Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

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!

Jp juliens in park?

profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110

how would these perform in the park? would lizzies be better?

May 18 2007 10:09PM
0 0
profile picture
MeanMr.Mustard
Posts: 39 - Karma: 18
If you want a fat ski for the park i would go with the seths becasue there a bit slimmer than those skis
May 18 2007 10:21PM
0 0
profile picture
hawaiiansteeze
Posts: 3255 - Karma: 3,226
i would alo consider the arv's ive never tried the jp's or lizzies but the arv's are sick in the park so soft and poppy but there width is really stable on landings
May 18 2007 10:37PM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
well im not actually worried about lizzies but i just havent heard much about the jps
May 18 2007 10:52PM
0 0
profile picture
ski_cartel
Posts: 6598 - Karma: 18
jps are really sick skis but they have a very soft core so they are prone to binding tear outs
May 18 2007 10:59PM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
yeah thats what ive heard, but they seem really fun because theyre so soft
May 18 2007 11:01PM
0 0
profile picture
canuck
Posts: 1124 - Karma: 137
The ski is great for jumps, and rails arent bad... If you are wondering about softness they are nothing compaired to the invaders. the invaders are almost too soft for big jumps i feel. the JPs always felt stable despite being a "soft" ski.
May 18 2007 11:13PM
0 0
profile picture
Sharko
Posts: 2274 - Karma: 4,101
Hey hey hey, I actually have a real answer for you:

If you go to Armadaskis.com and click on "skis," in the lower right corner of the window it says "Which ski si right for me?" If you click on this, it takes you to a "condition matrix," a grid where they rate each ski in each condition on a scale of 1 to 10. They rate the JPvsJulien at a 4 in the park, which is the LOWEST score they give any of their products in any condition. To sum it up, it just wasn't designed for park use. The Elizabeth, on the other hand, was designed by Pollard as a really fat park ski. It is designed with all the features of a park ski (nearly symmetrical shape, nearly center mount, symmetrical flex, etc.). If you want a fat ski in the park, I'd say Elizabeth is a good choice (though there are many others), and JPvsJulien is a bad choice.
May 18 2007 11:15PM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
how bout the edge? i know they have a thinner edge to reduce weight, how does it hold up?
May 18 2007 11:17PM
0 0
profile picture
canuck
Posts: 1124 - Karma: 137
Fine, i have two pairs of JP's and my brother has a pair and they have held up great,,, mind you we arent hitting the rails all day everyday,,,we have park skis for that. But for the average use it should be OK.
Also i wouldnt go too much off that website thing mentioned above,,, itt is all marketing. the lizzies for example might be marketed as a park ski, but it really excels in pow. anythng with a waist like that is going to be great for pow.

