-piste" do not reflect the reality of the OP's situation.

 

The OP's an intermediate skiing mostly on hardpack groomers. He only weighs 150 at 5'9. Consequently, I'm going to recommend the OP actually demo something in the 72mm or less underfoot range and 166-170cm in length (add more length for a rockered ski). Something like the Head Integrale 1000 or Head Magnum will give great performance on hardpack/ice with enough flexibility to ski the bumps and moderate eastern powder. This type of ski will give the OP lot of smiles on even the crustiest of days. These skis will also help the OP's development around learning to get on and off edge.

 

The big mountain/deep powder hype machine does a major disservice to eastern skiers.

post #13 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metaphor_ View Post
 

 

Skiing Whistler and SLC's "Deep Pow, Trees / steeps, off-piste" do not reflect the reality of the OP's situation.

 

The OP's an intermediate skiing mostly on hardpack groomers. He only weighs 150 at 5'9. Consequently, I'm going to recommend the OP actually demo something in the 72mm or less underfoot range and 166-170cm in length (add more length for a rockered ski). Something like the Head Integrale 1000 or Head Magnum will give great performance on hardpack/ice with enough flexibility to ski the bumps and moderate eastern powder. This type of ski will give the OP lot of smiles on even the crustiest of days. These skis will also help the OP's development around learning to get on and off edge.

 

The big mountain/deep powder hype machine does a major disservice to eastern skiers.


Agreed.  

 

And the Latigo would be an excellent choice for most EC skiing, though narrower skis are worth a look, for the reasons given.  You never doubt where your edges are, skiing a narrow ski.

post #14 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metaphor_ View Post
 

 

Skiing Whistler and SLC's "Deep Pow, Trees / steeps, off-piste" do not reflect the reality of the OP's situation.

 

The OP's an intermediate skiing mostly on hardpack groomers. He only weighs 150 at 5'9. Consequently, I'm going to recommend the OP actually demo something in the 72mm or less underfoot range and 166-170cm in length (add more length for a rockered ski). Something like the Head Integrale 1000 or Head Magnum will give great performance on hardpack/ice with enough flexibility to ski the bumps and moderate eastern powder. This type of ski will give the OP lot of smiles on even the crustiest of days. These skis will also help the OP's development around learning to get on and off edge.

 

The big mountain/deep powder hype machine does a major disservice to eastern skiers.


This, all the way. 

post #15 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metaphor_ View Post
 

 

Skiing Whistler and SLC's "Deep Pow, Trees / steeps, off-piste" do not reflect the reality of the OP's situation.

 

The OP's an intermediate skiing mostly on hardpack groomers. He only weighs 150 at 5'9. Consequently, I'm going to recommend the OP actually demo something in the 72mm or less underfoot range and 166-170cm in length (add more length for a rockered ski). Something like the Head Integrale 1000 or Head Magnum will give great performance on hardpack/ice with enough flexibility to ski the bumps and moderate eastern powder. This type of ski will give the OP lot of smiles on even the crustiest of days. These skis will also help the OP's development around learning to get on and off edge.

 

The big mountain/deep powder hype machine does a major disservice to eastern skiers.

 

Ducky.The point was that a MX108 or a Patron (and many other >100mm underfoot skis) will rail carved turns on groomers that belie their width and will burn up your quads in an instant, which is the quote that I was responding to (it's the thing above what I said in blue), NOT the OP's request, but please, carry on :rolleyes.

post #16 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post
 

 

Ducky.The point was that a MX108 or a Patron (and many other >100mm underfoot skis) will rail carved turns on groomers that belie their width and will burn up your quads in an instant, which is the quote that I was responding to (it's the thing above what I said in blue), NOT the OP's request, but please, carry on :rolleyes.

 

Fair enough. It's great that you can ski that on a lovely soft Whistler or SLC groomer on those skis, but let's not confuse the OP or muddy the waters by implying >100mm skis are effective carving skis. This discussion has been done before (including at present): 

 

http://www.epicski.com/t/132971/your-fat-skis-are-killing-your-knees/30#post_1841589

 

My other question is this: why are your quads burning when you carve? That's not a good thing...

post #17 of 29

I'm going to try that experiment one of these days in a NASTAR course.

I think my 20m FX94's will give up about 5 handicap points over my 21m race stock Atomics (94 v. 65 mm)

In a real masters course it would be much worse.

But the 94's have so much more leverage on the side of my boot they would be much more tiring.

post #18 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post
 

 

Ducky.The point was that a MX108 or a Patron (and many other >100mm underfoot skis) will rail carved turns on groomers that belie their width and will burn up your quads in an instant, which is the quote that I was responding to (it's the thing above what I said in blue), NOT the OP's request, but please, carry on :rolleyes.


You seem to be missing the point that the OP is an intermediate beginning advanced level skier.  He doesn't have the skills yet to rail a 100+ width ski like you and I can.  I ski Rossi E98's out west and I can rail them like nobody's business, but just about every person I have lent my 98's to for a few runs, can't wait to give them back and when they do they ask me how I can rail them and be so quick edge to edge?  Well they ski at a lower level than I do and have not learned how to get up on their edges or to transition quickly from edge to edge.

 

The two choices the OP mentioned the Latigo or Brahma will be a better ski for where he is ability wise and for where he will be skiing most of the time.

 

A good skier can ski any ski in any condition.  However a skier who is just learning and moving up the ranks will benefit more from a ski that is correct for their ability and snow conditions.

