Bluehouse Maven Review

[Core Shot]

Powtron, You can't go wrong at -2cm. You can go to -4cm and still have fun.

Since your skis are mounted, go ski them. At least ski the forward mount for future reference.


I forgot to mention the other great thing. These bases are tough. lots of rocks and no core shots, only a few scrapes.


Final point of reference is PRAXIS
their 185 powder 185cm is 97-100 from TIP, or 85 to 88cm from tail.

[PowTron]

Powtron, You can't go wrong at -2cm. You can go to -4cm and still have fun.

Since your skis are mounted, go ski them. At least ski the forward mount for future reference.

Well, you may not have read my other post, but one of the toe-pieces is angled outwards on the ski, so I am not going to ski them ....otherwise I would have.

So, seeing as they HAVE to be remounted, I am going to move them back and start over.

[gaijin]

BTW, coreshot-

Cheers for the write-up!!

[Core Shot]

A couple final thoughts.

I am big at 6'4" 215lbs, but relatively avg BSL at 325mm.
I may be flexing the ski differently than a lightweight.
Me at the factory stamped line bogging down when I pressured the ball of my foot may not be as much as an issue with a lightweight.

I was more interested in skiing these with high speed GS slarving, drift turns, and not the usual bouncy bouncy Powder Eight Mike Wiegle crap.
In a forward position, powder bouncing should be no problem (again, I never felt like I was going to flip over the bars, just bogged down a lot).
But really, you should be slarving the pow if you own these.

I try not to ski in the backseat, so I didn't notice the tail being short or soft even on hardpack.
Neutral weighting is as far back as I go. I don't really ski from my heels.

EDIT: final final thought. Are all these variations in factory marked boot center due to variance in the tail? e.g., should we all be trusting the marked line on the sidewall?
How do they set those marks?
If they do it in a sidecut shaped jig, then it would be more accurate than holding a tape to the tail.
Even so, 90, 90.5 and 91 seems like a lot of variation between three samples.
Furthermore, the BH website lists 92 as the proper mounting point, and that just seems retarded.

[Core Shot]

Skied the Mavens today, mounted at -.5cm...full review to follow, but if you weigh over 200lbs like me, DO NOT MOUNT THIS FAR FORWARD. Super disappointed with this ski in over 20" today. I CONSTANTLY buried the nose on these and kept flipping over the handlebars.

Review tonight

Ouch.
what a waste of 20 inches.
I think Bluehouse owes you a powder day.

[jon turner]

I mounted mine at 92cm from the tail as specified by BH. This was pretty much dead on the 0 mark on the ski as well and looked to be about the center of running length, but I was just eyeballing that. For all BH skis you should double check the lines as this was an issue with last year's skis as well.

I thought these skis were a blast at 92cm, but I could definitely see going back 2-4 cm as well. I hit some pretty deep pow on Sunday, and I didn't get any tip dive, but I did seem to want to get my weight back slightly. However they were super fun and agile (surprisingly) on the hardpack as well at this mount point. I wanna get a few more days in some deep powder to decide, but I might go back a few cm at some point. I really like how well these carve and spin around at 92 though, so its a toss up for me. I might just go back to 90 to keep them at a good compromise. Reading some of the other posts, it sounds like 88 from the tail might be a solid place to be for powder.

For reference I'm about 6'0" and 185 lbs, so I'm thinking I might not want to go back quite as far as some of the bigger guys on here. I also have these mounted with NX21's, so I don't know how the bar down the middle affects the ride compared to those who are using alpine binders.

Coreshot, are you measuring along the curve of the ski, or along a straight line from the tail to the mount point? I'm assuming along the curve of the ski.

[Core Shot]

Coreshot, are you measuring along the curve of the ski, or along a straight line from the tail to the mount point? I'm assuming along the curve of the ski.

Negative smokey,
All measurements are with the tape straight, not following the ski curve.
(whether a ski is measured from tip or tail, almost all manufacturers use measurements that are taken with the tape in the air, not pressed down to follow the ski curve)

Hook the tape on the tail, touchdown onto the mounting line, and read the number.

