Blizzard Spur

[Lindahl]

Sounds about right based on my experience. 2000 is much softer than 4000, but does need to be waxed more often. I tend to wax every 3 ski days. Not sure about differences between the 4000s between material manufacturers. Really really glad to hear you guys are moving to 4000.

And yeah, 2000 is industry norm for the big companies (K2, Volkl, etc). Many smaller companies use 4000 - Moment, Icelantic, Praxis, etc. Most of the soft base complaints are coming from those who usually buy from these smaller companies, but are being drawn to Blizzard by the progressive shapes and designs that ski really well.

[givethepigeye]

The whole base durability and hardness issue has always intrigued me. Never really knowing much about the technical side of base material or what we used I took the opportunity to ask the one of the engineers tonight at dinner in Cortina a little more about the bases on our skis.

The bases are harder this year than they have been in the past. They are now 4000 bases (or some number above 4000, he might have said 4445 but I honestly can't remember... few too many pops) on every ski above say $549 or $599. They have used 4000+ bases for the F.I.S race skis for a little while but they didn't use it for anything else because the harder base material heats up faster and needs to be waxed more frequently as it dries out easier and can become slow. Clearly someone racing at a high level waxes their skis after every use and 10-30 times before they even use them (or hot boxes them, or whatever) so drying is not a concern. However the supplier introduced a new base material in the last few years that has wax integrated into it in production so they can run a harder base material with less drying. The bases were never "soft" they were the industry norm (that a lot of manufacturers still use) for all skis above a certain price point, not because they were cheaper but because the harder bases would dry out a lot faster.

FWIW

totally jives with my experience - have the 2015 Cochise and things that would have shredded the original versions - barely put a scratch on these.

[XavierD]

I've only managed to put one small scratch in my 192 Cochise, and that is based on skiing in the PNW this season. So they have that going for them.

[Muggydude]

Anyone skied both the Spurs and some Lhasa Fats? Curious how they compare on the slope.

Got to fondle a pair of spurs today and compare to my 186 Fats, Skis are pretty similar. From Underfoot forward their sidecut profiles are almost the same, the Lhasa Tails are straighter than the Spurs, which have more width behind the bindings, and more taper. Rocker profiles are near identical, Lhasa maybe has a little more continuous rocker (though only slightly off from being flat). Spurs flex about the same as my Lhasas, though the Spur tips are stiffer. Lhasa Mount point is further forward, maybe by 1-2cm (taking into account the Spurs extra length).

Or anyone else have comparisons between the Spurs and BGs?

[roQer]

Is there any difference between the 14/15 and 15/16 version besides the topsheet? Like my white spur more than the new black design but would eventually trade in if there are constructional improvements.
The smooth white topsheet is kinda sticky to the snow. What are the experiences with the new black one?

[Brianskis]

Is there any difference between the 14/15 and 15/16 version besides the topsheet? Like my white spur more than the new black design but would eventually trade in if there are constructional improvements.
The smooth white topsheet is kinda sticky to the snow. What are the experiences with the new black one?

Same ski, new graphic.

[roQer]

Thanks!
BTW: this ski just fuckin rips. No speed limit in any kind of soft conditions. Skiing hardpack and groomers no problem at all and fun as well. Hard moguls suck as usual with skis this wide. Makes me kind of carve after the new Bodacious as daily driver.

[wasatchback]

Thanks!
BTW: this ski just fuckin rips. No speed limit in any kind of soft conditions. Skiing hardpack and groomers no problem at all and fun as well. Hard moguls suck as usual with skis this wide. Makes me kind of carve after the new Bodacious as daily driver.

New 193 Bodacious was pretty fun yesterday... Although just about anything would have been fun

[Brianskis]

Just a PSA, I have a couple pairs of these new, unmounted, still in the plastic that I can sell for $450 shipped to anywhere in the Lower 48. PM me if your interested

[XavierD]

Thanks!
BTW: this ski just fuckin rips. No speed limit in any kind of soft conditions. Skiing hardpack and groomers no problem at all and fun as well. Hard moguls suck as usual with skis this wide. Makes me kind of carve after the new Bodacious as daily driver.

The new bodacious is a legit. Great resort powder ski for anyone who prefers big open turns. Stable but loose feel to it.

[undertow2]

The new bodacious is a legit. Great resort powder ski for anyone who prefers big open turns. Stable but loose feel to it.

Curious , how do you think it compares to the 191 Billy...?

[XavierD]

Curious , how do you think it compares to the 191 Billy...?

Different. comparison is coming. In short:
Bodacious is a powder charger
Billy Goat is a soft snow charger, and quicker in the trees.
I think they are the two best 115+ mm skis out there right now for folks who don't ski backwards.

[Merlyn]

So I'm the proud owner of a new pair of Spurs and I just read through the entire thread. It sounds like the consensus is to mount at 0, correct?

FWIW, my boots are 285mm, which might indicate a slightly forward mount. However, I find the mount on my EHPs to be a bit forward for my taste and I'm really happy with my 185 Cochise on the line.

Just looking for some feedback before I fire up the drill ...

[cbgarrett]

I have my cochise and spur mounted up on the line and have no issues. So if you like the mount on the cochise, probably just go with the recommended on the spur.

[skibrd]

I've got mine mounted on the line and have no issues. I regret putting them away after a big storms leftovers are gone, skiing is just easy on them. I also de-tuned the tips and tails a ton after I skied them a few times.

[otto parts]

Edited-found info in thread.

[salx]

So i got some white spurs - they look and feel great )
Guess i can sell my völkl kuros now, no need for them anymore

[verbier61]

So i got some white spurs - they look and feel great )
Guess i can sell my völkl kuros now, no need for them anymore

which generation kuro? pre- or post-metal? I strongly believe the kuros are a mastarpiece that has been poorly understood/promoted/marketed in the US. So, a comparison with the spurs will be interesting

[salx]

Haven't skied the spurs yet.
The Kuros are the pre metal ones 195.

But as i am bringing my Skis to the resort i suppose theres no need for the Kuros anymore .

[verbier61]

Haven't skied the spurs yet.
The Kuros are the pre metal ones 195.

But as i am bringing my Skis to the resort i suppose theres no need for the Kuros anymore .

ok so waiting for a comparo kuro/spurs

[whyturn]

Kuro is a pintail with fat tip and stiff flex throughout. Feels hard like renegade on anything that is not soft. For me I could other fat skis to be more forgiving on the way back to the lift. Obviously floats like a boat but not super quick in the trees which killed it for me

The spur is directional and super easy to ski. Almost no effort. In powder it's more slarvy but not quite like reverse. It's a great all mountain pow ski that can eat up vertical. Not he quickest in trees but can be skied all day with ease and for high alpine like whistler it was perfect.

[Brock Landers]

My Spurs are mounted -1 but I have big boots and am 225# so didn't want to take any chances. On line prob not a bad way to go unless you're larger

[wasatchback]

At 285mm you could go 1cm forward. All Blizzard mount points are way different than 4frnts. 1cm forward on a spur would be like -4 or -5 on a comparable 4frnt I think

[verbier61]

Kuro is a pintail with fat tip and stiff flex throughout. Feels hard like renegade on anything that is not soft. For me I could other fat skis to be more forgiving on the way back to the lift. Obviously floats like a boat but not super quick in the trees which killed it for me

The spur is directional and super easy to ski. Almost no effort. In powder it's more slarvy but not quite like reverse. It's a great all mountain pow ski that can eat up vertical. Not he quickest in trees but can be skied all day with ease and for high alpine like whistler it was perfect.

in my experience the kuro 185 is super easy in trees, floats like heaven and is still pretty good (for its size) on groomed back to lifts.
I was skeptic before using it because of the dimensions, but totally sold after two days of use. I was told the 195 kuro is a different story, but have never used it. So, again, pretty curios about first had comparo vs the spur.

[Bandit Man]

Finally got out on my Spurs this past week. Holy Hell...want an amazing ski. Never skied pow so fast and with such confidence. Feel light on the feet for such a big ski. Really impressed at how stable they are while still being maneuverable when needed. Still a bit much for tight PNW trees but stellar everywhere else. Looking forward to another big storm to unleash these again.

P.S. I owned 185 Kuros (non metal) and the Spurs are much more of a charger while the Kuro was easier to pivot and throw sideways. Hated Kuros when it got skied out. Spurs still handle skied out chop better. I also have 193 Shiros and believe 193 Shiro is better than 185 Kuro.