Lotus 120's or 138's as second ski?

[samwhit]

Hey guys, after reading I think every thread about the Lotus' over the past few months I think it's time to start one of my own.

I'm from Maine but am moving to Colorado in mid-late January, and am looking for advice for a pure powder ski to have in addition to my hybrid wailer 99's 184cm. I love these skis, but always wish I had a wider setup whenever there is ~6"+. In addition to Colorado, I'll be traveling to BC, the Sawtooth's, and Utah.

I'm 5'11, 180 pounds, powerful snappy skier. Good skier in moguls, crud, hardpack, trees, but still learning the art of powder (haven't had many full true powder days) - I think I'll learn quickly when the opportunity comes.

So..

***Lotus 120 spoons 189cm, or
***Lotus 138 spoons (not sure what length yet)

The guys at DPS said I should go with the 120's because the 138's would leave me with a significant gap, but I'm interested in the 138's reverse/reverse slarving capability. I will be using this ski for touring, as well as any resort powder skiing I do.

It will be my first pure powder ski, and I suppose there's always an option to sell/buy later, but I'd love to hear what you think I'd be best off with starting on. I'd like to be able to ski steeps, trees, and most everything when the snow is deep with these skis.

A few questions/comments:

*** I'm enticed by the 138's, but will I get as much use out of it as the 120's (considering my other ski will be the 99's?

*** Will the 120's suffice in really deep days?

*** How do the 120's vs 138's handle tights?

*** Should I actually care that the 120's are easier on hardpack/non powder than the 138's?


Thanks in advance - I appreciate it!


PS - if you're wondering why I'm only asking about DPS, I have a discount on a pair, and the 99's have been outstanding, so I thought I'd stick with them (not to mention all the good reviews and low weight).

[lynchdogger]

Go with the 120's. Better touring ski and agree that it will fill out your quiver better and leave no gap. Start cat / heli skiing by a 138 or spoon.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using TGR Forums

[JeffreyJim]

120s.

The 138 is best for those who have something 110-120 under foot as their "do everything" ski.

[weasel1]

120. Fantastic ski, will go down in the annals of gear lore, in my opinion, as one of the greats. Not that there's anything wrong with the 138, mind you. But the 120 will give you more and better days in more varied conditions.

[1000-oaks]

Either is a big width jump, I'd say get something more "resortable" in the 118-125 waist range with sidecut (new Megawatts, Squad7, GPO, etc), then if you're still itching for something bigger later add the 138 to the quiver.

[lynchdogger]

^^^ The lotus 120 is 120 width?! Hello...

Thus the recommendation for the 120.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using TGR Forums

[Rob Stokes]

with sidecut

The 120 doesn't have much sidecut...hello!


I recommend the 120, one of the best soft snow skis ever imo.

[grskier]

Lotus 120 Spoon is 122 under foot and super fun to ski. I've been on my pair almost all season so far and it's handled beautifully, especially considering what I've been asking from it.

[lynchdogger]

With the skis shape and slarvability any turn shape is possible. But why do you want sidecut for a western pow touring ski? To each their own.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using TGR Forums

[Mofro261]

Highly recommend the Spoon L120. Incredibly easy to ski and change directions on a dime, does have a 35M radius so it will carve a turn on packed soft snow surfaces, will totally put a smile on your face in any amount of fresh. You may find wanting to grab it over the W99 even in snow better suited for the W99, just because it's so fun to ski.

[1000-oaks]

Since there's a lot of overlap between the 120 and 138, why not get the L138 (which can be had for a few hundred $ used) and something more versatile than the L120 (talking about older versions, I'm not up on the latest ones) in the 120mm waist range?

[El Chupacabra]

I haven't tried any of the spoon DPS skis, but have older Lotus 120s (190cm) w/ Dynafits for touring, and several older 138s w/ alpine bindings (192cm). Based on these older versions of the 120 & 138, my thoughts:

- You won't give up anything in float going with 120 or 138.
- The 138 is more maneuverable, but the 120 turns just fine too. The 138 just has the "turn on a dime" ability of a fully-rockered reverse/reverse type ski.
- IMHO the 120 is a better choice for a touring ski due to the flatter tail.
- The 138 handles groomers/chop on the way back to the lift just fine; there's a tiny bit of sidecut. Neither 138 nor 120 is going to be a ski of choice when it's not a powder day, so this is kind of a wash here too.