Re-measure your skis and report back.
I would be shocked if your ski factory mark is at 92cm.
That is some crazy variance. Sample so far is 90, 90.5 and 91cm

[jon turner]

I'll try and get around to it. About the measurement, check this thread from last year. Bluehouse posted about the Districts, directing to do the measurement following the curve of the ski:

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95706

[jon turner]

Alright, after your post and finding the old bluehouse post, I had to go check. If I measure along the curve it comes out to 92cm. If I measure straight it's 90.5cm. I think BH intends you measure along the curve even if that's not standard.

Good to know I'm not way in front of where you were at, which puts my obs on the skis about in line with yours. Very turny, good rotation, have to put weight a little back in the pow at the 0 line. I'd recommend -2 to -4 from the line depending on your size and how dedicated of a pow ski you're going for.

[Core Shot]

I'll try and get around to it. About the measurement, check this thread from last year. Bluehouse posted about the Districts, directing to do the measurement following the curve of the ski:

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95706

WOW.
That is yet another amateur blunder on their part.

The BH website says nothing about following the curve of the ski.
Most measurements do not, so I assumed keep the tape straight.
Its just too hard to follow the surface of the ski with a regular steel tape measure.
http://bluehouseskis.com/adam/mounting-instructions

That would explain why they say 92cm.
But they should say tape pressed to ski.

edit: cool. At 90.5 measured straight, you and I have the exact same factory stamped line. From that line, I agree that -2 to -4 is a power power setting for a heavier skier.
Thanks for clearing up the 90 vs 92cm confusion. Gold star to you!

[Bluehouse]

Sorry about the confusion with the lines. All the lines this year were set in a jig for each model so the lines should match every pair. The variance should be minimal down to a couple millimeters. The measurements listed were from a design perspective and not from a mounting perspective. I updated the site to indicate that the measurements should be taken following the curve of the ski. I've been away from the forums for awhile but will be monitoring this as well as the others to keep up with question. Let me know if there are any other questions.

[laseranimal]

still loving these skis, went into the trees today to find what would have been an absolutely nasty crust if I wasn't on Mavens. I still can't get over how quick these skis are, and when they get back on the groomed they're silly fun, I've never enjoyed skiing switch as much as I have with these and I'm NO park rat. Plus they're awesome at pulling full on ski ballet 360's

plus they DO handle bumps, they're not world beaters, but they're WAY more fun then stiff boards like Pow Pluses or Exploders

[PowTron]

Good to hear...we will just have to agree to disagree on these skis.

Amazing how we are mounted at the same spot but have completely different experiences. Gotta love different styles, I guess

[gaijin]

Mavens at the shop getting STH 16s at 88cm from the tail for a Falcon 10 285mm under a 5'9" 175lb tronner.

My BOF puts my boot center at 89cm, but decided to go the extra 1cm due to the Delta of the STH, the forward lean of the Falcon, and my racing & bm background.

Will report back once ridden...

[laseranimal]

Good to hear...we will just have to agree to disagree on these skis.

Amazing how we are mounted at the same spot but have completely different experiences. Gotta love different styles, I guess

I've got some thoughts on that coming later, now I'm HORRIFICALLY late for a meeting

[PowTron]

I've got some thoughts on that coming later, now I'm HORRIFICALLY late for a meeting

Cool, I am very interested to hear. I really WANT to like these skis, but it is amzing how they felt when I mounted them at -.5 like you...and I have skied multiple other super fats, and never had this experience (which was not good )

[laseranimal]

ok here's my thoughts

today I went out and skinned K-mart with early wood, Mavens skinned well with the proper width skin attached and we dropped in to find 4-12" of wind deposited blower pow on top of hard bumps and a slight scratchy crust. The mavens ownerized this stuff. Yeah I was slightly in the backseat but it was more to protect against unseen bumps/troughs then a need to float the tips.

fast forward an hour and I'm on the gondi stoked beyond all belief to shred the gnar. I had heard reports that Flume was good the other day and the Cascade headwall looked good so I decided to drop in. First turn was scratchy blown off ice, then into a 2 foot wind-drift, POW over the handlebars. Slightly shaken I collected myself and chalked it up to the fact that I never bothered to reset the heel DIN on my Dukes from the shop set 8.5 to 10. I continued down the run finding lots of variable density snow and weird wind drifts and was completely struggling. I felt like I had to lean WAY in the backseat just to get the tips up, and the skis were completely uncontrollable because the tips were getting bounced and deflected.

