[upallnight]

Originally Posted by Dromond

Has anyone on the board mounted these up with freerides or naxos? With the benefit of lighter weight it seems like that combo could make a great powder day big gun/soft snow sidecountry/occasional soft snow touring setup.

Originally Posted by marshalolson

UAN has 120s mounted w. dynafits, and hev has FR +'s on his.

i personally can't wait to put dukes on mine.

OK... so, I was waiting to get some more days on my 120s before posting a review, as I'd rather supply more meaningful commentary, and that's only possible with more time.

Take this review for what you will -- given that it was only during a span of 2 days. By the time the skis arrived at my door (pretty much Feb), and by the time I got around to drilling holes in 'em, it was late into a low-snow year.

Snow conditions
Conditions during those 2 days were the best we've had all year -- the two biggest powder days back-to-back. I mounted the skis in a hurry, because our season hasn't given us a ton of opportunity to pull out these kinds of skis. I got these skis hoping they would become my go-to BC pow ski. I wanted to shake them out for a couple days at or near the resort/sidecountry before taking them for long trips.

If you knew where things were filling in, conditions were as much as above-the-knee pow (which, on a 120mm-waisted ski, is quite a bit). During those 2 days, I skied deep pow, moderate pow, a few inches of pow over groomers, cut-up stuff, some (sun-)crust and scraped-off stuff (S-facing steep aspects that had a little new snow that would slide off a firm surface).

I have this feeling that review skis in pow makes for a tough review as most skis ski well in pow (it's easy), and the fact that it's an "epic" day clouds your judgment -- it's easy to assume the ski has something to do with it, when in reality it got lucky to be picked for that day.

So...these were "epic" days indeed, for this year.

[/end of long diatribe]

Equipment, weight, other stuff
I've got Dynafit Comforts (no brakes) mounted to mine, and it is retarded how light these things are. Put 'em on your shoulder and it feels like *nothing* is there. I weighed them before, and while I don't recall the exact weight, I believe they are <10 pounds WITH the bindings. That is just plain silly for their size. For reference, I have a shorter & narrower pair of Seth Vicious w/ Dynafits that weighs 20% more than this setup. I'm skiing these with AT boots...but I ski those AT boots full-time, every day in the winter/spring.

So tell us how the hell they ski, already!
In soft snow, these are great skis. It's definitely easy to "carve", smear, or "slarve" your turns in any amount of soft snow -- and you can do this at speed. In my short review, I wasn't able to find a top speed for them in those conditions (I was limited more by the large amount of new snow than by the ski) -- so it seems they have more speed stability than a Spat. I found they want to go faster than slower (which is cool...so do I ). In tight spaces, they don't pivot as well as a Spat in my experience. I would not expect them to -- Spats have full reverse camber & reverse sidecut, so pivoting and billy-goating in tight spots is where they shine. Spats also seem to accel in dealing with any breakable crust.

The 120s perform really well in the pow and, while not a Spat, can still do well at lower speeds in tight spots, though not quite *as* well.

The 120s are quite light, but they're torsionally very stiff. This is immediately noticeable on firm terrain. I felt like I could set -- and hold -- an edge. This is a good thing. The combination of an injured knee and the rigidity of the ski + Dynafit binding = a very sore knee.

While they were very capable of bombing down groomers, I would not take these out without at least a few inches of fresh. In contrast, I have spent about 20-25 days on EHP 193s this year (w/ NX21s), and I would not (have not) hesitate to bring them out on firmer days.

The Dynafits *could* be a contributing factor, but I found the 120s to be very sensitive to subtle edging movements -- that is, subtle movements either brought you on or off edge, altogether. They seemed to be "binary" in that regard, whereas some other fat skis had more feel of the edge initially hooking up (and you can ride that for a while & release easily) and progressing to a deeper carve. WIth the 120s, I was either on edge -- and on it all the way -- or I was off. This is less an issue with soft snow, but for skiing a long stretch of firm snow (and late in the day inbounds on a pow-day) it is prominent.

My opinion (others may have different thoughts):
* They want to go fast -- really fast -- in soft snow. A definite plus.
* They are not difficult to handle in terms of length (190), width and flex (2) -- light weight probably helps
* At slower speeds this shape is not going to do what a full reverse-camber (reverse/reverse) ski does.
* Their width and shape should be a pretty good indication that they are not designed for hardpack performance (so don't hold that against them). While they were OK on that stuff (and I was able to stand confidently on my edges on steep/exposed/firm lines), they would not be my first choice of fat ski.
* They are so incredibly light, that they will tour very well on the up-track or on your back...and for soft snow/variable conditions/crust, they are definitely a "go-to" ski. They are versatile in terms of the snow they can handle. When I look at my quiver which has 5 skis with touring bindings >99mm waist, I'd probably choose the 120 *every* time.
* I'll keep my EHP 193s for more resort pow days (granted, my home resort tends to have some big, open terrain) as I found them a bit more fun on runouts or the occasional groomer. Could I be happy with 120s in those conditions? Maybe...but I have the luxury of a choice there. They *did* handle that firm terrain -- or the long traverses out of JH sidecountry terrain...they just weren't quite as much fun as the EHP was on that bit.
* They like to stomp and are confidence-inspiring in the air -- although I only took some modest air into soft landings over those 2 days (although their weight causes one to wonder about durability with firmer or back-seat landings)
* Their bases are durable... so far. I definitely hit rocks and charged lines I've wanted to ski all year (knowing full well they would have some rocks under the fresh blanket of snow). Most hits caused nothing more than a tiny scratch, and one firm hit did much less damage than it might have to, say, a Gotama.

My last word on the 120s
If you ski alot in the backcountry and want a big ski that handles well at speed and can arc in all kinds of soft snow & crust, the 120 comes HIGHLY recommended. I really feel like they are THE main option in this category.

If you want a resort pow ski for your quiver (and have something 105 or less), then these are worth considering -- although the rider in this category has more options to consider.

There's at least 1-2 months of skiing left this year. Why are you hanging up these skis?
I'd love to take mine out more and on some longer tours to give better feedback... but it seems that spring is in full effect (50s tomorrow??? ). While you never know what the weather will bring around here, we're definitely heading to warmer days and there's more ground exposed (meaning any new snow melts fast). Plus, it's time for me to stop skiing on a damaged knee, call it a season at about 100-110 days, and schedule surgery. I'll likely have to hang up the sticks in a week. [I reserve the right to recover from surgery fast and do some tours in the event of a good spring! ]

I hope this helps some folks out.