Feeler: WTB Wailer 99 pure or similar

**sethschmautz** · 05-24-2015, 11:17 PM

Just a preliminary check to see what may be out there in one of the following (or similar) skis.

Looking for mid 180s to low 190s in length, approx 99 underfoot. Approx 8 pounds for the pair. Would prefer a flat tail, but it isn't a deal breaker. Looking fit camber underfoot with early rise or rocker in the tip. I am open to alternatives. I bought RPCs to replace RPs, so would like something a little on the stiffer side. Would probably be interested in matching skins if available.

1. Wailer 99 pure
2. Volkl Nanuq
3. Dynastar Cham 94 hm
4. Praxis Yeti
5. Others?

Seth

**whatsupdoc** · 05-25-2015, 12:07 AM

Shorter than you were looking for but I'll throw it out there anyways. 180 G3 synapse 101. Excellent shape. Drop me a pm if you're interested.

Edited to add: skins available as well

**alive** · 05-25-2015, 08:46 AM

If you were looking to mount Radicals of some type on there I have a set of pure 3 in minty shape 3 days on them. Was thinking $550. us?

**1000-oaks** · 05-25-2015, 09:35 AM

A bit wider than 99mm, but ticks most of the boxes otherwise.
DPS Wailer 105 Pure3 Carbon Fiber 185cm

**sethschmautz** · 05-25-2015, 01:10 PM

[QUOTE=alive;4496569]If you were looking to mount Radicals of some type on there I have a set of pure 3 in minty shape 3 days on them. Was thinking $550. us?/QUOTE]

What size are these? Looks like two toe mounts and a single heel mount. Inserts?

Seth

**alive** · 05-25-2015, 01:16 PM

Yea, they have inserts for 297 BSL just behind recommended and 317 BSL for + 1. Gives a few different mounting options for you. 184 cm with the textured topsheet. any questions, let me know...

**sethschmautz** · 05-25-2015, 03:40 PM

Originally Posted by 1000-oaks

A bit wider than 99mm, but ticks most of the boxes otherwise.
DPS Wailer 105 Pure3 Carbon Fiber 185cm

That's a great suggestion. Thanks! I like the flat tail...

**1000-oaks** · 05-25-2015, 05:02 PM

Assume you watched the video? Does a good job showing the tail, & the Pure3 is 1,865g.

**sethschmautz** · 05-25-2015, 07:33 PM

Originally Posted by 1000-oaks

Assume you watched the video? Does a good job showing the tail, & the Pure3 is 1,865g.

Weird. . . on my phone this video showed up as a middle eastern news feed. Very odd.

Yes! I did see this video and liked the flat tail that it highlighted...

Thanks,

Seth

**Doremite** · 05-25-2015, 08:54 PM

Pure3 99s are powerful as f*aack. Love that ski but intrigued by the new 105s. Also prefer more bite on the tail.

**plugboots** · 05-26-2015, 08:41 AM

FYI, I skied the 99, (mine), and the 105, (rental), back to back a couple months ago. They are completely different skis. Mostly the 105 is a straighter, waaaaay stiffer, feels-a-lot-bigger ski.

**sethschmautz** · 05-26-2015, 09:50 AM

Originally Posted by Doremite

Pure3 99s are powerful as f*aack. Love that ski but intrigued by the new 105s. Also prefer more bite on the tail.

Doremite, maybe you should sell me those Pure 3 99s and buy yourself the 105s on eBay. :-)

Seth

**sethschmautz** · 05-26-2015, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by plugboots

FYI, I skied the 99, (mine), and the 105, (rental), back to back a couple months ago. They are completely different skis. Mostly the 105 is a straighter, waaaaay stiffer, feels-a-lot-bigger ski.

Which version of the 99 do you have?

