Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
4FRNT STL Review - for those who care
Posts: 205
-
Karma: 10
So I finally got to ski my new STLs this weekend. Here are my thoughts on how they skied…
My Stats: 6’2”, 185 lbs. Former racer (powerful skier). Skis are 183 cm, mounted at 3 cm (halfway between freeride and center).
My History: Have been on 181 Salomon 1080s (orange ones) for a few years. I really liked the 1080s. They carved well and worked all over the mountain. I also had no durability issues. I skied the Rossi Scratch FS 181 for a couple days last year too. I did not like the Scratches. They were too soft for the way I ski, but skied fakie really well.
The STLs:
I had a PSIA level I exam this weekend (first days on snow too). It was COLD. I was pleasantly surprised by the STLs. They skied very well. I like to go fast and make big GS arcs. The 22.5 m radius was more than big enough (almost too big for some of the exam stuff) for my turn style. They are not a quick carving ski, but can be thrown around and skidded just fine. Surprisingly the skis held and edge really well, even on glare ice (northern Minnesota manmade at the end of the day). Overall the skis were stiffer than I expected which is good.
The 3 cm mounting point didn’t seem to affect turning that I could tell. The skis skied quite nice fakie too. There were no jumps or rails, so I can’t comment on how they ski the park, but I expect it will be very good.
Overall the STL is a better all mountain (carving groomed, not deep stuff) ski than I expected. To me it skied similar to my old 1080s (after 2 seasons on them). It was just a little slower (bigger radius) than the 1080s. I also passed the exam with no problems, so they wedge turn super sweet!
--rick
Now who will be first to say, “buy Armada.”
Posts: 11456
-
Karma: 634
Posts: 358
-
Karma: 11
Its good to see an actual real review, thanks cuz i was interested in them
Posts: 31125
-
Karma: 336
solid review on how they ski. addition of stats and history help a lot
Posts: 386
-
Karma: 12
I'm surprised they didn't just roll over and die outside the park. I was always under the impression they were a super-soft park-specific ski
Posts: 3462
-
Karma: 237
^i think this years have been stiffened up.
Posts: 6805
-
Karma: 23
i think this years are softer than my last last years model, just personal opinion though.
now for how they ski in the park. i skied mine in park on saturday, they have tons of pop in the tails, and are flexible enough to do butters really easy. nose and tail presses are so easy on these skis
Posts: 2100
-
Karma: 23
we need more reviews like this here.
Posts: 6301
-
Karma: 349
yeah, this year they thickened the ski up quite a bit, making them a bit stiffer. i know mine from last year skied pretty damn bad out of the park, cause they just wouldnt hold an edge.
Posts: 2155
-
Karma: 19
Quality review. If you had a park performance section it would be perfect, but i realise there was no park.
Posts: 154
-
Karma: 13
i have last years stl 167 wich is way small for me now ... thats why i have a invader 178 but ne way they soften up a lot once you ski them for a while and they have really good performance in the park. now when i flex them they are like rubber bands. im prolly just gonna use them for a rail ski but ne one interested in them they are deff the way to go
Posts: 527
-
Karma: 10
yah thanks a lot i was thinking about getting these skis and i probadly will know
Posts: 2628
-
Karma: 25
Such an awesome ski, just too expensive for me.
Posts: 1854
-
Karma: 10
i love my stls from last year
Posts: 1186
-
Karma: 11
Ill give a park review!
I have skied that ski over 20 days and nearly 100 if you include last years model which was a little softer in the tail.
Backround
7 years shop experience
3 years ski snowboard buyey
Have been to over 20 demo days typically ski every twintip ski.
20th season skiing
Racing backround
Been into newschool skiing for 6th season
The ski is not bad as long turn radius but is not in the type 5 in skiability.
The sidecut is desighned to allow the ski to go strait and not catch and be hooky cus thats bad for park.
Its ok though as a spring ski with softer snow because of the width.
The stl is desighned for park riding and the things that impress me was the amount of camber which i felt added good pop.
The ski feels very light but stable as well as the use of the p tex sidewalls is nice for durability. They have lasted me well and i usually can break a pair per year. I was really impressed by the swingweight which is usually not an issue but i noticed a difference on these that was enough to pay attention to it. The ski is extremely smooth and fast on raiks and yhe edges are layed in real well.
Overall its a good park ski or a second ski for fun.
Stats 5feet 10in tall 150lbs
stl 177cm
mounted 2 1/2 cm more in the nose than in the tail
Would recomend 4 out of 5
Posts: 31125
-
Karma: 336
Posts: 2064
-
Karma: 16
they're much stiffer this year which I'm stoked on. They are at least as stiff as the AR5 now which is perfect. I'm skiing the 177 in the park this year I'm stoked to hear the solid reveiws.
Posts: 270
-
Karma: 10
Sticky this, these reviews are good and objective.
Posts: 201
-
Karma: 11
Posts: 994
-
Karma: 105
I have 04/05 STL 183's
Im 6'2" and my first set were some heads,which were the original b/w's from like the happy days era.
These skis are really poppy, which surprised me. My buddy rides the same year Armadas and mine are softer even tho his are 176s. The buttering ability is awsome, as for tree, these might fuck you up, but thats just my opinion as a east coaster who skis trees in 6 in snow. They hold up really wee too. That was surprising. The topsheets kinda shit the bed, but the bases held up really well as did the edges. I have em mounted w/ some FKS 185s, and with the flexyness, that is a dangerous combo for overshots. If you land too far backseet on them, once broken it, your gonna have a tough time not slipping out. Overall tho, they are my favorite skis, i have Larose pros as well, and these shit on the laroses. Definetely a solid pair of skis, considering my buddy told me theyd be noodles by the end of the year.
Posts: 2489
-
Karma: 49
another park review:
im 6'3/4" 190lbs, riding 183s, centermounted with p18s.
i too, found these skis to ride really really well all mtn, even centermounted. they hold an edge well, and the pop makes for a really lively ski. But where they excel is the park, especially on kickers. theyre poppy enough to boost you well, and just stiff enough to not wash out on the landings. They are, however, soft. the tails are noticeably stiffer than the nose, but not excessively. They slid boxes and rails very very well, and i had no issues with the edges due to rails.
The downside: My skis delaminated, had a tip edge rip out and snapped two weekends ago (i purchased them shortly before christmas). This was obviously a defect, and will be covered by warrentee(currently being sent to 4frnt). from what happened it just looked like the epoxy didnt set right, and didnt hold the ski together. Just a bad batch.
i give them a 4.5 / 5, the .5 for durability, but that was a defect, and probably will not happen to you.
Posts: 3457
-
Karma: 41
sweet i like real reviews
All times are Eastern (-5)
