Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 30 of 30
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by MJbumper1121 View Post
    Promising.... I think it's about time I sketched out every ski's dimensions that I've also been lurking over as well...

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    pugski.com
    Posts
    3,207
    Quote Originally Posted by esales09 View Post
    Phil, where and when did you demo the 99? Also what length and construction? Just curious because I ski them on a daily basis and have skied the bonafide and mantra as well. I agree that the bonafide is probably the best choice for an EC skier that stays out of the backcountry. But I find my 184 pure 99s to be very playful and rewarding. I also feel like that I can make pretty much any turn in any situation on them. I have about half of season on them ~25 days and love them, but I spend a lot of time in the BC and its not my every day choice for skiing at the resort in most conditions.
    Marshall send a pair of 184's last year at my shop. We did check and put a proper tune on them.
    Click. Point. Chute.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Ice Coast
    Posts
    948
    If you like the idea of a lighter touch ski that will slay east coast trees but can carve, the Armada TST.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    at work
    Posts
    959
    Quote Originally Posted by Beyond View Post
    If you like the idea of a lighter touch ski that will slay east coast trees but can carve, the Armada TST.
    Picked this ski up last spring. I have yet to ski them, but I chose them over the S3 and PB&J due to their increased running length and stiffer tail. (192's)
    Reviews seem to be fairly favorable- mounting mine tele with NTN. I like a lot of sidecut in my skis, so the short turn radius was a plus.

    Other skis in the quiver:

    189 K2 Seth's (yellow)
    189 Icelantic Keepers
    "What moves men of genius, or rather what inspires their work, is not new ideas, but their obsession with the idea that what has already been said is still not enough."

    -Eugene Delacroix

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Inland N.W.
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by whatsupdoc View Post
    4FRNT Cody looks like it would fit the bill based on specs.

    I fondled a pair and they look nice. 100 ish underfoot, something like a 19-20 m radius, roughly medium flex in the tips and tails, medium stiff underfoot. It's got tip and tail rocker but the rocker is subtle (not a ton of splay). Also a bit tip and tail taper. Mild camber underfoot. It looks like it would be fun in soft snow with the rocker/taper. Nimble with the shorter radius. But enough running length and enough tail that I imagine it would be pretty stable in firmer snow as well.

    It's got the 'mega block' core. I own the MSP which also has this core. Sturdy and damp. The MSP is full sandwich construction and has a lot more camber. Cody is semi cap. So I imagine the Cody would give something up on groomers to the MSP, but in soft 3D snow it looks a lot more fun.

    I'm looking forward to trying this ski out this winter.
    I demoed these one fine powder day in March, and to say they're "nice" is putting it mildly. The above supposition is pretty much dead-on; they ski really well just about anywhere, but uber-deep days may not be their thang. I have no doubt they could handle it, it's just that there are better weapons out there for the truly deep. They turn on a dime, but they're not squirrelly...solid underfoot but really nimble and playful. I now own a pair of 179's, and will be putting the new Guardians on them.

    If you're looking for something burlier and more of a hard-charger, get the Turbo, tho; another killer ski for what its intended role in the quiver supposedly is.

Posting Permissions

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