[grskier]

Since the W99 won't see much use in CO, and there's a lot of overlap between the 120 and 138, why not get the L138 (which can be had for a few hundred $ used) and something more versatile than the L120 (talking about older versions, I'm not up on the latest ones) in the 120mm waist range? My $0.02, nothing more.

FWIW, I'm going back and forth between ordering the W99 and W112RPC as my next ski for most everyday for here.... Even if I end up with the W112RPC as what I order, I'll still probably want a skinnier ski for spring and some peak skiing... All depends what you want to do...

[capulin overdrive]

Yup, 99 would be a great Colorado ski.

[samwhit]

Thanks everyone - I'm definitely interested in more feedback, but these answers are very helpful.

I'm counting on the W99's for spring skiing, moguls, and non-pow days - 1000oaks, I'm surprised to hear you think they won't be much use in CO with that said.

I was leaning towards the 120's anyway. Now the question is what's the next ski after that?! Either something wider (138 or spoon, praxis), or something 110-120 with more sidecut than the 120's.

Seems like I could've saved some $$ with the 112rp's and 138's. But I think I'd miss the W99's on those spring days and bumps!

[Banh Mi]

Id go with the 120. Better for touring, better for resort, still slarvable and it will definitely suffice for deep days.

If you want to try out a super fat pow specific design, id suggest getting something used for cheap to see if you like it. I mean instead of dropping a grand on a ski youd only want to use 10x a year. The lotus 120 will be way better on those dust on crust days, and just a lot more versatile in general.

[mfa81]

Now the question is what's the next ski after that?!

like said 110-115 flatish tail more charger ski... that's what I'd look for if I had w99 and a lotus 120/138...

but now as it was also said, if you are already asking what's next, going 138 instead of the 120 might not be a bad idea since you would close the gap

[Two06]

Lotus 120 over the 138 for sure. Throw a Lhasa pow 112mm in there and you are set!!

[PNWbrit]

Just buy something cheaper than DPS and get both?

[PlayItLeo]

PNW Brit beat me to it. Score some bibbys and powderboards in gear swap for the price of a discounted pair of dps.

[Dry]

Not skied the Spoon versions. Or the 120 in deep conditions. But if you are looking for opions... no lack of them here.

With a 99 in hand, I'd get a pair of RPC @115 under foot next time around. Better touring and every where else ski IMO than something bigger. (have skied them all) Ski the 115 before going any bigger. 15mm width jump is signifigant. And you may well want more later. (me not so much now having used them for a season or two) At one point even Marshal was saying a RPC and a full on Spoon was all he needed as a soft snow quiver.

I suspect Marshal gets in more soft snow than the rest of us generally.

[saxon]

I've never skied the Lotus 120's but my (2011) Lotus 138's are my daily driver when touring; I had about 30 days on them last season and 3 (bigger) days where I took my Manaslus instead and regretted it all the way down. I'm in the Canadian Rockies so I ski in a similar snowpack to what you'd have in Colorado. There are conditions where they are inappropriate but I don't tour for such conditions (and can deal with it if faced unexpectedly). The rocker in the tail is slightly irritating while skinning but manageable.

I'm hardly answering your question but this is the Internet.

[jerr]

Fuck pragmatism get the 138. Having a ski with the feel of a rounded side cut is way more valuable than having a neat quiver match.

If practicality must be addressed; you'll be amazed the variety of conditions you end up enjoying 138's. Once you begin mucking around with them, they become way more versatile than they look on paper.

[BaNosser]

[sethschmautz]

Just added a non-spooned L120 to my W112RP. Haven't been on them enough to give a real solid piece of advice, but here are a few thoughts:

1. In full on blower, I wished I had a bigger ski than the 190 L120. I don't get those conditions too much up here in NW Montana, however.
2. The L120 appears to tour better than my 190 W112RPs due to lack of tail rocker.
3. The L120s rocked for all but skiing tight Alders at the bottom of the run - but anything would have suffered in there.

All in all, I'm a happy man. I'll probably have more feedback as I ski them more. I've only skied them a few times and I think I already like them better than the Wailers...

Seth