To say I was at a loss would be an understatement. How could these skis that I loved so much let me down. I mean not more then an hour ago I had completely slayed on these same boards, now I looked like I could barely ski.

So next lap I went back to the same run I had hit this morning. It was more tracked but I still found a reasonable facsimile of earlier conditions and the mavens performed as before, slaying everything in their path. I ducked into the neighboring woods and got the same results, unbelievable quickness edge to edge and amazing float, even at slow speeds. I took yet another lap into the woods just to confirm that I hadn't lost the ability to ski and again the Mavens performed as expected.

I was racking my brain to figure out what the heck happened with that first lift served run. It sounded eerily similar to what happened to you at Loveland and as luck would have it on my way back down to pick up the mini-animal at the hotel I ran into similar variable snow and had the same results as earlier, but I think I've found the culprit.

I was charging pretty hard(for me at least) because I was late to help pack up the room and despite the -17* temps Mini was demanding one gondi lap before leaving. As I was skiing I ran into a snowmaking whale comprised of denser snow at speed. I felt the tip fold and bam I was over the handlebars. However I NEVER BURIED THE TIP I dusted myself off and continued skiing down but at a lower speed and attacking the whales at more of an angle which seemed to work much better then going straight at them.



My conclusion is that the Maven is NOT designed as a big mountain slayer, it does not handle variable crud well at all. Rather then plow through the pile the Mavens tips flex hard, the ski bows and your momentum carries you over the bars. Its a little different then the classic tip dive/over the bars but the result is the same. Each time I ran into this problem I was skiing fast in wide open terrain, when I get the Mavens into EC woods at slower more turny speeds, I don't notice this problem even when I'm confronted with similar snow.

Basically the Maven rocks as long as you can either:

a. Make sure you're skiing snow that is fairly homogeneous ie powder

b. Stay on top of the surface ie heavy dense snow or groomers

or

c. keep your speed down and make lots of turns

Anytime the snow is pillowed or dense its going to be difficult on Mavens unless you're skiing really low density fairydust. I still really like the Mavens because my terrain of choice is much more technical and tight vs wide open and bombing, plus I wind up skiing more hardpack and wind scoured then I care to admit to. I'm also willing to trade some stability at speed for slower speed maneuverability.

However if you ski much more wide open terrain at a higher throttle the Maven probably isn't the ski for you. Its a fun stick for sure, but it's not a variable snow charger at all. I'm really curious to see if moving the mount back to -2 or -4 would help any. My guess is that soft tip will be soft regardless of where the ski is mounted and if you wanted a ski that can charge it in the crud you should have bought Shoots instead of Mavens

[Core Shot]

ok here's my thoughts


Basically the Maven rocks as long as you can either:

a. Make sure you're skiing snow that is fairly homogeneous ie powder

b. Stay on top of the surface ie heavy dense snow or groomers

or

c. keep your speed down and make lots of turns



snip

I'm really curious to see if moving the mount back to -2 or -4 would help any. My guess is that soft tip will be soft regardless of where the ski is mounted and if you wanted a ski that can charge it in the crud you should have bought Shoots instead of Mavens

Better Option

d. Mount back -3 to -4 cm

It makes the ski a charger/slayer.

We should try to hook up so you can try my demo binding version.
Being further back is critical to high speed performance.
I don't think Powtron was skiing variable crap, he was just skiing hard and fast.

You are too close to the tipping point.
Any variability throws you over the bars.

It's not the tip collapsing as much as it is a stupid factory line that is way to far forward.

I felt this same problem as a "bogging down" or speed kill when mounted at the line and slightly pressuring the balls of my feet.
Back is where it is at.

[laseranimal]

I'd love to try out your demo's, I'm toying with the idea of going back, but I really like the versatility/quickness I get from the forward mount

[oftpiste]

Better Option

d. Mount back -3 to -4 cm

It makes the ski a charger/slayer.