I just wouldnt buy the JP thinking it is going to be mostly used in the park,,,,,unless mayby , mayby if you were considering the 178.
May 18 2007 11:31PM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
yeah id get the 178
May 18 2007 11:33PM
0 0
profile picture
canuck
Posts: 1124 - Karma: 137
Dude you ride the bird,,,,go for it, i think it would be a great ski for that mountain.
May 18 2007 11:44PM
0 0
profile picture
J.D.
Posts: 21362 - Karma: 5,142
They don't exactly... um... turn. Definitely not a park ski. Get ARVs.
May 19 2007 12:34AM
0 0
profile picture
stuff
Posts: 53 - Karma: 56
I personally didn't like my JJ's in park at all. They are not as soft as they used to be considered imo... Sure, tails are soft like i don't now what, but tips are not even close (yet not stiff by any means). So, what you get is like no support on backseat landings and not that butterable tips, i mean they are just not as fun for that shit as most of park skis out there. Also they were noticeably slower than my park skis (i wax them all like everyday i go skiing), i think it's due to the huge surface area. As a pipe ski they suck like nothing, consider supersoft tails and 38m turning radius (according to Endre's measurements).
So i'd say they are amazing "backcountry freestyle" kind of skis, i really enjoyed them for what they were designed for. But there're tons of better options for wider park skis imo.
Click for larger image
May 19 2007 2:35AM
0 0
profile picture
Ryanvdonk
Posts: 12811 - Karma: 1,971
they butter nice, but are too big for serious park riding, especially in the 188 size, they work alright off jumps as long as you're not spinning more than 5 or 7. bulky on rails due to the width. and the lack of sidecut is a down to for park. also the long size and width can be harder to hold an end on icy pipe walls. as for the edges, they're not the strongest, saying armada edges like to crack (they're average for cracking, but stay in the ski once cracked, not ripping out), a skinnier edge won't help your cause.
May 19 2007 4:21AM
0 0
profile picture
EL_FINRE
Posts: 2486 - Karma: 52
ding ding ding we have a winner!!!
May 19 2007 10:47AM
0 0
profile picture
goskinow22
Posts: 42 - Karma: 10
I agree, ARV's would be a better pick.
May 19 2007 11:15AM
0 0
profile picture
canuck
Posts: 1124 - Karma: 137
For park yes,,,, but if you ride at the Bird and are looking for a great all around ski the JPs would have to be the pick.
Like JP said, if he could only take one ski it would be the JPs.
They wil be fine in the park,,,especially the 178.
May 19 2007 11:36AM
0 0
profile picture
tjski
Posts: 5859 - Karma: 44
the ARV's and JJ's are almost identical, the tip/waist/tail are all like 3 or 5 mm's wider than the ARV....


i think JJ's would be fine in park especialy if you got the 178's, cuz they are so light.
May 19 2007 2:16PM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
k thanks, ill try to find good deal on some 178s if not ill go with lizzies
May 19 2007 6:59PM
0 0
profile picture
SV420
Posts: 242 - Karma: 10
I think the jps would be better just cause they are not as short as the lizabeth
May 19 2007 7:26PM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
dont the elizabeths not ski as short though?
May 19 2007 7:31PM
0 0
profile picture
soradrightnow
Posts: 318 - Karma: 10
No that's crap. I've skied both and the ARV is much, much, much better in the park.

The JPs will work, but they're not nearly as fun.
May 19 2007 7:38PM
0 0
profile picture
poofartpee
Posts: 7436 - Karma: 1,538
never have rodden either but i know when i went to pick up the Jp vs jew I thought they would be heavy and put a littile bit of force into them and hit the ceiling of my local low roof shop...they are light but i dont know which is better thought i would just say this
May 19 2007 9:59PM
0 0
profile picture
dorikin
Posts: 1914 - Karma: 16
The waist on the Jp is about 13 mm wider than the ARVs you have. The tip and tails on the Jp are about 10mm wider. As you can see, the Jp is much wider and has less sidecut by looking at this comparison. ARV's are a much much better park si. I love ARV's in the park. Jps are doable but it just isn't as easy, or fun.
May 20 2007 1:58AM
0 0
profile picture
Carrphotography
Posts: 590 - Karma: 95
i hate riding my jp's on anything hardpack.  they are just too big, no sidecut makes then just want to go srtaight. 
May 20 2007 2:09AM
0 0
profile picture
strode
Posts: 7549 - Karma: 14
you ride the bird what are you doing asking about park skis? only kidding.

if you already have a pair of charging skis, get lizzies, they are super fun and rock socks for jibbing.

if this is going to be your only ski and you ride the bird, don't get either. lizzies won't be able to handle the punishment of a badass mountain like that. jp's would be a little better on the mountain, but lizzies kill them for park, (unless you don't slide rails and only hit kickers larger than 60 ft.)

if it's your only ski for snowbird, arv would be much better suited.

of course if you're skiing the bird you should have burlier skis than any mentioned in this thread unless you're a tiny dude. there's so much better stuff to do at that mountain than ride park.

