Advice on new boards

[yak]

So I've got some coin to drop on a new pair of boards, and I'm not sure which direction I should go.

I really like the Salomon X-wings (I demo'd the Fury and Tornado's in Breck on a firm day and a powder day). I thought the Fury's were a bit unstable at high speed on the firm, but they were also on the short side (163 IIRC). They were awesome in fresh pow.

I'm looking for something that is going to be great in powder, manky crap, and also not let me down on the firm. Good for both East coast and Rockies. I don't want to end up with a fat ski that sucks on the groomed, but I think I want to have something a bit wider in the tip than my current BC setup - Legend 8800's.

I'm also hoping to put another set of AT binders on them, and I'm not sure if the Tornados require their own bindings.

I figured I'd get some good feedback from y'all. Whattaya like?

Thanks, Jack

[Sharon]

I too am looking for my next pair of all mountain skis. From what I've seen, it seems that you should expect to go 90mm or more under foot. In fact, I'm thinking about 100mm under foot. With enough side cut, this will work just fine on the groomers. Keep your old skis if you think you want something skinnier.

freeskier.com has full listing of 2009 skis...check under all-mountain...you'll be surprised at the widths.

I'm looking at the Line Prophet 100s at this time. But am considering other options like the Dynastar Legend Pro..which you may like if you liked the 8800. I'm waiting for great end of season deals...checking tramdock.com frequently too. Something will come up that will hit me. Love the internet for ski shopping, especially that I don't have a great ski shop nearby.

[yak]

Thanks for the suggestions.I've been looking at the D Pro Rider, Mantra, and the Xwing Fury. Mantras seem to have the biggest tip width yet a nice sidecut.

I need to get mine soon for a trip in March.

BTW, nice pic's from your Utah trip, looks like you had some quality skking.

[Tony Crocker]

I bought the Mantras from Alta's demo shop last February, but did not do particularly well on them in varying terrain in the trees in powder at Chatter Creek. I will concede to "operator error" here, but nonetheless I did fine on a more powder specific ski the other 3 days. No surprise Adam rips powder on the even beefier Volkl Gotamas.

I think for most of us "nutcases" we should aim to have 2 pairs of skis to cover the full range of conditions. No problem fitting in a typical ski bag, and while you could have more when you're driving, I think 2 pair is going to be the limit with the airlines.

If I think 2 pair are necessary living in California I think that goes double for the easterners who need a good hard snow ski. Unless you have Patrick-level skills.

[riverc0il]

I was going to say Fischer Watea 94 until you wrote considering an AT binding. That would be a pretty heavy setup for BC'ing. Tough finding a good light weight 90-100 waist ski that is beefy enough to destroy crud/mank and also get you safely across the groomers. I have been considering the Karhu Spire BC (Jak BC 100 previously) for this task but have not yet pulled the trigger. Though that would be a BC only ski, def no groomers or lift served as I would be taking a weight and thus a stability on firm penalty.

[yak]

I'm thinkin this would be the only ski I'd bring on my Vail trip next month. The AT binding is just to give me the flexibility to do some slack country or light touring.

I have a buddy who loves his mantras, but he's a heavy dude. I'm 5'10" 170

[Admin]

I have a buddy who loves his mantras, but he's a heavy dude. I'm 5'10" 170

I love mine, and I'm 5'8" 150 lb. Mine are mounted with Fritschis. However, it's a very heavy rig for touring.

[yak]

I have a buddy who loves his mantras, but he's a heavy dude. I'm 5'10" 170

I love mine, and I'm 5'8" 150 lb. Mine are mounted with Fritschis. However, it's a very heavy rig for touring.

Marc, What length are you on? I'm not that concerned with weight. I toured my first year with my downhill boots. I considered it a good workout.

[Admin]

173cm, although if I had to do it all over again I'd go longer. In all fairness I really don't ski them anymore even though they're a fabulous ski. My everyday ski is a Movement Goliath (191cm, 135-108-124) and if I need something turnier, more often than not I grab a pair of 177cm G3 Reverends.

[yak]

Now the G3 Rev's at 177 sounds intriguing. My buddy in Colorado highly recommends them, too. Too many choices...

[Admin]

Now the G3 Rev's at 177 sounds intriguing. My buddy in Colorado highly recommends them, too.

And far more suitable for touring as they're featherweight. And that leads to my only (and I mean only) complaint about them: when snow is cut-up crud, rather than untracked powder, skier-packed moguls or groomer corduroy, they're so light that they easily get tossed around. They're not unmanageable in cut-up crud, mind you, but in those conditions I'd rather have the plow-through-anything characteristics that those mammoth Goliaths offer.

FWIW, Tramdock.com had some amazing deals on Reverends earlier this season, something like $275. I don't know if they have any left or not.

[yak]

Now the G3 Rev's at 177 sounds intriguing. My buddy in Colorado highly recommends them, too.

And far more suitable for touring as they're featherweight. And that leads to my only (and I mean only) complaint about them: when snow is cut-up crud, rather than untracked powder, skier-packed moguls or groomer corduroy, they're so light that they easily get tossed around. They're not unmanageable in cut-up crud, mind you, but in those conditions I'd rather have the plow-through-anything characteristics that those mammoth Goliaths offer.

FWIW, Tramdock.com had some amazing deals on Reverends earlier this season, something like $275. I don't know if they have any left or not.

Would you recommend going a little longer that 177 on these?

[Admin]

Would you recommend going a little longer that 177 on these?

Well, I don't know your size, but if you're bigger than me (again, 150 lb) I definitely would. My philosophy has grown to no longer shy away from longer boards just because they're "shaped" skis or fats. (Funny how we all used to ski 204s, then went to 170s before moving longer again!) Even at my size I likely would go up one length if I bought them again. They're a very agile and lightweight ski, so I think that lengthening a bit would add stability without sacrificing their agility.

[Tony Crocker]

I'm somewhat in the opposite camp from admin on the issue of length. My everyday ski the K2 Apache Recon is only 174cm, a fair amount of sidecut, yet very stable at speed, perhaps too much so last April 12 .

The fat powder boards I've been renting lately (K2 Pontoon at Chatter and Atomic Heli Daddy at Eagle Pass) have been 170's, though I had the Heli Daddy at 180cm at Wiegele 2 years ago. The reverse camber skis do argue for going somewhat longer though.

[Admin]

The reverse camber skis do argue for going somewhat longer though.

Of course...especially when things aren't so deep and they behave like snowblades.

While I have no love for reverse camber, the early rise tip has potential for powder skiing. As we were boarding Supreme last weekend, Tele Jon was talking about some antique wooden skis he has hanging on the wall in his home. What do they have? An early rise tip!