**plugboots** · 05-26-2015, 12:17 PM

Special order green ones, 192cm, the year before they added the weights to the tips. I guess they'd be Pure 2?
I was skiing down Paintbrush at Jackson on the 105's, and an instructor pulled up to me and asked how I liked them, and I said they're OK, or whatever, and he said yeah they're pretty stiff. We pretty much agreed on the differences. Dude ripped btw.
Or another example: I skied hoopsgap/mushroom over and over, and the 99s are just dead easy to fling around. The 105s are more work for sure, but would be about perfect in the Hobacks after it's been skied out a bit. Crud busters.
I was bored and found this review. He explains the differences better than me maybe. http://blistergearreview.com/gear-re...dps-wailer-105

**Doremite** · 05-26-2015, 04:42 PM

My 99 first gen Pure 3s are crazy stiff (184s). I am shocked to hear the 105s are materially stiffer.

Only skied older gen 105 hybrids and way softer than my 99s. Realize the pure a different beast but still find this hard to believe.

Just realized plug was on the prior year pre-pure3 layup. You'd have to ask someone with more DPS nerdery if the Pure3 is a stiffer build. Guessing yes. Also that review if for the T2 105 which is the ballsy metal version. The Pure3 should be much easier to manhandle due to weight differential. I have heard the T2s are chargers so no surprise they would demand a lot more drive (not necessarily precision) than a pure build. Plug, curious if you demoed the T2. If so your assessment makes a lot more sense to me. I've skied Hybrid 105s a ton and found them incredibly quick and agile but likely a very different animal than the new T2 Hybrid.

Seth, alive's price on minty 99s looks fair to me. That said I would research the Pure 105s more if you like more of a flat tail directional charger. 99s are powerful but pretty turny. I tele them but would def go 105s for alpine. That said to each his own.

**plugboots** · 05-28-2015, 09:20 AM

I was on pure 3 105s. They are very different from the old 105s. The only diff between pure 2 and 3 is the weights in the tail and tip. That's why I bought the green specials, as the new pure 3 s were coming and DPS gave me a deal. They flap more at speed but I wanted a couloir ski to replace my old Wailer 95s. I realize the blister review was for the hybrid 105, but he describes how the 105 shape and design felt. They agree with me about them being crud buster skis, and that's how they felt to me. I was surprised, since I was looking to buy the 105s as a BC replacement for my 112s. I don't want that stiff a ski for BC.

**sethschmautz** · 05-28-2015, 11:48 AM

All good info. Thanks guys.

Can either of you comment on how the pure 3 99s and the new pure 3 105s compare to the RPCs?

I bought RPCs to replace my RPs and am very happy that I did. Longer radius and stiffer. If the 105s are like a narrow version of the RPCs in terms of stiffness and turning, that may be the ticket. I didn't hate the RPs, and I could see the advantage of shorter radius for this ski, but I can also see the benefits of having something like the RPCs.

Thanks,

Seth

**plugboots** · 05-28-2015, 02:15 PM

I've never skied the RPCs.

**Mofro261** · 05-28-2015, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by plugboots

The only diff between pure 2 and 3 is the weights in the tail and tip.

The terminology gets a little confusing, as the older "pure" carbon models came in 2 flexes, flex 2 (pure 2) and flex 3. I have owned and skied all 3, albeit in the L120. The new "pure 3" has a similar flex profile/stiffness to an older flex 3 ski and is weighted in the tip and tail, and will be much more in line with an RPC than the flex noodle that is the RP.

**plugboots** · 05-28-2015, 11:03 PM

I forgot about the 2 flexes. I don't think the 99 came in the 2 flexes since it was a newer model, maybe. I'll have to look, but I don't think mine say "flex2" like my old Wailer 95s do.

**Doremite** · 05-29-2015, 05:46 AM

Good info, plug.

Seth, my take is if you have RPC the 99s might provide the quiver diversity you are looking for. 99s will be more similar to the RPs (although learning flex 3 much stiffer than 2) and 105s even more of a classic directional charger than RPCs. Based on what plug is saying 99s/105s very different skis so decision should be an easy one depending on preference and needs. That said I still can't decide if I want to move onto the 105s!