Page 2 of 54 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 1326
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Fernie
    Posts
    41
    My first post, and I know nobody wants to hear from the new guy, but these skis are sick!
    I got a pair of EHP's last year, and thought I would never find something I liked better... then these come along and I'm glad the EHP's have Dukes on em or I might never reach for them again.
    The Rens still have the super solid feel of the EHP, but with a lot more pop. I've now skied them in most conditions but deep pow, where I know they will be real good, and can't really believe how versatile they are. Worth every painful second of waiting for these to show up.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mostly in a bad dream
    Posts
    563
    Quote Originally Posted by Maker View Post
    Has anyone had these in deep snow (2+ ft) yet? I would like to hear your thoughts. I had them at Silverton in waist deep snow and was a bit puzzled. I ski pretty fast, but these definitely seemed to want to plow due to their stiffness. It was tough getting them to surface without learning back (mount 88cm as reco). I just didnt get the "hinge-like" rocker feeling in the tip like I have with 190 bibbys, lhasas, 138s, pontoons, etc. The bibby for instance, is probably as stiff underfoot but has a softer tip so you feel a nice hinge point that pops you up to the surface when you pressure the tips. I have had both the lhasas and bibbys in similar deep snow and my initial impression was that they ski better.

    Renegades definitely kill variable and are surprisingly good on hard pack for their width, but that really isnt what I bought them for.

    CaCaw...can you compare the flex of the EHPs to Renegades as I have never skied the EHPs. I believe the Renegades are stiffer all around? I am the most interested in the tips.

    185lbs gearless
    I haven't skied them in any sustained deep pow but I was thinking the exact same thing hitting small areas of knee deep. I wouldn't say 'tip dive' necessarily but definitely tip resistance. I am also mounted at 88cm from the tail. I am between 150 - 160 lbs @ 5'8". I have some Wagners that are 146-120-134 @ 187 - unrockered, and they definitely feel much floatier, even on the chopped stuff.

    I imagine that Eric probably designed these skis on super steep pow terrain where tip hook and slidability are very important. I mean anytime the guy is on anything under 40 degrees he's pretty much straightlining. They really don't feel like a mid-angle glade ski that's for sure.

    Anyway, I brought them home and gave them the full spa treatment. I noticed that the front third of my skis' bases were pretty rough and dry. Good wire brushing, 2 coats of wax followed by more brushing and then a final coat of rub-on flouro which I let dry and then softly brushed. Maybe that will change things up a bit. If not, I want to mount back 2cms.

    If anyone gets them figured out please let us know. I'd prefer not getting the drill out again.
    Last edited by DudeLebowSKI; 01-07-2011 at 12:57 PM. Reason: Edit for skier size
    First 360 mute grab --> Andrew Sheppard --> Snowdrifters 1996

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Arctic North
    Posts
    83
    Renegades arrived today. They look amazing!

    Now to the big question; where to mount? I'm aware of Hoji's recommended mount at 88cm from tails, but after reading some of your experiences I'm a bit hesitated. Let's face it - I don't ski steep pillow lines all day, hence I'm looking for that float and maneuverability in more moderate pow lines as well. Also, I've heard from other sources that Hoji has a kind of "special" skiing style making the forward mount more suitable. As I understand Norwegian 4frnt team skier Eirik Finseth apparently skis them at more traditional 84cm and also co-designer Endre Hals didn't agree with Hoji on the forward mount. Comments or experiences?

    I'm thinking about a compromise and mount at 86 cm. I've been skiing 186 EHPs mounted on the line for some years. It felt quite forward compared to other skis, but at the same time they really performed with that mount. Pivoty, good maneuverability and stable at speed, though perhaps missing some float in deep, but moderate steep, powder. As I sold my EHPs, I can't really compare the mount with the Renegades, anyone that can share some knowledge?
    Cold water stoke

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    78 41′ 0″ N, 16 24′ 0″ E
    Posts
    1,453
    You could ask Tore Meirik, he seems to have skied them for a few days and can probably contribute with a bit of insight:

    http://friflyt.no/index.php?pagenr=32&threadnr=271623
    simen@downskis.com DOWN SKIS

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Noreg
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by esagen View Post
    Renegades arrived today. They look amazing!

    Now to the big question; where to mount? I'm aware of Hoji's recommended mount at 88cm from tails, but after reading some of your experiences I'm a bit hesitated. Let's face it - I don't ski steep pillow lines all day, hence I'm looking for that float and maneuverability in more moderate pow lines as well. Also, I've heard from other sources that Hoji has a kind of "special" skiing style making the forward mount more suitable. As I understand Norwegian 4frnt team skier Eirik Finseth apparently skis them at more traditional 84cm and also co-designer Endre Hals didn't agree with Hoji on the forward mount. Comments or experiences?

    I'm thinking about a compromise and mount at 86 cm. I've been skiing 186 EHPs mounted on the line for some years. It felt quite forward compared to other skis, but at the same time they really performed with that mount. Pivoty, good maneuverability and stable at speed, though perhaps missing some float in deep, but moderate steep, powder. As I sold my EHPs, I can't really compare the mount with the Renegades, anyone that can share some knowledge?
    Having mine mounted at 86 with NTN. NTN lets you move the binder back and forth by 1cm. Endres recommendation is 85 BTW.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    4,480
    interesting. i reread the discussions in other REN thread and Eric says could be mounted to 86 (-7) if your bigger taller or "like more traditional mount". I got hung up on words "like more traditional mount". having skiied ARG and others I'm fine with center mountish. maybe us bigger guys (bigger than Eric) should have listened to first part more. They are more forward than EHP, but very different shapes. I can't wait to see in JAN pow trip how they perform. Looking at ruler 2-3 cm is so little. But with 107 effective edge and recurve, WTFK's.

    More info please..........
    I need to go to Utah.
    Utah?
    Yeah, Utah. It's wedged in between Wyoming and Nevada. You've seen pictures of it, right?

    So after 15 years we have finally made it to Utah.....


    Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues

    20, 18, 16, 18, 13, 17, 8

    2016/2017 (18/19)

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Truckee, CA
    Posts
    254
    Fwiw, Elite feet in Squaw got three pairs of these in this week and one pair got mounted up as demo boards.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    41
    I'm 6'2 and 185 ended up mounting at 88 hopefully I dont need to change the mounting position. I should be skiing them for the first time this weekend and in a bit of pow as well. Interested to see how they perform will update.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mostly in a bad dream
    Posts
    563
    I am going to guess that the flex will soften over time? I can't imagine that Eric's skis are as stiff as our brand spanking new ones after the relentless number 30ft+ airs he's dropped.
    First 360 mute grab --> Andrew Sheppard --> Snowdrifters 1996

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Fernie
    Posts
    41
    Skied today with about 18cm's of fresh. I'm about 5'8"/160lbs, which if I remember correctly is in the same ballpark as Hoji. I have mine mounted at 88cm's right now, and I can def. see what you're talking about. I did find that if I ride the skis more from the middle I get more float than weighting the tips like I do with the EHP's. Don't know if that makes sense to you or not, but it was working for me.
    I think that if I had another pair of unmounted ones sitting in front of me, I would give some thought to mounting them at 86. That said, I don't think I will go as far as to remount mine yet until I have given them a fair shake. Would be curious to hear from someone who has them mounted back too.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    107
    In 18 cms of fresh I think you can actually ski on a 90 mm waisted ski and be fine with it!

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Fernie
    Posts
    41
    Totally agree, but this isn't about 98mm skis, it's about renegades.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    4,480
    Hey maker, I got both and will compare. So far RENS in crud, variable, groomer and 6-8" are effortless. Maybe lighter pow is better. I found certain pow skis to perform very differently in snow %. Obvious but maybe worth mentioning.
    I need to go to Utah.
    Utah?
    Yeah, Utah. It's wedged in between Wyoming and Nevada. You've seen pictures of it, right?

    So after 15 years we have finally made it to Utah.....


    Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues

    20, 18, 16, 18, 13, 17, 8

    2016/2017 (18/19)

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Fernie
    Posts
    41
    Maker... Rens are stiffer than the EHP's for sure. Overall, as well as in the tip. I think the stiffer flex is good though, especially with the increased rocker. The EHP is no noodle either though. I don't think you can go wrong either way, but I would give the renegades the edge.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    HR
    Posts
    2,528
    I am very curious to hear more about this potential lack of tip float issue in pow and whether different mount points help. Especially being 6'2" 215.

    I experienced the same sort of feeling on my 195 praxis pows which I promptly sold. I couldn't believe how bad they plowed/dove in the deep. I never had this issue with my multiple pairs of spats.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    3,244
    I got a decent powder day today, pretty deep though somewhat consolidated snow. I have no float issues to report. Though they're not the floatiest skis I've tried (Salomon Rocker takes that honour), they definitely float enough given what the stiffness does for the ski's other characteristics. These are the fastest pow skis I have ever tried, i.e. they plane perfectly balanced, with no tip plow or tail drag (which my S7s exhibited), and turns are frictionless. I found they floated best if I made sure to have a good, smooth transition where I actively re-centred and allowed the skis to find the fall line and pick up speed before tipping them over. I will report back after trying them in blower, but so far so good.

    Edit: I wanted to clarify further about driving the tips in pow. At lower speeds or on flatter terrain, they prefer to be skied centered, surfing with ankle movements. As speed picks up, you can drive the tips as long as your transition returns you to center and allows the ski to pick up speed down the fall line. The key is patient turn initiation to allow a good platform to be built, but this isn't that different than with other stiff skis I've used. I think what these skis give up a bit is forgiveness. You really need to be on them and well-balanced to make them perform compared to other models.

    Also, I'm 5'8" 175 and mounted at 88 cm from the tail.
    Last edited by D(C); 01-09-2011 at 11:36 AM.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Vancouver BC
    Posts
    2,375
    Mini-review after 3 days, I'm 5'10 and 195# naked, decent skier but no Hoji and I do not take big air. Mounted at 87cm from tail with Dukes (went back 1cm due to my size).

    Other skis: 08-09 EHP 193 (sold), Armada ANT 191

    These are the first skis with a real amount of rocker that I have tried (the only others being my EHPs), so I was a bit worried about hard snow performance. I've skied them 3 days in a row this past week, starting with a 12cm over hardpack day, followed by 2 pow days. Since I haven't skied any other skis in recent years this will be short. In pow they kill it, very fast ski as DC says above. I'm finding they perform best from a centred stance versus trying to get forward on the tips which I did on the EHPs. They have an awesome pivot feeling in trees, definitely a hell of a lot easier to turn in trees than the EHP 193's. The stiffness really helps in crud/variable snow as well, the tips do not flap around much at all and they track well. Hardpack/groomers really surprised me, they are predictable and stable, again I am finding it easier to stand centred and roll them versus trying to drive the tips (which are off the snow). Definitely prefer the ANTs on hardpack, but these things are so much better in soft snow (obviously). By day 3 I'm getting more confident on them and very happy with the purchase.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    25
    Anyone know the weight on these?

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    4,480
    10.5 lbs
    I need to go to Utah.
    Utah?
    Yeah, Utah. It's wedged in between Wyoming and Nevada. You've seen pictures of it, right?

    So after 15 years we have finally made it to Utah.....


    Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues

    20, 18, 16, 18, 13, 17, 8

    2016/2017 (18/19)

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    norcal
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by D(C) View Post
    I got a decent powder day today, pretty deep though somewhat consolidated snow. I have no float issues to report. Though they're not the floatiest skis I've tried (Salomon Rocker takes that honour), they definitely float enough given what the stiffness does for the ski's other characteristics. These are the fastest pow skis I have ever tried, i.e. they plane perfectly balanced, with no tip plow or tail drag (which my S7s exhibited), and turns are frictionless. I found they floated best if I made sure to have a good, smooth transition where I actively re-centred and allowed the skis to find the fall line and pick up speed before tipping them over. I will report back after trying them in blower, but so far so good.

    Edit: I wanted to clarify further about driving the tips in pow. At lower speeds or on flatter terrain, they prefer to be skied centered, surfing with ankle movements. As speed picks up, you can drive the tips as long as your transition returns you to center and allows the ski to pick up speed down the fall line. The key is patient turn initiation to allow a good platform to be built, but this isn't that different than with other stiff skis I've used. I think what these skis give up a bit is forgiveness. You really need to be on them and well-balanced to make them perform compared to other models.

