Sanouk

[milkman]

Been reading all the old Sanouk threads I could find and I'm thinking about pulling the trigger on a pair. Just wodering if anyone that skis in the PNW can give some more detailed opinions. I know they're super soft, so was wonding how they'd be for heavier PNW pow and wind affected snow. I see a lot of people at Whistler with Madens (similar flex), but not too many Sanouks. I weigh approx 165, only ski WB, and these would be a powder only ski. Thoughts?

[skier666]

The ski is fun as hell even for its softness. The only time the softness gets scary is if you are maching out of a straightline.

[hemas]

The ski is fun as hell even for its softness. The only time the softness gets scary is if you are maching out of a straightline.

Or trying to turn on ice... Luckily a lightweight idiot on tele's, like me, can make them work... Sort of.

[sar13]

Mounted mine with Dynafits and this is the BEST winter touring rig ever!

[Buster Highmen]

paging dashbo!

[laseranimal]

hmmm

does the swallowtail actually make it ski shorter?

I saw a guy at MRG during the tele-fest who had a pair and said he skied them EC all the time except on really bulletproof days

[Jumper Bones]

I have these and a pair of Kahunas, and have skied both in the PNW. I will say that i only have 2 days on my Sanouks, though. Anyway initially (to me) the Sanouk felt extremely long - I think it's every bit of its 193 cms, plus the mount is further to the rear so you have a lot of tip out ahead of you (compared to my Kahunas). You really notice that going on little traverses and shit through the trees, the tips get snagged a fair bit until you get used to it.

In pow, they're awesome. For me I just had to put the slightest pressure aft, and the swallowtails made the tails drop, and off I went. Kind of weird at first, feels like you're always doing a huge wheelie, forward 1/3 of the ski up out of the snow, but going fast it's a shit ton of fun.

I will say that, for me, I do prefer my Kahunas for general all-around skiing - they have a bit more of a generic shape (instead of a pow-specific way straight one), and IMO are a touch softer - maybe I've just broken mine down a bit compared to the Sanouks. But I'm sure it'd be a fine all-around ski too.

I didn't spend many days on these last season, I ended up getting some Pontoons too and spent a lot of time on those, and to me they felt like the complete opposite - short and turny and maneuverable even at slow speeds, whereas the Sanouks felt a lot longer and more locked-in, and it seemed like they wanted to run. I think I'll be putting Dukes on them next season and will be using them at Bridger a fair bit.

Z-Bo has far more experience on these, especially in deep pow. PM him if he doesn't see this and reply...

[milkman]

Thanks Jumper. They sound like a blast. I'll PM Z-Bo soon if he doesn't reply....The evogear price of $550 seems pretty decent, especially to us Canadians. Damn our dollar is crankin'....

[Gunder]

They where my main ski for two years and I still love them.

Mount them on the line and they are good to go. It takes a bit to get used to the super soft tip but wants you do you will be STOKED. They even ski groomers et al suprisingly well.

[foreal]

I have prolly 15 or so days on mine and disagree with ^^^. They ski MUCH better IMO mounted @ +2 than on the line (have had about 7-8 days on each mount). You are able to drive the tips like a more traditional ski, rather than making them turn by skinking the tails. They track basically straight and need to be flexed a bit to turn quickly....which is easy to do. I have not skiied 'em anywhere but in the PNW and I feel that they are possibly better in heavy snow due to the soft flex...

[verbier61]

I've used sanouks drilled at 0 for a full winter as deep-pow sticks and have been super-happy with them. They ski short, are easy, stable (well at least for my 78 kg) and a true joy. I've found their limit only when I got my 138 lotus, which floats even better than sanouks (I could not believe it was possible) and blast through crud and crust way better. I'd suggest sanouks if you are on a budget, but if you can afford a 138..... they're better

[milkman]

Thanks for all the great opinions guys. Might just have to pick up a pair.

