EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Line Prophet 100 Length Question
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Line Prophet 100 Length Question - Page 2

post #31 of 43

Sell them (try TGR Gear Swap) and take your lumps then never go back to that shop again. They are absolutely without a doubt too short so don't ski them as that will further decrease their value   Hopefully they have a decent binding and won't be too difficult to unload. They are a great size for a decent woman skier 5' 5" to 5"9 and 125 to 140 lbs.

 

Regarding the longer skis question- the contact length on twin tips is shorter than 'regular' skis because of the turned up tail. Eg. my 186 Prophets have the same contact length as my 177 Atomics. In other words, with your height and weight your 172s will ski like a 165s ie; twitchy and sink like a stone. 

 

Regarding 179 versus 186 -  My wife is 5'5"/105 lbs and loves her 179's but she is an extraordinary skier. How good a skier are you? Do you ski Eastern trees a lot? If you are a solid intermediate by Western standards and don't ski sugerbush trees then 186. More edge and more float. If you already have skinny short skis for ice days then definitely 186.  

post #32 of 43

I am a solid intermediate.  I am no dare devil, but will take the occasional jump.  I don't ski any eastern trees and typically stay on trail.  I looked down at the skis when I put them on in my living room and felt they were too small.  I think if I only did groomers and just wanted to have fun at the park, the 172 might work, but last time I was on all mountain skis out west (after a dump), I couldn't stay up over the snow.  Again, I am almost 6 ft tall and 185lbs.   I only go out west once a year and typically stay east coast.  I guess I will put them up for sale.  They have good bindings.  I told the guy I am going out west, and both the guys at that shop showed me their powder skis which were taller than me!  I should have made the connection, but he didn't have any other skis there that were larger than 175.  I still can't believe he had me in the 165 first...

 

Would you suggest the Prophet 90s instead?  

 

 

If you don't mind me asking, where do you ski mostly Dave?  

post #33 of 43

I ski the Canadian Rockies at Castle and Fernie. Powder to boilerplate - we get it all. I would still go with the 100 over the 90 especially if you have a pair of skinny ice skis or you can get some cheap at an Eastern swap. Both skis will get you down the hill on pure ice but that's not what they are for. They  work extremely well on anything else. Both are super quick, agile yet stable skis so why compromise and stick with the 100s. If you're worried about manouverability just go for the 179's in the 100 but really, if you are a solid intermediate you'll be fine on the 186s especially in Vail. BTW At 6'1" 190 lbs I am just a little bigger than you but on the other hand I'm probably old enough to be you father @ 62

post #34 of 43

Dave,  

 

Thanks for all the great advice.  All your experience has helped me greatly, and I am sure to buy you a beer if we ever run into one another on the slopes.  

 

After deliberating my purchase for a few days, I realized that I currently own a ski that doesn't perform well on ice or help me in powder...so consequently, it's specific to neither discipline.  I will learn from this and hopefully not make the same mistake.  

post #35 of 43

Sold the 172cm today, and will be purchasing the 186cm 100s.  Thanks all who helped me figure this one out.  Should be a great time out west.  

post #36 of 43
Thread Starter 

great choice, just had my 186's mounted last week and skied them yesterday.

 

I had a question though. They mounted them where the ski says to, it has a mark for mid sole. But, they seem far forward. I am coming off a pair of 177 Volkl AC3's (not 30's, 3's).

 

i think its just me, and the fact that carvins skis sit further back on the ski. but its weird. Comments?

post #37 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by DucatiTorrey View Post

great choice, just had my 186's mounted last week and skied them yesterday.

 

I had a question though. They mounted them where the ski says to, it has a mark for mid sole. But, they seem far forward. I am coming off a pair of 177 Volkl AC3's (not 30's, 3's).

 

i think its just me, and the fact that carvins skis sit further back on the ski. but its weird. Comments?

Keep in mind they are a twin, so some of the tail is not being engaged.

 

You want to talk about tail. Trying going from a 186 mounted more traditionaly to a 191 thats more of a center mount.
 

post #38 of 43
Ducati, how do you like the 186s? First impressions?
post #39 of 43

Is the midsole mark for a center mount?  If it is, then yes they are too far forward.  If the line was midsole for an "all mountain" mount then you should be fine.  I'm not sure how Line marks their mount position(s), but many other manufacturers put more than one mount line on the ski.  One is typically for a center mount for park skiers and another for more of an all mountain use mount.

 

Mike
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DucatiTorrey View Post

 

I had a question though. They mounted them where the ski says to, it has a mark for mid sole. But, they seem far forward. I am coming off a pair of 177 Volkl AC3's (not 30's, 3's).

post #40 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeC View Post

Is the midsole mark for a center mount?  If it is, then yes they are too far forward.  If the line was midsole for an "all mountain" mount then you should be fine.  I'm not sure how Line marks their mount position(s), but many other manufacturers put more than one mount line on the ski.  One is typically for a center mount for park skiers and another for more of an all mountain use mount.

 

Mike
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DucatiTorrey View Post

 

I had a question though. They mounted them where the ski says to, it has a mark for mid sole. But, they seem far forward. I am coming off a pair of 177 Volkl AC3's (not 30's, 3's).


 


The P100 isn't an all mountain/park ski. It's a pure all mountain ski. It has one mark. Mount it there.

post #41 of 43

You are correct sir!  

 

Did a bit more research after my post and there are a number of mount threads on TGR for the Prophet 100.  Seems most people are mounting them on the line or a bit behind the line.

 

Mike
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecimmortal View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeC View Post

Is the midsole mark for a center mount?  If it is, then yes they are too far forward.  If the line was midsole for an "all mountain" mount then you should be fine.  I'm not sure how Line marks their mount position(s), but many other manufacturers put more than one mount line on the ski.  One is typically for a center mount for park skiers and another for more of an all mountain use mount.


The P100 isn't an all mountain/park ski. It's a pure all mountain ski. It has one mark. Mount it there.

post #42 of 43
Thread Starter 

thanks guys, that was my assumption, wish i would have gone maybe .5 inch back from the line, but i guess this will work. 

 

they shred by the way... and in deeper snow, i dont even notice the mount.

post #43 of 43

I'm sure everyone here has given you interesting and helpful advice, but why not find a place demo the very skis you are interested in?  

 

WINTER IS COMING!!!

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 › Line Prophet 100 Length Question