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!

New Skis

profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
This year I'm thinking of selling the anthems and getting a pair of 09 hellbents in a 169. Do you guys think thats too much ski for a small guy like me (5'6'' 120)? I like skiing park, but I'm really more of a backcountry skier, so I'm really looking for a great powder ski that can still handle groomers.... Tell me what you think. Oh and do you know if you can get look px12 jib bindings with a brake wide enough for hellbents? because if you cant, I'll sell those with the anthems and get some marker griffons.

Thanks.
Aug 16 2010 1:55AM
0 0
profile picture
_steffen_
Posts: 903 - Karma: 124
i know your situation and i would really recomend the sir francis bacons
Aug 16 2010 1:57AM
0 0
profile picture
ndye
Posts: 3756 - Karma: 7,094
you could handle the hellbents in a 169 i bet as long as your a really strong skier. may want to bulk up a little it will make skiing in better general for you but the hellbent is sick i would look at something a little bit narrower possibly but the 09 hellbent apparently does suprisingly well on groomers for what you would expect.
Aug 16 2010 1:59AM
0 0
profile picture
ThaLorax
Posts: 21083 - Karma: 8,455
4frnt CRJ
Aug 16 2010 2:24AM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
Solid choice.
Aug 16 2010 2:55AM
0 0
profile picture
blatt
Posts: 5584 - Karma: 3,097
If you want a pow slither can handle groomers, try blends. One the best all mountain skis out there
Aug 16 2010 3:17AM
0 0
profile picture
ThaLorax
Posts: 21083 - Karma: 8,455
the blends would be too stiff if he's interested in the Hellbents.
Aug 16 2010 3:23AM
0 0
profile picture
flexpattern
Posts: 1090 - Karma: 45
Atomic Bentchetlers. Reverse camber and regular camber underfoot. yaayyyyy!!!
Aug 16 2010 8:38AM
0 0
profile picture
belden...
Posts: 2914 - Karma: 1,274
BACONS!!! this years are sick
Aug 16 2010 8:41AM
0 0
profile picture
no_steeze
Posts: 23992 - Karma: 4,272
a great powder ski that can handle groomers is definitely not hellbents. bents are great in tons of deep snow but as soon as it gets slightly tracked out they flop and skip everywhere. they have zero stability and cannot handle speeds over 2mph in anything that isn't waist deep blower pow. i suggest something closer to 115 underfoot that can handle itself in all conditions like jj's or crj's
Aug 16 2010 12:39PM
0 0
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,404
going from anthems to a fat pow ski is gonna be pertty strange, but if you are really set on it, then i'd look into the new bacons, same as the old model just rockered
Aug 16 2010 12:43PM
0 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
Thanks for the input, I think I'll demo both the bacons and the hellbents before making a decision. The Blends aren't really what I'm looking for, as I like a pretty soft ski and they dont have any rocker, but thanks anyway.
Aug 16 2010 2:41PM
0 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
Oh also for anyone that has tried both, how do the bacons hold up in powder compared to the hellbents?
Aug 16 2010 2:45PM
0 0
profile picture
ThaLorax
Posts: 21083 - Karma: 8,455
dude, peep the JJ's and the CRJ's. I fucking love my CRJ's. Never had so much fun on a ski and it handles suprisingly well on hardpack.
Aug 16 2010 2:55PM
0 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
Do you know if the jjs and crjs are as versitile as the bacons? because I'm mainly looking for a powder ski.... It doesnt matter if it isn't THE BEST on groomed runs; I'm a pretty good skier and I'll be able to deal with it. I'd like a versitile ski, but its lower priority than powder performance.
Aug 16 2010 3:20PM
0 0
profile picture
ThaLorax
Posts: 21083 - Karma: 8,455
I've never rideen the bacons or the jj's but i have friends with both. However, I'd venture to say that the CRJ' are more versitile (and fun/poppy) than my Guns. ESPECIALLY in powder.
Aug 16 2010 3:22PM
0 0
profile picture
ThaLorax
Posts: 21083 - Karma: 8,455
sorry, let me elaborateon the CRJ to help you more.

