Check Out Our Shop
Page 102 of 112 FirstFirst ... 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 ... LastLast
Results 2,526 to 2,550 of 2796

Thread: What's Blizzard up to?

  1. #2526
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    109

    What's Blizzard up to?

    Quote Originally Posted by twat View Post
    What is your bsl? How long is the ski?
    I am 6’2 and 209 lbs, my BSL is 335 mm and the skis are 188 cm. Won’t be doing any butter or straight lines with those in pow (did my ACL a couple of years back on the first gen doing just that [emoji51]) but as my only ski for touring (the 95 is way too light for me) I wonder if the forward mount could be a better option for an all rounder (conversions, shit snow conditions, turn initiation, etc). I Wish I could remember which bump I was on the first gen but I found out there was two bumps only when the bindings were mounted and I never really cared to find out… All I remember is that the skis were great but a bit hooky [emoji2371]


    Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

  2. #2527
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    5,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Gweilo View Post
    I am 6’2 and 209 lbs, my BSL is 335 mm and the skis are 188 cm. Won’t be doing any butter or straight lines with those in pow (did my ACL a couple of years back on the first gen doing just that [emoji51]) but as my only ski for touring (the 95 is way too light for me) I wonder if the forward mount could be a better option for an all rounder (conversions, shit snow conditions, turn initiation, etc). I Wish I could remember which bump I was on the first gen but I found out there was two bumps only when the bindings were mounted and I never really cared to find out… All I remember is that the skis were great but a bit hooky [emoji2371]
    Go with the forward bump with a 335mm BSL, ski first then de-tune as necessary. FWIW, the old version bumps were 1.5cm apart and the new ones are 2cm apart.

  3. #2528
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    not there
    Posts
    1,829
    Quote Originally Posted by Gweilo View Post
    I am 6’2 and 209 lbs, my BSL is 335 mm and the skis are 188 cm. Won’t be doing any butter or straight lines with those in pow (did my ACL a couple of years back on the first gen doing just that [emoji51]) but as my only ski for touring (the 95 is way too light for me) I wonder if the forward mount could be a better option for an all rounder (conversions, shit snow conditions, turn initiation, etc). I Wish I could remember which bump I was on the first gen but I found out there was two bumps only when the bindings were mounted and I never really cared to find out… All I remember is that the skis were great but a bit hooky [emoji2371]


    Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
    My bsl is 297 and I went for factory recommended, guess almost 40mm difference justifies for moving your heel forward.

  4. #2529
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    109

    What's Blizzard up to?

    I will ! Thank you guys for your help ! I reckon I was probably too much on the back seat on the first gen - glad I sold those skis anyway it was a bit weird skiing them following the ACL crash [emoji95][emoji51]


    Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

  5. #2530
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    5,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Gweilo View Post
    I will ! Thank you guys for your help ! I reckon I was probably too much on the back seat on the first gen - glad I sold those skis anyway it was a bit weird skiing them following the ACL crash [emoji95][emoji51]
    You're in a 29.5 Atomic Hawx Prime XTD? You might also consider a lighter boot to pair with those skis to get the most out of them . . .

  6. #2531
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    You're in a 29.5 Atomic Hawx Prime XTD? You might also consider a lighter boot to pair with those skis to get the most out of them . . .
    Thank you greg ! I am either in cochise or zero g 130 and they are both great at what they do [emoji6]


    Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

  7. #2532
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    5,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Gweilo View Post
    Thank you greg ! I am either in cochise or zero g 130 and they are both great at what they do [emoji6]
    Zero G Tour Pro is an excellent matchup; BSL should be 333mm @ 29.5 though.

  8. #2533
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Eugenio Oregón
    Posts
    8,849

    What's Blizzard up to?

    R9 for west coast junk snow / firm snow ski (to complement an ON3P Woodsman 110 for “half-inch indentable” snow to boot deep), for medium speed off piste noodling / pecking about where other skiers won’t go, and groomer zooming with side hits, but not totally trying to dominate the snow and mountain:
    Good fit or wrong tool?

    (Note: I demoed the E94 for this application in 2022 and really liked the core feel and profile but not the sidecut shape and propensity to make one turn shape, and make it on behalf of the skier as opposed to the skier telling the ski what shape to make)

    Seems like a Rustler 8 would be the droid I’m looking for … but maybe the 9 could work?
    _______________________________________________
    "Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.

