Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 39
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Bigger Sky
    Posts
    371

    Anybody ski this years 4FRNT Cody? No Reviews out there yet!

    Looking to buy a 100mm ski, and the Jeronimo and PBJ, Blend, Fujas and Turbo others are options.

    The blend and fujas are noodles and the jeronimo, PBJ, and Turbo are too stiff. Looking for something in between.

    Anyone get to demo the Cody? Whats it like?
    Last edited by TwinTipFlip; 09-22-2012 at 11:02 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by splat,Huckin eh?, and Stroupskier, respectively
    Someone shoulda warned him that no matter how brutal winter or summer can be, a bad post on TGR can be almost impossible to weather once the shitstorm breaks loose.

    Or worse, the "Shitnado"!

    No, a shiticane.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Aspen
    Posts
    965
    Would love to hear some opinions on this ski as well, looking to fill the "all-purpose except pow in-bounds" quiver slot. Other skis I'm eyeballing are the Cochise or the Rocker2 108.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    123
    I had a few days on them late last season, and they rock. Mid flex ski, camber profile very similar to the CRJ. I skied everything from crud in the trees to park, and they can charge absolutely everywhere. They could definitely hold their own as a pow ski if it was your only option, or would slay as a light weight touring ski. In regards to your question on stiffness, it is slightly stiffer than the fujas and the blend, I dont have enough experience with the jeronimo and the pb and j to say anything there. Any other questions? I'm happy to help out. Also, keep an eye out in your shops, some online stores have them in select sizes (AKA backcountry.com) and they are shipping out to shops everywhere now.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Calgary/Golden
    Posts
    5,536
    Quote Originally Posted by JaytaeMoney View Post
    Would love to hear some opinions on this ski as well, looking to fill the "all-purpose except pow in-bounds" quiver slot. Other skis I'm eyeballing are the Cochise or the Rocker2 108.
    The 4frnt Turbo is a great fit for this^^^. Can hold it's own in the pow too.
    It doesn't matter if you're a king or a little street sweeper...
    ...sooner or later you'll dance with the reaper
    -Death

    Kaz is my co-pilot

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Bigger Sky
    Posts
    371
    Bump....Thanks for replies any more would help!
    Quote Originally Posted by splat,Huckin eh?, and Stroupskier, respectively
    Someone shoulda warned him that no matter how brutal winter or summer can be, a bad post on TGR can be almost impossible to weather once the shitstorm breaks loose.

    Or worse, the "Shitnado"!

    No, a shiticane.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Stumptown
    Posts
    5,759
    BskiP pretty much nailed it. These are a super fun, truly all mountain ski. Playful, stable and forgiving flex-wise with a little bit of tip and tail rocker to help you out off trail and as a pow ski in a pinch.

    I liked how quick they were edge to edge for a ski that was 100mm underfoot.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    741
    Hey Phildo, any beta on the mounting point for these in a 186? Specifically, how far from the tail is the recommended line?
    Last edited by whatsupdoc; 09-23-2012 at 11:11 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Stumptown
    Posts
    5,759
    I have learned that the best bet with 4FRNTs is to start them on the line, and then move them of you need to. Our athletes set the mounting points on their skis, so I know they are marked for good skiers. I'm not super picky about where my mounts are, though.

    If you're one of the people who want them within .5 cm of perfect, I would get on a pair of demos and move them around a bit before you commit to the drill.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Portland by way of Bozeman
    Posts
    2,809
    I too am looking at this as an off-day ski and for some touring with the requisite dynafits. The betat shared is good stuff, thanks.

    How would these stack up against Armada's TLT? That's another ski that's been recommended to me for that quiver slot and touring.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Stumptown
    Posts
    5,759
    I honestly haven't ridden the TLTs to give any good comparisons. Maybe BskiP can weigh in? I think he's been on most of the Armada stuff.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Calgary/Golden
    Posts
    5,536
    How do they compare to the Turbo?

    I'm digging the Turbo, but everything I see about the Cody makes me want a pair.
    It doesn't matter if you're a king or a little street sweeper...
    ...sooner or later you'll dance with the reaper
    -Death

    Kaz is my co-pilot

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Stumptown
    Posts
    5,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Caucasian Asian View Post
    How do they compare to the Turbo?

