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!

EHP vs. CRJ

profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
Sometime in the near future (aka by next season), I plan to switch to an AT setup. I have already purchased Garmont Adrenalin boots this season, got a free pair of skins, and am going to mount skis with the Fritschi Freeride AT binding. The only thing left is the skis.

I have 4frnt VCTs and I love them. 4frnt is a great ski company IMO (also have STLs from the same year) so I have started looking at the EHP as the possible ski for the new setup. This has led me to the CRJs as well, which seem to also post similar dimensions (EHP in 179: 128-116-122, CRJ in 180: 126-115-124) and both are rockered, however the CRJ has a more all-mountain feel from what I am reading so far.

Has anyone had experience with either/both, and how did either ski in any conditions you experienced?


Spark notes: Buying AT setup, looking at EHP vs CRJ.
I searchbarred and came up with nothing like this. Thanks for the help.
Dec 25 2009 7:10PM
0 0
profile picture
-ShredTheGnar-
Posts: 2038 - Karma: 111
/threads.
Dec 25 2009 8:23PM
0 0
profile picture
rudager
Posts: 11335 - Karma: 4,624
Can't say I've skied either. So I'm not the biggest help.
But I was going to order the CRJ in this year as my ski. Thankfully I didn't. It's really soft in the nose in my opinion. It's more of the soft, playfull pow ski.

The EHP's are sick. Wish I had money to buy them, cause I would. Makes sense right?
EHP is stiffer, a Big Mountain ski, able to charge, has a sweet rocker and everything.

If I was in your shoes, I'd go EHP.

Hopefully I'm helpful
Dec 25 2009 8:29PM
0 0
profile picture
-ShredTheGnar-
Posts: 2038 - Karma: 111
You kinda contradicted yourself buddy

If you haven skied them how can you give an opinion on the nose being really soft?
Dec 25 2009 8:32PM
0 0
profile picture
wrichmond
Posts: 562 - Karma: 369
^^^^^He might have hand flexed them.
Dec 25 2009 8:36PM
0 0
profile picture
rudager
Posts: 11335 - Karma: 4,624
That I did. Both of them.
Dec 25 2009 8:39PM
0 0
profile picture
Barsevskis
Posts: 183 - Karma: 138
i have the crjs and i absolutely love them.  they are so good in the powder.  but i have also heard so many good things about the ehps.  i think no matter what decision you make you'll have a great time with them
Dec 25 2009 8:49PM
0 0
profile picture
iFail
Posts: 2066 - Karma: 65
Yeah, I'd say EHPs.. I doubt you're planning on switch skiing on Freerides, and if you're not jibbing then go EHPs.  They(193s) will still turn short enough for most anything.  They also went through more(like, 45+) prototypes of the EHP than CRJ, so it is even more fine tuned.  I don't like normal tip shapes at the end of rocker, which CRJs have and EHPs don't.  CRJs are more designed for jib, and EHPs for charing with a little jib potential....
Dec 25 2009 9:19PM
0 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
Yeah I wasn't planning on doing much, if any, park on them. I have STLs and VCTs with PX12s that can handle that better.

Thanks.
Dec 26 2009 9:46AM
0 0
profile picture
Octopus
Posts: 1175 - Karma: 55
I have a pair of CRJ's and I love them.
On the groomers they do very nicely every once i a while they'll start washing out a little (if thats the right term). But I was surprised that these skis can carve quite a bit.
In the pow they are amazing. they're a nice playful ski but they still charge. I can make really tight turns in trees and I find that the soft tip doesn't have any bad sides to it except for in the crud sometimes.

I have no experience whatsoever with the EHP's though.
I'm sure whichever ski you get you will be pleased with.

Dec 26 2009 9:52AM
0 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
Yeah, I think I'm leaning toward the EHP but I'm a bit worried its too much for our eastern conditions. The VCTs are quite perfect for my skiing style and the conditions here, but the EHPs may be too serious for in-bounds skiing...
Dec 26 2009 10:37PM
0 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
Sorry for double post... but I wasn't clear:

I'm not planning to ski in-bounds with the AT setup very much. That's why I have the other skis and am keeping them. But I still will probably take them up the lift sometimes. I will mostly use them for hiking, however.
Dec 26 2009 10:39PM
0 0
profile picture
Octopus
Posts: 1175 - Karma: 55
I think you should go for the ehp considering that its mostly out of bounds.
Do you prefer to charge or play around in pow?
Dec 27 2009 6:05PM
0 0
profile picture
ectreeskier11
Posts: 697 - Karma: 366
ehp's are way heavier, AFAIK.
Dec 27 2009 7:13PM
0 0
profile picture
Dustin.
Posts: 13839 - Karma: 7,704
I bet you did what everyone did though and flexed the rocker instead of the camber associated with the effective edge.  Both of those skis are very powerful.

To the thread creator, what kind of skiing do you do and where?

If you are looking for more of a charging and cliff dropping ski, the EHP is made for that.  It has a much larger turning radius, weighs a tiny tiny bit more, and has a lot more effective edge.  The CRJ can also handle that, but it is geared to be a little more versatile and playful.  It has less effective edge and is much more "turny".    If you have ever seen video of Wiley Miller (Refresh is a good example), he rides both.  He's on the EHP slaying in Alaska, and the CRJ when he's doing cork 9's through trees.  Both skis can take some serious skiing, just pick what kind you need.
Dec 27 2009 11:08PM
0 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
Well, I am here in the east for now, so it will be primarily used as in trees. Hike up a trail, drop off into trees, just as an example. My skiing style is definitely geared more towards powering/charging down though than just turning and such. I am leaning towards the EHP I think.

