or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Where to find good end of season deals on skis?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Where to find good end of season deals on skis? - Page 2

post #31 of 53
Thread Starter 

Thank you everyone for all your great suggestions, I am checking into every lead on this thread, including supporting our sponsors who have also contributed to the wealth of knowledge here. I will call around on the demos too, very good point there.

 

On the Kastles, I'm tempted but feel like I'm in between the 173 and 184 MX83 sizes, and a bit wary that it may be too much ski given some of the reviews, while the FX84 sound like a phenomenal deal but perhaps too little ski (too soft). Otherwise I'm really intrigued by the 2016 Head Monster reviews. Other skis that have come up as a potential fit include the Fischer Motive Ti 86 or Atomic Blackeye Ti.

post #32 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post
 

 

The MX is quick if you can pull your feet back and get that tip engaged at the top of the turn, it just comes around, seems like the tip engages very forcefully.  I find it be very good in bumps, as long as you have active feet; that is really the key to skiing anything that is a bit stiffer than average. 

 

Edit: here is the image I am looking for: key to bending the tip of a stiffer ski (this was the Motive 95ti).  You can get your feet moving fore and aft, you will be able to turn any ski out there.  In that pic, I am pivoting on the tip, in funky snow on a steep pitch.  

 


Thanks, Dawg.  I've been working on several things this year; that foot-pullback thing is one of them.  

post #33 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post
 

 

The MX is quick if you can pull your feet back and get that tip engaged at the top of the turn, it just comes around, seems like the tip engages very forcefully.  I find it be very good in bumps, as long as you have active feet; that is really the key to skiing anything that is a bit stiffer than average. 

 

Edit: here is the image I am looking for: key to bending the tip of a stiffer ski (this was the Motive 95ti).  You can get your feet moving fore and aft, you will be able to turn any ski out there.  In that pic, I am pivoting on the tip, in funky snow on a steep pitch.  

 


Thanks, Dawg.  I've been working on several things this year; that foot-pullback thing is one of them.  

 

Is one of those skis shorter than the other?

post #34 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidFeet View Post
 

Is one of those skis shorter than the other?

 

I believe it's an optical illusion, but I'm not sure why I believe that.  It's kind of Escher-like, right?

post #35 of 53

I'm convinced it's real.

 

post #36 of 53
Giants stadium sale before the season starts. Hosted by Mt Everest ski shop.


Sent from my iPhone. There may be horrible grammar and misspelling involved
post #37 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidFeet View Post
 

I'm convinced it's real.

 


Looks like the right boot and ski are angled more toward the viewer, but it's a pretty radical difference.

post #38 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakespapa View Post
 


Looks like the right boot and ski are angled more toward the viewer, but it's a pretty radical difference.

 

I assume I would have noticed!  But yeah, now that you mention it, looks crazy.  They were both 180's, no doubt. 

post #39 of 53
Honestly , I don't see why you want to limit yourself to skis in the 70s if you plan on skiing in the northeast. 88mm is awesome. Fast edge to edge on the groomers, and more float off piste.

I bought a pair of Blizzard Brahma's in December, and have put 30 days on them or so since, almost entirely in Vermont. I have skied them carving down double black diamond steeps, moguls, and in steep backcountry pow. They turn fast, float well enough for the northeast, and grip our all too common hardpack really really well.

for referenced. I'm 5'7", 175, describe myself as an advanced intermediate. I ski primarily in Vermont, and absolutely love going off piste.
post #40 of 53
Oh, and I have the same boots. Love them.
post #41 of 53
Pinnacle Ski Shop is Stowe had great prices early season.
post #42 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sithjedi333 View Post


On the Kastles, I'm tempted but feel like I'm in between the 173 and 184 MX83 sizes, and a bit wary that it may be too much ski given some of the reviews, while the FX84 sound like a phenomenal deal but perhaps too little ski (too soft). Otherwise I'm really intrigued by the 2016 Head Monster reviews. Other skis that have come up as a potential fit include the Fischer Motive Ti 86 or Atomic Blackeye Ti.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Keller View Post

Honestly , I don't see why you want to limit yourself to skis in the 70s if you plan on skiing in the northeast. 88mm is awesome. Fast edge to edge on the groomers, and more float off piste.
.

The OP seems pretty clearly to be looking at skis in the 80s.
post #43 of 53
My apologies for only reading the first few posts and then posting s reply to the OP rather Han reading all two pages of responses. A friend told me I should check the OPs original post and offer advice considering I ski frequently in the east coast and bought skis this season.
post #44 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post
 

My understanding is that the MX series has pretty long running lengths; they have no early rise and a fairly traditional tip. I'd bet, compared to the 177 Enforcer, the 173 is as long or longer in running length. The Enforcer will be less stiff, too, because it's aimed at softer snow. So I'd predict the Enforcer at 177 is an easier ski to bend than the MX at 173. :dunno

I don't get this at all. Nor do I get the pull back thing. Maybe that's why it feels long? I don't ski it that way. That pic is in the air! Failure to pull back there could've been bad.

