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!

Line Honeybadger

profile picture
_salty_
Posts: 672 - Karma: 1,034
Any one had the chance to test it? I saw it got rated pretty well in the freeskier buyers guide its looking like an attractive ski to me. I'm just worried that it will turn out to be another A bang.
Aug 28 2016 1:28PM
1 0
profile picture
a_burger
Posts: 5240 - Karma: 20,806
also curious, looks like they took a step back towards the invader
Aug 28 2016 4:03PM
0 0
profile picture
Dddsz
Posts: 3042 - Karma: 7,326
_salty_it got rated pretty well in the freeskier buyers guide.


Don't trust a freeskier review, man. They might be ok skis until they delam or your edges fall out. They are made by poverty stricken Chinese kids.
Aug 28 2016 4:35PM
0 0
profile picture
K-Dot.
Posts: 3743 - Karma: 7,771
Can't really speak on them but yeah, freeskier guides aren't really reliable. That being said it doesn't look like the worst ski ever, but who knows.

So it's a medium soft 92 underfoot ski, nothing miraculous, however it is very light for its size, comparing it to other skis of its caliber. This could be nice but line has been known for iffy durability in lower end park skis. The bases are extruded and the materials look that of a cheaper ski so keep that in mind.

I would look at the Tom Wallisch, k2 shreditor 92s, surface blanks, on3p magnus, or faction 1.0s. They're all in a similar class but are bound to be more durable. Although I have seen factions just fall apart before
Aug 28 2016 10:23PM
0 0
profile picture
Newschoolers55
Posts: 851 - Karma: 4,794
K-Dot.Can't really speak on them but yeah, freeskier guides aren't really reliable. That being said it doesn't look like the worst ski ever, but who knows.

So it's a medium soft 92 underfoot ski, nothing miraculous, however it is very light for its size, comparing it to other skis of its caliber. This could be nice but line has been known for iffy durability in lower end park skis. The bases are extruded and the materials look that of a cheaper ski so keep that in mind.

I would look at the Tom Wallisch, k2 shreditor 92s, surface blanks, on3p magnus, or faction 1.0s. They're all in a similar class but are bound to be more durable. Although I have seen factions just fall apart before


But they got bamboo cores tho, maybe they are more durable side of line skis but who knows
Aug 29 2016 12:41AM
0 0
profile picture
fredyferl
Posts: 2947 - Karma: 14,855
I've had TCs, Future Spins and Afterbangs and while the Future Spin and the Afterbang weren't very durable, I've had 2 pairs of Traveling Circus and they've both lasted me a year.
The Honeybadger looks really similar to the TC, both cap construction, very similar width underfoot.
I'd try them, the construction is not at all the same as the Afterbang. It seems like a very fun price point jib ski.
Sep 1 2016 2:53PM
0 0
profile picture
K-Dot.
Posts: 3743 - Karma: 7,771
I dunno why I didn't think of it the first time I commented but OP you should also take a look at the Joystick These. I don't know the exact weight but they are super light skis with a medium soft flex. Much cheaper than the line's and will likely last you just as long if not longer. Also, sintered bases.
Sep 1 2016 3:53PM
0 0
profile picture
_Jeffrey_
Posts: 1651 - Karma: 572
Cap construction sucks
Sep 2 2016 5:02AM
0 0
profile picture
_salty_
Posts: 672 - Karma: 1,034
K-Dot.I dunno why I didn't think of it the first time I commented but OP you should also take a look at the Joystick These. I don't know the exact weight but they are super light skis with a medium soft flex. Much cheaper than the line's and will likely last you just as long if not longer. Also, sintered bases.


I actually was looking at them a lot I just can't bring myself to buy them, their top sheets are butt ugly, that being said I guess the lines are not much better and you don't buy skis for how they look. Thanks for the suggestion!
Sep 2 2016 8:56AM
0 0
profile picture
..=
Posts: 548 - Karma: 1,224
Was also interested in these myself, until I remembered how subpar an extruded base can be. For only $50 more, you can get the TW Pro, which is sintered and has a full sidewall. Definitely better value all around, worth the extra bit I'd say. Not as soft looking as the Honey Badger is though
Sep 3 2016 1:38AM
0 0
profile picture
Heart
Posts: 6156 - Karma: 3,462
Never buy a ski with an extruded base. Just don't. They're incredibly slow. If you ever have trouble getting enough speed for features, avoid at all costs.
Sep 3 2016 1:51AM
0 0
profile picture
stinky_cheese
Posts: 1221 - Karma: 5,173
K-Dot.That being said it doesn't look like the worst ski ever, but who knows.


profound
Sep 3 2016 1:57PM
0 0
profile picture
TravelingCircus
Posts: 146 - Karma: 14,892
Super light but still stable and durable .. the bamboo core is sweet. Panda powered.
Sep 3 2016 4:30PM
0 0
profile picture
Dddsz
Posts: 3042 - Karma: 7,326
_Jeffrey_Cap construction sucks


HeartNever buy a ski with an extruded base. Just don't. They're incredibly slow. If you ever have trouble getting enough speed for features, avoid at all costs.


