or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Could some one recomend a powder ski that can still rip the whole mountain?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Could some one recomend a powder ski that can still rip the whole mountain? - Page 4

post #91 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post
Samurai:
Anyway, my question for you (Samurai) is why do you consider the Gotama's (105mm) an all-mountain ski, while the Legend Pro's (97mm) "pow skis that rip everything? I've heard great things about both these skis, I intend to demo them, but I can't say that I've ever heard that the Gotamas aren't damn good at deep powder (and possibly better at it than the Legend Pro's).
Thanks!
Good question... as I mentioned- those genres overlap. Nonetheless, the LP is much more stable than the goat in variable conditions. If I had to choose one as my daily go-to ski, I'd choose the LP. The goat does ski deep snow better, but those few days a year wouldn't be worth the trade-off, imo.

In wind-buff, crud, crust, packed-pow, etc... I'd prefer the LP.
post #92 of 114
Oh... and the LP (XXL) is 109 underfoot.

sorry about that...
post #93 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by samurai View Post
Oh... and the LP (XXL) is 109 underfoot.
Indeed - I thought you meant the LP Rider. Never mind (the LP XXL is not a ski that I would consider anyway since, at 194cm for a 130lb'er, it would eat me for lunch and spit me out.)

Take Care!
post #94 of 114
Did a big demo thing this spring looking for a VERSATILE 95-105 waisted ski. To be brief, the top 3 were the Nordie enforcer, the Fischer watea 94, and the Line Prophet 100. The Nordie was the best on hard snow , the Fischer just fun all around, no big faults or outstandings though. The Line Prophet 100 was a standout. It did it all. Groomers, no problem, Crud, pow a hoot, trees, it is made for trees. I tried the 179 and the 186. the 186 is on order Me 5 11, 175 #
post #95 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post
the LP XXL is not a ski that I would consider anyway since, at 194cm for a 130lb'er, it would eat me for lunch and spit me out

Nah. It might give a little burp after swallowing you whole though .
post #96 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post
Do you really think the OP is still reading this?
Heh, good point. Still, that shouldn't slow the discussion.

I hesitate to respond to BWiP since the discussion has moved beyond our exchange...but I just can't resist a few comments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
umm 140lb girls ski on 175-180 100mm skis here.
All of them? Still, that's awesome dick-waving.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
Seriousally the verdict is not a powder skis and 170 is much to short. IMO a gotama can be skied much harder on groomers than a verdict.
My opinion on all three of those points is exactly the opposite. I have to assume you've skied the Verdict, but it's IME it's less floppy and better at railing than the Goat. And I love mine in powder, thought I've never skied them in more than 30 inches of fresh.

You remember that Verdicts are 102 at the waist?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
The verdicts felt really weak on edge(could of been the freeride binder though).
Heh. Ya think? So, didja ski it in powder at all?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
and again he asked for a powder ski, I actually recommend all mountain ski that ski powder great.
So did I.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
people quit selling yourself short on skis the reason why most people continue to suck ...
You're pretty sure I suck?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
... because their short skis make high speeds seem impossiable.
Not if you're a good skier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
... Just remember the difference between me and the rest of the board is I dont care if I offend anyone as long as the post are going to help out the very people I am offending or at least opening up peoples minds to other possabilities.
Not to worry, you aren't offensive - just kind of a dick-waver and a bit...narrow-minded and overconfident with your opinions.
post #97 of 114
so Bob Lee the best skiers in the world use longer skis because they make higher speed possiable, so you must be better than them because you can make your 170s go fast. If short skis rocked so much why dont Pros use them.

Plus tromano can vouch for the fact MOST not all people including the girls here use skis just over there forehead and about 90-110 under waist. I am actually not on them, when its gets harder I switch out to shorter/narrower skis, but this was about powder skis, not all mountain or carving skis.
post #98 of 114
:
More entertaining than I would have thought. I have no valid experience with modern powder equipment (my newest deep snow ski is 2002 vintage). All my powder skiing was done on GS or SG skis, years ago.

I just want to point out that the Dynastar LP Rider is by all accounts a much better powder ski than what I've used, and is also available in a short 186 cm for the lighter folk and 194 for heavier folk.
post #99 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
so Bob Lee the best skiers in the world use longer skis because they make higher speed possiable, so you must be better than them because you can make your 170s go fast. If short skis rocked so much why dont Pros use them.
That kind of depends on 1) who you think the best skiers in the world are, and 2) who you think the 'pros' are. Not everyone that makes their living skiing is a steezy cover-kid. And I'm guessing the OP isn't either.

And how about you spare us the "you must be..." silliness.
post #100 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Lee View Post
That kind of depends on 1) who you think the best skiers in the world are, and 2) who you think the 'pros' are. Not everyone that makes their living skiing is a steezy cover-kid. And I'm guessing the OP isn't either.

And how about you spare us the "you must be..." silliness.
1. all the best freeskier in the world use larger than most people would think skis, yes they are better but part of the reason why they are better because they know what the bigger skis allows them to do.

