EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › What to get? Snoop, Montra, last years Lab Gun,
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What to get? Snoop, Montra, last years Lab Gun,

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
I am 6', 190 lbs and an ex-racer and instructor, long board style! I am technically very strong and ski the back country, trees and shoots the most. My go to ski is an Atomic R ex 184cm, i also have a Salomon Xtra Hot 185cm, skis I've gone through for one reason or another include the Head Monsters iM70 and iM75, K2 Mod X, I currently have a new set of Rossignol Scratch BC's 178mc mounted with Rossignol Axial 2 Pro 140 bindings, that I would sell for $500. They only have 2 hours use on them (mint condition). Anyone out there know about the Snoop, Montra, last years Gun Lab (my Rossi's are stronger than this years?); or what you think would be a good recomendation for me? I run my R ex'x .5 cm forward 95% of the time, mid to fly on hard pack. Unlike most that speak of the R ex's, they turns very well for me. I totally enjoy the ski in most all conditions although I find myself getting worked in heavy snow and need be very technical and fast through tight trees and narrlw shoots

I seek a smooth, powerful, good turning, strong holding, powder ski! Please help!!
post #2 of 14
There are a lot of mixed messages in your post. You say you want smooth and powerful and the '06 BC is all of that, yet are getting rid of it. You also currently have a Solly X-tra which is not terribly powerful but you are keeping that one. In what way do you want a ski to be different than the BC??

Re you choices........

The Snoop is one of my favorite skis but I wouldn't describe it as powerful. Lively, grippy and fun yes, but not really powerful. The Mantra is grippy, and stable when on edge but it has a lot of shape and might be pretty turny unless you go long. The Dynastar Legend Pro is one of the more powerful skis available, has great stability and skis like a fat SG ski. While not terribly nimble (at least in the 186) it has the qualities that (I think) you are seeking.

SJ
post #3 of 14
SJ:

Have you skied the Legend Pro in 176?

Just wondering what its like and I know your take would be illuminating.

Got
post #4 of 14
In my limited (demo) experience I loved the Mantra - it's weird how you can twist and turn a ski so fat (even in moguls). It's probably not a true BC or pow ski but would be a nice compromise for someone who still wants to do some on piste in addition to busting crud and surfing pow. That was my impression - felt like surfing but you could still set it on edge.

184 would be doable for you I bet - check it out. It was a damned fun ski when I tried it.
post #5 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotama View Post
SJ:

Have you skied the Legend Pro in 176?

Just wondering what its like and I know your take would be illuminating.

Got
I have and it is what I wish the Legend 8800 was and what I hope the Mystic will be. What I mean by that is that I really like the shape and general performance of the 8800, but it is a tich soft in the 178 and just a little cumbersome in 188. If the 8800 was built like the LP 176, I'd buy it in a 178 length.

The LP 176 has a more tractable flex than the other lengths and is smooth and supple without being overbearing on one side of the scale or wimpy on the other. Yes the 186 does break in, and get a little easier going, but even the "broke in" ones are just more ski than I care for. OTH, the 176 is perfect in flex but is just a little wider ski than I need most of the time. Hence my hope that the Mystic (with a great shape) will have the build of the LP 176.

SJ
post #6 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
I have and it is what I wish the Legend 8800 was and what I hope the Mystic will be. What I mean by that is that I really like the shape and general performance of the 8800, but it is a tich soft in the 178 and just a little cumbersome in 188. If the 8800 was built like the LP 176, I'd buy it in a 178 length.

The LP 176 has a more tractable flex than the other lengths and is smooth and supple without being overbearing on one side of the scale or wimpy on the other. Yes the 186 does break in, and get a little easier going, but even the "broke in" ones are just more ski than I care for. OTH, the 176 is perfect in flex but is just a little wider ski than I need most of the time. Hence my hope that the Mystic (with a great shape) will have the build of the LP 176.