    I'll be there."
    ... Andy Campbell

  9. #2534
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,627
    R9 would be a good choice. It’s my no new snow, let’s explore / screw around ski at A Basin. Handles everything there well, except straight-lining, it’s got to be kept on edge.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  10. #2535
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    5,508
    Quote Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio View Post
    R9 for west coast junk snow / firm snow ski (to complement an ON3P Woodsman 110 for “half-inch indentable” snow to boot deep), for medium speed off piste noodling / pecking about where other skiers won’t go, and groomer zooming with side hits, but not totally trying to dominate the snow and mountain:
    Good fit or wrong tool?

    (Note: I demoed the E94 for this application in 2022 and really liked the core feel and profile but not the sidecut shape and propensity to make one turn shape, and make it on behalf of the skier as opposed to the skier telling the ski what shape to make)

    Seems like a Rustler 8 would be the droid I’m looking for … but maybe the 9 could work?
    They won't be making a Rustler 8 on your account, nor a Rustler 10.5 on mine. In the meantime, I'll be using the new Rustler 9 for the quiver slot you mention. If you go long enough, it can roll with the big dogs, too. (Skiing a 186 Rustler 11, 180 Rustler 9).

  11. #2536
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    5,367
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    They won't be making a Rustler 8 on your account, nor a Rustler 10.5 on mine. In the meantime, I'll be using the new Rustler 9 for the quiver slot you mention. If you go long enough, it can roll with the big dogs, too. (Skiing a 186 Rustler 11, 180 Rustler 9).
    You really make me want to try the new Rustler 9. I ski my 184 M6 for that slot, but they leave a bit to be desired going off trail, especially when the snow is on the PNW-type, heavy side. Thoughts on new R9 vs M6?
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  12. #2537
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Eugenio Oregón
    Posts
    8,849
    Thanks Greg.

    Would you say the new R9 is a big change from previous model or a subtle refinement? I can see that the tapered center titanal layer looks to have been changed to more of an H frame ... does this change how quickly the ski settles or quiets down in garbage snow?

    I'm 140 lbs and would be looking to get the 180s (also on the 2020 180 cm R11). If the new R9 is a major change then I may hold out, if it's a refinement then maybe I'll look to pick up a used set or new old stock. It's not easy to demo skis down here, apart from Berg's demo weekend every March (which may or may not line up with a weekend work schedule or other kid care requirement).
    _______________________________________________
    "Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.

    I'll be there."
    ... Andy Campbell

  13. #2538
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    5,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    You really make me want to try the new Rustler 9. I ski my 184 M6 for that slot, but they leave a bit to be desired going off trail, especially when the snow is on the PNW-type, heavy side. Thoughts on new R9 vs M6?
    Very different skis - I love the M6 when conditions mostly call for a race ski but I might wander off the groomed once in a while. You need to be prepared to ski the M6 full gas all day, and be in shape to keep it working deep into the afternoon. The new Rustler 9 actually has similar edge hold on hard snow, but a smaller sweet spot when purely carving - it's stronger and more stable than the older R9, with more surface area for leftovers and cut up chop, but actually stays above the loose stuff while the M6 just plows through.

  14. #2539
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    5,508
    Quote Originally Posted by SchralphMacchio View Post
    Thanks Greg.

    Would you say the new R9 is a big change from previous model or a subtle refinement? I can see that the tapered center titanal layer looks to have been changed to more of an H frame ... does this change how quickly the ski settles or quiets down in garbage snow?

    I'm 140 lbs and would be looking to get the 180s (also on the 2020 180 cm R11). If the new R9 is a major change then I may hold out, if it's a refinement then maybe I'll look to pick up a used set or new old stock. It's not easy to demo skis down here, apart from Berg's demo weekend every March (which may or may not line up with a weekend work schedule or other kid care requirement).
    It's a fairly big change in my mind, not just because of the placement of the Titanal but also increased width and stability. It's more useful in more types and depths of snow than before - the old Rustler 9 went out mostly on groomer and family days, the new one will get more time with fresh snow on the ground.

  15. #2540
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Eugenio Oregón
    Posts
    8,849
    Thanks Greg, all that is good to know. All sounds very positive to me.
    _______________________________________________
    "Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.