 

It feels shortish to me. Well let's say normal to less for a 174. I even moved the demo back one notch to give more front.  3 Days on it, 2 at Jackson, 1 at Mad River

But even standing on it going to the lift line it doesn't feel long. It does have a slightly elevated tail of a couple inches.

 

Fwiw, demoed the new Enforcer in 185 or whatever it was. Had I more time I would've tried the 193 and I haven't skied a ski that long in years. Enforcer skis short. Bindings are seemingly pretty fore.

If looking for a 100mm ski you can't go wrong with the Enforcer unless you have specific requirements and needs.  (like very aggressive crud and pow busting I suppose)

Though I didn't get to try it in soft snow.


Edited by Tog - 3/23/15 at 3:35pm
post #45 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post
 

Enforcer skis short. 

 

 

I've distilled your commentary.  

 

So my guess that 169 was short for me wasn't, in your opinion, entirely off.  I'll have to demo a 177, then.  I liked the 169.

post #46 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakespapa View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post
 

Enforcer skis short. 

 

 

I've distilled your commentary.  

 

So my guess that 169 was short for me wasn't, in your opinion, entirely off.  I'll have to demo a 177, then.  I liked the 169.

No, not off at all. I would've gone automatically for the 177 if it had been there. After the 185 I actually wanted to try the 193 which is rare.

 

Doesn't mean you shouldn't ski it short if you really liked it though.

post #47 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post
 

No, not off at all. I would've gone automatically for the 177 if it had been there. After the 185 I actually wanted to try the 193 which is rare.

 

Doesn't mean you shouldn't ski it short if you really liked it though.


I'll give the 177 a shot, however.  If it doesn't give me the jazz, there's the answer.

 

Thanks, Tog.

post #48 of 53

Yep that's the answer.

 

I still remember demoing my first shaped skis. It came down to the Volkl P30. Now, what length? No one believed the " go down 20cm" nonsense. That would've meant 183cm. Crazy talk! 193 seemed to be it. I thought I should be on the 198 though. Demoed that one also. Now that was work handling that freight train. Good thing I was tired and hurt after that one or I might have gotten it and would've not liked it. Ended up with a 193, even though probably 188 would have been better. Haven't skied that long a ski since except for a rare occasion.

post #49 of 53
Thread Starter 

Thanks everyone. Ended up getting the Latigos for skis and will get bindings from my local ski shop and mount them there as well. So sad ski season is several months away now.

post #50 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by sithjedi333 View Post

Thanks everyone. Ended up getting the Latigos for skis and will get bindings from my local ski shop and mount them there as well. So sad ski season is several months away now.

Heck, we're still skiing up here. Sunday at Sunapee, anyway. Might be glossy.
post #51 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Keller View Post

for referenced. I'm 5'7", 175, describe myself as an advanced intermediate. I ski primarily in Vermont, and absolutely love going off piste.

We look to be the same size and ski style, I was wondering did you go 173 or 180 in the Brahmas? Many thx
post #52 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by madriversven View Post

We look to be the same size and ski style, I was wondering did you go 173 or 180 in the Brahmas? Many thx

I bought them in 173. I find that that length is pretty perfect for me. I probably trade a tiny bit of float and stability, but get a shorter carving radius and a shorter ski to turn in tight spaces.

I am friends with a lot of snowboarders, and we have a tendency to go into the trees often. I find that even at 173 I am often in areas where I can't get hem around fast enough (part of that is that I am not good enough to do certain thinks yet). However, I wouldn't go shorter, as I have compared the space that contacts the snow to my previous 166s (volkl RTm 73s), and I like the longer length of my brahmas. I rented 176cm powder skis in Japan back in February, and found them to be too long (also, they were just much heavier skis than the brahmas).

I did have an opportunity to demo the 173 brahmas before buying though, which was great!
post #53 of 53
I don't know why you think epic skiers like 80 under foot. Personally I think something magical happens at that 67 under foot and find 70+ slower on transitions. I would recommend some demo days or high performance rentals.

Around 70 under foot I would not write off the Fischer progressor or the blizzard 770 iq. I have not personally tried the progressor but hear from a lot of people how good it is. The blizzard was a surprise to me and a blast to ski. It has a lot of energy and a very aggressive side cut (17m) at 174. That will also get you through those tough spots easy.

Everyone is going to have different tastes though. I am more into racing than all around skiing. If I was going for an all around ski I would probably aim for around 17m for East, Midwest skiing. Just not enough vertical feet for much over that.
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 › Where to find good end of season deals on skis?