Which Charges Harder, 189 Squad v 194 xxl

[fluffballs]

The 189 squad vs 194 xxl question has plague me for the last year. I skied the squads for half the season last year and loooooved them. That said, I couldn't resist when the xxl's popped up on tramdock. I would love to keep both, but it seems silly. You can add into the mix the fact that I have a pair of phantom 108's coming my way. But apparently they only come in 185 or 195, some I'm leaning on letting them go.

My question, which ski charges harder? But can still ski the rest of the mountain. I loved the stability of the squads, I reached my personal level of straight line, and they didn't flinch. Also like how they plow crud, and the ability to smear. Is the xxl mo bettah? How's it different?

[Sloafer11']

well the XXLs kicked my ass pretty bad. but i haven't skied the squads.

[Hugh Conway]

rontele in a J. Crew :fm:

[Bandit Man]

Phill skis both the 189 Squad and 194 XXL (and both very competently). He ought to have some insight to consider.

[beaterdit]

I haven't skied the 94XXL but just from hand flexing it, I'd say the 89 Squad is more ski to handle. That said, it's not as versatile because the tip is so stiff it likes to find the bottom in the deep. Also what makes it such an awesome ski.

I've got some 87XXLs coming and I might actually let my new pair of 89 squads go depending how the XXLs ski.

The Phantom SC108 definitely looks like XXL competition.

So other than spending a good deal of last season on Squads, I've got little to add.

[fluffballs]

I haven't skied the 94XXL but just from hand flexing it, I'd say the 89 Squad is more ski to handle. That said, it's not as versatile because the tip is so stiff it likes to find the bottom in the deep. Also what makes it such an awesome ski.

I've got some 87XXLs coming and I might actually let my new pair of 89 squads go depending how the XXLs ski.

The Phantom SC108 definitely looks like XXL competition.

So other than spending a good deal of last season on Squads, I've got little to add.

I've got the same feeling that the squads ski 'longer' despite being shorter. Not so worried about pow performance with praxis in the line up. So I wonder if the xxl will be deflected more with that big tip.

Maybe my question should be, which makes a better everyday ski?

[azzure]

Had both in past. Squads are stiffer for sure. Xxl's are easier to ski but charge as hard. I had the 194's last year but will be on the 187 this season.

[beaterdit]

I've got the same feeling that the squads ski 'longer' despite being shorter. Not so worried about pow performance with praxis in the line up. So I wonder if the xxl will be deflected more with that big tip.

Maybe my question should be, which makes a better everyday ski?

That's what I'm wondering myself. We shall see...

[jerr]

I skied the 187 XXL in NZ this year. I was amazed how versatile it was. This is the ski I used most - and that surprised me.

Don't worry about tip deflection. It doesn't happen. And don't worry about finding the bottom. It has a knack of staying on top thanks to the massive tip rise (which is not soft).

I think the thing that most amazed me is how little input you need for the result. I'm not saying it's a walk in the park to ski, but it certainly ain't a body drainer.

I've never skied squads but I definitely rate XXl's.

[Professor]

I havent skied the shorter lengths, but if you compare a 194XXL and a 195 Squad (green ones), the XXLs are downright playful. I have both and the XXL is so much easier to ski it is ridiculous. It is also a much better pow ski than the squad due to the big round nose, more user friendly flex, and extra bit of girth. Hope that helps.

[Phill]

The 189 squad vs 194 xxl question has plague me for the last year. I skied the squads for half the season last year and loooooved them. That said, I couldn't resist when the xxl's popped up on tramdock. I would love to keep both, but it seems silly. You can add into the mix the fact that I have a pair of phantom 108's coming my way. But apparently they only come in 185 or 195, some I'm leaning on letting them go.

My question, which ski charges harder? But can still ski the rest of the mountain. I loved the stability of the squads, I reached my personal level of straight line, and they didn't flinch. Also like how they plow crud, and the ability to smear. Is the xxl mo bettah? How's it different?

As Bandit Man said I ski both quite a bit. The 189 squad is definitely "more" ski. The xxls are easier to ski and despite their larger radius do a better job arching turns. But don't be turned away by their easier to ski quality, they are a terrific ski and you can still charge the heck out of them.

Also I'd say both squads and xxls ski short

[rugbydave]

I've been wondering this myself. I've spent the past 2 seasons on 89 squads and love em as an everyday ski. I have a pair 0f 94 XXls on the way too, curious to see how they will compare. Those 2 skis are pretty much the skis that most of the Whistler crew skis on, minus the boys on Bros.

[Professor]

Also I'd say both squads and xxls ski short

They wouldnt if you would stop buying the "ladies length" ;)

[splat]

After you try them both, stop by and take some 192s out to ski, fluffers.

