Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 50 of 50
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Potato state
    Posts
    515
    We finally got some snow and I spent most the day on these puppies. I also took a few runs on this years BD Verdict. Conditions were 7 inches of lift served heavy-ish fresh over 3 week old refreeze.

    First run felt like the ski was a little twitchy but once I found the sweet spot I found them nimble and lively while retaining the torsional rigidity to hook up where the new snow was pushed away. They got pushed around in the crud a little more than the metal laminate Verdicts but we still very reliable and secure feeling when plowing through the cut up. The verdicts were damp and predictable preferring long radius turns while the Peacemakers eagerly varied turn length at will.

    Where the wind left us deeper snow I wished for a little wider ski than the 104mm peacemaker, but most of the day I was grateful for its perfectly versatile mid-fat width that keeps it quick and fun.

    This was every bit the ski that I was hoping the Rocker2 108 was going to be last year.


    As compared to the P4 I think you will find the Peacemaker to be quicker,easier and more fun in tight spaces while being nearly as stable and damp as the P4 when you let them run. The Peacemaker only has metal underfoot so it can't be as stable as the p4, but it's close.


    The peacemaker fits my needs for a quiver of one. Or much better it is a great ski for the middle ski of a 3 ski quiver. A fatty for deep days and a park ski when the snow has that not-so-fresh-feeling.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    6,176
    Looking for a playful ski, and the Peacemaker seems to fit the bill. However, being it will be used for some slack country, tight tree skiing, and general all mountain fun, what size would you guys recommend.

    I am 5'11. 170-180 (depends how much I like to eat), ski aggressively (ex-racer), yadda yadda. 179 or 186? Couldnt find anywhere with effective edge length which is a major deciding factor. Any help?

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    ut
    Posts
    939
    Definitely 186

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,673
    liking mine still, though still feel my mount is a little far forward even though its on the line. anyone mount further back with some feed back?
    Do I detect a lot of anger flowing around this place? Kind of like a pubescent volatility, some angst, a lot of I'm-sixteen-and-angry-at-my-father syndrome?

    fuck that noise.

    gmen.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    6,176
    ^Getting the same feel. Anytime it is in anything that involves some sort of firm moguls they chatter a lot. But, they are more for a playful ski for me, so I will see how they go in the trees first.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    ut
    Posts
    939
    -1.5 to -2 if you don't ski switch. Much easier to drive the tips without the tails washing.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    6,176
    Do you still find the tails easy to throw around at that mount?

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Potato state
    Posts
    515
    Finding that the peacemaker demands a little speed before they come alive. They don't like to mellowly bounce through the bushes and trees, but would rather shralp and carve and clobber the crud with a little bit of wrecklessness. They're super fun and reliable. But you definitely have to give it, in order to get it back out of these skis.

    I'm mounted boot center on the line for tele and I'm toying with the idea of moving them back 2-3cm. There's no shortage of tail where I'm mounted now.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Potato state
    Posts
    515
    Also, de-tuned the entire erly rise of the tip & tail. The ski was previously a little twitchy and this helped considerably.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Truckee, CA
    Posts
    8,784
    I finally skied mine yesterday and this past Saturday at A-Basin once the snow softened up. Very playful and easy to turn in trees and surprisingly maneuverable in soft bumps.

    I had originally demoed them 2 seasons ago when they were first premiering the ski around the country. I only skied the 186 (at Alpine Meadows in early spring conditions) and have no clue where they were mounted for the demo/test day.

    For my pair I went with a mount +2 in front of the line based on a recommendation from the shop that I have work on my gear (Start Haus in Truckee), as well as the Blister review (although they recommended at least +2.5). After skiing them for a full day (half day each day I got on them), I feel I probably could have gone +2.5 or even 3 on the mount. I concur with the Blister review (and my shop guy's rec) that I wouldn't go less than +2.

    I'm 5'11" and float between 150 and 160 lbs and I'm on the 186. Definitely not too much ski for me, but it is beefy compared to my 180cm Brahma and my beater 8.7's. I haven't found its speed limit, but again, I'm not a terribly huge or violently aggressive skier. I did find it to be more playful than the Gunsmoke, at least for someone my size.

    Mounted them with Atomic Tracker WTR 13 and have them primarily reserved for powder and spring corn action in/around Tahoe.

    As far as I know the ski for 14/15 is the same, just with different graphics.