[sar13]

Do it. On the mounting subject; I skied mine for a season with Freerides on the line and enjoyed them but felt like the soft swallow tail had a tendency to slide out and the hudge shovel felt like it might flex back and hit me when I hit piles of snow. I went +1cm with the Dynafits and like them even better. +2 might be money. Anywhere in there would work fine though and they make tight turns in trees much easier than the length and shape would suggest.

I'm about 5'9" and 160#

[Jer]

I ski in Utah, but not every day is 4% powder. Sanouks aren't my first choice in really slabby wind affect or bad sun crust, but they're great in powder of all densities. For such a soft ski, they can handle a lot of speed as long as it's not too chopped up. The only real negative is that the topsheets chip easily, but it's just cosmetic. I'm right on the line with 916s.

[foreal]

Forgot to mention, I'm 6' 185 ex racer blah, blah, blah. I think my heavyness is why I felt the mount on the line was not enough tail for me. It looks like the lighter folks around feel that mounting on the line is $$$.

[skier666]

Me = 6'2" @ 195 lb. Mounted with 916's at 3+. Also, Jesus taught me how to ski, for what it's worth :)

[Altaholic]

I ride altabird with them, I had Look P 14 bindings on them the last couple years, though I'm gonna put Naxo 21 on them this fall. They are great skis in pow but sometimes I wish they were a hair stiffer, but as a touring setup I think I'll love them even more. I'll have '06 Armada ANTs and my new warenteed '08 193 Nordica Blowers both with Rossi 185s, as my resort skis. But I might pull the trigger on some Moment Comis but that is iffy right now.

Overall, the sanouk is a fun pow ski.

[Particle]

Seconding the touring ski setup...they are WAY lighter than my old Sickbird setup with the same bindings (Freerides).

The backseat feeling is a bit odd at first but they are a fun ski. I've only skied them with my AT boots though, so I'm sure that only makes the backseatness worse.

[Gunder]

I have prolly 15 or so days on mine and disagree with ^^^. They ski MUCH better IMO mounted @ +2 than on the line (have had about 7-8 days on each mount). You are able to drive the tips like a more traditional ski, rather than making them turn by skinking the tails. They track basically straight and need to be flexed a bit to turn quickly....which is easy to do. I have not skiied 'em anywhere but in the PNW and I feel that they are possibly better in heavy snow due to the soft flex...

I dunno to each his own, but I do have over 200 days on mine, and think they ski fine on the line. The whole concept behind this ski is a LONG drawn out tip for planing, and a swallow tail in the rear to allow the tails to sink. Mounting forward decreases this effect, and imop if your going to mount them forward buy a different ski. They will still ski fine forward, but why not just buy a ski with less tip and more tail in the first place????

[HitMe]

I love 'em, despite the fact that I normally like stiffer skis (like Explosives). The kind of conflicting opinions on wether they feel short or long probably depends on what you mean by "feel". When just standing on the ski, it feel super long because of the very long tip. But when skiing it . more exactly when turning it - it feel super nimble and easy and maybe one could say it feels short because of this "easyness". In my opinions they are still fairly stable in a high speed turn though.

I personally don't turn the skis by "sinking the tail" like somebody wrote above. Rather, I think that what makes this ski rock is that the long and soft tip gives me the opportunity to stay extremely centered on the ski - even forwards. Its like driving a modern racing ski on hard snow, you keep pressure on the front ski and it draws you in. On the Sanouk, there is practically no shape, but the long nose and soft flex seems to initiate ski flex which then draws the ski into the turn. So, as long as you keep moving, the ski goes from turn to turn super easy. Since you can stay so much forwards on the ski without ever getting tip dive, you are in a position to both take hits well and still be super fast reacting if you need to. An unusual feel.

Its simply a super fun ski in any sort of soft conditions.

Edit: ...and bwt I don't think the swallow is there to make the tail sink. I feel the idea of the ski is rather to ski it very "flat". The swallow may have some effects but I don't think its there for "sinking the tail".