    I'll be there."
    ... Andy Campbell

  16. #2541
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    109
    Curious about the new R11 vs the OG in 192 length. Construction is obviously different but length remains the same while side cut and turn radius are slightly shorter.
    Since it was such a great ski I am wondering if it is worth an upgrade like the R9 or R10 over the previous gen ? Anyone tried both and care to comment ?


    Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

  17. #2542
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    743
    Sweet new stoke vid, good tunes good times

    https://youtu.be/S2LMc3KkDZg?si=v9gcnE2PXjGKVnmV


    Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

  18. #2543
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,007
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    It's a fairly big change in my mind, not just because of the placement of the Titanal but also increased width and stability. It's more useful in more types and depths of snow than before - the old Rustler 9 went out mostly on groomer and family days, the new one will get more time with fresh snow on the ground.
    What's the deal with the r10? I was thinking of mounting pivots + atk inserts on one because I loathe traveling with two skis but opinions on the new ski and weights are hard to come by.

  19. #2544
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    5,508
    Quote Originally Posted by Westcoaster View Post
    What's the deal with the r10? I was thinking of mounting pivots + atk inserts on one because I loathe traveling with two skis but opinions on the new ski and weights are hard to come by.
    New Rustler 10 rips. They've fixed the issues that made me reach for something else in the past.

    If you were to Google "Ski Weight Chart" you might find this:
    https://www.evo.com/guides/alpine-an...ry-ski-weights

  20. #2545
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    1,007
    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    New Rustler 10 rips. They've fixed the issues that made me reach for something else in the past.

    If you were to Google "Ski Weight Chart" you might find this:
    https://www.evo.com/guides/alpine-an...ry-ski-weights
    Haha fair enough, for some reason I always thought those were just taken from mfg copy.

  21. #2546
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    367
    Haven’t heard much about the updated Rustlers. Anyone been on the 10? Did the updated construction fix the hinge/tip hook that plagued the previous generation? Is this the 10 we’ve wanted all along? Comparison to Enforcer 104 would be much appreciated if anyone can offer that up.

  22. #2547
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    109


    In Tignes this morning… First day on the new 192 R10. Will report back [emoji6]


    Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk

  23. #2548
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SE Idaho
    Posts
    2,164
    Have a new pair of 2022 Brahma 88s showing up tomorrow that I scored for a great price. 183 was the only size available and I tend to like 180-185ish ski lengths but this sounds like a pretty stiff ski. I’m 6’ and working back toward 170ish lbs but it sounds like some pretty burly clydesdale types are happier on the 183 vs 189. Wondering if anyone my size prefers the 177 in the newer iteration of the Brahma? I haven’t had a ski that short in a long time but maybe would have been the right choice for a 59 year old freeheeler?? Granted not much difference in length, but sounds like each size up is a pretty good jump in stiffness due to the new true blend core. Am I just turning into a worrying pussy type?

    This will strictly be for charging on firm groomed snow and hitting side aprons. I have OG 180 bones and other skis for softer/deeper conditions including Praxis Quixote in a 182 that I love.

  24. #2549
    Join Date
    Feb 2022
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by 3PinGrin View Post
    Have a new pair of 2022 Brahma 88s showing up tomorrow that I scored for a great price. 183 was the only size available and I tend to like 180-185ish ski lengths but this sounds like a pretty stiff ski. I’m 6’ and working back toward 170ish lbs but it sounds like some pretty burly clydesdale types are happier on the 183 vs 189. Wondering if anyone my size prefers the 177 in the newer iteration of the Brahma? I haven’t had a ski that short in a long time but maybe would have been the right choice for a 59 year old freeheeler?? Granted not much difference in length, but sounds like each size up is a pretty good jump in stiffness due to the new true blend core. Am I just turning into a worrying pussy type?

    This will strictly be for charging on firm groomed snow and hitting side aprons. I have OG 180 bones and other skis for softer/deeper conditions including Praxis Quixote in a 182 that I love.
    Im 6' 1, 195 so a little bigger than you and I have the same ski. Not once have I ever felt they were too long.

  25. #2550
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Eugenio Oregón
    Posts
    8,849
    If anyone is loving their new R9s and moving on from the previous 172/180, hit me up! I wanna try it out as a low tide / garbage snow ski. [emoji1690]
    _______________________________________________
    "Strapping myself to a sitski built with 30lb of metal and fibreglass then trying to water ski in it sounds like a stupid idea to me.

    I'll be there."
    ... Andy Campbell

Posting Permissions

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