[Phill]

They wouldnt if you would stop buying the "ladies length" ;)
im grabbing a pair of 194s from tj. but i meant short as in if you look at how long the tip is the contact length is a bit shorter than you'd expect from an 89 or 94.

[fluffballs]

After you try them both, stop by and take some 192s out to ski, fluffers.

my pleasure

[jerr]

So, how do squads compare to Blizzard titan pro's? I know the Bliz Titan p isn't that common but does anyone have any point of reference for both?

[fluffballs]

So, how do squads compare to Blizzard titan pro's? I know the Bliz Titan p isn't that common but does anyone have any point of reference for both?

My brother has a pair, they're great skis. I would liken them to a standard stiff bro with a little more sidecut. I liked them.

Compared to the squads, not as stiff, doesn't blow or smear as well. But, more fun on the groomers, to arch turns. Generally easier to ski, but still a solid ski. Personally would be a great between storm ski, whole mountain, including some high speed groomers :)

[beaterdit]

im grabbing a pair of 194s from tj. but i meant short as in if you look at how long the tip is the contact length is a bit shorter than you'd expect from an 89 or 94.

He's kinda right. Runnig lenth on 89 Squads is about 165cm, due I guess to the "sharknose". It's got kind of a long rise. I still wouldn't stay they ski short though, those things demand everything I've got. Then again, I'm 5'7" and 140 lbs wet.

I've got 87 XXLs coming but I can't help feeling like the 94s are just not that much ski. Like someone up above said, the Squad is harder to ski. I could have saved a couple hundo and just got the 94s. Oh well, at my size I shouldn't even be discussing either ski, let alone skiing them. But I do.

I'm wondering if the 87 XXLs are gonna to make me hang up the Squads though.

[jerr]

My brother has a pair, they're great skis. I would liken them to a standard stiff bro with a little more sidecut. I liked them.

Compared to the squads, not as stiff, doesn't blow or smear as well. But, more fun on the groomers, to arch turns. Generally easier to ski, but still a solid ski. Personally would be a great between storm ski, whole mountain, including some high speed groomers :)

Thanks for your reply but are you sure you're thinking of the right ski?

[h2d]

Where does the 193 ehp fit into the charger rating then? Guessing bttom of the pile? H x

[hemas]

Thanks for your reply but are you sure you're thinking of the right ski?

-me thinks not... at least when I compared the flex of my Titan Pros to the 195 or something Squad, they were about the same stiffness. The Squad was wider though.

[bluesbrother49]

The 194 XXL's do everything the 189 squads do (straightline, bust through crud, etc) but float better and are more versatile. Plus, this years graphics are sick.

[fluffballs]

Thanks for your reply but are you sure you're thinking of the right ski?

titan pros or titan krietler pro? I was reffering to the 188 titan pro, sorry for the mix up.

[jerr]

titan pros or titan krietler pro? I was reffering to the 188 titan pro, sorry for the mix up.

You might be thinking of the titan 8 or 9. The titan pro only comes in a 193 and seems really scary stiff. I wanted to know how it compared to the squad Thanks for the effort though.

[Phill]

You might be thinking of the titan 8 or 9. The titan pro only comes in a 193 and seems really scary stiff. I wanted to know how it compared to the squad Thanks for the effort though.

Handflexing, titan pro = noticeably stiffer than squads

[Professor]

Handflexing, titan pro = noticeably stiffer than squads

They are close, but I would have to disagree with this statement. Seems to me the Titan Pro had a more even flex and was much less "boardy". But why are you comparing skis that arent even close to the same dimensions? The Titan Pro was 95mm under foot and squads are 104. That is a pretty big difference right there.

[yonny]

In my opinion the Squad is the "Harding Charging" ski of the two it definately was able to get my heart pumping once or twice, I mean that thing just wants to go fast, and thats what its designed for, however ive never skied the XXL but juding from what Ive heard id have to say the squad is more ski.

[beaterdit]

Handflexing, titan pro = noticeably stiffer than squads

unpossible

[RaccoonFace]

Okie dokie. I am staring at a pair of 189 Squads leaning unmounted on my wall. This is my third set. I have never skied this ski... Ever. I have sold the other two pairs before skiing them because, frankly, I'm scurred of them. I am fully committed to skiing these, and as to who will be the owner of whom is yet to be determined. But I will ski them.

I was interested in the dimensions of the people skiing them. Am I about to put some saddles on torough breads that are normally skied by the 200+ pound bastard children of the Hermanator? If so, who in the hell skis the 195?

Me: 5'10" and about 170-175 in gear.

I consider myself a sufficiently capable skier, but I'm no Shane McConkey by any means. I know that I'm going to have to dust off my balls to handle these things, but I am just interested in what I'm getting myself into.

How about some human beta. If I could ask: Height/Weight/Background if it isn't too much.

Thanks to all.

okbye

[Phill]

Okie dokie. I am staring at a pair of 189 Squads leaning unmounted on my wall. This is my third set. I have never skied this ski... Ever. I have sold the other two pairs before skiing them because, frankly, I'm scurred of them. I am fully committed to skiing these, and as to who will be the owner of whom is yet to be determined. But I will ski them.

I was interested in the dimensions of the people skiing them. Am I about to put some saddles on torough breads that are normally skied by the 200+ pound bastard children of the Hermanator? If so, who in the hell skis the 195?

Me: 5'10" and about 170-175 in gear.

I consider myself a sufficiently capable skier, but I'm no Shane McConkey by any means. I know that I'm going to have to dust off my balls to handle these things, but I am just interested in what I'm getting myself into.

How about some human beta. If I could ask: Height/Weight/Background if it isn't too much.

Thanks to all.

okbye

6'4" 200lbs. More of a finesse skier than a strength skier.

I'm selling my 189s and trying to find a pair of 194s. I love these skis.

[smuggs]

6'4" 200lbs. More of a finesse skier than a strength skier.

I'm selling my 189s and trying to find a pair of 194s. I love these skis.

i found the minute i took my squads in the trees my knees started to really hurt. everyday ski i think not.

[smuggs]

^ i dont know why it quoted phil but i didnt mean to.

[fluffballs]

Well I'm 6'2 190lbs and I was scurred when I was playing with unmounted 189's too. I would call myself a finesse skier, no race background. I loved the squads, so much fun. Perhaps because from the start I had the mindset to ski them like they didn't care, as in, they're going to smash anything in their way, and I'm going to drive them to do so. They shined just about everywhere, and I think the area they excelled the most was in snow with a bit of a crust that would normally be frustrating. I remember a day of lapping untracked trees with a moderate crust and having a blast. Then speaking to others who were not enjoying the snow at all. The skis just don't care.

[T-Boz]

I'm 5'10" and 180 and ski the squad 104 in the 194 length. I come from a hard charging racing background and I am an arborist in the summer so my legs are strong. The 194 is great for me, I can really flex the ski out if I try its not too easy, it takes some work. At first they seemed long but then you get used to it and anything shorter feels like fruit boots now. Funny enough I just got my Phantom 108 in the 195 mounted up and they scare me because they feel stiffer and are fatter! They are all around stiffer where as the Squad's tip is a little softer but the rest is a comparable flex. Does anyone have and Phantom 108 reviews!! I will tommarrow afternoon. Also, with the stiff skis you need stiff boots I have the Squad carbon 130 and they are barely stiff enough, what boots do you use?? how long (a season or 2)?

[rugbydave]

Well, I've put a bunch of days now on my new 194 XXLs so I can offer a decent comparison to the 189 squads that were my everyday for about 2 years. First, I'm 5'7" and about 165+ without gear. For 2 skis that fall into pretty much the same category, they really ski differently. The Squad skis noticeably stiffer than the XXL. It's also more playful and snappy on firm snow. They're both plenty stiff and can straightline although I'd liken the ride of the Squad to a I-beam, where it feels stiff as fuck when maching but like it can just crush anything whereas the XXL is much more damp. I'm guessing lotsa that damp(XXL) vs snappy(Squad) comes from the wood vs foam+metal construction of the 2 skis. The XXL is hands down the winner in pow though, no tip dive, better float. So as far as which makes up a better everyday ski, I'd say you have to compromise a lil with each, the XXL gives up a lil of the Squad's hard snow performance for improved pow performance. Both are definitely very competent skis...

[RaccoonFace]

I finally have some input...

Me 5' 10" 165 sans gear, and a racing background old enough not to matter. I consider myself a mild charger and a finesse skier.

I've been skiing this ski exclusively with the exception of some half days I switched to other skis to avoid rocks. The Squad 89 has been the only ski I want to ski. I've skied it in tight trees and bomber wide open, but not in anything deeper than 4-5 inches. They are super solid and I've never been in/on anything that gave me this much confidence to go fast... Really fast! If you air, all you need to do is make sure the bases hit the snow and they'll do the rest.

They are very stiff and I have had to change my style a bit. I used to just lay skis over and they'd turn. The Squads won't do that, if you get them you will no longer be able to finesse shit. But when you get used to it nothing else will do. You need to make them do everything, and apparently the resent you for it at the same time they reward you. Lose focus for the shortest of instances and they'll take you for a gnarly ride. BUT, if you can keep on top of them you'll be looking for any pairs that may be left in shops on the shelves. The destroy anything that is questionable (corn, crust, etc.) and if you ski everything like it was groomed they really shine. They won't zipper line moguls, but they will let you point through them, and they even keep a good edge on icy stuff. The only place I had a problem was some crusty heavy snow, but I wasn't keeping good form so it wasn't their fault, they were just doing what they do.