Dec 27 2009 11:42PM
0 0
profile picture
Dustin.
Posts: 13839 - Karma: 7,704
The CRJ sounds better for that though, much tighter turning but it still can hold up at speed.
Dec 27 2009 11:45PM
0 0
profile picture
iFail
Posts: 2066 - Karma: 65

Check TGR, they have more detailed reviews.  The CRJ has gotten great reviews as a ski with a jib feel.  The EHP has gotten great reviews as a ski you can smear like a reverse sidecut ski or turn like a normal sidecut ski.  The 186 will ski as short as you want it to without working very hard..

The CRJ was designed with more switch riding in mind and playing around in pow(not saying it can't ski hard though, just saying what it's design was made for), where the EHP was designed as a ski that Eric H. could make any turn shape he wants(smearing or cutting) while skiing all types of billy goat lines and open faces, and went through a ton of protos(the CRJ went through a decent amount too but nowhere close to as many as the EHP).

And like I said above, for powder and crud skiing, the EHP rocker shape slices perfect smooth turns, where the normal tip at the end of the CRJ gets tossed around more.

Dec 28 2009 1:23AM
0 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
Hmm good point. It gets pretty tight in some spots where I ski. The EHP does look like a big mountain (e.g. wide open steeps and such) ski rather than a tree ski and that's the main reason for my questioning how well it would work for me.
That said though, I am not really a park skier or anything so whichever one I use would see practically zero park runs.
Dec 28 2009 12:45PM
0 0
profile picture
iFail
Posts: 2066 - Karma: 65

Here ya go, a 145lb guy talking about the 193s: http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73644

And a 186 review: http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=108404

I'd think you would be fine on a pair of 193s even..but I do like loner skis.  When I was about to get a pair of 193s in November I ran into a pair of 202 Lotus 138s(with holes already put in for large dukes at -1) for about $80 more, which I couldn't put down.

The rocker(and flat underfoot) and especially taper are going to make them turn easily.

Dec 28 2009 1:39PM
0 0
profile picture
rudager
Posts: 11335 - Karma: 4,624
I've learned not to do this now, with the pair of Maestro's from Bluehouse...

So this being said, I'm useless.

I'd still go EHP
Dec 28 2009 2:57PM
0 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
That 193 review is helpful. Thanks. I'm still leaning towards EHP.
Dec 28 2009 3:05PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
arent ehp's pretty heavy? and the rocker is gonna make skinning more difficult. i feel like the vct's would be a better ski than either of those, being a little less bulky and camber underfoot will make trekking better. my 2cents
Dec 28 2009 3:17PM
0 0
profile picture
TheWeaz
Posts: 803 - Karma: 1,903
i have the crjs and they are super soft and im only 4,11 and 90 pounds so depending on how much you weigh. but they are super fun skis
Dec 28 2009 6:16PM
0 0
profile picture
iFail
Posts: 2066 - Karma: 65

According to 4FRNTs site, 186 EHPs are 10.4lbs/pair and 188 CRJs are also 10.4lbs/pair.  CRJs aren't on the lighter side of pow jib skis, but they're not too far from the middle(179 bents being 11.2, EPs being 10.1ish, 189 LL2s being 9.2, Chetlers being about the same as CRJs I think and JJs being 9.5ish).

  I'd guess that if he is mounting just one pair of skis with AT bindings, and is deciding between EHPs and CRJs, he is probably touring for powder runs.  IMO, rockered(but not truely reverse camber) skis tour better in powder(even if you're on somebody elses track on a soft day) then normal camber skis.  The normal camber of Coombas(which have a larger than normal tip) dug the tip in while touring a bit, and on one of the BD skis(i don't remember which, rockered tip and flat underfoot though) I felt the rocker and flat camber kept the ski gliding over the snow better.  On bullet proof days touring with camber would be better though(but all I tour for is powder and warmer spring conditions).

Dec 28 2009 6:33PM
0 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
I already have the VCTs in 176. Love 'em, great ski and great for conditions here, But They are pretty heavy themselves and I don't see a point in buying another pair of them for touring when I already have a pair, and I'm not going to put AT bindings on them. I've thought about it, but the best idea I have is to just go bigger (EHP, CRJ, or another rockered ski)
Dec 28 2009 8:13PM
0 0
profile picture
Dustin.
Posts: 13839 - Karma: 7,704
Ya, the VCT Turbo is a solid choice if he is interested in something not as wide.  The EHP is only a hair heavier than the CRJ.
Dec 28 2009 11:00PM
0 0
profile picture
tjsnover
Posts: 1361 - Karma: 42

...you dont happen to know niall motson do you?

Dec 28 2009 11:25PM
0 0
profile picture
Ben.
Posts: 21463 - Karma: 683
i just dont understand why you would want to tour on something that bulky. why not get the fat fun ski as your inbounds ski, where the weight wont be a problem, and something more manageable as your touring setup
Dec 29 2009 3:13AM
0 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
Haha yeah he's my suitemate at UVM. why?
Dec 29 2009 10:06AM
0 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
They're all about the same weight (within .6lbs), the VCT, CRJ, and EHP. It just doesn't make sense to buy another pair of VCTs when I already have a pair. I know I want to go bigger and probably rockered.
Dec 29 2009 10:09AM
0 0
profile picture
tjsnover
Posts: 1361 - Karma: 42

im his friend tyler, i came up and stayed with him a few times

Dec 29 2009 11:00AM
0 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
Oh nice. Was you still out in colorado?


Oh and one of my friends, a big touring guy, said to look at the Black Diamond Justice's. Anything on them?
Dec 30 2009 8:13AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)