    I'm digging the Turbo, but everything I see about the Cody makes me want a pair.
    They are a touch softer I'd say, more playful and less chargey than the Turbos. That has todo mainly with the shorter turn radius and the tip and tail rocker a opposed to the early rise tip in the Turbo where you're really skiing it like a cambered ski in hardpack.

    If I had to pigeon hole them, I'd say the Turbo is an all-mountain powder ski, where the Cody is an all-mountain ski with a side of powder. If that makes any sense at all.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Aspen
    Posts
    965
    Hmm, was leaning towards the Turbo over the Cody after some light reading but if it snows more than like 4" I will likely be on my dedicated pow skis anyway... I like to ski fast so the combo of stiffness and no tail rocker appeals to me quite a bit in terms of stability. I have been on Czars as my everyday for the past few seasons, they are pretty stiff and have a similar camber profile to the Turbo.

    Can you guys comment on the speed limit for the Cody? I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to giving up a little chargeability for a more nimble/playful type of ski if I can still push it at times. I can't stand really soft skis though.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    28
    Not to threadjack, BUT...
    I can't comment on the Cody (yet), but I rode the Turbo 120 days last year at Vail in up to 10". It doesn't have a speed limit and I found it to be plenty playful to my liking. I'm 6'2" 190lbs and ski 100+ days every year. The Turbo was my park ski as well. I'm mounted it +2 from BSL and found that was an awesome spot for the ski, definitely made it a little more fun and less chargy than it would have been otherwise.

    I'm getting the Cody this season as my everyday ski. I'm interested to see how it handles the whole mountain. I have a pair of CRJs as well and I think it'll be more comparable to those it seems. Backcountry.com has a pretty nice little review.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Stumptown
    Posts
    5,759
    I never found the speed limit on the days I skied the Cody's. Pretty much had them as fast as they could run on groomers and about 3 inches of cut up pow. Granted I'm not some ex-racer type, so YMMV.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Washington Grown
    Posts
    250
    I haven't skied the Cody but I'm very interested. I own CRJ, Turbo's and demo'd TST's this year. The problem with Turbos for me was described perfectly in the blistergear review. To get them to quickly release the edge it is most useful to use a terrain feature of sorts to unload the ski. I'm lighter ~160lb, Turbo's do very nicely in NW pow or 1-2 days after pow dump, but for an everyday no fresh ski they aren't quick enough for bumping it out. TST's were also too pow specific for an everyday ski for me. The CRJs are super nimble (but soft) so I'm stoked to get on the Cody's this year at a demo day.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by Bobcat Sig View Post
    I too am looking at this as an off-day ski and for some touring with the requisite dynafits. The betat shared is good stuff, thanks.

    How would these stack up against Armada's TLT? That's another ski that's been recommended to me for that quiver slot and touring.
    These are slightly narrower with a slightly longer turn radius. The TST felt a little sloppy and too turny in comparision to the Cody. That slight amount of extra width/shorter sidecut makes a little bit of a difference in my opinion. The flexes and profiles are pretty similar, not dead on of course, but pretty close. I felt more comfortable at speed on the cody over the TST, and they both saw just about every type of terrain i could find for them. I'm used to skiing on skis with a larger radius, so i think that is what i prefer. If you are looking for a little bit turnier ski, the TST could be a great choice, but i was stoked on the cody. Small charger ski for sure.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Inland N.W.
    Posts
    26
    I demoed the Cody at the end of the season and will buying a pair in the next couple of weeks. It's an awesome ski! I tried the Turbo and and TST also. I agree with BskiP - The TST was a bit too jittery for my tastes. The Turbo is great, but it's a more hard-charging, burlier ski than the Cody. The 4FRNT rep called the Cody a "Turbo-lite," and that is a dead-on description. If you like more open areas, get the Turbo. If you like trees and tight spots, get the Cody. They're super-playful and quick, yet very sure-footed also. I had them on a good powder day, and they handled boot-top+ just dandy.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1

    Sizing

    I should be an expert because I sell ski's but I wanted a second opinion. I am getting a 4FRNT Cody because I mainly ski tight eastern trees and prefer to stay off the trails. I am 6'1" and 190lbs. Should I be looking at the 186cm over the 179cm. Let me know if anyone here has skied the 186cm and how it was in the trees.