[Jer]

I personally don't turn the skis by "sinking the tail" like somebody wrote above. Rather, I think that what makes this ski rock is that the long and soft tip gives me the opportunity to stay extremely centered on the ski - even forwards.

That's how I ski - pretty forward. Maybe if the ski was desinged to be tail gunned it would benefit from a more forward mounting, but I can't see any reason for that if you're skiing centered in powder. It's pretty much unpossible to pearl the tips with an on the line mount.

[Particle]

That's how I ski - pretty forward. Maybe if the ski was desinged to be tail gunned it would benefit from a more forward mounting, but I can't see any reason for that if you're skiing centered in powder. It's pretty much unpossible to pearl the tips with an on the line mount.

Exactly. I can drive this ski in pow as hard as I can without ever worrying about pearling. And the swallowtail does noticeably sink into pow...interesting feeling, but once you get it dialed, it's a blast.

[foreal]

I dunno to each his own, but I do have over 200 days on mine, and think they ski fine on the line. The whole concept behind this ski is a LONG drawn out tip for planing, and a swallow tail in the rear to allow the tails to sink. Mounting forward decreases this effect, and imop if your going to mount them forward buy a different ski. They will still ski fine forward, but why not just buy a ski with less tip and more tail in the first place????

The way I ski, always aggresively driving the tips, this ski performes better for me mounted @ +2. This ski rocks period. I just felt that I was just limited to doing windshield like turns while mounted on the line. For what it's worth, I only have 15 days on these because I have a cupple other options...

This leaves me to only one question: If you have never tried skiing them at +2, how do you know they don't ski better????

[Jer]

This leaves me to only one question: If you have never tried skiing them at +2, how do you know they don't ski better????

Very true. However, the Sanouk is a pretty thin ski with no metal. I'm hesitant to put any more holes in 'em than is absolutely necessary. Plus, I've never ever mounted any of my personal skis anywhere else than dead on the factory mounting point.

[foreal]

Very true. However, the Sanouk is a pretty thin ski with no metal. I'm hesitant to put any more holes in 'em than is absolutely necessary. Plus, I've never ever mounted any of my personal skis anywhere else than dead on the factory mounting point.

I agree - I lost sleep over putting another set of holes in 'em....but it was worth it:D

Now I may put another set of holes for dynafits, gasp.

[SkiBumOfVT]

So im 6'2" and approx. 150 lbs. I ski the EC mostly Smuggs and Stowe. I like to ski backcountry mostly woods. Would i be able to control these beasts or are they to beastly for me?

[SkiBumOfVT]

also I was wondering how much shorter it skis because of the swallowtail?

[cooltsi]

Bumping this thread for all of you buying Sanouks from Ptex. Curious where everyone is going to mount? Here is another thread as well: http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34837&highlight=sanouk+mounting

[HitMe]

SkiBum: I'm your weight. Its not a difficult ski to drive at all. t only feels big when your standing still och maybe when your skating. As sson as you move (at least in pow/soft tuff) its just fun.

Length/swallows: I wouldn't say the swallow tail itself is what affects the "length feel" or feel in general of this ski. If the whole totality of the design: long soft shovel, hardly any sidecut, back mount, soft but progressive flex pattern etc.

Again: This is NOT a ski you sink the tails on. Its a ski you actively drive forwards.

If anything, the swallow may lightly alter how the ski hooks up in the turn at speed, I would say. There is a speculative thread about this somewhere around here.

[hway2]

Mine are mounted at +2cm from the line. I dont have a reference point to compare this to since that is the only mount Ive skied them on - but I can drive the tips as hard as I would ever need in pow just fine at that mount and I have to think it improves their performance on the rest of the mountain between pow fields. I am 5'11 and 180. I dont regret going with that mounting point. BTW - these are crazy fun in pow of all water content /densities.

[Particle]

Just a quick comment that if you plan on using these for touring, the stock mounting point is ideal. It's so far back on the ski that it makes switchbacks a breeze - minimal stepping on your own tails when kicking the ski around. It makes a long ski surprisingly nimble for touring.

