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!

Help!! 2010 Line Afterbangs or 09 Tanner Halls???

profile picture
Howie07
Posts: 73 - Karma: 49

yo im having a hard time deciding between these two skis, they both cost around the same price range so thats not an issue. I probably ski park like 90%, a lot of rails,boxes,jumps n drops, n maybe like 5% backcountry. Ive heard good stuff about both skis, so it makes the decision pretty tough. Let me know what you guys think about both skis and which ones you would prefer/choose out ot the two. Thanks

Dec 11 2009 7:59PM
0 0
profile picture
lilwhiz165
Posts: 502 - Karma: 47
afterbangs i'd say
Dec 11 2009 8:15PM
0 0
profile picture
BWalmer
Posts: 9141 - Karma: 12,883
That's a pretty tough call actually - they are both gonna be pretty durable (the THalls might have the slight edge, but it's hard to tell), both a pretty soft and fun to ski... I really don't know. Personally, I'd go with the Afterbangs, but that's just me (plus then you'll have a 2010 ski).
Dec 11 2009 8:31PM
0 0
profile picture
iboyz6
Posts: 9 - Karma: 10
i have the invadors which i love so personally i would go with the afterbangs
Dec 11 2009 8:34PM
0 0
profile picture
Howie07
Posts: 73 - Karma: 49
k well if i do decide on the afterbangs, should i go with the 177's? im prolly 5'10 n 135 lbs or so.... also what would be a good binding to go with these skis(something cheap but still good)? preferably a 12din binding
Dec 11 2009 8:43PM
0 0
profile picture
p-oskier
Posts: 1407 - Karma: 58
The abangs are softer than the t-halls if it changes anything.
Dec 11 2009 8:48PM
0 0
profile picture
Howie07
Posts: 73 - Karma: 49
rossignol sas2 120 wide bindings on the 177 afterbangs.... what do you guys think?? should i get 166 or 177 afterbangs? (5'10', 135-40lbs)
Dec 11 2009 9:38PM
0 0
profile picture
lebowski
Posts: 212 - Karma: 11
are u looking at these skis from sporting life by any chance
Dec 11 2009 10:30PM
0 0
profile picture
Che~
Posts: 2108 - Karma: 296
deffinetly the 177s
im 5'7, i got the 166s, and regret it
they ski alot smaller than what they really are
Dec 11 2009 10:51PM
0 0
profile picture
DannyBoat[978]
Posts: 99 - Karma: 5
afterbangs its a better quality ski then the t-hall
Dec 11 2009 11:21PM
0 0
profile picture
ReetsAdeets
Posts: 1531 - Karma: 611
I have heard of numerous T-Halls getting "rocker" in the tail from landing backseat, and other problems like that. They do seem like sick skis, but I would get Afterbangs.
Dec 11 2009 11:27PM
0 0
profile picture
iFail
Posts: 2066 - Karma: 65

Stupid fuck, GTFO, or learn what you are talking about.

One post up, that was very true of 07 and 08 Thalls, but 09s are much better.  Also, this season a pair of Abangs was on a ski rack after lunch and I took them off to take a look and compare to what they were like new.  Pretty much flat camber then and the tails were starting to rocker and tips soon to come.  They were very soft and I bet will keep getting softer just like invaders did.  Line has good advertising, but IMO Abangs are just going to be exactly like Invaders on the 20th day on both.  Plus symmetrical skis are only a sales point, which is something Line is very good at.

Now Armada on the other hand really isn't that great at sales pitches, but they do focus on making the best skis possible.  The Thalls have a flex point right after the heel and toe of the binding, but it was done wayyy better than Anthems or Invaders, no comparison to me.  Thalls are also directional and have a thought out sidecut that isn't a sales point sidecut.  The tail releases and they actually carve like a real ski, not like shit.  Skiing switch is at least as easy on Thalls as it is on Anthems or Invaders, and I really think it's actually much better switch than either of those..  So go with the Armadas, which have been tested for a season now, and aren't just going to be invaders =).

Oh yeah, nearly forgot to add- NS is filled with people who like to say how great skis are that they've never touched, and once the tone is set for a product it's set.  So many NSers have this wierd obsession with Abangs even though they've never used them.  I've skied 09 Thalls and Anthems and Invaders, and talked to a guy on his 15th-20th day on Abangs who said they were just like invaders at that point.

Dec 12 2009 1:57AM
0 0
profile picture
Howie07
Posts: 73 - Karma: 49
damn yo.... you guys had me pretty convinced on getting the afterbangs, but now things are kinda in the air again =(
Dec 12 2009 2:58AM
0 0
profile picture
-james-
Posts: 192 - Karma: 19
armada no doubt
Dec 12 2009 6:42AM
0 0
profile picture
Howie07
Posts: 73 - Karma: 49
any info on these two skis would help me soo much, i gotta make a decision today so that i can order them before tomororw. any pros n cons you guys have, problems with the skis let me know. ive been reading many reviews on the afterbangs and from what i read theres a possibility of water ruining the wode core of the skis, n that they can loose stiffness after not long... i know the weight of the afterbangs are around 1930g's(177s) per ski but does anyone know the weight of the t-halls (171 or 176s).... any advice/help is appreciated.. thanks
Dec 12 2009 7:14AM
0 0
profile picture
Howie07
Posts: 73 - Karma: 49
chyyeah
Dec 12 2009 9:03AM
0 0
profile picture
Krystian
Posts: 356 - Karma: 29

either one will be a great ski man....just go with your gut feeling. both are great skis.

and as someone mentioned before, if u get abangs u will have 2010 ski. if that even matters.

Dec 12 2009 9:38AM
0 0
profile picture
Howie07
Posts: 73 - Karma: 49

tomorrow im gunna decide between the two, which shoud i go for?????????????????????????????

Dec 13 2009 3:26AM
0 0
profile picture
afed
Posts: 35 - Karma: 10
Afterbang if you like to hit the rails
Dec 13 2009 1:29PM
0 0
profile picture
asian_andy
Posts: 830 - Karma: 61
Umm. the thall is a rail ski too idiot. And about the rockering tip. Check my threads! I under rotated my front flips and i rockered my tail. But other than that its a super fun ski and soo nice for jumps aswell.
Dec 13 2009 1:34PM
0 0
profile picture
afed
Posts: 35 - Karma: 10
iv ridden both skis and the afterbangs are by far better on the rails and the thalls have harly any sidecut so its a bitch to do anything but rails and there just not vary good becuse how hevey they are. so the afterbangs are just a better ski
Dec 13 2009 1:47PM
0 0
profile picture
pigglywiggly
Posts: 4482 - Karma: 305
all i can say is i have skiied one park ski..and those are my 08/09 armada ar6s. thought that they would be too stiff/ too big for my 5 foot 6 and 115 pounds and i got the 166...after half of a run, i was already used to them and i loved every little aspect of them. kinda learning how to butter, 3's off little natural terrain were super easy, and just cruising and jibbing around the mountain was so much fun with them!

armada FTW
Dec 13 2009 3:35PM
0 0
profile picture
95romeo
Posts: 276 - Karma: -99
either way your good, last year i had the ar6's and they were great for park, and all mountain, this year i have the afterbangs and just skiied on them, there probably the most playful ski ever , super buttery, a lot of pop, and light, the only problem is , is that they chip really easily, but otherwise i would redemond the afterbangs!
Dec 13 2009 3:39PM
0 0
profile picture
SweatyBallShack
Posts: 2857 - Karma: 58
I hope youve got powder skis because if you ski the backcountry at all the afterbangs will buck you right onto your face. The t halls have a different flex pattern but theyre not too good up there either. Both great in the park tho
Feb 4 2010 5:56PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)