Originally Posted by Speerhead
I never noticed that shovel with holes in the epoxy..
At least if I did , it wasn't anything that I was concerned with.. NO epoxy was ever used.. I''ve never done that to any ski..
I think the ultra close up makes it look way worse than it is..
BTW - I wasn't trying to hide anything,. I actually was a little sorry I sold them as I paid to get them shipped..
they ski great.
I have the same ski in 176. Not sure about the year of mine, but it looks identical, including the wear. I paid just slightly more for mine. I got it on ebay a few months ago, and it was pretty beat up too. Both the tail metal (skin?) clamps attached by binding posts with screws (Chicago screws?) were loose, and one came off as I removed it from its box (still off - looking for parts). It was shipped and wrapped in a similar way to yours, but not the apparent open box taped up at the bottom. Did I say really scratched up? I too wondered if mine had been damaged in shipping. But that one side scrape down to "teeth" is slightly worse than mine, in that way.
I'm away from these skis, so I'll check them tonight for similar tip "bubble" openings, etc. I think epoxy would work, but I'd be inclined to just fill them with softer wax, say yellow Swix then red Swix, and just add a bit occasionally when waxing.
I want to encourage you about these skis. I am lighter weight, ~145 lbs, and ski bumps with these, so the 176s were best for me. I think if you are stronger than me, or are ~165+ lbs or more, and/or are planning to not ski bumps with them much, then your skis will be great, once tuned correctly. And the longer length will add stability for everywhere but the bumps.
I think the guy who sold them to me thought they were caput. Ha!
Mine were most likely well used demo skis, pretty obviously, with demo bindings; but the seller denied such use. Said they were his personally and had only a dozen or so days on them.
I'm just glad the skis worked out, ultimately. My favorite hard snow bump skis ever. Super versatile, including in spring slush and on steep Palavicini at A Basin. So I don't really care, now. I'd guess they'll last at least several more seasons minimum, 50 or more times at least.
To be really good, these old skis will probably need a real rejuvenating base flattening and re-set edge tune to work right, no matter how good condition the bases look, I'd guess. Read no further if the bases are fine, but the following is what I had to do to get mine to go from bust to wonderful.
The bottoms looked perfect, and well-waxed, but when I took them out for a spin they didn't hold an edge well: the edges under a glass were worn and rounded, and the bases were convex. I did a Jacques/SkiVisions (both on Epic in video) combination base flattening (lots of ptex removed), set a new ~.7* base bevel and 2* side bevel on them, did full 3 wax preps and iron ins, and they skied almost perfectly. The tips needed fine-tuning, an increased base bevel (instead of de-tuning), and after that they were great. They do exactly what I'd hoped and more: hold an edge well on and off piste at speed, groomer charge, and handle packed and hard-packed bumps here in Colo. better than any ski I've had in years, a real dream come true.
Hang in there, and good luck with yours.
Originally Posted by kpbski
I was wondering if anybody knows how the FX84 has changed from 2011 to the 2015 model?
Specifically, do they have some early rise like the 2015's do? Titanal in the core like the 2015's?
Any information is appreciated!