[HitMe]

As usual, mounting points tend to be personal. I haven' t tried them forwards so I can't compare. But I LIKE LIKE LIKE them at the line and the really short tail has something to do with it too in my case. The swallow seems to stabilize it at speed and the short tail is handy when you want to slam the breaks in a tight spot.

[skier666]

I have mine mounted +3cm, and are currently for sale if anyone wants them. Better price for pickup in South Lake Tahoe. They were mounted with S916s.

[SkiBumOfVT]

I have mine mounted at the line and I REALLY like them.
thanks everyone for the reviews

[Wetdog]

This info is what I have been searching in vain for. There are few good reviews on Sanouks and where to mount them. Got it all in one thread and lots of it. I have always had a fascination with this ski, despite people warning me away from it because it is too soft. I have developed a new and equal fascination with the Katana, and wonder if any of those who posted have had a chance to compare them and which they like better. It seems as if the Katana was an attempt to make the Sanouk, which is a pure powder ski, more versatile, as the Mantra was to the Explosive. The purity of the Sanouk's design is what captures my imagination. I ride 04/05 190 Gotamas, the widest ski in my quiver. Is the Sanouk a huge enough difference in powder performance to be lusting after it?

[Particle]

I ride 04/05 190 Gotamas, the widest ski in my quiver. Is the Sanouk a huge enough difference in powder performance to be lusting after it?

Yes.






Completely different ski, loads more float.

[HitMe]

I second that. The Sanouk is definitely something else compared to the Gotamas. Unfortunately, I have not usd the Katanas. I didn't get ahold of them in time for last seasons escapades and I spend this season surfing/windsurfing.

From the looks of it though, I don't think one should consider the Katanas as any kid of remake of the Sanouk. As mentioned above, the Sanouk is pure pow pureness. No compromises. The Katana is obviosly designed to be a very versatile ski. The Katana approaches "pow-ness" from the opposite end - tweaking, stretching and bending of a kind of classical Völkl constrution. Kind of like it was born with Mantra an Sumo (?) as parents but then went to spcial pow school. The Sanouk never went to school. She's a natural. I don't think she has skis as parents, rather breed from snow itself.

Now when I think if it, a friend own both the Sanouk and the 190 Katana. Maybe he can chime in.

[MnO]

Is the Sanouk a huge enough difference in powder performance to be lusting after it?

Another yes to that from me.

I have a pair of Sanouks and also a 190cm Katana (which is actually 186cm btw). Unfortunately I haven´t tried the Katana in powder, or even soft untouched offpist snow, yet. However I have some days on groomers and tracked out old pow on them and all I can say is that Katana is a really nice ski, but it skis totally different from the Sanouks. The Katanas are rather stiff skis that rails on groomers. The slight rocker (mine have some rocker after skiing it) makes it behave a bit softer and easier in soft snow conditions, but it is still miles away from the Sanouk. Katana is what Mantra was when it entered the market. An everyday ski for big resorts that can rip groomers but still perform in powder.

[Bandit Man]

Once I get some pow sessions on the Sanouks, I can do a compare. I have spent a few days on the Katanas so far. I was not thrilled with them at first, but the more I use them in pow and cut-up stuff, the more my opinion improves. They are not an all-mtn. ski like the Gotama, but rather a soft snow ski that is tolerant of all-mtn. use, IMO.

[hofferfish]

i know it is not their intended purpose but how do the sanouks perform in chop for a lighter weight skier? im 145-150 and my everyday ride are elizabeths (short and fairly soft) which im pretty comfortable on in chop and crud. i just bought some sanouks (thank you ptex1!) and i intend to ski them more than just epic days, so i was thinking about mounting them at around +1 or +2 to make them a bit more stable in crap. is that a good idea? this is the longest ski ive ever owned so i dont have any experience with super big skis.

