Mounting point Obsethed

**arne_and** · 10-08-2008, 07:55 AM

(Yes, I have searched and read some posts about this.)

I will buy the Obsethed 179. I have read that the mount point is considered to be unusually far ahead, so I am looking for some mount point recommendations that fit me and my style of skiing.

I will not use the skis in the park, or do any jumping worth talking about, or ride switch. I only care about the skiing performance.

My main priorities are:
- Good performance in powder/loose snow
- Good performance in real life (i.e. often crappy) conditions: tracked snow, breaking crust, mank, slush
- Acceptable performance on hard pack

I weight about 150 lbs plus clothing and gear.
I ski offpiste whenever possible. Open terrain, trees, colouirs.
I will use them for BC, meaning conditions will be varied and sub-ideal.
My skiing style is not very aggressive (although I like to push myself, e.g. occasionally venturing into 40-45 degree colouirs).

My present ski is Gotama 05/06 model (black with wide back tip) mounted at the all mountain position. That position seems good to me, but I have not experimented with other positions.

What are your recommendations for binding mounting position based on this?
Please only reply if you have actually skied the Obsethed (or have another good reason to think you have good advice to give).

**J_money13** · 10-08-2008, 09:14 AM

from the sounds of it I would say +4 --> +6. +4 is very much all mountain, very traditional and nothing risky about it. +6 is kind of a best of both worlds. Far enough forward to take advantage of some of the "advantages" i.e., better switch, personally better feel in the bumps and because of the pivot point a better flex pattern on the ski.

That said you're not going to ski backwards, sounds like no jumps (air) or anything of that sort so +4 may give you what you want best.

**glademaster** · 10-08-2008, 09:19 AM

The Obsethed mounting point, at least in the 179, is different from previous Seths. Check out this thread for more info: http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...light=obsethed

I'm ordering a pair of 179's today and I think I'll mount on the line of 1cm back actually, as I don't ride switch except for occasionally screwing around on cat tracks.

**haydukelives** · 10-08-2008, 03:08 PM

john clendenon describes this very well

**arne_and** · 10-09-2008, 12:39 AM

Originally Posted by glademaster

The Obsethed mounting point, at least in the 179, is different from previous Seths. Check out this thread for more info: http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...light=obsethed

I'm ordering a pair of 179's today and I think I'll mount on the line of 1cm back actually, as I don't ride switch except for occasionally screwing around on cat tracks.

Thanks for the reply. Yeah, I read that thread. Especially this caught my eye:

Originally Posted by meatdrink9

Maybe my Obseth'eds are just weird but I mounted them on the recommended line and feel like I have way too much tail and not nearly enough tip. My made'ns are mounted at +2 and they're way the hell back from the recommended mount line on the Obsethed's. I might have to take pics and post. Others who have borrowed my Obsethe'ds have felt the same way.

I am considering mounting back from the recommended line. As I wrote, performance for jumping and switch do not matter at all for me, only "regular" skiing.

**[Sir.Holland]** · 10-09-2008, 06:18 AM

yea i am mounting mine at +5 of suggested i beleive, maybe a lil farther back but i doubt it. however i am doing much different things than you.

if i were u i would go either traditional or maybe +1 or 2 from traditional, but not farther forward than suggested.

**x lurker** · 03-02-2009, 03:07 PM

Reviving thread for a little more discussion of the issue. I mounted my 179's @ +1. Skied 'em one day in 4"-6" of tracked and untracked heavy PNW pow. Seemed extremely short and I often felt like I was gonna go over the handlebars. Tips dove fairly easily. Very turny and grippy on groomers. I never ski switch so I am thinking of moving the binders back a few notches. Anyone mounted them back of the line have any feedback on the differences? I was thinking of moving them back to -1. Can't imagine skiing them at the +5 line everyone was recommending.

**BigLineSeeker** · 03-02-2009, 06:04 PM

I am 5'10ish" and 160ish. I have put two days on my 189s mounted at -1cm. I feel like this is the money spot for me, but like you, I do not ride switch. The soft tip and rocker make them very easy to maneuver at the rearward mount.

**x lurker** · 03-02-2009, 06:21 PM

Thanks for the info. Exactly the type of info I was looking for.

**PuderLuder** · 03-03-2009, 09:11 AM

Originally Posted by arne_and

(Yes, I have searched and read some posts about this.)

I will buy the Obsethed 179. I have read that the mount point is considered to be unusually far ahead, so I am looking for some mount point recommendations that fit me and my style of skiing.

I will not use the skis in the park, or do any jumping worth talking about, or ride switch. I only care about the skiing performance.

My main priorities are:
- Good performance in powder/loose snow
- Good performance in real life (i.e. often crappy) conditions: tracked snow, breaking crust, mank, slush
- Acceptable performance on hard pack

I weight about 150 lbs plus clothing and gear.
I ski offpiste whenever possible. Open terrain, trees, colouirs.
I will use them for BC, meaning conditions will be varied and sub-ideal.
My skiing style is not very aggressive (although I like to push myself, e.g. occasionally venturing into 40-45 degree colouirs).

My present ski is Gotama 05/06 model (black with wide back tip) mounted at the all mountain position. That position seems good to me, but I have not experimented with other positions.

What are your recommendations for binding mounting position based on this?
Please only reply if you have actually skied the Obsethed (or have another good reason to think you have good advice to give).