    Good, solid set of planks, totally fun in spring corn and a nice crud buster, but if you're not into jibbing definitely go with at least +2 on the mount.


    here's the Blister review:
    http://blistergearreview.com/gear-re...d-peacemaker/2
    "Man, we killin' elephants in the back yard..."

    https://www.blizzard-tecnica.com/us/en

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    147
    Anyone else have an opinion on the mounting point? I got this ski to be my "dicking around ski". I'm not a park skier by any means and have no plans of riding switch. I will not be mounting demos on this so I'm open to opinions and suggestions.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    5,122
    Quote Originally Posted by smallfry506 View Post
    Anyone else have an opinion on the mounting point? I got this ski to be my "dicking around ski". I'm not a park skier by any means and have no plans of riding switch. I will not be mounting demos on this so I'm open to opinions and suggestions.
    -2cm has worked well.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    ut
    Posts
    939
    -2

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    147
    Can any explain why there is such a large variance in recommended mount position? One site adamantly says +2.5 and lots here say -2. That 4.5 cm difference seems like a chunk of change to me. I'm probably just over thinking it. Note this is my first playful twin shaped ski that I'm actually going to use.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    ut
    Posts
    939
    If it's your first "playful twin shape" ski that is why we recommended -2. Jason from Blister, who reviewed this ski, skis predominately "playful twin shape skis" and does more spinning than you probably will, hence the +2.5.

    I don't spin and keep the tips headed down hill and prefer a more traditional mounting point. I've never skied the Peacemaker at +2.5 because I've skied it at 0, -1, and -2 and don't like it at 0 as I feel like I need to sit back in order to keep the tails from washing. -2 mount solves that issue and I really like skiing the Peacemaker at this mount point. I normally ski a more traditionally mounted ski which has a mounting point simile to the peacemaker at -2.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    147
    Thank you. That was a perfect response. I appreciate the explanation, as I hate just following what people say without understanding why. -2 it is.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    5,122
    Baskin Robins has 31 flavors. Amongst 7 billion people, a 4.5cm range isn't that much.

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,887
    Thanks for all the good info.
    Last edited by mattig; 02-04-2017 at 09:05 PM.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Aspen
    Posts
    1,492
    Anyone who has been on these and the Cochise, do you think there's too much overlap? (have 185 Cochise, looking at 186 Peacemaker). For the record I am 5'11 around 170lbs.

    I love the Cochise and skied them every day last year unless it was really deep. It's a great ski, but a little lacking during playtime (for me that means spins, jumping/popping off natural features, and powder - lively skiing). For example I find the Cochise to be very dead/boring on sidecountry laps where you're often skiing untracked but kind of set-up snow. Sometimes I want to be smearing and slashing and airing off of stuff and the Cochise isn't great for that.

    If I could I would buy the 186 Rossi Sickle right now, which was the perfect do it all ski for me - mine are broken, they don't make them anymore, and I'm not a fan of used skis. Other skis I'm looking at to fill this spot are the Rocker2 108 and the 190cm Line SFB.
    Last edited by JaytaeMoney; 12-31-2014 at 12:47 PM.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Wa wa..tatic
    Posts
    3,987
    Resurrecting a dead thread to hopefully get a few more opinions on this ski, now that there are 5 (? 4?) production years of it. Just bought a pair and they seem to me like they have too much tail (mounted at the line).

    Dookey (and both Blister reviews) say to go at least +2 or +3 (or more) in front of the "recommended" line (which already seems pretty far forward) https://blisterreview.com/gear-revie...ard-peacemaker
    Yet most of the guys in this thread have said go at least -2 behind the line. ???

    What say you, Peacemaker riders past and present? (and yes I realize that ~5cm is not a huge difference overall but it *does* make at least a small difference in the feel of the skis and how they ride)

    Have also heard the complaint that these can throw you in the back seat in bumps, I didn't notice that problem skiing big pow bumps last week, but in which direction would one go with the mount to remedy that issue, if it actually is one?

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    15,691
    I wemt plus 2. Very fun ski. A good do it all. Bit o powa for a twin tip. No noodle

    Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,887
    If you rarely, but sometimes ski backwards, mount on the line.

    If you never ski backwards, mount 1-2 back.

    If you mad switchy, +2.

    This all confused me when I originally bought this ski, but the above is the correct solution.


    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    821
    I ski switch but not a ton and am super happy with +1,5... however they do get pushed around a bit in deeper/heavier snow. But guess if you are worried about that kind of snow you're likely looking at a different ski. Can't really imagine skiing peacemakers behind the line.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Wa wa..tatic
    Posts
    3,987
    Quote Originally Posted by grinch View Post
    I wemt plus 2. Very fun ski. A good do it all. Bit o powa for a twin tip. No noodle
    Yeah man they are a super fun ski. Definitely not noodles. Blizzard doesn't fuck around IME

    Quote Originally Posted by mattig View Post
    If you rarely, but sometimes ski backwards, mount on the line.
    If you never ski backwards, mount 1-2 back.
    If you mad switchy, +2.
    This all confused me when I originally bought this ski, but the above is the correct solution.
    Thanks dude perfect answer guess I'll leave them at the line where they at

    Thanks for all the answers gents

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    448
    These are the one ski I can't get rid of, I just keep coming back to it. So fun, very capable and surprisingly versatile.

    I have demo bindings on my pair and I have tried several mount points (see Blister confusion for recs Vs. -2cm recs here), and find them to be super balanced with a drivable tip at +2.5cm. I am def not a park or jib guy, but I think the high splay and deep rocker on the tail makes the forward mount feel best. I tried on the line and there was not much support in the back especially compared to the front.

Posting Permissions

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