[mojorisin]

No clue when I last weighted myself, say 155ish, but the 'nouks get bounced around plenty in harder chop. They have really soft tips and they're really flimsy torsionally, neither of which helps instilling confidence in trickier snow. While the "chop" is still lighter/softer, they're fine, but they get downright scary through more set-up snow at speed.

They will work as long as you pressure the tips and remember to turn, but there are better skis out there for chopped snow.

[UTpowder]

Depends on how chopped up it gets. If it stays soft they are ok. Once it starts to firm up they get deflected quite a bit. They are actually kind of fun on the groomers provided that you keep your speed down and it is smooth.

[hofferfish]

cool thanks for the info!
what about the mount? hopefully im putting dukes on them!

[HitMe]

I think they are rather good in chopped up stuff (I'm 150 too) ad personally I'm not so worried about the deflection itslf. The key to skiing them there is to stay light and flowing. This is a rather effective way of skiing those conditions. However (or rather: HOWEVER), when you eventually mess up and run into something you will not get ANY help from the ski to filter this energy out. You will take the hit. This means that the bigger bumps and stuff get and the more refrozen it gets, the more your confidence in letting the ski run goes down the drain. So at some point it simply makes more sense to change to a more charging type ski and start to charge instead of to flow.

Groomers: As mentioned, if its soft they are rather fun. For bigger runs a higher speed with lots of vertical feet I would say they are dead an uninspiring, but sill not that limiting when it comes to matching your buddys speed. You have enough meat under your feet to handle change direction and avoid collisions and there is a certain kind of damping to the ski which makes the chatter bearable. So, they get the job done so that you don't necessarily have to pay for the first round of beer on the after ski. But that about it.

[anthill]

http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/9574/volklsanoukwt4.th.png (http://img227.imageshack.us/my.php?image=volklsanoukwt4.png)

They look like this. :D

[Goatboy]

Just chiming in... Yes, Sanouks are really, really super fun on any kind of soft snow :D . Much more float than Gotamas, very bouncy and a helluva lot more manouverable than you'd think. Still stable at speed, though.

Alas, they don't make skis like that anymore. Why?

But today a storm had scoured the mountain, turning all the pow into hard, wind-packed sastrugi crap with some icy patches in between. Now the Nukes were not so fun anymore, and leaning into a high-speed carve on ice just made them go straight ahead, leaving my ass whipped.

Still, bring back the Sanouk!

[mr_gyptian]

Been reading all the old Sanouk threads I could find and I'm thinking about pulling the trigger on a pair. Just wodering if anyone that skis in the PNW can give some more detailed opinions. I know they're super soft, so was wonding how they'd be for heavier PNW pow and wind affected snow. I see a lot of people at Whistler with Madens (similar flex), but not too many Sanouks. I weigh approx 165, only ski WB, and these would be a powder only ski. Thoughts?


there is a pair of 193's on sale at Sports Authority in Dillon for around $400.

there are also ladie's size Sumo's for about $450.

[GBB]

Are you guys going to mount them straight or with the duck stance?
What exactly does the duck stance do?

[GapersGoHome]

x2 on wanting to know about the duck stance... I know it's probably obsolete, as they were the fattest thing out there when they first came out - wasn't the idea to help people ski firm snow who didn't really know how to ski a fat ski on groomers? From what i understand, it's supposed to mimic the natural duck stance we all have (Fischer did it with their SomaTec boots, too), and make pressuring the edges easier...

[Bandit Man]

I'm going straight stance somewhere between +1 and +2. Forget the duck stance.

[Bandit Man]

Mine arrived today (stoked!)...but I have a question, are people using the "I" mark on the sidewall or the line on the topsheet (that is part of the duck stance-o-meter)?? The "I" mark is about 5-mm ahead of the other, so maybe it isn't that big of a deal in the scheme of things.:confused:

Want to mount them tonight for use tomorrow, so feedback is appreciated.

[zion zig zag]

I got mine today. I was going to mount mine 1cm ahead of the I on the sidewall.

