New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

East Coast Powder Ski - Page 2

post #31 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2-turn
No problem, I hated those skis when I tried them, so they're all yours....
Did you try them in powder and in the trees? It's hard to imagine not liking them there.
post #32 of 51
check out the Volkl Gotamas Alfonse, they are kinda of in between skis stiffer than the the PR but softer and more playful than "big" mountain skis and the vertical sidewall unsures edge grip on hardpack.
post #33 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA
check out the Volkl Gotamas Alfonse, they are kinda of in between skis stiffer than the the PR but softer and more playful than "big" mountain skis and the vertical sidewall unsures edge grip on hardpack.
I second this too - even if Bushwacker doesn't know what lengths Sugar Daddys come in

...and Alfonse - if you like the pocket rocket just flat out stay away from the Supermojos : - maybe try the Mojo 90 (very, very different ski)...

..I can't wait until the 176 Legend Pro comes out to hear how you Eastern folk like it....
post #34 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by moguljunkie
Ah, yes, the Dynastar 8000. My fear is that the PR may actually ski very much like it. It was an outstanding ski in almost all areas, but tended to surf over crud (getting knocked about some in the process), rather than plow through it.
this hasn't been my experience with the ski at all, but it just goes to show you that skis behave differently depending on the type of skier and their characteristics and technique employed. i love plowing through crud in my 8000s, almost as fun as powder! i just open it up and let the ski rip it up. i am a big guy though (210 lbs, 6'1") so perhaps my weight held things in check, but i never get knocked around on my 8000s.
post #35 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfonse
Big mountain stiff boards in the east are a risk since you come in contact with tight stiff bumps so much. Which makes a ski like the pocket rockets(guns) so inviting. I love mine in the trees, they are fun on groomers(unless they are really hard) and they are not bad in the bumps at all. I skied them all day in the bumps at kmart on our glorious spring day. I have been eyeballing a pair of atomic pimp daddy's in 183 or Head Supermojo's in the same length but fear they will not get used much since in the bumps I will get tossed. As an expert in the east lots of the time the most fun and technical terrain is bumps....

Alfonse
Alfonse,

You surprised me that day. You and the PRs were great in the bumps. When I first saw you venture out into the bumps I thought you were crazy. I would not have considered the Pocket Rocket for the East, but you are living testimony that it could be.

Now lets see how they do in the woods at Mad River!
post #36 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones
Alfonse,

You surprised me that day. You and the PRs were great in the bumps. When I first saw you venture out into the bumps I thought you were crazy. I would not have considered the Pocket Rocket for the East, but you are living testimony that it could be.

Now lets see how they do in the woods at Mad River!
alfonse and his PRs do quite well around the woods at MRG. I have been lucky enough to see it first hand.
post #37 of 51
Yes, I am quite the lightweight, so that explains different experience with 8000, I think.

This leads me to a question which may need its own thread: can you have a ski that both floats in deep powder and, at the same time, will plow through crud/chopped-up powder? It seems to me like a ski would be inclined to do one or the other. Maybe I need to read some of PhysicsMan's posts on other threads more carefully -- I have a feeling, if anyone knows the answer, it's him.

EDIT: From reading PhysicsMan's post on 82mm skis, it sounds, rivercoil, like you wouldn't get float in powder on the 8000s. That might explain your ability to plow through crud. I, on the other hand, could float on powder on the 8000s like I was riding on a cloud. Hmm, maybe I should have kept them after all.
post #38 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by moguljunkie
Did you try them in powder and in the trees? It's hard to imagine not liking them there.
I know a couple of people that swore by them, and 1 had them on a demo binding, so he had me try them. I couldn't understand what he loved about them, but to each his own. I did try them on a powder day on the east coast, they were OK in the powder, but I didn't like them when it went to crud, or any other conditions. they weren't quick turning enough for me, but my powder skis are 68-70mm, and the rest of my skis are narrower. It was a while ago, so I don't remember the details,but I think I also didn't like they way they got deflected. They were the original Pocket Rockets, I don't know if they got any better, and I only had them out for half a day, so I may not have gotten centered on them either.
post #39 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by moguljunkie
EDIT: From reading PhysicsMan's post on 82mm skis, it sounds, rivercoil, like you wouldn't get float in powder on the 8000s. That might explain your ability to plow through crud. I, on the other hand, could float on powder on the 8000s like I was riding on a cloud. Hmm, maybe I should have kept them after all.
i don't know the physics of it, but my 8000s float fine in powder too. with the crud thing, it isn't like i plow through the crud like a pro rider, which would be over kill for the east, but i have never had any issues. like i said, different people can get vastly different experiences on various skis. the 8000s is my 'does it all in any natural snow conditions' ski. i also have a pair of inspired bigs (8800) depending on conditions.
post #40 of 51
I want a pair of these...

www.phantomskis.com

Crystal Ship goodness
post #41 of 51
Thread Starter 
I wish to thank all those who have made sugestions. I had the opportunity to test the Salomon PR and the Rossi Scratch BC 2 or 3 seasons ago, I liked the PR's better. Last season I could have tested the Mojo 90, but I got caught up testing the supershapes and the iXRC 1100.