LINE needs to get with it. They are producing complete trash.
Sep 4 2016 12:00AM
0 0
profile picture
a_burger
Posts: 5240 - Karma: 20,806
SconnieLINE needs to get with it. They are producing complete trash.


this just in, anything with cap construction or extruded bases is complete trash
Sep 4 2016 9:49AM
0 0
profile picture
_salty_
Posts: 672 - Karma: 1,034
I'm getting the jist here but explain to me as if I was 5 why extruded bases are crap and why sinterd bases are better.
Sep 5 2016 7:31PM
0 0
profile picture
a_burger
Posts: 5240 - Karma: 20,806
_salty_I'm getting the jist here but explain to me as if I was 5 why extruded bases are crap and why sinterd bases are better.


Basically extruded bases do not absorb wax as well because they don't really have pores, and thus will lose wax pretty quickly. The trade off is that they are cheaper and it's easier to get p-tex repairs to bond to them.

Sintered bases have pores and are generally harder, making them less likely to get damaged and allowing them to hold wax for much longer. The trade off here is that if you don't wax them for a while they begin to dry and out and will not accept any more wax (meaning you need a base grind), they are also more expensive and harder to repair.

I've also heard an unwaxed extruded base is faster then a dried out sintered base, not sure how true that is.

It makes sense to put an extruded base on a pure park ski because it will be easier to maintain as well as cheaper and require less attention. Sintered bases make more sense on all mountain skis that are going to be well maintained and waxed more frequently. afaik theres no speed bonus in having sintered bases if your only gonna wax them once or twice a season.
Sep 5 2016 7:59PM
0 0
profile picture
_salty_
Posts: 672 - Karma: 1,034
a_burgerBasically extruded bases do not absorb wax as well because they don't really have pores, and thus will lose wax pretty quickly. The trade off is that they are cheaper and it's easier to get p-tex repairs to bond to them.

Sintered bases have pores and are generally harder, making them less likely to get damaged and allowing them to hold wax for much longer. The trade off here is that if you don't wax them for a while they begin to dry and out and will not accept any more wax (meaning you need a base grind), they are also more expensive and harder to repair.

I've also heard an unwaxed extruded base is faster then a dried out sintered base, not sure how true that is.

It makes sense to put an extruded base on a pure park ski because it will be easier to maintain as well as cheaper and require less attention. Sintered bases make more sense on all mountain skis that are going to be well maintained and waxed more frequently. afaik theres no speed bonus in having sintered bases if your only gonna wax them once or twice a season.

Ahhh that makes sense, what if I just waxed extruded bases frequently would you notice a difference?
Sep 6 2016 12:00PM
0 0
profile picture
a_burger
Posts: 5240 - Karma: 20,806
_salty_Ahhh that makes sense, what if I just waxed extruded bases frequently would you notice a difference?


If you did that they would be comparable to a sintered base but you would have to wax every 2 or 3 days at least

tbh I never had speed issues except in the spring, but here on the EC the snows usually pretty hard all winter
Sep 6 2016 12:14PM
0 0
profile picture
skidemon22
Posts: 4427 - Karma: 1,955
a_burgerthis just in, anything with cap construction or extruded bases is complete trash


accurate
Sep 6 2016 12:24PM
0 0
profile picture
_salty_
Posts: 672 - Karma: 1,034
a_burgerIf you did that they would be comparable to a sintered base but you would have to wax every 2 or 3 days at least

tbh I never had speed issues except in the spring, but here on the EC the snows usually pretty hard all winter


Yeah same here in the Midwest, thanks for taking the time to answers man I appreciate it.
Sep 6 2016 12:36PM
0 0
profile picture
SofaKingSick
Posts: 9327 - Karma: 61,270
a_burgerthis just in, anything with cap construction or extruded bases is complete trash


_salty_I'm getting the jist here but explain to me as if I was 5 why extruded bases are crap and why sinterd bases are better.


i mean, buying a ski with extruded bases is stupid. the entire sport is based on sliding down the hill on snow, why would you get something with shitty slower bases? would you buy a bike with wheels that don't spin quite as well to save $100? it's just the dumbest shit to cheap out on

OP, you can tell im pretty opinionated on this but i suggest you get something with sintered bases. it's not the end of the world if you get extruded bases but there are way better ways to save money. even if youre "only" skiing park, speed is insanely important. no one ever wished their skis were slower. you can cut all the speed you want, you can't magically gain it quite as well...
Sep 6 2016 1:14PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)