[spthomson]

Mine arrived today (stoked!)...but I have a question, are people using the "I" mark on the sidewall or the line on the topsheet (that is part of the duck stance-o-meter)?? The "I" mark is about 5-mm ahead of the other, so maybe it isn't that big of a deal in the scheme of things.:confused:

Want to mount them tonight for use tomorrow, so feedback is appreciated.

wondering about the I vs. the topsheet line as well.

Leaning toward mounting them right on the line (whichever one I should use)...

[Bandit Man]

Just mounted them +1.5 of the "I" or +2 of the topsheet mark. Will report back tomorrow on how they do in the uber-deep piling up in the Cascades right now. :fmicon:

[El Chupacabra]

Got mine today too.

Impressions:

1) they look skinny
2) they're stiffer-flexing than I expected

[spthomson]

Just mounted them +1.5 of the "I" or +2 of the topsheet mark. Will report back tomorrow on how they do in the uber-deep piling up in the Cascades right now. :fmicon:

May I ask why you chose +2? Definitely report back. I probably won't get to mount mine until early next week. Granted, our snow conditions are different, still appreciate the input...

El C-

I'm guessing you have fatter in the quiver? This is now the fattest ski I own. Tails seemed non-noodley, given what I was expecting - tips are definitely soft - but should be money for the pow.

[El Chupacabra]

El C-

I'm guessing you have fatter in the quiver? This is now the fattest ski I own. Tails seemed non-noodley, given what I was expecting - tips are definitely soft - but should be money for the pow.

Tips & tails on the Sanouks felt soft, but it stiffened up underfoot a lot more than I expected (I thought they might be like the K2 Kahuna/ Made'n, which are noodley everywhere).

Biggest skis I have now are Sumos and Praxis. I don't need the Sanouks, but I wanted a pair a few years back, and for $200....

[StormDay]

El Chup: When hand flexing, I have noticed a bit a variation in the stiffness of the skis. With the ones I have there is more difference within a pair then between different model years. Fortunately, the difference is not noticeable when skiing.

When skiing them, the ski feels stiff from just in front of the toe piece through the tail. So the boot dead spot actually makes the ski a little more functional on the groomer back to the lift or any time you need get an edge in on hard snow. You can get the them to carve on groomers. Just do long turns and don’t put any pressure on the tips, focus on skiing the middle and tail of the ski.

I have mine mounted straight and on the line (which for the blue topsheet and Samurai ones is the same as the “I”).

You guys got a great ski at an amazing price. Have fun.

BTW: I really like everything HitMe has said about the ski in this thread. Particularly, that it was “breed from snow itself.” When it is deep, the Sanouk does have that “one with the snow” feel.

[Kroenen]

I haven't fondled the Sanouks, but I've always thought the "I" on the sidewall would be more precise than a line integrated in the top sheet graphics, at least on traditional sandwich construction skis.

[hemas]

I haven't fondled the Sanouks, but I've always thought the "I" on the sidewall would be more precise than a line integrated in the top sheet graphics, at least on traditional sandwich construction skis.

Yep, the marks on the topsheet are printed on the material, where as the sidewall marks aer stamped post pressing.

[sfotex]

Mine are stiffer then they thought they would be. Now the question is, what to mount them up with?

[anthill]

Is the consensus to fuck the duck?

[GapersGoHome]

seriously, nobody has these mounted up duck?

Paging plywood....

[JoeStrummer]

I'm leaving mine at Bent Gate with a pair of Dynafits and a note that says "surprise me!"

[rabbit]

The "duckstance", Soma(Fischer) or "Aggressor(Nordica) etc stance makes biomechanical sense at first and second glance.
That's why I tried it. Then I talked it through with a knowledgeable skiracing coach, and remounted my lotus 120s straight.

The "toes out" stance is used in skiracing because it allows the skier to get into the fall line a little bit quicker. The fall line is the only place you can pick up speed. Thus it gives an advantage. It makes the skis feel very aggressive, not my cup of tea for free/bigmountain skiing.
As for the advantage of a biomechanical stance. There really is none. Or rather, it's very limited.
Q: For how long (in milliseconds), during each turn, is the rest of your body positioned so that the "duckstance" actually give a biomechanical advantage?
A: Not very long at all.

