Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 63
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Golden, Colorado
    Posts
    5,868

    PSA: New DPS Lotus 138 SE (blue) Pure2 for $274 shipped

    It's more about the width and large hucks than anything - though the length would make it awful in several of the exits where I often ski - lots of bushwhacking brush.

    Totally agree on stiff fully rockered skis. I love my extra stiff Kusalas (they could be a bit longer). I suppose I could see myself using the 138s on a few wolf creek days a season. We didn't have any of those this year, though.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,488
    I need a little help. I'm 6'1" 220 lbs. I love the ON3P Wrenegade in 191 (11-12) and Billy Goat in 191 (12-13). Do you think the Lotus 138 in a 192 is too short for me? Ski would be for deep days only....

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    6,748
    Maybe one of the bigger guys here will chime in?

    If you pick up a new pair of 192s, you could probably trade them for a used pair of 202's or 192 Flex3's. Somebody smaller might have gone too burly and is looking to downsize.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    monument
    Posts
    6,910
    Quote Originally Posted by DeepHelmet View Post
    I need a little help. I'm 6'1" 220 lbs. I love the ON3P Wrenegade in 191 (11-12) and Billy Goat in 191 (12-13). Do you think the Lotus 138 in a 192 is too short for me? Ski would be for deep days only....
    with R/R skis I say go long and stiff.
    i have 202s and while they are only flex 2 they hand flex like I-beams.

    145# 5'10"
    In search of the elusive artic powder weasel ...

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    8,404
    6'3, 180. 202 138's are fine, though can be a little intimidating on the trail back to the lift. Long skis truck.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Bay Area / Tahoe
    Posts
    2,474
    From my experience on my powderboards and talking to keith about R/R- stiff is definitely good because the skis don't rely on the flex to float or be maneuverable.
    I think weight more so than height should be factored into length- if you're a smaller guy >165-170lbs 192 is probably fine. Bigger than that the extra length is nice in the deep stuff

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    694
    Quote Originally Posted by DeepHelmet View Post
    I need a little help. I'm 6'1" 220 lbs. I love the ON3P Wrenegade in 191 (11-12) and Billy Goat in 191 (12-13). Do you think the Lotus 138 in a 192 is too short for me? Ski would be for deep days only....

    I'm also 6'1" and 215 pound as we speak. I ski a 138 p3 spoon in 192 cm and can't really say anything about the difference between that version and prior versions. The other skis in my quiver are RPC 192 and R2 122, both in 192. I also haven't been on any ON3P skis (but would like to, I just can't get them around here) so for what it's worth:

    The 138 ski shorter then the RPC and R2 122. I wouldn't mind a p3 spoon 202, if there was such a thing. That said, I find the 138 in 192 to be very manoeuvrable in trees as long as it's untracked, even at slow speed. But the most important thing, they ski better the faster you go on them. They excel at skiing fast in steep terrain. I haven't been on any ski that will let me do high speed pow surfing like the 138, even if they feel slightly shorter.

    I'd say go for it.
    Last edited by LiveLarger; 05-19-2015 at 03:05 PM.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,488
    Thanks for the insight guys. I'll probably grab a pair. If I change my mind, worse case scenario I sell them here for what I paid.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Park City
    Posts
    5,013
    Hey Deephelmet we can switch up at the bird if it snows next year! I grabbed the 197 lotus 120 pures!


    Killing it with the 4-5 year old crowd!
    I rip the groomed on tele gear

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,488
    Sounds like a plan man. I'm already praying for snow.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    SLUT
    Posts
    2,039
    My "202" SEs showed up and the topsheets say 200cm. I'm not super concerned about 2cm, just wondering if maybe they were blems, hence the price? Has anyone else had a similar experience? Seems like I recall a thread from awhile back that had something about DPS length / topsheet discrepancies but I can seem to find anything.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    7,243
    My hybrid 138 had small weight difference on each one. Everything else was solid so maybe just an anomaly.
    I need to go to Utah.
    Utah?
    Yeah, Utah. It's wedged in between Wyoming and Nevada. You've seen pictures of it, right?

    So after 15 years we finally made it to Utah.....


    Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues

    8, 17, 13, 18, 16, 18, 20, 19, 16, 24, 32, 35

    2021/2022 (13/15)

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    6,748
    What do they measure? Maybe they should have been listed as 200cm, and 202 was a typo. Someone more familiar with the DPS line might know.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Dirty E
    Posts
    1,047
    Not really an issue, but their ad shows the 13/14 model and you get the 12/13s of the 138 hybrids. Don't care, just an FYI.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Sun Valley, ID
    Posts
    2,527
    Quote Originally Posted by OldSchool1080s View Post
    My "202" SEs showed up and the topsheets say 200cm. I'm not super concerned about 2cm, just wondering if maybe they were blems, hence the price? Has anyone else had a similar experience? Seems like I recall a thread from awhile back that had something about DPS length / topsheet discrepancies but I can seem to find anything.
    Bet they are fake. Bet they are all fake. If I was ski fab shop in China I sure as hell would fake stooooopid price skis.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Da Norf Lake
    Posts
    2,449
    Man, that is a tough one. If you couldn't afford both, would you get the 120 Pures or the 138 Hybrids for pure powder touring in Tahoe?

    Also, if it's the same manufacturing and they're just ripping off DPS' logo, R&D and customers, what's wrong with some counterfeits?

    Marshall Olson care to comment on whether they are legit?
    Even sometimes when I'm snowboarding I'm like "Hey I'm snowboarding! Because I suck dick, I'm snowboarding!" --Dan Savage

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    LV-426
    Posts
    21,126
    The Spoons I got sure look real, and really spooned. It'd be pretty hard to fake this.

    Lepistoir - I have old Lotus 120 pure as my main BC ski. I haven't toured on any 138s, but I wanted the 120 instead of the 138 for a BC ski for the flatter tail for skinning.
    Quote Originally Posted by powder11 View Post
    if you have to resort to taking advice from the nitwits on this forum, then you're doomed.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    6,748
    Lol, highly doubt a DPS dealer (the Gear Co-Op) would be selling fake DPS skis.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    SLUT
    Posts
    2,039
    Hahaha this thread is taking off in the ridiculous direction. They came packaged just like my other RPC 112s that I grabbed from Marshall himself. I'm sure they are legit, just wasn't sure on the 202 vs 200. Haven't put a tape on them yet.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Golden, Colorado
    Posts
    5,868
    Quote Originally Posted by CaliBrit View Post
    Bet they are fake. Bet they are all fake. If I was ski fab shop in China I sure as hell would fake stooooopid price skis.
    ^^^^ jealous

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Sun Valley, ID
    Posts
    2,527

    PSA: New DPS Lotus 138 SE (blue) Pure2 for $274 shipped

    Quote Originally Posted by Lindahl View Post
    ^^^^ jealous
    Ha! Just stirring the pot. I have promised myself that I will never own a dps ski, even though I would love to try a 138. Their marketing stance and brand arrogance just pisses me off.

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Sun Valley, ID
    Posts
    2,527
    You got to think though. Cosmetic imitating is not that hard. And little details like missing the actual length is a normal cue for a fake in other markets.....

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    7,243
    So I went bananas on STP skis and bought DPS 138 hybrid
    Anybody interested in DPS hybrid 138 for $300. Straight up my cost of $268 and $32 to ship. Let me know
    I need to go to Utah.
    Utah?
    Yeah, Utah. It's wedged in between Wyoming and Nevada. You've seen pictures of it, right?

    So after 15 years we finally made it to Utah.....


    Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues

    8, 17, 13, 18, 16, 18, 20, 19, 16, 24, 32, 35

    2021/2022 (13/15)

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Da Norf Lake
    Posts
    2,449
    120s are gone and someone wised up about the price on the 138s --> now $974
    Even sometimes when I'm snowboarding I'm like "Hey I'm snowboarding! Because I suck dick, I'm snowboarding!" --Dan Savage

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Dirty E
    Posts
    1,047
    Quote Originally Posted by lepistoir View Post
    120s are gone and someone wised up about the price on the 138s --> now $974
    ^anyone know how to make Amazon accept bacon sammiches?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •