Thread: Kneissl Tankers (Thanks Yossarian!)

My Tankers showed up at my door on Friday, very unexpected as the tracking report showed them still in Vancouver.

I was happy.

I was supposed to be in Montana all week skiing this week, but plans changed and I ended up busting out of LA at 10:00 Friday night for Mammoth. Threw the Tankers, bindings, my cordless dill, and my 4.1mm bit in the truck as well. Mounted them up on Saturday morning in the Mammoth parking lot on my tailgate. Got plenty of looks and an atta boy. Then I had to let them sit until Sunday so the glue could dry properly.

Took them out Sunday - I was hesitant when I bought them because they were only 180's (even though I'm only a little guy) - but everyone had told me they were a stiff, solid ski. And that they are. I loved 'em. The conditions were chopped crud, and they just ate it up. Fast, stable, and burly. The only gripe I have is that they seem to weigh about 2.3 metric tons each. I did a little hiking and they were a bit of a bear to shoulder -although I'm used to an Atomic 10EX, which is on the complete opposite end of the weight spectrum. But that's a small complaint. On the whole, these fuckers rip.

Thanks for the recommendation, Yossarian - this is defintely a steal at $290 bucks shipped to my door. I'm one happy camper.

Ditto on the above.

Pointedem, wish I knew you would be in Mammoth. There was a big group of us hanging out on Sat. Mattitude, Tarkman, and others. We hit up Hole-in-the-Wall in the afternoon. Ehh. It was so-so.

It was my first days on the Tankers as well. They are one of the best skis I've ever been on. Felt a lot like my XXXs, but stiffer. They are a little heavy, but I felt like I could toss them around OK when they were clamped to my feet. All in all, I'm stoked on the deal.

I was supposed to be in Montana all week, and when that fell through, I made a snap decision to do Mammoth. I did about 4 laps through the Hemlocks on Saturday - the main stuff was fairly cut up, but it's amazing how much deep snow you find if you stick really tight to the trees toward the bottom. Everyone seems to miss the best lines... but I'm okay with that! It wasn't fabulous, but better than a sharp stick in the eye. I imagine hole in the wall was a little sunbaked, huh? I wanted to go hike the Sherwins on Sunday but forgot my snowshoes in my maniacal packing on Friday night.

I didn't noticed the weight of the Tankers when I was skiing, only when I was hiking. The low profile tip makes them look like a DH board - hopefully that won't be a problem when the pow gets that crusty layer and top and the ski gets caught underneath... but I'm so happy with my purchase. I was wary about buying them without a demo ride or anything, but it all worked out. When are you gonna be in Mammy next?

got mine through the same deal, but haven't skied 'em yet. you boys mount them on the mark? they ski ok there?

Yup, T@nkers pretty much rule. Think yours are heavy, I had 920's mounted on mine last year.

Mounted them with freerides this year, much better.

where'd you mount 'em, big boy? esp with the freerides (shim/no shim?). thanks.

hey! great to hear! I ran into another maggot too who had passed the deal on to a friend and was stoked as well, Hugh Jass I think it was.

The low profile tip thing was really ever my only worry about the ski, beyond that, they freakin crush stuff. I had 190s at one point, and to make em nimble and a little quicker/better in the hardpack/variable, I had mounted them forward 1cm. I definitely felt like they submarined in real deep/heavy snow like that.

So, this time, with a pair of the 180s, which are otherwise on the shorter end for me (5'10", 180 lbs or so), I mounted 1cm back. Perfect compromise! Ski is plenty stiff for the crud, so going shorter wasn't an issue, and mounted back juuuust slightly seems to have done the trick with the float issue for me. I can throw em around pretty fast cause they're short, but they're stable enough to run up some good speeds.

So, I'd recommend 1cm back on the 180s for alpine, and on the mark with no front shim for freerides, unless you're a bigger dood, in which case I still might recommend 1cm back with no shim. For what it's worth, anyway. If he sees this post, Foggy will probably give me some shit for mounting bindings off the mark (after all, the ski was designed to be mounted where they put the mark!), but in this case, I think it's a fair adjustment in response to the low profile tip on a stiff pow ski.

Originally Posted by ulty_guy

where'd you mount 'em, big boy? esp with the freerides (shim/no shim?). thanks.

Shim, 1 cm forward. They ski fine and don't submarine.

Well I didn't score my Tankers when you all did, but I did notice the same things earlier this season when I got mine. They definately rip. Got the 180's from Dan the man and have loved them. I really havn't noticed how heavy they are, but they are my first fat ski, so I just figured they would be heavier than I was used too.

Glad to see people enjoying them as much as I have.

Originally Posted by Yossarian

hey! great to hear! I ran into another maggot too who had passed the deal on to a friend and was stoked as well, Hugh Jass I think it was.

Roger that.

Originally Posted by Blurred

Shim, 1 cm forward. They ski fine and don't submarine.

I've got 190s, mounted with Freerides 1 cm forward without the front shim. The ski great. Like them better w/o the shim if I'm inbounds.

yup I say 1cm forward, is the way to go..

I mounted mine straight up with Rossi Axials. They seem perfect to me, but I'm only 5'7" and about a buck sixty, so float wouldn't really be an issue anyway. It seems like if I mounted them back, I might not get the same drive on more firm snow. You can't go wrong either way.