I have almost the exact same style as the original poster here and just dropped off my new 179 ObSETHed's to be mounted at -1cm from the traditional line with my fritschi's based largely on this and other TGR threads. I'll let you know how it goes.

Puder Luder

**x lurker** · 03-03-2009, 02:10 PM

Thanks PL - please do.

**Tick** · 03-03-2009, 02:45 PM

I mounted mine up on the line for tele sking, so far its working out well.
even at that point there is a ton of tail on this ski!
it skis great in wide open trails but I'm a bit nervous about trying to swing them in the woods. I can't imagine trying that with the even more forward mounting points!

-Tick

**pechelman** · 03-03-2009, 02:47 PM

i have nothing to add that im really surprised people would still be suggesting +3 and +5 when it sounds like the mount line was moved forward about 3cm from past versions.

im under the impression the obsethed suggested 0 is -7 from chord center, whereas the old 0 was about -10.

**x lurker** · 03-03-2009, 08:29 PM

Pech - are you talking about the 08-09 being moved versus the 07-08 or the one just coming out being even further forward?. I'm gonna give mine one more try at current +1 and if nothing changes, go at least to -1. Anyone skied these at -2 or -3?

**Steven S. Dallas** · 03-03-2009, 10:45 PM

Originally Posted by pechelman

i have nothing to add that im really surprised people would still be suggesting +3 and +5 when it sounds like the mount line was moved forward about 3cm from past versions.

The current version is also quite a bit longer than past versions. My '09s are at least 3 cm longer than my '07s.

**pechelman** · 03-03-2009, 10:47 PM

O RLY?

have a picture comparing the length and the mount locations?
like line up the toes laying them on the floor base down and then take pics of the tips and tails?

**Steven S. Dallas** · 03-03-2009, 11:51 PM

Not on me, man- but if you look at MD9s pics, I think you can see that the tails of the Obsethed in that pic are longer than the tips of the Vicious are long. I will take pics when I can, but at present the Vicii are in Mammoth and the ObSetheds are here in LA.

**wizard604** · 03-04-2009, 12:12 AM

Just got some 169's for the wifey. Great powder ski for lighter skiers. I have been looking at the threads on suggested mounting points. It is obvious that there is confusion over the older Seth Vicious vs Obsethed. They definitely have totally different mounting markings. The +5 recommendations seem to be from those who are confusing the older SV (more rearward mounting markings) vs the newer Obsethed (more forward markings). +5 for the Obsethed is way too forward for an all mtn mount.

I'd say mount at 0 if you want to use it for pow or all mtn. If you compare it to other similar size skis, even at 0, it is still quite forward. Having said that, I ended up going +2 for the wife. I skied them today to see how they felt. If they were my skis I would have went with 0, because the tip felt way short & tail too long. The wife seems to like them at +2, so we'll leave them at that for now.

**PuderLuder** · 03-06-2009, 07:19 PM

Originally Posted by x lurker

Reviving thread for a little more discussion of the issue. I mounted my 179's @ +1. Skied 'em one day in 4"-6" of tracked and untracked heavy PNW pow. Seemed extremely short and I often felt like I was gonna go over the handlebars. Tips dove fairly easily. Very turny and grippy on groomers. I never ski switch so I am thinking of moving the binders back a few notches. Anyone mounted them back of the line have any feedback on the differences? I was thinking of moving them back to -1. Can't imagine skiing them at the +5 line everyone was recommending.

Are you reffering to -1 from the "suggested" point or the "traditional" point? For that matter, on this entire thread, what is the reference point that people are talking +/- from?

**karpiel** · 03-06-2009, 08:02 PM

Originally Posted by pechelman

i have nothing to add that im really surprised people would still be suggesting +3 and +5 when it sounds like the mount line was moved forward about 3cm from past versions.

im under the impression the obsethed suggested 0 is -7 from chord center, whereas the old 0 was about -10.

My guess is the recommended line was moved forward due to the tail rocker.

**x lurker** · 03-06-2009, 11:24 PM

I'm not sure what you are referring to by the "suggested point." On mine, there are two points at either end of a scale on the sidewall. The rearward point is denoted the "traditional" point and the forward mark is denoted the "chord center" if I remember correctly. Mine are mounted with the boot center +1 of the rearward "traditional" point, which I felt was too far forward and cannot imagine pushing the mount closer to chord center. Maybe that's cause I'm just too old school. I am thinking of going 1 or 2 back from the rearward "traditional" point but am waiting for a little more feedback and one more day on them as they are now. Hope that helps. Let me know exactly where yours are mounted and then how they ski

**karpiel** · 03-07-2009, 10:55 AM

Mine had...

Chord center
Recommended
Traditional

**x lurker** · 03-07-2009, 08:46 PM

Looked at mine again. 0 = traditional. +7.5 = chord center. No recommended mark.

**BigLineSeeker** · 03-07-2009, 09:21 PM

I am at -8.5cm from chord center (-1 from traditional) on my 189s and love them there.

ArtVandalay · 03-07-2009, 09:50 PM

Skied both 179 and 189 quite a few times....always take them out from my buddies ski shop so I assume they were both mounted at recommended (I think that is +3 from traditional, but dont hold me to it) for the demo crowd. The 179s at recommended do not have nearly enough tip so would do well from mounting back from there....either traditional or behind (-1 feels right). The 189s were fine at recommended but I would probably go with BigSeekers reco if I bought them.

dont ski switch
5'11''
185