I am going to try to get a deal on either the Salmon Gun, Head iM.88 and Mojo 90. How does the Gun compare to the Mojo 90?. Should I be looking at 180+cm in these skis?
post #42 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by mchase83
I wish to thank all those who have made sugestions. I had the opportunity to test the Salomon PR and the Rossi Scratch BC 2 or 3 seasons ago, I liked the PR's better. Last season I could have tested the Mojo 90, but I got caught up testing the supershapes and the iXRC 1100.

I am going to try to get a deal on either the Salmon Gun, Head iM.88 and Mojo 90. How does the Gun compare to the Mojo 90?. Should I be looking at 180+cm in these skis?
All over the map, huh? A few points:

- The im88 is not a powder ski. In deep light powder snow, it pretty much sucks compared to a real powder ski, the flex is too round, and it's just not wide enough. They kick ass on pretty much anything else though, from icy hardpack to heavy/melted powder. At 185 lb, you had better not be looking at the 175cm, too short, 186cm is the right size. The 186 im88 was my all around freeskiing ski last year, and will be again this year....getting a new pair on warranty (they are not durable!).

- If you intend to ski trees on the east coast, YOU WILL HIT ROCKS. Lots of them, all time. Thus, it makes no sense to, 1. Own a cap powder ski, 2. Own a powder ski you intend to ski other conditions with. So, you may pick a versitile ski, but after a few trips through the woods, they'll be dull and will suck on ice anyway.
post #43 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star
All over the map, huh? A few points:

- The im88 is not a powder ski. In deep light powder snow, it pretty much sucks compared to a real powder ski, the flex is too round, and it's just not wide enough. They kick ass on pretty much anything else though, from icy hardpack to heavy/melted powder. At 185 lb, you had better not be looking at the 175cm, too short, 186cm is the right size.
.

Me=135 lbs
Pow ski : IM 103 Pro @ 183 (& no wimpy, lenght shortening twin tip)

for real ripping, I wish I had the 193 cm size. There really is a diff. with getting on a wide board for crud & pow. Go for the 186!
post #44 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star
- If you intend to ski trees on the east coast, YOU WILL HIT ROCKS. Lots of them, all time. Thus, it makes no sense to, 1. Own a cap powder ski, 2. Own a powder ski you intend to ski other conditions with. So, you may pick a versitile ski, but after a few trips through the woods, they'll be dull and will suck on ice anyway.
You are right about the rocks part. That's why I think an EC Pow ski should be really wide, so you can float higher and hopefully miss some of those rocks (and shrubs and whatever else is down there). Of course, I think you should get the most versatile fat ski you can because you still need to get to the powder that can involve blown out icy groomers, sketchy traverses, bumps, and who knows what else.
post #45 of 51
Having owned Salomon Guns (until they got stolen) and now Mojo 90's, I can tell you that they are very, very similar. A lot would depend on the length of course, but I found both skis to perform nearly equally off-piste and in the pow, but I preferred the Mojo 90 on groomers. It initiates almost as well as a true carving ski, and holds its edge well too, while the Gun felt just slightly more sluggish edge to edge, though very stable.

I guess I'd say short/medium turns are best with the Mojo 90, while longer turns are nicer on the Guns. I've also demoed the IM 88's, but preferred the Guns/Mojo's to them. Felt really sluggish/heavier to me, though they may be sidewall construction which is more durable. However I think I'd take the maneuveribility off-piste of the Guns/90's for in the trees.

Even though Guns/90's are fairly soft I'd say 175 would be fine, but 185's wouldn't hurt either.
post #46 of 51
I have nothing against Guns/Pocket Rockets except for durablity, when they are new they ski great. The Mojo 90 is a wood core cap, and from what I have seen with this type of construction from HEAD, they should be pretty durable.

I'm inclined to think the K2 Seth's or Madens in a 179 or 189 would be a pretty decent choice.
post #47 of 51
Sidewall construction or not, the M88 isn't very durable at all.
post #48 of 51

Edited by RUIDI WIRSCH - 1/20/11 at 4:00pm
post #49 of 51
Thread Starter 

Stockli Snake BC

How does the Stockli Snake BC compare to the Head iM.88? I have the opportunity to buy a pair of Snake BC in size 188 with Marker speed-point 4-12 bindings. Would they be rental bindings? Would the 188 be too big for the tight east coast trees?
post #50 of 51
I looked at the snakes as well. But to be honest that ski is not unlike your 1080's. To respond to some comments from earlier, people said PR's are not durable I beat the piss out of mine and they are fine. I heard Mojo's have a delam problem(I heard they ski great though) A hot one quiver tree ski are the k2 Seths....

I am currently looking for a fatter big mountain board to compliment my PR's. Skis I am considering are Scratch BC's, Gotamas, Atomic Pimps, and Prophet 100's. The prophets are leading since they are priced to go, if price was no object it would be a tough call between the pimps and the Gotamas, and yes I ski in the east.

Alfonse
post #51 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star View Post
The Mojo 90 is a wood core cap, and from what I have seen with this type of construction from HEAD, they should be pretty durable.
I haven't skied them, but FWIW, my brother has a pair of Mojo 90s, and they are definitely very durable. He's had them for a year and a half or so, and they get a pretty serious beating as a park and pipe ski. In the time he's had them, he's gone through 3 other pairs of skis, but they keep on going somehow. Highly recommended in terms of durability.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion