Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 109
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    PS. I found a pair of Ski Trab on sale and went that direction . . . .
    Which Trabs?

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Amherst, Mass.
    Posts
    4,684
    Quote Originally Posted by shirk View Post
    They've got sooo much over lap in their line-up it's hard to keep it all straight. There are 17 skis between the Adventure, X-Series, and Touring, with such minor differences between each one they have several that are basically the same.
    In the process of preparing a follow-up to this summary of rando race skis:
    http://www.skintrack.com/skis-comparison/
    ... to focus on non-race skis <= 1300g (in at least one length > 160cm), I counted ten Movement skis meeting that criterion (e.g., what's the difference between the Feather v Native v non-X Random ... or Natural v Iki?)
    Mo' skimo here: NE Rando Race Series

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    44
    I think the Atomic Charter may be an option. 100 underfoot. 7lbs 8 oz. Some rocker. Not to pricey. Easy to get. They are a little soft. I think softer that Coombacks.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    SW CO
    Posts
    5,588
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Steve View Post
    Which Trabs?
    Stevio Light XL -- the ones you recommended in a thread a while back. But I'm a bit smaller than you are, so I went with the 178 length. Thinking about picking up a pair of TLT5 to complete the setup, but I might just stick with the Maestrale RS.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    North Vancouver
    Posts
    6,457
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    ^^Now I'm sufficiently confused. I thought the Bond X was basically a Logic X w/ early rise...? What makes you say "they went the wrong way?"

    And yeah, Movement needs to overhaul their line. Minimal reviews, tons of similar skis, etc. I need to know exactly what I'm getting for me to drop $1000 on a ski.
    The Bond is narrower than the Logic, they should have gone wider. That ski should be in the same range as the W99 from DPS.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Jackson
    Posts
    774
    Kastle TX line? Minimal reviews on these, but the TX107 seem to fall close to the Jakal. With Kastle's reputation for stiff well made skis, I am intrigued, but to drop big money with out some info... there are better options, most of which have been mentioned here.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    cordova,AK
    Posts
    3,688
    Volkl Aura at 7lbs and Atomic Access at under 7. It is great to see the choices in light weight skis. i went with the DPS 112 to replace the Manaslu's I skied last 3 seasons. Haven't picked them up yet but am thinking I should of just gone with the access since they both have turned up tails.
    off your knees Louie

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Dreamland
    Posts
    1,103
    This might be of some assistance.

    http://www.wildsnow.com/more/backcou...-gear-weights/
    Gravity Junkie

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Sun Valley, ID
    Posts
    2,527
    Scott Pow'dair.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    6,012
    Quote Originally Posted by treebark View Post
    I think the Atomic Charter may be an option. 100 underfoot. 7lbs 8 oz. Some rocker. Not to pricey. Easy to get. They are a little soft. I think softer that Coombacks.
    Where did you get that weight from? Atomic lies about their ski's weights.
    ...Some will fall in love with life and drink it from a fountain that is pouring like an avalanche coming down the mountain...

    "I enjoy skinny skiing, bullfights on acid..." - Lacy Underalls

    The problems we face will not be solved by the minds that created them.

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    7,239
    Ski logic yeti is 7.25 pounds. O test drove howitzer and larger ski. Super light and stable. Alot of fun
    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 finally made it to Utah.....


    Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues

    8, 17, 13, 18, 16, 18, 20, 19, 16, 24, 32, 35

    2021/2022 (13/15)

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    1,095
    Check out the la sportiva line.

    The lo5 looks appealing. 95 ish underfoot, tip rocker, pretty light.

    I've been digging the GT in firm/spring conditions, but I would've looked closely at the lo5 if it had been available last season.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Schruns
    Posts
    839
    I've got a pair of Trab stelvio xl's that I picked up in gear swap and I love them for the spring. The only pow i skied them in was 6 inches on top of a solid base and they were great, but I can't imagine liking them in the deeper stuff. They are hyper cambered, more than any alpine ski i've seen.

    They are pretty damn stiff for they're weight, so a super solid ride. I would be interested in something a little straighter, a tad wider and with rocker, in the same construction. I just think straighter skis are more predictable in shitty conditions.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    SW CO
    Posts
    5,588
    Quote Originally Posted by JRainey View Post
    They are pretty damn stiff for they're weight, so a super solid ride. I would be interested in something a little straighter, a tad wider and with rocker, in the same construction. I just think straighter skis are more predictable in shitty conditions.
    A little straighter with a bit of tip rocker would be perfect. 90 mm is wide enough, IMO.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    utar
    Posts
    2,743
    My Woo-Tests are really light. Don't know how much exactly but they feel like a dream on my feet when I tour in them.
    Quote Originally Posted by SpinalTap View Post
    I'm really troubled by whatever pictures the Don had to search through to arrive at that one...

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Bern, CH
    Posts
    346
    Slightly thinner than required by the OP, but had a look at this years Mustagh Ata,
    as was posted by someone a while back, these now have a perfect early rise touring profile, starts deep and subtle then becomes something similar to the Manaslu in the final 20cm. Also much stiffer than Baltoro and Manaslu. Will be getting some.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Schruns
    Posts
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    A little straighter with a bit of tip rocker would be perfect. 90 mm is wide enough, IMO.
    Yeah, I was talking about if I wanted a general touring ski. But for a spring slayer, you're right.

    I picked up a pair of Woo 1.0 also, those should take care of me winter powder touring.