Some notable people who use shorter skis are ski mountineers like Andrew Mclean his skis actually fall in between 160-175 for the most part. You know what though he has great skill but its not a charger like the guys you see in films or in my case my resorts.

who cares if the OP isnt a 'steezy cover kid" BTW I cant tell you how much I hate that word. Steezy wannabes usually ski on short twins with pants around there knees, I highly doubt this kid is one of them.

but that doesnt even matter i recommend longer skis because they are easier to turn on powder with, the minute you relize that is the minute you might stop sucking.
post #101 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
1. all the best freeskier in the world use larger than most people would think skis, yes they are better but part of the reason why they are better because they know what the bigger skis allows them to do.
I think we're getting close to some agreement here. Perhaps earlier on if you'd said "If you're looking to ski like a charging professional big-mountain film freeskier then a longer ski might suit you better." But that would have seemed kind of ridiculous in light of the original inquiry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
Some notable people who use shorter skis are ski mountineers like Andrew Mclean his skis actually fall in between 160-175 for the most part. You know what though he has great skill but its not a charger like the guys you see in films or in my case my resorts.
Bingo. McLean is exactly who I was thinking of - and guys like Dawson as well. And you're right, they don't charge their chutes and faces, but the people in your resorts and films couldn't charge what they ski on their big skis either. I admire the guys that can ski anything, not just rip wide-open huge faces. Sue me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
who cares if the OP isnt a 'steezy cover kid" BTW I cant tell you how much I hate that word. Steezy wannabes usually ski on short twins with pants around there knees, I highly doubt this kid is one of them.
But can we agree that it is important what kind of skier the OP is? That's kind of germane to the point of the thread, isn't it? Look, the OP may love to ski the Verdict in a 190, but you don't know that. I only suggested something based on what I knew - he wanted a ski that would do well in powder and rip on the whole mountain and that he's 140 lbs - and you insisted that it wouldn't work without knowing anything more than that. Difference: I suggested, you insisted, me - helpful, you - dick-waving.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
but that doesnt even matter i recommend longer skis because they are easier to turn on powder with, the minute you relize that is the minute you might stop sucking.
I might stop sucking? Do I know you? Have we met?
post #102 of 114
The original poster wanted a ski that could "rip" the whole mountain. To me that means ski at high speed with control. I agree with BPA, a longer ski is in order. Given the OP's 140 lbs perhaps not the longest ski available, and speed event skis are too stiff for powder, so an LP should be just about right. A demo should be used to determine whether 186 or 194 cm is the correct length.
post #103 of 114
Dynastar made a 176cm LP this year, there are even more sizes available next year when the waist goes to 100mm.
post #104 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
Some notable people who use shorter skis are ski mountineers like Andrew Mclean his skis actually fall in between 160-175 for the most part. You know what though he has great skill but its not a charger like the guys you see in films or in my case my resorts.
Ummmm...

I've actually been in attendance to watch Andrew charge big lines at your resort; VERY fast. He's a very accomplished former racer. He just doesn't ski resorts anymore so you've not had the opportunity to watch what someone like him can do on skis that you think are incapable of that kind of skiing. You're projecting your own realm of experience to situations you've never actually seen.

I hope you'll remember that in the Alaska chute-shots that Nobis made famous ten years ago, he was charging those lines on skis that most of you would consider mid-fats today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
...but that doesnt even matter i recommend longer skis because they are easier to turn on powder with, the minute you relize that is the minute you might stop sucking.
You'd be wise to think twice about suggesting someone you've never met or skied with "sucks". The guy you're talking about skis REAL damn well according to some people you and I both know (and whose opinions I greatly respect).
post #105 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters View Post
I hope you'll remember that in the Alaska chute-shots that Nobis made famous ten years ago, he was charging those lines on skis that most of you would consider mid-fats today.
Right you be. But that was 10 years ago. Those were the widest/straightest skis available. (And those lines were famous way before Nobis straight-lined them. And they were made famous by much narrower skis.)

He was filming with TGR this year too... I guess we'll have to see what he was riding to make your argument valid.

I don't know who he rides for now, but if it is still dynastar, I'd bet he's on LP XXL's. Either way, I think everyone here would agree it's not the (midfats) of ten years ago. I also think everyone would agree that they're over 100 in the waist.
post #106 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters View Post
I hope you'll remember that in the Alaska chute-shots that Nobis made famous ten years ago, he was charging those lines on skis that most of you would consider mid-fats today.
Long, Stiff, and relatively wide mid-fats. He took the skis most similar to the current crop of "freeride skis" and opened it up down pyramid. You may have a point, but this example certainly doesn't support it.
post #107 of 114
I am devastated! I thought he did it on his Race Stock Slaloms:
post #108 of 114
The op is still 145#, no?

Without any dick-waving, or other freak-dancing comments, the following skis would be perfect, as I'm nearly as light and have demoed each...

