Line Prophet 100's

[jacksdog]

I currently have the last pair of Line Prophet 100's on hold at my local REI. The price is $400 flat. The length is 186. I'm trying to decide whether or not to pull the trigger.

I'm 6'1", 185 lbs., and a fairly aggressive skier. I'm just really getting back into skiing after several years of 5 day winters. I don't do park stuff or jump off of cliffs bigger than a few feet but love skiing bumps, powder, and big lines on all terrain and in all conditions. Is this a good ski for me or would the K2 Coomba be better? My other ski is a G3 baron with an AT setup. Its a fine ski and nice and light for backcountry but I don't like it at high speeds and its not wide enough for powder.

Thoughts?

[JohnF]

Tech Talk.

Great ski. I have Karhu Team 100's which are the same. Look at the ski review section of telemarktips.com.

[Nathan Explosion]

They're too much ski for you. Don't go any longer than 135. Don't let the label fool you, the kid's Volkl Mantra is the best ski ever made.

[wigman]

I have a pair. 186 is too much ski for you. Its too wide to be a great bump ski although I do ski them with mine. For bumps I prefere a narrower ski. 180 would be a better length. I have ?175s. I use them mostly for tight trees on powder days. If you lay them over they will hold at any speed in bounds. For big lines its not stiff enough. I'm 6 feet 200 lbs. Your probably getting a deal because no one wants that length.

[tahoegnar420]

They're too much ski for you. Don't go any longer than 135. Don't let the label fool you, the kid's Volkl Mantra is the best ski ever made.

Do you ski? How the fuck do you get over 2,000 posts in a year?

[Nathan Explosion]

Do you ski? How the fuck do you get over 2,000 posts in a year?

Lots of CAD labs.

And I still post less than rideit.

[ripvanwinter]

186 is definitely not too much ski for you.

I'm 5'9"/165 on the 179's for about 10 days so far this year and they're great in the soft and bumps (for a ski that wide) on icy/dust on crust I wish I had 186's. Very good in trees.

The tails feel super soft relative to the rest of the ski so if you're backseat at all going fast on hardpack you're kind of screwed

[irul&ublo]

And I still post less than rideit.

That's like saying you suck fewer dicks than Richard Simmons.

[RoanMtnMan]

I own the 06/07 179's and use them most days (bought them for $300 used off of EBay last year). There has been talk of a loss of quality in the construction, but I have around 120 days front and backcountry on mine and the only damage was my fault. They hold an edge pretty well on the hard stuff, are great for bigger lines, and for me handle the bumps just fine. Some days (deep pow, charging on the spring stuff) I wish they were longer but I have other skis for that. All around I like them. If I see another pair on super sale for less than $300 I will be all over it, however I will probably try something different for my next go to. My current pair will probably move to my all around rock ski with a Dynafit in the next season or so.

Oh yeah, I am 6'3" 175, aggressive, split days between resort and backcountry, though when spring comes around the big peaks always rope me in.

[tenB]

I have a pair. 186 is too much ski for you. Its too wide to be a great bump ski although I do ski them with mine. For bumps I prefere a narrower ski. 180 would be a better length. I have ?175s. I use them mostly for tight trees on powder days. If you lay them over they will hold at any speed in bounds. For big lines its not stiff enough. I'm 6 feet 200 lbs. Your probably getting a deal because no one wants that length.

This is funny!

Back to your question. Prophet 100s are great skis. 186 will work great.

[gunniride]

You will love them. They are a great all rounder. The 186 would only be too long if you were skiing tight terrain all the time, say Crested Butte or Taos, where I found them to be fun, but just a bit on the fast side. I mounted mine at -1 and they were a pretty perfect balance- on the line would be just a bit quicker

[other1]

I agree with everything gunniride said as I just got back from the butte with them. I am 5'8" 155 on the 186. You should be fine, they are a great ski. Mine are mounted on the line, if I only took them out in the fresh I would probably mount them at -1.

[AntiSoCalSkier]

I'm on the 90s and I love them. I'm 6'0 and 210, on 179s. Obviously those a shorter than most people around here would ski, but I'm skiing primarily on the East Coast.

The skis are really damp and stable at high speeds, but when you put them on edge they hook up quickly (at least compared to my old Volkl Karmas which had a turn radius that was longer by a good 3 - 4m). I'm not sure I would want to ski the 100s in the bumps. Even with the 90s I find myself getting a bit tangled up. Also, they feel relatively heavy, so if you're looking for something that feels really quick under foot, these probably aren't them. (Of course I have heavy bindings so that definitely affects my impression....)

Overall, the 90s are a great all mountain ski. They rip on the groomers, are stable in crud, and are fun in the woods and parks. If I was going to ski a ton of bumps, I'd go for something narrower, and lighter (maybe a dedicated park ski?), but if you aren't constantly ripping zipper lines, you should be fine.