REVIEW: 2009/10 4FRNT CRJ 188

**fit flops** · 10-01-2009, 09:23 AM

I skied these today. It was the longer ones. 186 or 188? I'm not a big ski review guy. I REALLY LIKED THE SKIS. That says it all. I could use them everyday. I will ski the 09/10 ehp 193 tomorrow. I'll know more then. The only thing I think is another 5 - 10 cm of length would be good.

I'm 5'1" and 468 lbs and a type 6+ skier. What should I set my din at? If my second cousin's baby's mama is 4'4" and 679 lbs, what length should she get? Are the 125cm K2 China pro models too long? Maybe she should get the Volkl 110cm Sellouts.

**justAskier** · 10-01-2009, 09:35 AM

I think you're about 6.7 level skier but we do not know anything about your type. If you're type 2c than at 468 lbs you should set your binders at 25 on jong scale.

And can we see your cousin's nekkid pics? Don't care bout her mama.

**SnortZpow** · 10-02-2009, 02:33 AM

Marshal, can you give me your opinion on the 185 JJ vs. 188 CRJ?
-Which did you find to be more stiff in the underfoot
-Did you find the JJ or CRJ better in crud

Thanks

**marshalolson** · 10-02-2009, 08:00 AM

i found the JJ to ski pretty well overall, but was definately a wimpier construction - more deflection, less stable etc. i have also seen a good handful of delams and stuff w/ the jj.

**SnortZpow** · 10-02-2009, 12:10 PM

Much appreciated, Marshal…..looks like the trigger will be pulled on the CRJs today.

**Jarle** · 10-02-2009, 02:28 PM

Great review! But I'm still a bit torn between the EHP 186 and CRJ's in either 180 (anyone skied those?) or 188... I'm a small guy, 147-150 pounds (67-68kg) and 5.6 feet (170 cm), looking for an everyday ski that can charge a.k.a I wanna be able to use them at comps but still is pretty "jibby" and/or playfull. So a jibby charger or chargy jibber is pretty much what I'm looking for. Don't ride that much backwards but it would be fun to have the oppurtunity. I like my skis damped but not necessarily all that stiff (as long as they are damped) mediumstiff is more of my thing, liked the dampness of the old white and black B3 185 and orange AK rocket s-lab 195 (although the ak swallow would'nt feel so damped in a shorter lenght and were too long for an everyday ski when tight trees were involved). Skied the P4 last season as an everyday ski but they did'nt feel damped (in a 171 that is, tight trees here in sweden, the 181 or 191 are probably better) so those really sucked in open spaces (when not on a clean carve) and the one comp I entered on them... Lets just leave it to what it was... Horrible...

Anyway I'm concerned that the 188 CRJ would be too long (18cm/7inches taller than me, but maybe the softness/rocker makes that up?) and the 180 might be too jibby/not stable enough? And the 186 EHP might be awesome when charging but a bit boring when playing around bonking trees/spinning cliffs/cornices and/or in tight trees?

Will be skiing revelstoke this winter...

And yeah, I'm new to this whole rockerthingy (only skied like 10 days or so on rockered skis) so jong away

**marshalolson** · 10-02-2009, 03:59 PM

the 188 CRJ is less ski for sure that the 186 EHP. it is lighter, softer and poppier. if you can ski the EHP, you can ski the 188 CRJ.

the crj is fairly damp, and i would call it medium in stiffness. the ehp is quite damp and definatley stiffer and heavier by a good bit.

dunno if that helps.

**adam** · 10-02-2009, 04:03 PM

Honestly when I took a run on these, I was unimpressed. I thought they felt very dead, and they definitely were not as playful as my Lotus 138s.

Just my two cents.

**Jarle** · 10-02-2009, 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by marshalolson

the 188 CRJ is less ski for sure that the 186 EHP. it is lighter, softer and poppier. if you can ski the EHP, you can ski the 188 CRJ.

the crj is fairly damp, and i would call it medium in stiffness. the ehp is quite damp and definatley stiffer and heavier by a good bit.

dunno if that helps.

Actually that help a bit, I now know that I'm not interested in the 180 CRJ.. Or so I think, do'nt want to sacrifice too much stability in them, better of having that unsaid 'til I've fondeled them

. It seems like the CR is what I'm looking for and will help me become a little more spinny/flippy thing on the mountain and since I'm small they'll probably be pretty stable due to the lenght and the dampness (if you have a similar-damped ski too compare with that would be awesome

). And exactly how stiff is the ehp? Did'nt have any problems with the older LP's 194 (actually likes them quite a lot but I got so tired skiing them) and from what I've read the EHP's are softer? Where would you place the 180 CR(if you've been in contact with them), 188CR and 186 EH on the scale?

