4frnt EHP 186 vs. 193 - thoughts and comparison please...

[failbail]

Hi everyone,

I had a great pair of 08.09 EHPs in the 186. Fantastic ski. Sadly, They were destroyed, and I am looking at a hefty repair cost that may not really address the key issues at hand. I have the chance to pick up the same vintage EHP in a 193 for a very good price, however, I am a little intimidated by the length. I was quite comfortable on the 186, but it was at the long end of my comfort zone. I am approx 5'9", 170, spend time sending whistler alpine, and mid/lower mountain zones that can be heavy. I am using vintage flexons that could use some stiffening.

Anyone who has skiied them back to back is welcome to provide their thoughts. I have exhausted all avenues to find a pair of the 193 to demo.

Thanks for your input.

[iscariot]

I have both. Skied them extensively.

My 193 review is on TGR. I haven't written my 186 review yet. Don't have time now but I will write it in the next day or so.

[failbail]

A solid review. What would you highlight in terms of easily discernable differences between the two lengths? As a 186 lover, would I be unhappy on the 193? I realize these are completely subjective questions, I am just at a loss here.

[volklpowdermaniac]

it's my understanding that at some point in the past... maybe 08-09 ish that the 186 and 193 were two reasonably different skis, whereas in the current incarnation, the EHP is the same throughout save for length.... Am I making this up?

[D(C)]

it's my understanding that at some point in the past... maybe 08-09 ish that the 186 and 193 were two reasonably different skis, whereas in the current incarnation, the EHP is the same throughout save for length.... Am I making this up?

The 179 and 186 have the same tip and tail profiles, as well as tip to tail width ratios. The 193 has a similar tip profile to 179 and 186, but a more square tail with shorter rise. As well, the tip is relatively wider and tail relatively narrower.

[prophetman]

The 08-09 EHP is the pilsner graphic correct?

I've had two pairs of 186's and have gotten to spend a fair amount of time on some 193's. I also weigh a little less than you. Main difference I found was that the 193 liked to stay in the fall line a little more than the 186, probably because of the flatter tail (and the length). This was great when I was able to open it up, but in funky snow or tight trees, it was more work. In good snow its just as versatile as the 186

I'd love to have the 193 as a big/deep day ski, but I like the 186 more as an everyday ski. You should definitely get it if its gonna be part of a quiver, though.

[failbail]

Thanks for your thoughts everyone. Please keep them coming, if you have any. One key issue that I immediately thought of when reading various reviews was the difference in mounting points between the two skis... I may be hallucinating, but it would appear that the 186 mount line is much more forward than the 193? Would bad things happen if I mounted the 193s more forward than recommended, as this would be closer to what I am used to?

[D-ROCK]

I've skied both and recently just bought some '11 186 ehps. I'm 200lbs 6'1". I loved the 193's in the open areas but found it was way too much ski for me in the trees. Love the 186's. I find them great for everything (I ski whistler too)

[iscariot]

I own both and ski primarily at Kickinghorse.

The crux of my 186 (Blue and Pink Water Colour) review when considered in comparison to the 193 (Pilsner) is this:

For my ability, size, skiing style, history, and what I like in a ski, the 193 is better. The only place I would rate the 186 better is in tight trees.

- The 193 is a lot more stable in crud and choppy snow, the 186 gets bounced around and deflected more.
- The 193 is more stable landing bigger drops.
- The 193 rails open untouched better but can pivot with some work, the 186 smears and pivots untouched better but can rail it with some work/attention.
- The 186 feels much lighter on the feet (likely due to the low effective swing weight due to the more centered mounting position).
- The 193 is confidence inspiring and lets me do things I normally wouldn't, because it is a stable but lively missile.

The only place I prefer the 186 is in really tight trees (ie. tight like when you're taking branches in the body and arms in between turns and there is no real "line" to be skied. But shit, that's where the only untouched snow is on the mountain after you've ripped the chutes up high and are now down low rocking in the trees between all the blue and green runs that lead back to the lift). That's where the 186 is perfect and cannot be replaced. Maybe re-watch Eric ski the trees in Claim, this is the terrain where the 186 shines stops, starts, accelerates, dumps speed, slashes, pivots, floats, and turns on a dime.

If its in a quiver, get the 193. If its a daily driver the 186 will be easier to handle, but note that there maybe better options for a versatile daily driver out there.

Again, these are my thoughts as the skis are applied to my preferences and skiing style, so you may find differences based on differences in weight, skiing ability, type of preferred terrain, skis you've skied previously, etc...

eg. If you were 5'8" and 150#, a strong skiing background, and looking for a big mountain ripper above the treeline, I'd say get the 186 maybe mounted a c-hair back (in very tight trees a 179 might be good for this type and size of skier).

If your 5'10" 185# with a strong skiing background and are looking for a big mountain charger above the treeline, get the 193 (in very tight trees a 186 might be good for this type and size of skier).


If this is the only pair of skis you can afford and you don't have any skis in the quiver, and you are dead set on getting EHP's, I would say go with the 186. ***But again, I would also suggest a different (ie. slightly less novel) ski shape for a daily driver as this ski shape is not ideal for everyone.

When do I take my EHP186 out?
- when I'm skiing with the girlfriend on the lower mountain and do many laps ripping very tight trees.

This was a quick post to get the info out there, so I apologize in advance for any confusion its likely to cause.

[BeardedClam]

Again, these are my thoughts as the skis are applied to my preferences and skiing style, so you may find differences based on differences in weight, skiing ability, type of preferred terrain, skis you've skied previously, etc...

eg. If you were 5'8" and 150#, a strong skiing background, and looking for a big mountain ripper above the treeline, I'd say get the 186 maybe mounted a c-hair back (in very tight trees a 179 might be good for this type and size of skier).

If your 5'10" 185# with a strong skiing background and are looking for a big mountain charger above the treeline, get the 193 (in very tight trees a 186 might be good for this type and size of skier).


If this is the only pair of skis you can afford and you don't have any skis in the quiver, and you are dead set on getting EHP's, I would say go with the 186. ***But again, I would also suggest a different (ie. slightly less novel) ski shape for a daily driver as this ski shape is not ideal for everyone.
5'8 and 150 and that description is right on the money for me. I ski the 179 at my home mountain as a daily ski and as a touring rig. Tight trees, steep chutes, pillows, and long tours. They are a great ski for my size and style. super easy to throw around and maneuver when I need to