    I just keep thinking the I want something like the w99, but with a ehp/renegade shape and rocker profile. Maybe 105 under foot.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Socal
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by JRainey View Post
    I just keep thinking the I want something like the w99, but with a ehp/renegade shape and rocker profile. Maybe 105 under foot.
    An ehp/ren shaped W99 is interesting but something of a contradiction, no? However, I'd love to see that idea in a Lotus 108 type of thing. If you want reverse camber and slightly longer radius in a light-ish 105-ish ski, look at the Volkl Nunataq. I wasn't too enthused with them when I demoed, but lots of people love them. I'm surprised the Voile Vector hasn't been mentioned in this thread. (maybe I missed it) Its light, cheap, and has a fun looking shape. It might be on the soft side but I haven't skied them yet so I can't say for sure. BD's Revert looks like a similar idea, maybe with more beef. I love my W99s but that is so-last-year's-news.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    retired
    Posts
    12,465
    for the OP, not sure what weight you are really after, but:

    DPS 176cm wailer 99 HYBRID is ~1695g in the real world (1685g, 1695g, 1705g).
    go for rob

    www.dpsskis.com

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Squamish BC.
    Posts
    707
    I'm surprised no one has suggested the DPS Wailer 105. They were all the rage a few years ago, but have got lost in all the hype of new skis. I bought a pair two seasons back and it is the best all around touring ski I have ever been on and I have been ski touring for 40 years. I have skied the Wailer 99 and own the 112's and have skied the G3 line and the some of the Movement, Voile's and Dynafits and none compare for my needs. The Wailer 105 is wide enough to float well, holds and edge on hard snow and is light enough to tour long distances. I did the Spearhead in a day with them in mixed conditions and they were perfect. They have just enough softness in the tip combined with a very subtle early rise and taper to get them floating well and not hook up, but enough stiffness and camber to hold an edge and get good rebound and responsiveness on harder snow where I felt a lot of the the more rockered skis, even the Wailer 99, were lacking. I like them better for touring than the 99's, though the 112's are more fun on BC powder days. I think a ski like the Praxis BC would be similar and a good choice, with more rocker than the Wailer, though the lack of rocker in the 105 has never been an issue, and the Zen Oxide comes close as well, but there is nothing quite like the feel of a pure carbon ski underfoot. The Wailer 105 has been lost in all the excitement about new skis, but it still stands up well in my opinion, more than well. It is superior to a lot of the new skis out there and I hope DPS continues to offer it.

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    5,676
    I used to have W105's and found them too "active" for me. They were light as hell, though.
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    SW CO
    Posts
    5,588
    ^^ Thinking about maybe trying to pick up a used pair at some point. Care to elaborate?
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    5,676
    I think my skiing style just doesn't do as well with poppy skis as it does with damp skis.

    I had a decent time in powder with them, but on the 3 tours I took, there were a few occasions where the light and slightly jittery behaviour wasn't ideal. 2 were on a packed down luge-like ski outs, and the other was on firm and windpacked/rippled surfaces. I've skied similar terrain in my old Coomba's and never felt uncertain, but on the W105's I was all over the place.

    Maybe just my style though, so take that for what it's worth.
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    South Lake Tahoe
    Posts
    3,612
    Just heard Movement won't have a US distributor this year. They had Garmont lined up and then Scott bought Garmont and that fell through.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Golden, Colorado
    Posts
    5,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Shorty_J View Post
    I think my skiing style just doesn't do as well with poppy skis as it does with damp skis. I had a decent time in powder with them, but on the 3 tours I took, there were a few occasions where the light and slightly jittery behaviour wasn't ideal. 2 were on a packed down luge-like ski outs, and the other was on firm and windpacked/rippled surfaces. I've skied similar terrain in my old Coomba's and never felt uncertain, but on the W105's I was all over the place.
    +1

    Light skis, especially mid-stiff ones with a lot of carbon in them (i.e. Wateas, DPS Pures), tend to behave like this. Not a fan of the feeling either. If you're skiing tight, controlled turns where you're not moving too fast, it's not too bad, but it sucks when you want to open it up in variable conditions. Not a lot of people like to open it up and get speed in variable conditions, especially in the backcountry (where injury can be bad news), so they do work for some people. I'm not one of those people. Be ready for a lot of rebound and bouncing/skipping across the snow. In powder, it's no big deal, because powder doesn't push back - it actually can be quite lively, fun and playful. However, get into hard variable snow, and it ain't fun no more. I kind of consider DPS Pures to be a quiver ski - when the snow is soft and you want a light stiff ski for a fun, expressive ride in powder. Grab another more predictable, damp, smooth, stable ski when the conditions get harder and more variable.

    K2 is a good example that has a pretty opposite feeling. Their feeling is soft but damp, smooth skis. You tend to give up some edge hold, though, with a softer ski. They definitely are the opposite of lively. They're often described as being pretty dead, but IMO, in steep variable conditions, that's what you want... no surprises and complete predictability. Not a lot of people like them for this reason, but if you generate excitement in other ways (i.e. skiing really fast), one can appreciate them more.

    To get a damp, smooth ski, but with a bit of stiffness is a bit tricky, because that's when the constructions necessarily get heavier. Metal does a good job of this because it adds stiffness across the ski (torsionally), providing good edge hold, but doesn't add a lot of stiffness to the flex (longitudinally), and the ski will flow over the terrain while maintaining edgehold and giving you that damp, smooth ride. If you use fiberglass or a stronger wood core to get a torsionally stiffer ski, you'll also tend to make the ski stiffer flexing. A stiffer flexing ski will tend to get pushed around a bit more, since it won't flow with the terrain.
    Last edited by Lindahl; 11-16-2012 at 12:05 PM.

Posting Permissions

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