 

Of  course I have been wrong before...

 

Ski On!

 

Rick G

post #19 of 29

Rick is right on.

A 210 GS ski used to be perfect for powder.

If the front range powder pigs had to ski them we wouldn't have the problems we do now.

post #20 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickg View Post
 


You seem to be missing the point that the OP is an intermediate beginning advanced level skier.  He doesn't have the skills yet to rail a 100+ width ski like you and I can.  I ski Rossi E98's out west and I can rail them like nobody's business, but just about every person I have lent my 98's to for a few runs, can't wait to give them back and when they do they ask me how I can rail them and be so quick edge to edge?  Well they ski at a lower level than I do and have not learned how to get up on their edges or to transition quickly from edge to edge.

 

The two choices the OP mentioned the Latigo or Brahma will be a better ski for where he is ability wise and for where he will be skiing most of the time.

 

A good skier can ski any ski in any condition.  However a skier who is just learning and moving up the ranks will benefit more from a ski that is correct for their ability and snow conditions.

 

Of  course I have been wrong before...

 

Ski On!

 

Rick G

 

"which is the quote that I was responding to (it's the thing above what I said in blue), NOT the OP's request, but please, carry on :rolleyes."

 

And :rolleyes once again.

 

Here, I'll type slowly - I was responding to the guy who said anything beyond 90mm couldn't carve on groomers (trying to fix some internet misinformation), NOT that these were good for the OP :dunno.

post #21 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post
 

 

"which is the quote that I was responding to (it's the thing above what I said in blue), NOT the OP's request, but please, carry on :rolleyes."

 

And :rolleyes once again.

 

Here, I'll type slowly - I was responding to the guy who said anything beyond 90mm couldn't carve on groomers (trying to fix some internet misinformation), NOT that these were good for the OP :dunno.

Can they carve?  Yes, with big efforts and big stress.  Can they link turns and carve as quickly and precisely as a narrower ski?  Not really.

I could drive a 1 ton on a daily basis too, but my wagon is far more practical.

post #22 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by trailtrimmer View Post


I could drive a 1 ton on a daily basis too, but my wagon is far more practical.

 

But just think how cool you would look when you pull into the office parking lot in your F-450 and take up two whole parking spots. Also the trash talk you'll be entitled to spew at the water cooler will be unlimited. :rolleyes

post #23 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by trailtrimmer View Post
 

Can they carve?  Yes, with big efforts and big stress.

 

You're doing it wrong. Saying a Patron with a 16m turn radius needs big stress is just someone who's clueless.

 

Look I have MX88's too, so I know how and why and when to link carved turns. You know not of what you speak.

post #24 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post
 

 

"which is the quote that I was responding to (it's the thing above what I said in blue), NOT the OP's request, but please, carry on :rolleyes."

 

And :rolleyes once again.

 

Here, I'll type slowly - I was responding to the guy who said anything beyond 90mm couldn't carve on groomers (trying to fix some internet misinformation), NOT that these were good for the OP :dunno.

 

So, you were not trying to help the OP, you were just trying to prove your point.  I get it now.

 

Ski on!

 

Rick G

post #25 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metaphor_ View Post
 

My other question is this: why are your quads burning when you carve? That's not a good thing...

 

Seriously. Nature's way of saying, "backseat." 

 

Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post
 

Here, I'll type slowly - I was responding to the guy who said anything beyond 90mm couldn't carve on groomers (trying to fix some internet misinformation), NOT that these were good for the OP :dunno.

Glad we're not drifting into yet another thread on whether fat skis can carve. ;)

post #26 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post
 

 

You're doing it wrong. Saying a Patron with a 16m turn radius needs big stress is just someone who's clueless.

 

Look I have MX88's too, so I know how and why and when to link carved turns. You know not of what you speak.

 

The name-calling is unnecessary. 

 

The issue with carving on fat skis, including in current whistler ice conditions, is that the wider platform, the more the platform naturally flattens out. To keep it tipped on edge, you're fighting the ski using your knees, or excessive angulation, with the danger that messing up can cause significant strain on the knees. See some links here: 

 

http://wendellmoore.blogspot.ca/2015/02/fat-ski-syndrome.html

http://www.epicski.com/t/132971/your-fat-skis-are-killing-your-knees/30#post_1841589

 

While it's something you can accomplish, it's definitely sub-optimal..

post #27 of 29
Quote:

Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post

 

is just someone who's clueless.

You know not of what you speak.

Arguments are more effective if you dial back the invective a notch. 

post #28 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post
 

 

You're doing it wrong. Saying a Patron with a 16m turn radius needs big stress is just someone who's clueless.

 

Look I have MX88's too, so I know how and why and when to link carved turns. You know not of what you speak.

You might want to take a physics and physiology course or two, there is simply no way a 110mm+ waisted ski can even think of carving as effectively and as efficiently as a narrower ski of similar construction on eastern hardpack or ice.  If they were awesome at it, you would see them all over in nastar, maters and beer leagues.  USSA and olympians would be petitioning FIS to run fat boards.  Just because it has a 16m radius doesn't mean it's an effective tool for the east.  There is simply no way a human can overcome the deflection angles generated by a wide board to carve as effectively as something narrower.

post #29 of 29
Thread Starter 

I think I will go with the latigo. Local shops willing to sell for $329 + tax so I think it's a good price. Would anyone be able to recommend bindings to have with it? Thanks!

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