Appreciated marshal

**LocDog** · 10-05-2009, 02:07 AM

Hey Marshal I have a question for ya! I am really stoked on the CRJ's. I was riding a 2007maiden 189 up till this year. I am 5'10, and around 160 lbs, I ski aggressively but found the 189's just too much for me in the tight stuff and killed me after a long day. Just too much ski for me I thought. So that being said, do you think a 188CRJ is still too much or should I go down to a 180 CRJ??
Thanks!

**squirrelmurphy** · 10-05-2009, 08:50 AM

Originally Posted by adam

Honestly when I took a run on these, I was unimpressed. I thought they felt very dead, and they definitely were not as playful as my Lotus 138s.

Just my two cents.

I'm with you, thought they skied way too short with the taper and were overall pretty squirreley. Didn't get to ski them in anything deep though...

**F.D.V.** · 10-05-2009, 01:06 PM

Trigger pulled on my 188 CRJs.

I call it my own economic stimulus package!

**Jarle** · 10-06-2009, 02:14 PM

Originally Posted by squirrelmurphy

I'm with you, thought they skied way too short with the taper and were overall pretty squirreley. Didn't get to ski them in anything deep though...

Originally Posted by adam

Honestly when I took a run on these, I was unimpressed. I thought they felt very dead, and they definitely were not as playful as my Lotus 138s.

Just my two cents.

Whats your guys size/skiing style etc?

Always nice too hear some negative input on skis too, tell me everything.

**squirrelmurphy** · 10-06-2009, 02:35 PM

5'10", 170ish, generally ski fast and jump off shit. My background is moguls and trees at MRG, but I ski at CB now.

I tried the CRJ at Alta on a 6" over refrozen day. That day i had also been skiing 192 M1s and 191 Sally Shoguns and my 196 Lhasas. I thought the tip taper was way exaggerated, leaving very little effective edge in front of my boots. I didn't like how forward the mount was, felt like if i really pressured the tips they would wash out instead of locking into a turn. FWIW I loved my Lhasas and the Shoguns in the same conditions.

**F.D.V.** · 10-06-2009, 03:16 PM

Side Note: Does anyone know ANY SHOP that has the CRJs in stock?

4Frnt is laggggggggggggggggggging this year with shipping their skis!

**Jarle** · 10-15-2009, 12:47 PM

Anybody out there that has been on the 180 and the 188? Or just the 180?

**catfishjon** · 10-18-2009, 04:28 PM

anyone toured on these. i am debating mountaing these with some dukes or rossi fks. any input?

**mountain_man** · 10-18-2009, 07:07 PM

Before i read this thread i was buying JJ's, now it seems the CRJ needs more consideration. If there are anymore JJ vs. CRJ comparisons i'd be interested to hear them.
Any other skis that fit the bill, 185cm medium under foot with softer tips, rocker and 115-120 under foot.

**triebby** · 11-28-2009, 01:24 PM

Wow, the CRJ's really sound sick and according to what I am reading they are exactly what I am looking for. Though I am curious if anyone else has gotten a chance to ski these? I know this is their first year so there isn't a ton of info, but I am always interested in more opinions and comparisons.

**Telemarc** · 11-30-2009, 10:20 AM

Quick question/comment...do you think the "dead" feeling some folks are talking about is related to skiing them on harder snow...are they the type of ski that really comes alive with some snow under your feet?(3"+)

**marshalolson** · 11-30-2009, 11:02 AM

i skied them exclusively in 6-12+" of pow and thought they were nice and lively. i dunno where the dead feeling people are saying is coming from.

**Telemarc** · 11-30-2009, 04:41 PM

Thanks Marshal I was just referring to some other comments in the thread from some other folks.
Have you bought some???

**Jarle** · 11-30-2009, 04:49 PM

Originally Posted by Telemarc

Quick question/comment...do you think the "dead" feeling some folks are talking about is related to skiing them on harder snow...are they the type of ski that really comes alive with some snow under your feet?(3"+)

Sometimes people call damped skis dead, but thats really just an opinion and from what I've heard the CRJ is pretty damped.

**squirrelmurphy** · 11-30-2009, 05:39 PM

They were definitely damp, but I thought they felt dead as well, meaning when I gave them a bunch of input (like stepping into a carve) they didn't respond by snapping back out of the carve. I guess you could call it a low frequency flex? Dunno, not my cup of tea, despite liking them on paper. Guess I would recommend trying before you buy.