An argument can be made for the fact that landing big drops should be better in a "duckstance" but if you have been skiing normalstance for your entire life it will take some getting used to for the advantage to materialize.

Anyone care to add something to this? Please do, its always interesting to get another angle on things and who knows? I might have missed something.

My 2 cents...
-peace
/r

ps/ love the sanouks. mount them on the line. supersweet. /ds

[Snow7]

I've got two powder days on my new Sanouks, including Super Bowl Sunday at Mt. Rose. What an incredibly fun pair of skis. As others have said, they are great in the powder but not so good when things start getting really chopped up. No worries, I just changed them out around lunchtime. There is a lot of ski in front of the bindings, so when I swapped to my Ants, it felt like I had put on a pair of slaloms. It is interesting watching the tips of Sanouks flap in the breeze while cruising the hardpack back to the lift.

BTW mounted on the line. 6" 190 lbs.

[El Chupacabra]

I've got two powder days on my new Sanouks, including Super Bowl Sunday at Mt. Rose.

I saw a guy at Rose last Sunday on the brown woodburn-graphic Sanouks -- only 1 person on them -- you?

I had black Sumos & a pack. Saw another person with Sumos skiing way faster than me... guess he liked the snow too.

[hemas]

Mine are stiffer then they thought they would be. Now the question is, what to mount them up with?

Teles... über sweet rig when the snow is good...

[Snow7]

I saw a guy at Rose last Sunday on the brown woodburn-graphic Sanouks -- only 1 person on them -- you?

I had black Sumos & a pack. Saw another person with Sumos skiing way faster than me... guess he liked the snow too.

I'm sure that was me as I didn't see any other woody Sanouks. Green Fate jacket and a really red race helmet. I'll look out for you in the future.

[anthill]

Tuning question: Could sharpening to a more aggressive base/side angle do anything to improve the Sanouk's poor handling on hardpack/ice? Or would extra-grabby edges just be more of a liability when the tips start getting tossed around in crud or refrozen stuff?

[BSS]

I got a pair from 666 and mounted them up in the parking lot yesterday morning. I used 916's in the holes already drilled (on the line) just to get a feel for the mount point before I decided if I wanted to move it up or not. Factory line seemed like a pretty good spot to me, but I'll have to take them out on a pow day to be 100% on that. I Skied them for about 4 hours in pretty much all types of snow. To echo what others have said, the tips are flappy but I also found the midsection and tails to be far stiffer than I expected. They're fun skis, and man they can really get going fast. I didn't take them in any really tight chutes just because of the length and I didn't really feel like testing my luck on if I could get them to hold an edge or not in the no fall stuff. I found them to be pretty manageable in chop, breakable crust, dust on crust, chickenheads, packed pow. Not really outstanding at any of them, but like I said - manageable enough for me to call them a half-assed all mountain ski. I think they might actually make a decent touring ski, so I'll probably put the Naxos on after I ski them in the pow and decide for sure on the mount point.

Overall impression - pleasantly surprised.

[GBB]

I got a pair from 666 and mounted them up in the parking lot yesterday morning. I used 916's in the holes already drilled (on the line) just to get a feel for the mount point before I decided if I wanted to move it up or not.
I thought 666 had his mounted up +2 or +3, or did you redrill?

[BSS]

I thought 666 had his mounted up +2 or +3, or did you redrill?

Nope, you're right. I just measured. They're +38mm with bindings adjusted for my boots. He must have drilled for about a 325 BSL. Mine are 310. Anyways, felt like a pretty good spot to me.

[cooltsi]

Tuning question: Could sharpening to a more aggressive base/side angle do anything to improve the Sanouk's poor handling on hardpack/ice? Or would extra-grabby edges just be more of a liability when the tips start getting tossed around in crud or refrozen stuff?

