REVIEW: 2011/2012 Moment Skis Jaguar Shark - 182cm

[pappag]

Vitals:
- age 30, skiing since 29
- height: 5'10", weight: 170lbs
- not a former racer
- doesn't flip or spin
- thinks he's as aggressive as the next TGR poser


Ski:
- 182cm Jaguar Shark
- tip rocker, camber, flattish tail
- 143/116/129, 28m radius
- weight: 9.0 lbs


Rocker profile:




Associated gear:
- mounted with Dukes on the recommended line (-8.5cm if memory serves me right)
- Scarpa Maestrale




Been a while since I've written a review, mostly because the 190 Bibby Pro was my primary ski for the past few seasons. After realizing that I really didn't need a twin tip or a ski with tail rocker, Moment threw a bone my way in the shape of essentially a Bibby Pro with a flat tail: enter the Jaguar Shark.

Compared to the Bibby, the Jags have a softer flex, felt more lively, and planed much quicker in deep snow. I felt the Bibby needed some speed to effectively ski deep powder well whereas the Jags float almost immediately out of the gate with their softer tips.

For their maiden voyage, I took the Jags to Rocky Mountain National Park for a descent down Dead Elk Couloir which offered a variety of conditions starting with blower snow in the top portion followed by slightly heavier south-facing snow then concluding with an amazing untouched apron of awesomeness. The learning curve could not have been quicker and while I'm more used to a ski that you point and go, I felt comfortable with the Jags' desire to want to turn more than the Bibby.

As for deep powder performance, let's be real: 116mm in the waist with tip rocker and a softer flex will hardly suck in deep snow. The Jags are no exception and again, I can't stress how quickly they plane in conditions that reach 3 feet of fresh.

When conditions get firm and steep, the Jags are super easy to slarve if you prefer that vs. digging in your edges, but either method works without much effort. It was in these situations that I actually liked the slightly lower turn radius; and even with a flattish tail, I felt it wasn't difficult at all to disengage it when tight turns were necessary.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I think any ski does well in moguls all depending on the skier. With carbon in the Jags, 5mm of camber for pop, and a softer flex, running a zipperline down chair 1 at Loveland has never been more fun.



Summary:
- like a Bibby Pro with a flat tail
- planes quickly in deep snow
- super quick edge to edge




And now a POV edit of a season (mostly) on the Jaguar Shark:

[Jhaus]

And here I was with a pretty good idea of what I wanted for next season... Now I'm not so sure. These seem superficially similar to the K2 sidestash I demoed last season, but wider, lighter, and with proportionally less tail, all of which are srsly giving me a ski-boner. As long as the flex isn't on the low side of medium. How do they do in crud? Are they damp enough to rip through tracked-out powder and soft bumps without being knocked around too much?

Oh, and any info on demo days around SLC?

[NCski]

Excellent review. I'm looking to round out my quiver with something on the fatter end and these look sweet. How's the crud performance? They look perfect for deeper snow but I'm curious if these will stand up to the often tracked out Tahoe snow.

[pappag]

To be honest, I didn't ski much (if any) crud this past season. It was either deep powder, corn, or firmer snow on steep slopes. I did ski plenty of soft bumps and these didn't get knocked around at all. At 170lbs, I thought the middle section of the ski could be stiffer... not sure if production models will be tweaked. Compared to other Moments, I would put stiffness from top to bottom as M1/Garbones, 190 Ruby, 190 Bibby, Belafonte, Jag Sharks, Tahoe. Essentially, the Jags are a wider and slightly softer Belafonte with a flex around 5-6 with playful tips.

If these were my resort skis, I would go for the 192 length but being that this is my backcountry setup, the 182 made much more sense.

[joboy]

How do these compare to the Night Trains in powder?

[bridge]

Nice review, I like the links.

[pappag]

How do these compare to the Night Trains in powder?

Night Trains are the only Moments I've yet to try so I can't compare. However, these are more stable in tracked powder than the 1st gen Comi swallowtail but not quite as chargeable as the 190 Bibby or 190 Ruby. If the guys in Reno weren't putting out the 186 Bibby Special (150-116-126, stiff with camber, huge rocker, and flattish tail), I would not hesitate to get the 192cm Jags for inbounds.

[pappag]

Figured people would like to see a rocker profile picture, so I added one to the first post.

[Jhaus]

That profile looks niiice. Do they measure true to the marked size? 182 is on the low end of what I'd like for a mixed BC/resort soft-snow ski, so hopefully they don't run short. Could always sack up for the 192 I guess, especially with that big ol' tip rocker. Guess that's what demos are for.

You should tell Moment to offer that proto topsheet as a limited edition. People would totally pay $50 extra for boobies on their skis.

[ride_pow]

^^^^
I was also wondering about length. I have been on 185 S5s (cambered) the last two years and don't want anything too much shorter but 192 sounds long (only 2 full years telewacking). Anyone have any insight on how "short" they ski?

[pappag]

I don't have a tape measure handy but can almost 100% guarantee the tip-to-tail length of the 182 is 180.5cm given my experience with 10 different models from Moment in the past. I also venture the 192 measures out to 190.5cm.

Regarding the 182 vs. 192 debate, if this was my primary resort ski, then I would go for the 192 without hesitation, even at 170#. But being that anything longer than 190cm in the backcountry can be troublesome at times (switchbacks, extra weight, bootpacking), I went with the 182 length. When skiing untracked pow at a resort or coming down a 1,000' creamy apron with speed, never did the desire to have the 192 pop into my mind.

Also, when I was on the 182 Belafonte for a very short portion of the early season last year, not once did I feel like I needed the 192. The Jag Shark is basically a softer, wider Belafonte.

[Island Bay]

Some nice lines PappaG!
Nice review, too. Did the Maestrales drive them ok? Looks like it.

[pappag]

Some nice lines PappaG!
Nice review, too. Did the Maestrales drive them ok? Looks like it.

Thanks... was a fun season, that's for sure.

As for the Maestrale, I had ZERO problems driving the Jag Sharks on steep and firm snow with confidence. Absolutely love the boot.

[Gman]

debating making the switch myself, I think the flat tail would be better suited for me since I'm on the EC and only get out west for a couple days a year. I also think the flat tail would help the ski be less ski-blade like the bibby tends to be on EC ice. The one thing I do like about the bibby is the ability to slash turns and scrug off speed real quick. decisions decisions.

[Cascadian]

As with most Moment skis...

...Drool...

Can't wait to try!

[Beder]

Finally got some snow here in SV and have put a couple of days on the JagSharks. Me, 6-1, 205. Good skier but nothing special.

The ski rocks. It delivers all I hoped for and more. Great pow performance of course. Made bumps fun. Slayed the chop. If I had younger knees and skied where it was always soft I could see making these my daily driver.

[skier666]

Fucking hell...my 192's continue to stare at me from the dark corner of the closet. Soon....