    Also, I'm 5'8" 175 and mounted at 88 cm from the tail.
    ^^ good stuff.

    I'm 5 11" and 195. I went with 87 figuring I couldn't be too wrong given their initial advice. Only 1 short day in 15" of relatively heavy snow, but pretty happy. Further back and I think they'd lose some of the agility from the shape, but further up the lack of tip float might be an issue if you're bigger than 175 or so.

    So far, the shape is money, do wish they were 4.5 lbs and maaaaybe a bit more tip rocker.

    And yeah, they are even better looking in person.
    Life of a repo man is always intense.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mostly in a bad dream
    Posts
    563
    Skied mine 5 days so far. 3 in variable crap, 2 in some blower pow. The pow wasn't bottomlees and varied in depth from 'boot deep on top of firm' to 'deep enough to not feel the bottom but it was definitely there'.

    I feel the same as everyone else concerning their performance in variable snow. As far as pow performance, I don't have any idea about how I am initiating my turns, how much I am driving the tips, how I transition between turns, how centered my feet are, etc... No dig at DC for his detailed explaination, I just don't really want to start analyzing my skiing that deeply.

    All I know is that as long as I keep my center of gravity low and attack from an aggressive stance, the skis perform exactly as I had hoped. A perfect addition to my quiver for skiing steep pow. They float beautifully. They slarve/slide/smear or whatever the kids are calling it these days with ease. Very fun ski if skied aggressively. If I start to stand too tall they are more of a handfull. 88cm mount / 5'8" / 160lbs.

    EDIT: For those wondering, my Wagners are still floatier.

    Otto, I think they'll be PERFECT for you know where.
    Last edited by DudeLebowSKI; 01-09-2011 at 10:41 PM. Reason: For float reference
    First 360 mute grab --> Andrew Sheppard --> Snowdrifters 1996

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    3,244
    Quote Originally Posted by DudeLebowSKI View Post
    As far as pow performance, I don't have any idea about how I am initiating my turns, how much I am driving the tips, how I transition between turns, how centered my feet are, etc... No dig at DC for his detailed explaination, I just don't really want to start analyzing my skiing that deeply.
    Yeah, my apologies, I tend to get a bit techy. I was an East-Coaster/racer/race coach/epicski poster before I moved to Vancouver and started posting here All of this has made me unable to ski without thinking about technique and being analytical...

    Glad you're also enjoying the skis. I agree with you that they respond best if you charge.

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    4,480
    Whew. Had me worried on float issue. Can't to get to some xy chute in
    I need to go to Utah.
    Utah?
    Yeah, Utah. It's wedged in between Wyoming and Nevada. You've seen pictures of it, right?

    So after 15 years we have finally made it to Utah.....


    Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues

    20, 18, 16, 18, 13, 17, 8

    2016/2017 (18/19)

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mostly in a bad dream
    Posts
    563
    Quote Originally Posted by D(C) View Post
    Yeah, my apologies, I tend to get a bit techy. I was an East-Coaster/racer/race coach/epicski poster before I moved to Vancouver and started posting here All of this has made me unable to ski without thinking about technique and being analytical...

    Glad you're also enjoying the skis. I agree with you that they respond best if you charge.
    Oh no apologies dude. I'm just a bit OCD and I don't want to get stuck conceptualizing my skiing mid turn!

    I agree though that they are not the floatiest ski I've skied and I have a feeling that in bottomless powder on less than steep terrain, they'll be quad burners. Maybe not. It sounds like Maker had a bit of that experience though.

    The thing is, I'm not going to turn them into super floaters by mounting back. I have a super floaty ski already. What I wanted was a ski for powder on steep terrain that I could shut down at high speed without getting hooked into a tomahawk routine.

    I honestly think that the Rens are probably so dialed for EH that a low COG, 150lb skier is going to have a better relationship with the Rens than a taller heavier guy no matter what.
    First 360 mute grab --> Andrew Sheppard --> Snowdrifters 1996

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SF by way of JH
    Posts
    18
    couple days on mine. def doesnt pop me up to the top as my jjs seem to do in the pow but im ok with that. im much more comfortable with these guys under my feet. 5'11, 165, 87/86 from tail...liking the mount

Posting Permissions

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