Two cons:
1) I have spent a lot on repairing core shots. Some of them were reasonable and I knew they were core shots. Others not so much. I'm guessing the bases are pretty soft but I'm not sure which material they used so I can't confirm with data. The flip side of this: You can make these skis really fast, race ski fast. Jim S was frustrated one day when we went out and even in the flats I could motor away from him... :D

2) I'm skiing Krypton Pros with the stiff tongue and they are not stiff enough. In fact I have been in more than one situation where I pressured the tip of the skis and the skis pulled so hard that I, literally, felt the tongue of my boot just fold up... I then landed on my brain cell. The last time I skied them I was kinda scarred of them at about the half day point and started skiing in the back seat because they had taught me a lesson earlier... This is unrewarding and I hurt both of my legs bad enough that I had to stop and wait for a few minutes before I could even get going again. These skis don't crash, they keep going at all costs and they'll break your legs off to do it. You really need to ski stiff boots to keep them in check, and you can't daydream; you have to be there to ski.

If the SC108 or RC112 is anything like this I will be picking some up this season... Will have a report on the 108, hopefully, this weekend.

okbye

[wcf3]

Looking at the flex chart on the recommended skis and bindings sticky I see the following:

-The titan pro and XXL have almost identical flex patterns.
-The squad is stiffer at in the tip and tail than the others skis, but isn't as stiff in the midsection.

Oh, and for the many who claim that the XXL isn't as stiff as the standard LP, you can do that comparison too...

[huge-go]

Wow, after reading these about the 89 and 94 squads, I wonder, who in the fuck would need the 98's?

[voiron]

I'm 6'1" 175lbs. with chicken legs. I'm also type 1. Not skier type, i'm talking about diabetes. This 189 squad is my everyday ski. I was kind of mad i did not get the 194's. i also have some 192 thugs and 198 sal. xw labs. what the other guy said is true, these things are not good in deep snow. too stiff, i never see my tip. other than that - great ski. i have no race background, but have been skiing since i was 6. It's not our body size that matters, it's what is in our thick skulls and flowing through our veins.

[RaccoonFace]

Wow, after reading these about the 89 and 94 squads, I wonder, who in the fuck would need the 98's?

I think I do! I just spoke with someone today who had them out for a few laps and he said they are squad stable at speed, the RC section is money in the variable stuff, the width underfoot is great for float, and the rail the turns once they get up to speed.

okbye

[huge-go]

I think I do! I just spoke with someone today who had them out for a few laps and he said they are squad stable at speed, the RC section is money in the variable stuff, the width underfoot is great for float, and the rail the turns once they get up to speed.

okbye

I meant the 198 b-squads. The skis that Hugo Harrison skied, and other crazy chargers managed to retrieve, and somehow ski.

[rugbydave]

the 98s, like the 91s are a different ski than the 89s and 94s. The 98s and 91s are basically the same ski as the 184 and shorter squads. Softer and more sidecut than the 189s and 94s. FYI, on account of their longer running length, the 94s ski softer than the 89s, just saying...

[addict]

I skied the the 191s and the 194s. They are not hard to ski. Personally I didn't like them, they were less stable at speed than my other skis (for me that is - I feel more stable on wood + metal than foam). I did however really like them in bumps or billy goat lines as they were very predictable. Similar to the old volkl G4s.

IMO, in pow they (relatively) sucked balls. There are skis that charge harder, but are more fun, especially in deep snow.

[T-Boz]

Are you guys talking about the older squads the neon green ones or last years Squad 104, dark green. Because, I am talking of the squad 104,and I thought they only made these in like 189 and 194. Anyhow, I have a partial review of the Phantom 108, 195 lenght. I had them mounted with Look px18 binders (out of the rossi equivalent), and right away I notice they are heavier than the squads (probobly because they are all wood?). I skiied them at squaw on Friday, the conditions were pretty subpar, about 5" of dust on crust.
Heres the pros compared to the squads:
1. Snappier and more responsive (much more camber, could be good or bad).
2. Much better float (in the little pow we had) due to the increased head size.
3. Much less vibrations. No chattering at all, felt real solid in all he variable hard stuff.
4. For such big awkward skis they were surprisnly easy to turn and flex.

COns: Not much only, they seem a little harder to turn on the groomers but who cares.

I also never really "opened" it up because of the shitty vis, but I could tell they just wanted to take off. Like in a sports car when you accelerate beween 50-100 and the turbo kicks in. Here is a quote to sum the intianl test runs (if you can name the movie you win): "They're like a freight-train from hell, ready to go straight up the ass of the competition!"

[JayBruce]

Kinda random thought, but was curious. How does the BD zealot compare to the squad in terms of stiffness. Just hand flexed them(never ridden them) and they seem considerably stiffer than the XXL. Haven't skied them though.