May 20 2007 4:17AM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
its not like im just getting this ski for only park.  i just wanna make sure it skis it okay because i do ride park but only when everything else sucks.
May 20 2007 8:57PM
0 0
profile picture
ijibgoremtn
Posts: 4221 - Karma: 13
my friend has seth's and he charges crud and still skis good in the park with them you should check some out get the 179 or some ak enemy's or w/e the k2's kill it everywhere
May 20 2007 10:09PM
0 0
profile picture
=nick=
Posts: 10471 - Karma: 2,182
so youre telling me ANT and ARG are better in the park than JJ's. right.
May 20 2007 10:45PM
0 0
profile picture
Sharko
Posts: 2274 - Karma: 4,101
I aint sayin' nothing, I'm telling you that ARMADA says the ANT and the ARG are better in the park than the JJ's. I'd think they'd know best.
May 20 2007 11:54PM
0 0
profile picture
Sharko
Posts: 2274 - Karma: 4,101
Upon closer inspection, for ANT in the park it actually says NA instead of a number score, and the ARG does not appear on the table. That said, 4/10 is the lowest score that they give to any of their products in any condition, so by Armada's own admission, it aint to good in the park.
May 20 2007 11:57PM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
one more thing, i know theyre pretty soft but just how soft?
May 21 2007 1:16AM
0 0
profile picture
stuff
Posts: 53 - Karma: 56
Tail = Fujative (a bit softer)
Tip = TM (also a bit softer)
May 21 2007 3:57AM
0 0
profile picture
MarkieR
Posts: 5337 - Karma: 98
i like my ants in the park. much more than jjs. args though, those are downright scary to ride on anything remotely groomed.
May 21 2007 12:16PM
0 0
profile picture
=nick=
Posts: 10471 - Karma: 2,182
why? theyre stiffer and turn even less than the JJs...
May 21 2007 12:21PM
0 0
profile picture
MarkieR
Posts: 5337 - Karma: 98
i think they turn better than the jj. i own ants and my good friend owns jjs so i've skied them both a lot and i just think the ants are more fun in the park than jjs. i like the extra stiffness too. it's great for big landings. they are a bit laborious for small rails and shit though. so when i say fun for park, i mainly mean jumping.
May 21 2007 12:25PM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
wait does that mean that the fujative and the tm are softer or that the jps are softer than those?
May 21 2007 5:50PM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
eh?
May 21 2007 9:38PM
0 0
profile picture
Hotdawgg-Skier4
Posts: 295 - Karma: 39
I would go with Elizabeths! Ive seen my bro throw 270s and 450s on the boxes. Looked fine to me...excellent fer pow i guess too! haha
May 21 2007 9:55PM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
theyre softer than jps right?
May 21 2007 10:09PM
0 0
profile picture
CTD
Posts: 6300 - Karma: 348
JJs have a 38 M radius, AKA they are straight. not designed for groomed shit, dont even bother. besides, the flex is not good for park. ARVs are much better for a dual purpose ski.
May 21 2007 10:09PM
0 0
profile picture
skithebigA
Posts: 265 - Karma: 9
there super soft but there really light so there ok to take in the park.
May 21 2007 10:13PM
0 0
profile picture
skithebigA
Posts: 265 - Karma: 9
ohhh and if you watch the JP interview on armada skis podcast he talkes about them.
May 21 2007 10:14PM
0 0
profile picture
FNJ
Posts: 3026 - Karma: 110
the 188 or 178
May 21 2007 10:44PM
0 0
profile picture
canuck
Posts: 1124 - Karma: 137
Yes, but he rides at the bird...I have ridden both skis and for the bird and its park and its oh so lovely powder the JPs i think are a much better choice....They are fine on groomers.
May 21 2007 11:30PM
0 0
profile picture
dorikin
Posts: 1914 - Karma: 16
Second this. Yes they are soft, but by no means are they a soft that is good in the park. The flex is just wierd for park, It's probably just the length but I dunno.
May 22 2007 12:13AM
0 0
profile picture
stuff
Posts: 53 - Karma: 56
JP's are softer.
TM's tips are on a stiffer side btw
May 22 2007 1:10AM
0 0
profile picture
Freestyla_01
Posts: 8586 - Karma: 34
Made'ns in the park. Good times.
May 22 2007 3:31PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)