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!

Shreditor 102 vs 112 for Jay Peak

profile picture
cagro25jay25
Posts: 84 - Karma: 45
Hey i ski at jay peak Vermont and advanced, 5'11, 150 lb. I ski alot of tight trees, powder, moguls, and groomers, and just like to have fun. I need a one ski quiver that will allow be grip on hardpack, and the ability to make quick turns in the trees and moguls. I like to go off alot of natural feature s but not much park.I want something i can quickly turn on a dime in tight situations to slow down. Probably less than half of my days are pow days but we do get alot of snow at jay. I need your guys input. IS the 112 too much to handle or will it be better as it is more stable for landings and better for pow?

I need as much input as possible to make a decision.
BTW this will my only ski for the while year as i can only afford a one ski quiver. Versatility is my biggest concern, with quickness, float, and edge grip coming after that.

Which ski should i get?
POLL
Edit Poll
Votes:

Take care when editing a poll; Options should be similar to maintain vote integrity.

More options will be added automatically as you type. You must supply a question and at least two options. No HTML is allowed.

Apr 17 2014 7:53PM
2 3
profile picture
cagro25jay25
Posts: 84 - Karma: 45
Come on guys I really need your help deciding. Here's my list from most important aspects to less
1.quick turning for trees and moguls
2.float in pow
3.grip on hard pack
4.light enough to throw around anywhere
5.able to ski steep rocky terrain and good on landings

Less important:
Park performance
Apr 18 2014 8:42AM
0 0
profile picture
.nasty
Posts: 10582 - Karma: 11,183
If I lived where you live, I would never get more than the 102. I mean the 112 is definitely nimble but even on pow days you're not going to notice a huge difference in pow performance, and the 102 will be a lot more nimble in those tight as east coast trees. sure you could be that guy with a small dick buying the bigger ski but you don't need it
Apr 18 2014 11:50AM
1 0
profile picture
cagro25jay25
Posts: 84 - Karma: 45
Some make a desicion for me and support you choice. I need to decide by Monday.
I am still a kid but pretty tall and skinny 6 feet and 150lb. This will be my first ski over 90 mm waist but I am a strong skier. Will the 112 be too much for alot of days where I will only be skiing hard pack, moguls, and trees without pow or will it be worth it because of its performance in the pow days
Apr 18 2014 11:51AM
0 0
profile picture
PUFFY
Posts: 160 - Karma: 64
The logical choice here is for sure the 102, I skied at Jay Peak for around 3 years 30+ days each year mostly on a pair of Candide Pows that have a 102ish center width and the 102 was more then enough on pow days and given how variable and sometimes shitty conditions can be in the east it probably makes the most sense to do the 102. I also doubt you'd see a huge difference in pow performance between the two.

NOW with all that being said, in retrospect I wish I had gotten a fatter ski even if the performance might suffer somewhat. I think a 112 will serve you better if you end up skiing anywhere other than the east coat and I think if you're a good enough skier the difference between a 102 and 112 should be fairly negligible. Basically just comes down to what kind of skier you are and if you plan on buying new skis somewhat regularly.

To sum up: Don't be a pussy, go big or go home and go with the 112 even though the 102 probably makes the most logical sense
Apr 18 2014 7:51PM
0 0
profile picture
cagro25jay25
Posts: 84 - Karma: 45
Okay I need more input. I'm still leaning towards the 112s but how much quickness edge to edge for trees moguls and groomers would I be given up can someone give me a detailed comparison of the 2
Apr 18 2014 9:24PM
0 0
profile picture
cagro25jay25
Posts: 84 - Karma: 45
Bump.. Which one has more rocker and which one is stiffer?
Apr 20 2014 8:44PM
0 0
profile picture
Bogs
Posts: 4296 - Karma: 1,361
This is stupid. Just get the 112. The difference in performance between the two will be far more noticeable in terms of manuverability and edge hold than it will be in powder between the two skis.
Apr 20 2014 10:05PM
0 1
profile picture
MartianMan
Posts: 1101 - Karma: 2,099
Do you have to choose between these two skis? I would suggest the Blizzard Peacemaker, but if you do, the 102 makes more sense than the 112 IMO.
Apr 21 2014 10:20AM
0 0
profile picture
Bagina
Posts: 849 - Karma: 2,888
http://vimeo.com/86640817

112's in this video to show you the versatility.
Apr 21 2014 12:22PM
0 0
profile picture
eddy9
Posts: 383 - Karma: 216
I ride 114 waist skis whenever I'm outside the park(groomers, side hits, trees, pow depending on resort). Feels great for everything, except maybe spins are slightly slower(they are also much longer than my park sticks).
Apr 21 2014 2:29PM
0 0
profile picture
Espen519
Posts: 552 - Karma: 969
I ride Kung Fujas which are basically the same ski as the shreditor 102's, and I'm skiing in WA. They are great for everything, trees, powder, steep, even park. I recommend 102 becuase it's maneuverable in everything. The 112 won't mane that much of a difference in pow.
Apr 22 2014 12:49AM
0 1
profile picture
-MK-
Posts: 3253 - Karma: 5,332
I ski 115s now, and used to ski a 100
I ski same conditions, and am the same skill level and size
My 115s are a bit big for hardpack, and only bring them out on pow days now.
But my 100s were to skinny to handle any pow over 1', or any pow that is wet at all.