In order of MY preference,
1...PM Gear, 174 or 179 softs
2...LP, 176
3...Elan M 888, 176
4...Fischer Watea 94, 178

Any of these will rip the mountain, east or west, and will float a 145 pounder (eat some burgers, already!) in all kinds of powder, except bottomless...

Bada, boom, bada, bing!!
post #109 of 114

I read all the posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by jazz768 View Post
. Im currently on Rossi bandit b78s which are fun but i feel that they leave abit to be desired when really pushing.

This ski that I am looking for should be able to ski everything from steep deep bowls to tight trees. However it is also essential that it can handle marginal conditions like ice and crud. would also be nice if it could lay a trench in large radius turns back to the lift. alot to ask i guess but i know there are skis up to the job.

I am currently considering the following options:
  1. Line Prophet 100 in 172
  2. Vokl Gotama in 176
  3. Scott P4 in 171
  4. 4FRNT VCT in 175
I think any of the ski models listed here would do the job, however for ICE, CRUD, Powder and railing BIG FAST TURNs on the groomed, you should be looking at a ski in the 180+CM range for length. The skis you have listed are TOO SHORT for the duties you describe.
Also if you put a touring binding on said ski it will comprimise the CRUD, ICE and steeps performance.

My 2 Cents. Longer Stiffer skis with an even flex = STABILITY and predictability when the mountain throws inconsistent snow suface your way
post #110 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post
I just don't see the need for these big fats ski to ski quality Powder. Sure they make it alot easier in poor snow conditions (Well in all snow conditions) but that is my point. Bushwackin is waving his dick about long skis. I am waving mine about narrower I don't need no ultra fattie to ski powder!
Um... What? YOU may not need fatties, but the OP feels like he does- and BWPA is addressing his question, albeit with a bit of dick-waving of his own, while you're sitting there telling him to buy skinnies, so it really looks like YOU'RE doing the super-duper dick-waving here... AGAIN!!!! Nobody asked you if you can ski pow with a 75mm waist. Nobody cares. He wants to know about a pow ski that won't have him heaving when he takes a groomer to the lift to go back up, and no an 88mm waist ski is not a pow ski. You may be able to take it in 2-foot dumps, and so can many others but it is not answering the question that's asked. BWPA is actually adressing a matter congruent with the question at hand. You... Well, you just want to talk about Crystal and how you never need anything above an 80 waist. Good for you. :

How the hell do you manage to slither your way into every pow ski thread and talk trash about how you do it on bump skis or toothpicks or something equally retarted? When will you learn to keep your mouth shut when nobody's asking you a question and you have nothing to bring to the table? :

As for the OP- Gotamas, BROs, Praxis, Prophet 100, etc. You will want something about 100mm, maybe a little bit more- anything over 105 and you will definately be feeling it on the groomers. From everything I've heard, Gotamas are the bee's knees and rock on pretty much everything, so I'd say if all else fails, at 145lbs you could rock a 176 Goat and love life/pow/etc. If the 176 scares you, I think they make a 168 too, but I think stability may be an issue at that length. Good luck and happy hunting!!!
post #111 of 114
DoWork, whatever you may think about Atomicman, it'd help to realize that a lot of these D-waving matches are precipitated by inexperienced or flat unrealistic OP's. For instance, yep, the OP did begin this by asking for pow ski recs:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazz768 View Post
hey guys im looking to buy a second set up for pow specific use that is also able to do some short tours so it should be mounted with AT bindings.
But then he added:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazz768 View Post
However it is also essential that it can handle marginal conditions like ice and crud. would also be nice if it could lay a trench in large radius turns back to the lift. alot to ask i guess but i know there are skis up to the job.
No sh*t that's a lot to ask. "Essential?" So some (including me) gave him options that ran from AM pow skis like the Goat to high 80's if he really were serious about ice and trenches. (From his first post it was hard to decipher.) That's also when Atomicman got involved, and in that context, his rec of the iM88 was reasonable.

Later, the OP clarified his question, but by then several of us were off on the usual mine's-bigger-than-yours rants that have zip to do with the original point and make TGR seem erudite. But no one slithered in, and IMO Atomicman's allegiances aren't any more or less predictable than a bunch of the other folks here. Face it, web personas like to take over higher reasoning. :
post #112 of 114
Ah yes, I suppose... I saw this thread a while ago, and when it hit a kajilion posts I was like "this has either got to be great info or a freakin D-Tsunami"... You're right, slithering may be excessive but duuuuude... I digress... I guess I was just disappointed- y'know, hoping for some great info- which also abounds in this thread to those willing to wade the waters- but *sigh* swashbuckling is fun to watch too...

OPs are like sandscrit, man... Watcha gonna do? Damn all this grass and warm weather.
post #113 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoWork View Post
OPs are like sandscrit, man... Watcha gonna do? Damn all this grass and warm weather.
Truth
post #114 of 114
Beyond, Thanks!

Dowork, 88mm certainly is not fat but it is not skinny either, 63mm is skinny!:
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 › Could some one recomend a powder ski that can still rip the whole mountain?