Restless — An Alex Hall Portrait (Full Film) | Faction Skis

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!

Armada Halo help

profile picture
Theycallmealex
Posts: 31 - Karma: 10

So after a hell of a lot of research and reading basiclly every forum and every park ski you could think of i decided i really wanted the Halos

LOCATION: I ski outta Northstar and Heavenly in Tahoe and Truckee in California
HEIGHT/AGE/WEIGHT : 5'8" (growing fast), 15, 130
ABILITY LEVEL: Advanced

I can't decide on wether to get a 170 or 176? I dont wanna mess it up and hella regret it later

 Really would like to know what would be right for me if im 5' 8" and 125 pounds. Right now im skiing those dope 161cm 09/10 volkl bridge, but i think its a little small.

And any suggested bindings, I hear that armada recommends Look bindings, I have some Marker Griffon right now, but am looking into maybe the STH's?

Not sure on what to get with them and wanna see people opinions on those sexy ass skis :)

Jan 11 2011 11:51PM
0 0
profile picture
minibus4
Posts: 517 - Karma: 13
Atleast the 176. More stable, feels like alot shorter ski, no swing weight so you want have any trouble throwing it. I ride the 182 and I'm 5'11" and id even get 185 if I could.
Jan 12 2011 12:29AM
0 0
profile picture
japanada
Posts: 13784 - Karma: 1,957
176 at the min, the rocker will make the ski waaaaaaay short. The 18x's will be more stable, fast, and have more pop, but the 176s will have more of a jibby feel. Id size up forsure if I were you.
Jan 12 2011 12:46AM
0 0
profile picture
Theycallmealex
Posts: 31 - Karma: 10
yea then i think i will go with the 176, any recommened bindings for like 250 or less that be wet with the halo?
Jan 12 2011 12:59AM
0 0
profile picture
japanada
Posts: 13784 - Karma: 1,957
You are pretty light, so imo you dont need some 16 or 18 din binding. Id say take a look at the griffon, fks120s, px12s can be had hella cheap, mojo 12/15s.
Jan 12 2011 1:02AM
0 0
profile picture
bob1233456
Posts: 518 - Karma: 27
weird, I made a thread about these skis a while ago, and I also ski at Northstar.and Im 5 9 and 135.

I chose the 176, and im probably going to get the Look Pivot bindings. These may be a bit out of your price range, so I would also suggest the Marker Griffons.
let me know you you need any more help
Jan 12 2011 1:06AM
0 0
profile picture
Theycallmealex
Posts: 31 - Karma: 10

so im thinking to go with the halos in a 176 and marker griffon wuld he a hella sick setup.

and ive been using my volkl bridges for park and i was wondernig if i will  notice a difference in like swing weight and the pop?

Jan 12 2011 1:27AM
0 0
profile picture
japanada
Posts: 13784 - Karma: 1,957
There will be a definite difference. The halos are much lighter, narrower dimensions, and softer flexing than the bridges.
Jan 12 2011 1:39AM
0 0
profile picture
Theycallmealex
Posts: 31 - Karma: 10
im working on 7's right now but i cant get that last spin.. wanna know if the halos will throw me that extra 180
Jan 12 2011 1:41AM
0 0
profile picture
hsavage
Posts: 551 - Karma: 81
For sure. You'll notice a different but just cause theyll feel dope. Haha
Jan 12 2011 1:42AM
0 0
profile picture
Theycallmealex
Posts: 31 - Karma: 10

and the butters are gunnna be sick cuz u cant butter for shit on bridges xD.

anyone else have binding recommendations?