I've had nothing but good luck with this tactic in the past. When I've had issues with wider skis on the hardpack a good sharp tune helps immensely although nothing can be done with the stability when the ski is flat. Stability while on edge is improved and groomers become much better. I've never noticed a difference with higher edge angles in the crud. It's my opinion that edge angles become oblivious to soft snow.

I think it's interesting that BSS is at +4 and liked them. He and I have similar skiing styles, body size and past likes and dislikes in skis(by my recollection).

[JoeStrummer]

I skied them today at A-Basin and Loveland today. I'm tossing out the A-Basin testing since I couldn't actually see anything while making turns.

At Loveland I hit Chairs 4 and 8 for a couple of hours, skiing mostly windblown powder over varied terrain (i.e soft snow transitioning to cookies and moguls and then back to soft snow.) I thought they skied great, got going really fast but they felt stable. No chatter or floppiness (at least no more than my Goliaths.) Looking forward to skiing them for their deisgned purpose but I thought they were lots of fun and easy to drive. They are mounted on the line with Dynafits.

[Wetdog]

I skied them today at A-Basin and Loveland today. I'm tossing out the A-Basin testing since I couldn't actually see anything while making turns.

At Loveland I hit Chairs 4 and 8 for a couple of hours, skiing mostly windblown powder over varied terrain (i.e soft snow transitioning to cookies and moguls and then back to soft snow.) I thought they skied great, got going really fast but they felt stable. No chatter or floppiness (at least no more than my Goliaths.) Looking forward to skiing them for their deisgned purpose but I thought they were lots of fun and easy to drive. They are mounted on the line with Dynafits.

Having quite an interest in both of these skis, how would you compare them?

[easyrdr]

So you punks in on the ptex buy how do you like yer mounts? I'm getting ready to put freerides on mine either on the line or +1 (5'10 175lbs). Also curious anyone take some good air with these things-do the tails screw up landings?

[02sedona]

[QUOTE= Also curious anyone take some good air with these things-do the tails screw up landings?[/QUOTE]


Usually it is not the ski that messes up landings. To answer your question the are awesome pow skis and landings can get a bit tail heavy if you are too far back on the ski.

[JoeStrummer]

Having quite an interest in both of these skis, how would you compare them?

Goliaths are faster. They made my Kilowatts obsolete and i didn't think I would find a better ski. They don't release from the turn as easily as the Sanouks - I don't feel like I have to work AT ALL with the Sanouks. I like the Goliaths better for blasting through junky or harder snow but the Sanouks are better than I was led to believe in variable and harder snow. I have had a couple of near orgasmic experiences with the Sanouks in the deeper stuff.

There are people around here that are way more eloquent about ski reviews that I am but I give a slight to significant edge to the Sanouk in the softer stuff. The Goliath is still my preferred ski for going fast when I'm not sure what I might encounter.

[anthill]

Got mine today. That shovel is so big the skis could almost be called rockers. Plan to mount them on the line and enjoy the extreme geometry.

[drt]

I mounted mine at +3 and so far they are a blast... oh ya, 5'11" ~185...

[Bandit Man]

Adding my two cents...

Finally got the chance to get out on mine today since spring left for the day and we got 10" of fluff at Stevens. In short I LOVE MY SANOUKS!! Mounted them +2 with 914's and they felt perfect. I was worried about the length, but they don't feel long at all. I was amazed at how easy they float and how smeary they are in turns. I was worried on my initial run in the trees that the length would mainfest itself, but they are so quick I just ended up having tons of fun darting around in the glades.

Super fats and funshapes do give these a run for their money, but now I get why these have such a "cult following".

[SkiBumOfVT]

I have officially fallen in love with my sanouks
I skied them at Jackson Hole around the 1-3 of the month and had a hard time because of the snow.

But then headed to targhee with 1' of pow and loved them
then headed to bridger bowl and storm skied in 9" of blower 4 percent and these things are sick :yourock: :yourock: