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!
Need some help...weird situation
Posts: 5229
-
Karma: 36
Hey I kinda have a weird situation with getting new skis this year and needed some opions and/or advice on it. For the records I am 5'7, 130lbs, and a very agressive skier.
Well here we go:
I now live on the east coast, and will be spending this upcoming season there. I'll be graduating next year and attending the University of Utah. With cash tight I'm only gonna be able to get one pair of skis that have to last me for like the next 2-3 seasons. So if you can't see my problem already, I need a ski that can hold its own on hardpack, and be able to rip up backcountry. I was thinking of the following:
05 Mo'ship Flyte:
pros- fat, light, good park ski
cons- soft, hardpack grip?
05 MSP
pros- stiff, strong
cons- small sidecut?
05 Chronic
pros- bombproof, sick all around
cons- not that wide
05 Pollard Pro
pros- sick all around
cons- ?, only comes in a 166, 186
So I've been thinking for a awile and I'm kinda drawing blanks. If any of you guys have ridden any of the above (i know only a few have, or have any insight on this let me know. The Pollard Pros seem great but a 166 might be too small, and a 186 is def too big.
better to burn out...
...then fade away
Posts: 4214
-
Karma: 12
u want the Flites...their great park skis, yet wide and stable enough for nice pow days and bc shit. becker was taking them from keystones park to the 100 foot stepup gap we did out in Keystone BC...yeah the chronic is sick but its not all that wide
u might wanna consider the Skogen too, its 86 in the waist, super stable, and great for park. I have next years Mike Nicks and the chronics and the Mike Nicks are great all around skis, worked nice skiing outve the backcountry out in Keystone, park, ect
demo a pair of Flites or Skogens, u will definately like one of the two
Hibachi King drops 9/9/04...and it shouldnt suck! hah
Posts: 6414
-
Karma: 63
Fucking skogens are the worst skis for all mtn. My best buddy i skied with this year had them and they blow nuts for all mtn. They arent even good in the park, they are way to flimsy. Its like skiing on balsa wood, you have to have some substance to your skis....
'Don't fuck with me 'cause I'm going to delete everything you ever post and have ever posted - Flanker, A moderator
Posts: 6414
-
Karma: 63
Honestly Id stay away from line skis in general, most of them just fucking suck for the powder. I go to the U of U and you defintly want a big fat ski with all the snow we get out here, something that you can rip on. And lines just arent good ripping skis, they are all to flimsy park rat skis.
'Don't fuck with me 'cause I'm going to delete everything you ever post and have ever posted - Flanker, A moderator
Posts: 7549
-
Karma: 14
unless you are a die-hard slalom skier or something, the sidecut on the MSP won't do anything except help you ski switch better. both pairs of skis that i have (msp's and airstyle nt's) have 25m sidecuts, and they turn like nobody's business, plus a low-pro sidecut is actually better for huge, arcing turns
-Strode
Only in my sweetest dreams do my streams lack troubled waters, shallow pools full of shallow fools...
Posts: 4214
-
Karma: 12
dspin, im talking this years lines, they all come with a burly macroblock core, and both the skogens, and especially the flites, are pretty good for powder. I mean freeskier reviewed this years mothership and said it was 'potentially the best ski tested of next years brands'.
Hibachi King drops 9/9/04...and it shouldnt suck! hah
Posts: 7549
-
Karma: 14
^yeah FS went nuts over teh moships.....how could someone say they suck in pow at 97mm underfoot?
-Strode
Only in my sweetest dreams do my streams lack troubled waters, shallow pools full of shallow fools...
Posts: 942
-
Karma: 8
I got myself a pair of the Titanium Moships....Can't wait to ride em they're gonna be sick
Todd! Are you not aware that I get farty and bloated with a foamy latte'?- Mr. Mugatu
Posts: 1892
-
Karma: 16
Posts: 1087
-
Karma: 6
Posts: 7854
-
Karma: 89
stomps are a great ski, a little pricey though.
i was going to go for a quad daffy but i was like, why huck? -mommy
Posts: 1087
-
Karma: 6
Posts: 8272
-
Karma: 9
why not go scratch BC in a 176 or 182, or even an ARV in 175?
Freezy deletes all my posts because he doesn't like me, so I suggest you message him to make him stop.
Posts: 6384
-
Karma: 953
^I would agree with him, West. Snag some BC's. You can get them cheaper than most the skis you named, and are pretty dope all around. Those in a 176 would be perfect for you.
'can you read what that says?'
'donna simma?'
'yes, that's right. now how would that appear in a phone book?'
'simma, donna?'
'that's right now Simma down na!
Posts: 12973
-
Karma: 500
the pollards are good all-around skis. one ski that you didnt put on your list, that i think would be good for your situation, is the mad trix mojo. wide for backcountry, very durable (will last you a long while), and pretty good in the park.
ill be super rich and own mt.hood and let everybody from ns ski for free... except freezed
-hoodratz47
Posts: 5229
-
Karma: 36
Thanks dudes.
better to burn out...
...then fade away
Posts: 5229
-
Karma: 36
Seriously though, at 5'6-5'7 and 125-130lbs you don't think a 175 is too big?
better to burn out...
...then fade away
Posts: 5229
-
Karma: 36
Too..I was thinking maybe a 175 pocket rocket.....
better to burn out...
...then fade away
Posts: 1087
-
Karma: 6
its not too big if your good...go with the scratch bcs i tried pocket rockets at killington and they werent good at high speeds and didnt hold a good edge
Posts: 4214
-
Karma: 12
175 isnt too big for your height...i had 177 Mike Nicks (next years) a pair of 178 Concepts, ive HAD 185 ARV's, and 193 Ostness', and im like 5'5...your gonna want a little added length if your gonna go out in the bc, will give you some better float
Hibachi King drops 9/9/04...and it shouldnt suck! hah
Posts: 5229
-
Karma: 36
I guess the Mo'Ship Flites were what I wanted, I just figured they would blow on piste. I guess I'm lookin' into the MSP's now.
better to burn out...
...then fade away
Posts: 1087
-
Karma: 6
scratch bcs are gunna be better fo the east and fatter fo the pow depending on what size you get
Posts: 8272
-
Karma: 9
You'll have no problem with a Scratch BC in a 176. It's not ridiculously stiff, and it only has an 86mm waist. Think of it as an in-between Pollard Pro, at least as far as dimensions are concerned. I tried mine at Stoneham in Quebec, on an icy/rainy day, and they worked better than the 1080s I had brought with me in case of those exact conditions. And if they work O/B at Whistler-Blackcomb, they'll be more than adequate for the lowly little mountains of Utah :)
The Pocket Rocket isn't bad, but be warned: It contains a sheet or two of some kind of metal(titanium if I'm not mistaken). A ton of people will claim bullshit, but I've seen Pocket Rockets bend and not bend back. IE: the metal laminate was bent past it's 'deformation point'(engineering students have a real term for that). Metal isn't necessarily bad, but you have to realize that having it bend is a possibility, and that once it does, you need to replace the ski(s).
The 4FRNT is a damn nice, very solid ski that will hold up to anything. If you can lay down the cash, and you think that a ski that beefy is right for you, you won't regret your decision.
Freezy deletes all my posts because he doesn't like me, so I suggest you message him to make him stop.
All times are Eastern (-5)