The tips of the CRJ's are softer than the tails and the middle of the ski is the stiffest part. Overall, they're really soft though but b/c of the stiffer underfoot they are still fairly stable at speed as long as you don't mind some noodlage. they have a big rocker in the tips and a rocker in the tails too but not a huge rocker in the tails. the camber of the ski is very similar to the chetlers or the arg's in that the waste is wider than the tip/tail. reverse camber tip/tail and regular camber underfoot for edging when you need it. oh, and i've never been able to butter or pop a ski like them.

i've heard similar things for the JJ's but i can't review them like that cuz i've never ridden them personally. hope that helps.
Aug 16 2010 3:28PM
0 0
profile picture
ThaLorax
Posts: 21083 - Karma: 8,455
fuck, sorry for the triple post. forgot to talk about how they are in the powder.

i feel like i can almost literally pick the level i want to be at in the powder on them. deep or floating on the surface, they rip nomatter what. they're super smooth off drops/pillows too. on groomers they flop like a bitch but they hold their own if you're a strong skier.
Aug 16 2010 3:30PM
0 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
Thanks for all the info! I'll defintly look into the crjs, along with the hellbents and bacons. the jjs only come in 175 and 185 which would both be too big for me =( but ill look at the other 3. Oh and do you know if look offers brakes wide enough for any of these skis? cuz the ones on my bindings right now are 100 , and i dont think you could bend them far enough for hellbents or bacons. MAYBE crjs...
Aug 16 2010 4:33PM
0 0
profile picture
ThaLorax
Posts: 21083 - Karma: 8,455
yo i'm only 5'2" 110lbs and have the 164's. i love them but sometimes i wish i had a second pair of the 174's to charge harder but that's when i bust out my Guns i guess. if you go with the CRJs, the 174's def won't be too short.
Aug 16 2010 4:38PM
0 0
profile picture
ThaLorax
Posts: 21083 - Karma: 8,455
and yes, every binding company makes wider brakes you can buy. check evo's website.

i'm getting these for next season since i just broke my solly bindings. basically the same binding as looks. http://www.evogear.com/alpine-ski-bindings/rossignol-freeski2-120-xl-100-mm-2010.aspx?utm_source=googlebase&utm_medium=shoppingengine&utm_campaign=googlebase
Aug 16 2010 4:39PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
As for the JJ, stiffer in every way from the CRJ. carves better and busts crud more, but overall, the CRJ is many times more playful, and is such a fun ski.
Aug 16 2010 7:42PM
0 0
profile picture
Avifarer
Posts: 5926 - Karma: 598
We are pretty much the same size and i got 169 hellbents last year. DO NOT GET 169's.
They are way to small. I would get pissed off sometimes when i was riding them. Get 179's at least. I went from the hellbents to the 184 bibby's and i couldnt be happier.
Aug 16 2010 8:24PM
0 0
profile picture
Avifarer
Posts: 5926 - Karma: 598
But i do recommend the hellbents, just go big. This years ones are fire as well.
Aug 16 2010 8:30PM
0 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
you honestly think that for 5'6'', a 179 would be the right size? and what about bacons? 172?
Aug 16 2010 10:43PM
0 0
profile picture
.cam.
Posts: 1852 - Karma: 48
175 jj's and 169 bents are about the same size
Aug 16 2010 11:16PM
0 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
Ok i guess its between hellbents 169 (179s too big sorry man), bacons 172, and jjs 175.
Aug 16 2010 11:40PM
0 0
profile picture
Avifarer
Posts: 5926 - Karma: 598
no dude seriously..trust me. 10 cm is smaller then this sentence will be. you will never regret going bigger when it comes to pow skis.
when i was in your spot last year asking what skis i should get everybody was telling me go 179 but i didn't listen.


Aug 16 2010 11:55PM
0 0
profile picture
no_steeze
Posts: 23992 - Karma: 4,272
179 bents measure to 185 though
Aug 17 2010 2:05AM
0 0
profile picture
Avifarer
Posts: 5926 - Karma: 598
Just a few phots to help you out. I seriously believe if you are really a strong skier you can't go wrong with the 179 bent. When you have longer skis you can get better much faster.
The 179 bent will measure about the same as a 184 bibby which i have.

Click for larger image

When they are side by side you maybe have 6 cm more at the tip and 4 at the tail. They only look big when they're not on your feet.
Click for larger image
Aug 17 2010 3:25AM
0 0
profile picture
Ducky.
Posts: 5811 - Karma: 1,420
175 JJ's. Great bc ski, handle's groomers fine if your a decent skier
Aug 17 2010 3:52AM
0 0
profile picture
jscarpino
Posts: 647 - Karma: 70
i have a pair of bacons from two years ago and those things rip. i would never consider getting rid of them. i tell everyone to get a pair. they can handle alot. they go from back bowls back to groomers with no hesitation and they eat up sun packed snow. I would highly recommend the bacons to anyone. can only imagine what the ski is like with a little bit of rocker. GET THE BACONS you wont be dissapointed.
Aug 17 2010 7:09AM
0 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
Ok I think ill go to evo and see what they have to say, but I'll defintly get either the 179 2009 hellbents, the 175 2010 jj or the 172 2011 bacon. most likely the 'bents because I can get them for the cheapest...
Aug 17 2010 1:49PM
0 0
profile picture
Kreech
Posts: 4178 - Karma: 3,024
Ok Its bacons in 172 for sure
Aug 18 2010 6:51PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)