My 115s are rocker 2s, and 100s were Surface Green Lifes(not rockered)

Whatever you choose you will be happy with eventually
Apr 22 2014 1:23AM
0 0
profile picture
I_Am_Mod
Posts: 13214 - Karma: 3,753
probably a little late but i skied the 112 a while back and if i had the money it'd become my new allmountain shralping tool, that ski is so lively, playful and fun, i'd definitely recommend it!
only on ice i think it would probably blow because its quite a noodle ...
Apr 22 2014 5:36PM
0 0
profile picture
skier58284
Posts: 1705 - Karma: 5,366
Do you have a pair of skis right now? If so, why not keep that and get something else to complement it so you have two pairs? If that's not an option, I would go with the 112s. They'll suck on hard bumps and icy groomers but they'll own everything else. 102 is way too narrow for pow and cliffs. Not that you wouldn't be able to ski that kind of stuff on 102s, it just wouldn't be nearly as fun. And the good snow days are the days it's important to have the best gear, because those are the days you'll be having the most fun. I live in Utah, the conditions and terrain are a little different here, but I'm on 117s almost every day.

tldr 112
Apr 23 2014 5:11PM
0 0
profile picture
skier58284
Posts: 1705 - Karma: 5,366
cagro25jay25Bump.. Which one has more rocker and which one is stiffer?


Assuming Evo is correct (they sometimes get this stuff wrong), the 102 only has tip rocker, whereas the 112 has tip and tail rocker. Even if Evo is wrong, the 112 will definitely have at least as much rocker as the 102, if not more. I assume the flex is similar of not equal.
Apr 23 2014 5:14PM
0 0
profile picture
cagro25jay25
Posts: 84 - Karma: 45
I know this is sad but I still can't decide. My brother keeps a saying it's a dumb idea to get the 112 but that's the one you guys voted the most for. Can someone talk me into it for me and my brother
Apr 30 2014 8:06PM
0 0
profile picture
cagro25jay25
Posts: 84 - Karma: 45
And btw my twin brother has the 184 bacon and I want a simular ski to that and we are the same size
I would probably get the 179 112
Someone please tell me this is a good decision and why so my brother will shut up
Apr 30 2014 8:09PM
0 0
profile picture
MartianMan
Posts: 1101 - Karma: 2,099
cagro25jay25And btw my twin brother has the 184 bacon and I want a simular ski to that and we are the same size


Than get the 182 Salomon rocker2 108
Apr 30 2014 8:52PM
0 0
profile picture
brend
Posts: 779 - Karma: 3,608
I use 102s mostly for park, and they work just fine and so do many others at my hill. One of my friends even uses 112s for park and he loves them. The 102s perform really good on the whole mountain and are a great ski.
Apr 30 2014 8:56PM
0 0
profile picture
cagro25jay25
Posts: 84 - Karma: 45
brendanbectoldI use 102s mostly for park, and they work just fine and so do many others at my hill. One of my friends even uses 112s for park and he loves them. The 102s perform really good on the whole mountain and are a great ski.


First of all, how did thr 102 do in pow slike over 6 in?Can you ask your friend if the 112s are too much for groomers trees and bumps. I don't really do much park but want a playful ski for the whole mountain that can handle the half of the season when there is no new snow

Have you friend message me a review of the 112 I'd like to know how they performed in all conditions compared to what you thought of the 102 in pow
Apr 30 2014 9:09PM
0 0
profile picture
Twig
Posts: 6420 - Karma: 60,334
The 2014 102 is still basically the Kung Fujas with some minor changes. Compared with the Bacon it doesn't ski all that well in pow, doesn't carve as well and feels less poppy. The 2015 ski has added early taper and I think, slightly more rocker, this should improve it in deep stuff but it still won't float like the Bacon.

The Shreditor 112 has a more aggressive taper than the bacon, I would say it floats similarly well, perhaps even better. Preferred it for landing switch in pow but it still isn't as versatile, it doesn't carve as well, feels less stable on harder snow etc.

The Bacon is my favorite all conditions ski (though in europe I don't generally get the chance to try smaller brands) but I would definitely say they are the best of the big brands in this category. If you don't want identical skis to your brother, get a different year so you have a different graphic.
May 1 2014 5:43AM
0 0
profile picture
brend
Posts: 779 - Karma: 3,608
The 102s ski really well in 6 inches of pow, I skied one day of 36 cm pow plus and they were still great. I dont really think my friend skied to much pow on his 112s but ill try to find a review.
May 1 2014 6:08PM
0 0
profile picture
nortslayer
Posts: 61 - Karma: 222
I ride a 105 underfoot ski out west. I've been in 20 inches of pow and been able to land airs and ski aggressively just fine on them. In the moguls they for sure do not have the quick responsiveness that my park setup has, so I for sure wouldn't want to go wider with a one ski quiver than 105. If I was in your shoes, I would buy the 102's
May 2 2014 3:50AM
0 1
All times are Eastern (-5)