Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Littleton
    Posts
    2,454

    EHP 193 Review 08/09

    Height: 6’2”
    Weight: 200
    Age: 23
    Years: 15+

    Skis I Like: Praxis Pow, Gotama, XXL 194

    Background: Bump skiing (no gate running), snowboarding before that, a little park/pipe all mixed in, overly serious DH mountain bike racer through college. I ski a bit more centered (bump steeze) than some of you ex-racers might (more forward, driiiiive the tips). I bought these as my “one ski quiver” alla Lhasa or 120. I wanted a ski that I could take to Argentina and have the versatility of a traditional shape but the “funness” of rocker/early taper.

    What I like to ski: Anything soft. Skiing more and more in back/sidecountry than inbounds. No jib/park stuff anymore (mostly cause of concussion concerns).

    Mounted with: Dukes-On the line

    Where: Primary Home=Berthoud. Ski there 50% of the time.

    Days/year: While I have a real job about 50. When I quit and go back to the good life: 100+

    Initial Impressions: Very little sidecut Not as much tip or tail rocker as I was hoping. Slight pintail. Not light but not heavy. Even overall flex, solid underfoot. ALMOST no camber. Relatively soft tip. Put next to the Lhasa pow there is about 10mm less tip rocker, less shape in the tip and tail but all and all VERY VERY similar.

    Conditions skied: 2’ of blower, 4” of cream cheese on crust, ONE groomer, 10” of heavy sun effect in trees

    Skinning: Say what you want but I’m becoming less and less of a Duke lover. They are heavy and I HATE the flat ramp. Anyway, with the Duke this ski is not all that light (but what ski is w/a Duke?). For the under 1 hour type skinning I am usually doing they are fine, I just think putting an alpine binder on this ski might make more sense because I boot pack sooooo.

    Skiing: Fast, surfy and loves to stomp. Compared to Praxis (195) they ski notably faster. For a more traditionally shaped ski, they are for lack of a better word, surfy. Although I still wish it had a bit more rocker, the softer tip and flat camber, straight shape, early taper etc makes for a very floaty pivoty ski. Tip dive isn’t an issue despite what you might think looking at the ski. They like to run but are very manageable in tight spaces such as Floral park on Berthoud. Really, if I knew I’d be skiing tighter techier terrain, I’d have gone with the 186 as there is more pintail, more tail rocker and I think a lot of people need to realize they REALLY don’t need a gianormously long ski a lot of the time. (depending on where you ski). Don’t get me wrong, these aren’t Praxis/ARGs/138s but they also ski more LIKE that sort of ski than any other traditional shape I’ve been on before.

    I still need more time on them in crud, harder conditions but so far they show a lot of potential.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Redneck Town
    Posts
    47
    Great Review

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Littleton
    Posts
    2,454
    These skis were totally RAD today. 1' of heavier wind effect hero snow. Killed.

    Laying them over in deep snow is sooooo much fun. Closer to Praxis than any sort of "traditional" ski as there is NO hooking.

    At high speed on bigger lines they are more like(...okay, this is going to sound stupid...) a sports car. Little input is needed for them to do what I want them to do. I constantly need to remind myself not to "overski" them.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Littleton
    Posts
    2,454
    oh, and to add, I have skied these side by side vs the 186.

    Even though the shape is different don't let it be the determining factor. If you ski Jackson, Snowbird, Europe, AK=193

    If you ski Colorado or enjoy smaller techier lines=186

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •