Member of the Month

hi_vis360
November, 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!

Surface New Life

profile picture
andrewmeehan
Posts: 765 - Karma: 364
has anyone skied these yet?

im just lookin for some more info about them.

yes i have seen the pdf that they released but im looking for reviews in the park and pow.

++++++K
for legit answers.
Jun 20 2009 2:55AM
1 0
profile picture
B-runge
Posts: 16558 - Karma: 361
LL2
Jun 20 2009 3:49AM
0 0
profile picture
chazz.
Posts: 2721 - Karma: 23
nope. thats the one life. The new life definitely looks like a promising ski but i doubt anyone has skied them yet besides surface riders, and even then i havent seen any pictures of them yet. Kinda like a surface version of the hellbent? More continuous rocker and fatter than the one life/LL2, but i dont think i'll be letting my LL2s go anytime soon...
Jun 20 2009 1:36PM
0 0
profile picture
twsnow22
Posts: 1285 - Karma: 488
they are symmetrical too..
Jun 20 2009 2:10PM
0 0
profile picture
iFail
Posts: 2066 - Karma: 65

nooooooooooo........i hate symmetrical skis...

but what I would change on my LL2s would be making them 5-10mm wider.

Jun 20 2009 2:31PM
0 0
profile picture
chazz.
Posts: 2721 - Karma: 23
whats wrong with symmetrical skis? most planks out there only have a difference between tip and tail of 10 millimeters (1 centimeter) and the LL2 has only 8mm. Think about how small of a difference that is, 8mm. And 10mm wider than the LL2 (112 underfoot) is 122, which is what the New life is underfoot. one centimeter wider, symmetrical, and totally awesome!
Jun 20 2009 5:15PM
0 0
profile picture
iFail
Posts: 2066 - Karma: 65
yeah, good point.  I just hope they aren't made the way anthems are to be mounted center(where the skinniest part of the ski is truely boot center).  I think the skinniest part of the ski should be about where the ball of your foot is, which most center symmetrical skis lack, which is why I do not like some.  I have exceptions to that though, hopefully this is one.
Jun 20 2009 9:36PM
0 0
profile picture
chazz.
Posts: 2721 - Karma: 23
A ski where the skinniest part of the ski is on the ball of your foot is not symmetrical...Its symmetrical when its in the dead middle...
Jun 21 2009 12:36AM
0 0
profile picture
Ski.Ballet
Posts: 2860 - Karma: 200
That's pretty much the point of symmetrical skis.
Jun 21 2009 12:42AM
0 0
profile picture
iFail
Posts: 2066 - Karma: 65

I know, isn't that what I said?  I prefer it to be past boot center.

and for the person right above me, I like having equal tip and tail length while spinning and on rails and all that, but I think that putting the skinniest part of the ski right at boot center messes with the skis carving too much to be worth it.     Is what I am saying making sense?  I think the best ski for park would be made to mount two back or so with the skinniest part of the ski on the ball of my foot based on that mount.  I even prefer skis along those lines while skiing switch over skis like anthems.

Jun 21 2009 1:08AM
0 0
profile picture
powfoka
Posts: 2709 - Karma: 160
i have spent a few days on them... AMAZING!!! slightly stiffer than the LL2 definately stiffert han the hellbent and in my opinion a much more versatile ski!  i have ridden pretty much every reverse camber pow ski on the market and these rank #1 closely followed by the chopticks and the the LL2.

yes they are symetrical but actually ski very well!  a really long flat spot underfoot with a mellow rocker! really versatile i rode them in pretty much every condition but park laps and they kill it!

obviously incredible in deep pow never felt like they wanted to dive being centermounted and made switch shit a lot less scary!

being sligghtly stiffer they actually ski crud and heavier snow really well! they are really powerfull but are still really forgiving! really stable at high speeds and big cliffs!

and they were suprisingly fun on groomer!

UNLIMITED CHARGING comes to mind.....
Jun 21 2009 1:17AM
0 0
profile picture
iFail
Posts: 2066 - Karma: 65
how much less rocker than LL2s?  and if you have been on them a bit I take it you must have some hookup(even if minor) with surface, and I was wondering if they finally have something reverse sidecut or at least tapered ski?
Jun 21 2009 1:33AM
0 0
profile picture
chazz.
Posts: 2721 - Karma: 23
slightly stiffer than the LL2? so could the be compared to like, the chopsticks, in terms of stiffness?
Jun 21 2009 10:41AM
0 0
profile picture
powfoka
Posts: 2709 - Karma: 160
yes i would say fairly similar flex to the chopstick but with a little more rocker than the chopsticks!

and no plans that i know of for a reverse sidecut ski... i wouldnt expect to see many of thos from any company for that matter!
Jun 23 2009 4:20AM
0 0
profile picture
tiger_shart
Posts: 510 - Karma: 1,592
i skied a couple runs on them in some of the worst possible conditions for them (windblown ice with the ocasional spot were it had melted) and they held up pretty well considering what there made for they were very quick edge to edge on harder snow though they were very stable at high speeds and on jumps they felt pretty floaty but i couldnt test that aspect much i would say that LL2s were beter in the hard snow catagory
Jun 23 2009 12:30PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)