    Quote Originally Posted by Slurr P View Post
    Not to threadjack, BUT...
    I can't comment on the Cody (yet), but I rode the Turbo 120 days last year at Vail in up to 10". It doesn't have a speed limit and I found it to be plenty playful to my liking. I'm 6'2" 190lbs and ski 100+ days every year. The Turbo was my park ski as well. I'm mounted it +2 from BSL and found that was an awesome spot for the ski, definitely made it a little more fun and less chargy than it would have been otherwise.

    I'm getting the Cody this season as my everyday ski. I'm interested to see how it handles the whole mountain. I have a pair of CRJs as well and I think it'll be more comparable to those it seems. Backcountry.com has a pretty nice little review.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Eese Cose
    Posts
    179
    Any more opinions on mounting point for these? Just received mine and a pair of Jesters. I'm leaning towards mounting them on the line. Don't ski park much, more side country powder and trees.

    I'm wondering if anyone mounted them a cm or two behind the line to prevent tips from dropping in the deep stuff. Looks to be plenty of tail to still carve and pivot well.
    Best Regards,

    UMKP

    "Peter, You've been missing a lot of work lately".
    "I wouldn't exactly say I've been missing it, Bob".

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by UrMomsKneePads View Post
    Any more opinions on mounting point for these? Just received mine and a pair of Jesters. I'm leaning towards mounting them on the line. Don't ski park much, more side country powder and trees.

    I'm wondering if anyone mounted them a cm or two behind the line to prevent tips from dropping in the deep stuff. Looks to be plenty of tail to still carve and pivot well.
    Hopefully I'm getting to this in time but I mounted my 179s a 0.5cm forward of the line. I did this mainly because of the intended use of the ski from Cody himself and where I was going to be using the ski. I wasn't really planning on using the ski for open lines etc because I do most of my skiing in VT. I don't think 0.5cm forward of the line did anything significant but I do have to say that I wouldn't go back of the line any. These skis have been awesome in tight trees and surprisingly fun ripping groomers, even on the windblown hardpack days we get here in the east. They are however, compared to some other skis (my older Mantras with full camber) a little slower edge to edge. I would think that if you go back of the line you might not like how they ride. Once these things get up to speed they are as quick as you want them to be and I honestly haven't felt a speed limit on them yet. Despite being slightly slower edge to edge them some other skis the low rocker both tip and tail allow them to smear really well in the trees and make for easy tight tree skiing.

    Just FYI I'm 5'9" 190 (pretty athletic but on the heavier side)

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Eese Cose
    Posts
    179
    Thanks for the reply, I mounted them on the line. Spoke to Jeremy at 4Frnt and he took me through their thoughts on it, and like you recommended, he said don't go behind the line. I'm 5'11" 190 lbs, and skiing the 179cm because most of my skiing is east coast as well. Can't wait to let em rip!

    I'm skiing them for the first time later this week at Whiteface, will be sure to post a review shortly after.
    Best Regards,

    UMKP

    "Peter, You've been missing a lot of work lately".
    "I wouldn't exactly say I've been missing it, Bob".

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    200
    I guess I should get to it and write a review but the Cody's are definitely fun and have been a great DD for me on the east coast. I think you're going to love them especially being a little talker then me gaining some extra leverage. Even on super hard days I didn't feel the need to grab my fully cambered Mantras which ski more GSish then the Cody's. They rip when up on edge, obviously at 100 underfoot they aren't race skis but slay all. Tons of fun in the trees too from firmer conditions to a few inches of new snow. Also at 190 like you said the mid-flex is pretty sweet, playful when needed but like I said before I still haven't found a speed limit for them.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    89
    Can anyone speak to this years (13-14) cody?

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    200
    Quote Originally Posted by bohdup View Post
    Can anyone speak to this years (13-14) cody?
    They're saying that they're basically untouched except for a slightly stiffer tail and fore body. I think that this could only improve the ski. I never had a problem stomping airs on them but I don't go that big so a little extra stiffness in the tail could help there and also makes the skis a little livelier from edge to edge (honestly my only complaint from last years model)

Posting Permissions

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