Jan 12 2011 1:45AM
0 0
profile picture
Mr.Fister
Posts: 526 - Karma: 10
any binding really.
griffons would be retarded light.
Jan 12 2011 10:53AM
0 0
profile picture
Theycallmealex
Posts: 31 - Karma: 10
griffons > sth?
Jan 12 2011 12:30PM
0 0
profile picture
hsavage
Posts: 551 - Karma: 81
If you ask me the marker royal family shit on the sth's. Go grifons for sho.
Jan 12 2011 12:57PM
0 0
profile picture
Heart
Posts: 6156 - Karma: 3,462
you're gonna get a lot of hate for saying that, but i do like my griffons, definitely a good choice for a lighter rider
Jan 12 2011 1:45PM
0 0
profile picture
DUKES
Posts: 5150 - Karma: 691
love my sth series bindings super light, and way durable then past marker
Jan 12 2011 5:35PM
0 0
profile picture
Theycallmealex
Posts: 31 - Karma: 10
thats the only thing that i dont like about my griffons right now is that when i land swithc my breaks always bend, not sure if it a marker problem or if i just need to fix my breaks
Jan 12 2011 10:15PM
0 0
profile picture
minibus4
Posts: 517 - Karma: 13
Just spend the extra money for some FKS 12's/14's soo light and allways keep you in and safer and more durable. It would most likel be cheaper in the long run cause the bindings should last longer then the skis. I have Look Pivots mounted -1.5 on my Halos and its a fucking dream.
Jan 12 2011 10:35PM
0 0
profile picture
Theycallmealex
Posts: 31 - Karma: 10
brakes*
Jan 13 2011 3:30PM
0 0
profile picture
Theycallmealex
Posts: 31 - Karma: 10
i think im going to go with the griffons again. if anyone is selling or knows someone selling somr griffons or maybe evdn sth's lemme know, new or used. thanks guys for the advice :)
Jan 13 2011 3:45PM
0 0
profile picture
Big_Tuna
Posts: 191 - Karma: 17
hey what do you guys think of the ar7's ? would they be about the same in the park
Jan 28 2011 8:53PM
0 0
profile picture
NWPA
Posts: 2309 - Karma: 165
fks for sure
Jan 28 2011 10:43PM
0 0
profile picture
crawley
Posts: 605 - Karma: 729
shit, late getting in on this thread. You need to get the 182s if you are really an "advanced" skier and you are growing yet. They will ski really short. I'm 5'11" which means I can't even consider the halos until they start making a 188, hopefully next year?

-----And regarding STH vs. Griffon I'll repost what I always post up about that comparison:

1. the STH 5 hole pattern on the heel is more robust
2. the STH heelpiece has legit lateral exit
3. the STH screw mounting width is substantially wider
4. the STH toepiece is so much better it's absurd. Adjustable toe height, adjustable wings, metal construction. Not to mention the weakest part of the griffon is the toepieces tendency to develop some play after a few seasons.
5. for all of those advantages the Drivers are less than a quarter pound heavier. That is like wearing a heavy pair of socks, it makes no difference.

The griffons are really nice bindings. But they don't even come close to STH quality or reliability.
Jan 29 2011 11:34AM
0 0
profile picture
epic_line
Posts: 929 - Karma: 32
Shitty ski, snapped mine within 10 days.
Jan 29 2011 12:29PM
0 0
profile picture
Mr_pretzel
Posts: 4616 - Karma: 1,289
Yea no.

You where either really unlucky or its a faulty core.

Email armada
Jan 29 2011 1:30PM
0 0
profile picture
chimpson
Posts: 6 - Karma: 10

I Live in british columbia we get alot of powder up here but i really want to get good at park. will the halos be alright in powder

Feb 10 2011 1:59AM
0 0
profile picture
Mr_pretzel
Posts: 4616 - Karma: 1,289
They suck in pow. Get something wider like the on3p jeronimo or ar7.
Feb 10 2011 2:01AM
0 0
profile picture
chimpson
Posts: 6 - Karma: 10
i dont know my freind said that his alpha 1's are fine in powder
Feb 10 2011 2:05AM
0 0
profile picture
chimpson
Posts: 6 - Karma: 10
would alpha 1 do any better in powder
Feb 10 2011 2:10AM
0 0
profile picture
Rob.
Posts: 189 - Karma: 16
They have the same dimensions as the Halo's, so no they won't be much different.

If you live in BC and will be doing at least 40% powder, I'd go with the JJs (if you want to go with an Armada ski). They're pretty good in the park too from what I hear, but if you want a ski that will do it all (for where you live) I'd look into getting a ski that's wider underfoot than the Halo.
Feb 10 2011 4:12PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)