We should try to hook up so you can try my demo binding version.
Being further back is critical to high speed performance.

so you're 3-4 cm back from the factory boot center mark? Mine remain unmounted so far....

[PowTron]

Better Option


I don't think Powtron was skiing variable crap, he was just skiing hard and fast.

You are too close to the tipping point.
Any variability throws you over the bars.

It's not the tip collapsing as much as it is a stupid factory line that is way to far forward.

Yes, I tried to show that in my review, where it seemed to be super nice in the first few turns, before speed picked up. After I started picking up speed, that is when it got sketchy and started folding on me.

I was attempting to ski hard and fast, yes...and the only time I felt I liked them was in tight trees, when I was in fact going much slower.

As far as the snow, actually, that is what I was skiing...not variable snow, but it was wind-drifted and creamy layered pow. Typical Loveland Storm Pow. And, that is EXACTLY what was happening. Laser described it exactly how I was trying to...it is almost like the tip FOLDS on you, and if you hand flex the tip even (where it curves up), you can feel how soft it is.

I would for sure say that I could see the Maven charging more if I were mounted back more, but that soft tip is still going to be there. Not sure what to do.

I am sending something to Jared at Bluehouse as soon as I am done typing this though to discuss something

Well, I hope you still like them Laser, and I also hope you weren't out there thinking "Oh Shit, the curse of Powtron",


I think we are starting to figure out that if you mount these skis close to 0 or even farther forward, you can pretty much count on this happening unless you never go over 10 mph.

Thanks for the input, though...good to hear I am not as crazy as I sound.

[laseranimal]

Yes, I tried to show that in my review, where it seemed to be super nice in the first few turns, before speed picked up. After I started picking up speed, that is when it got sketchy and started folding on me.

I was attempting to ski hard and fast, yes...and the only time I felt I liked them was in tight trees, when I was in fact going much slower.

As far as the snow, actually, that is what I was skiing...not variable snow, but it was wind-drifted and creamy layered pow. Typical Loveland Storm Pow. And, that is EXACTLY what was happening. Laser described it exactly how I was trying to...it is almost like the tip FOLDS on you, and if you hand flex the tip even (where it curves up), you can feel how soft it is.

I would for sure say that I could see the Maven charging more if I were mounted back more, but that soft tip is still going to be there. Not sure what to do.

I am sending something to Jared at Bluehouse as soon as I am done typing this though to discuss something

Well, I hope you still like them Laser, and I also hope you weren't out there thinking "Oh Shit, the curse of Powtron",


I think we are starting to figure out that if you mount these skis close to 0 or even farther forward, you can pretty much count on this happening unless you never go over 10 mph.

Thanks for the input, though...good to hear I am not as crazy as I sound.

I actually was thinking "WTF Powtron posts a review and now its happening to me"

I'm actually still stoked on where I'm mounted. Its SO rare to ever get a day where its that much blower on the trails vs. in the woods so I'd say if the Mavens are out theres a 97% chance that for the most part I'm going to be in tight woods after the first run of the day

Though if I get the chance I'd still like to see what -4 would ski like

[PowTron]

I actually was thinking "WTF Powtron posts a review and now its happening to me"

I'm actually still stoked on where I'm mounted. Its SO rare to ever get a day where its that much blower on the trails vs. in the woods so I'd say if the Mavens are out theres a 97% chance that for the most part I'm going to be in tight woods after the first run of the day

Though if I get the chance I'd still like to see what -4 would ski like

Well, I think I am going to keep mine and mount them at -3 or -4 and take them out and try again with another review to post after. I will let you know how it goes. I hope it works out as I really like the shape and rocker on this ski.

[BasinDaddy]

I don't like what I'm reading here. Thinking I may have purchased the wrong ski. Hope the skis mounted further back provide better results.

[PowTron]

I don't like what I'm reading here. Thinking I may have purchased the wrong ski. Hope the skis mounted further back provide better results.

I pulled my Jesters off last night, and they are going back on the ski at -3...I will write another full review after and hopefully have different results.

I am confident that the ski should ride differently farther back from what some other Mags have noticed.