SJ

What are the dimensions of the Mystic?
post #7 of 14
From memory......................122-88-108 (ish)

SJ
post #8 of 14
Thread Starter 
I just like a ski that will ski more forward to mid. I don’t like a ski that makes you ski mid in a solid and non-fluid manor. The BC to me was too soft for my liking forward and back. I liked last years longer and stiffer 188 Gun Lab much more. Perhaps the 178 was too short for me, don't know, but the R ex (definitely a hard snow ski) and Salomon Xtra Hot's (which are certainly not a hard snow ski) skied the overall mountain, more difficult crud, tricky areas, with much more control with speed and power! You just need to take the ski for the condition (soft/Salomon, hard/Atomic). Perhaps they are just more similar to each other in technique to operate. BTW, couldn’t disagree with you more about the BC’s being a powerful ski! Quick, good float, snappy, yes, but powerful, not to me!
post #9 of 14
All twins (with the exception of of big mountain types) have fairly soft extremities and all have a fairly short running length. It sounds as if you hang on the front of the boot. (you want the ski to be solid mid to forward, and you ski "long board style") This does not speak to a short length in general or especially to a short twin tip.

Sounds like the Legend Pro is your ride.

SJ
post #10 of 14
Thread Starter 

You are totally correct!

I have not seen the Dynastar Legend Pro. What are the dimensions? I did ski last years Gun lab and liked it very much, once I got used to the turning position (know where I can get a good deal on a set?). It allowed me to grab from the forward part of the ski and finish at the mid, like the Xtra Hot’s. In fact, if you compare the dimensional correlation of the two, they are very similar, my Xtra Hots being much stiffer though. I also thought about the Rossi B-squad, again, have not tried them but the turning radius is larger than I had hoped. The thing that interested me about the Snoop is the torsional flex compared to the balance of the longitudinal flex, plus a 22 turning radius at 185cm. Even though I had found an excellent price on them, the turning radius of the Snoop seems too close to what I am already on to pull the trigger. Last years Lab is stiff enough and wide enough to add that hammer time to my day on in the powder and crud on that occasional Snowbird day, Great Scott to Daltons Draw (from the top and through the trees)!
post #11 of 14
From what you describe I think you might like the Atomic Sugar Daddy. A moderately stiff ski with little sidecut and the ability to own powder and crud. I find it inspires a lot more confidence than the Mantra which wants to turn, and is more appropriate as a soft-conditions and crud ski than Snoop. I have even had pretty good luck on groomers and stiff snow with edge hold, although the width definitely causes some lateral pressure in the boots (ie you better have some stiff boots to push this on hardpack). I like it a lot and think it might be similar to the Bro, but a little less damp. And for a twin, it has a long turn radius and is pretty bomber in variable snow. The LP is a dream ski for me in a 186. Consider this the poor man's version assuming you find the right deal.
post #12 of 14
Thread Starter 

There's another for the Legend Pro!

Thanks you guys, I had better find a set and take them for a ride, or have them take me for a ride? I did check out the Sugar, but again, with a 24+ turning radius, like the B-Squad, Gotama, and a few others, I pulled back. Freestyle is way in my past, but tight trees and shoots remain! That's why I want a tighter raduis. I now live, or ski, Hood Meadows in Oregon; it's fun but no Alta! Alta and Snowbird, main reason why it took me "sooooo" long getting through college!
post #13 of 14
Fat skis with small turning radii are lame.
post #14 of 14
The LP has the same TR as the Sugar 29M in 186/LP 183/SD. However, the TR (sidecut) is not the main operative factor when the snow is deep. Flex has more to do with it. I have skied the SD and the LP in deep snow and the SD is quite a bit quicker turning b/c it is lighter, and softer in the tip. The SD is my my personal favorite fat ski but I don't hang on the front of my boot as you do. A deeper sidecut than 21-25M is going to be a tough find in a relatively stiff, fat ski b/c most skiers want the stability of a straighter shape. Due to the stiffer flex, it won't turn you that quickly anyway when the snow is really deep and when it is shallower and cruddy, it will be quick, but you will probably want more stability then.

It's a conundrum it is.

SJ
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 › What to get? Snoop, Montra, last years Lab Gun,