Page 59 of 66 FirstFirst ... 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 ... LastLast
Results 1,451 to 1,475 of 1628
  1. #1451
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by klauss View Post
    New bones mounted

    Attachment 366765
    Bro.

    What year?

  2. #1452
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,262
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthMarkus View Post
    Read the dynastar thread and you'll find a bunch of us dynastar fanboys circle jerking about the m-free 108.

    But, I can honestly say that I've found the R11 to be a bit wanting in some circumstances. This is my first year skiing it after being on the gunsmokes for a very long time (still have them).

    Anyway, my two cents as someone who has the R11 and has been on blizzard the previous 6 years, the m-free fits very well into that 108 slot. I think I'd also consider the new cochise if you don't need a twin.

    Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk
    How is the R11 lacking for you?

    Having skied a lot of skis Iíd say the ski that feels the most similar to the gunsmoke is the R11 mounted forward. The Mfree serves the same function as the gunsmoke, but I dont think it has the same feel.

  3. #1453
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_pretzel View Post
    How is the R11 lacking for you?

    Having skied a lot of skis Iíd say the ski that feels the most similar to the gunsmoke is the R11 mounted forward. The Mfree serves the same function as the gunsmoke, but I dont think it has the same feel.
    I agree that the m-free fits a similar function as the gunsmokes. Even just the dimensions reiterate that point. I think how "bouncy" the m-free feels compared to the gunsmokes is something I notice as a significant difference and don't necessarily love. If I'm being honest, I still do prefer how smooth the gunsmokes were. If the gunsmokes were narrower or the peacemaker was longer, I probably would have had my unicorn.

    As to the differences between the R11 and gunsmokes, I think the gunsmokes were still more playful than the R11. The exaggerated tip splay also made the gunsmokes slightly looser in the tips and tails, though not underfoot. They also didn't have metal extending as far into the tip/tail as the R11s do. Whereas the R11 feels a little looser underfoot, but the engagement of the tip and tail happens a lot faster than the gunsmokes did. I think this is largely a difference in my preference. The m-free caters towards this (my) preference in that you can also point it and it'll blow through anything in its way - similar to the gunsmokes - but when you turn the ski over far enough, the camber and shape profile engaged and you get a very responsive ski.

    This is not to say that the R11 doesn't retain a lot of the same attributes, but I would argue it doesn't do them as well as the gunsmokes and m-frees do. I think they embody the "playful charger" better than a lot of skis out there.

    I'm also kinda weird in that I don't like my skis to be too wide, but I also like them long. I'd probably like the R11 more if it were narrower, especially in the 192cm. In a perfect world I think a 190cm (true), 106mm peacemaker would be my unicorn ski.

    All that being said, I still really like the R11 as a 50/50 ski. Its absolutely better for touring and side country missions than the gunsmokes.

    Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

  4. #1454
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,861
    What about a 192 Rustler 10? That would be a unicorn for me.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  5. #1455
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Mid-tomahawk
    Posts
    1,176
    Where's the recommended line for the OG 185 Cochise? If there was ever a mark on the pair I just picked up, it's no longer obvious.

  6. #1456
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,589
    there should be two raised dimples on the top sheet above each sidewall of every blizzard for boot center.

  7. #1457
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Mid-tomahawk
    Posts
    1,176
    Quote Originally Posted by XavierD View Post
    there should be two raised dimples on the top sheet above each sidewall of every blizzard for boot center.
    These predate that. My similar vintage Bodacious have it etched on the sidewall. Newer Blizzard skis in the quiver do have the bumps. There's nothing visible on these.

  8. #1458
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    737
    Quote Originally Posted by HAB View Post
    These predate that. My similar vintage Bodacious have it etched on the sidewall. Newer Blizzard skis in the quiver do have the bumps. There's nothing visible on these.
    NTBlanks I think still has a pair of my old ones. They still had the mark on the sidewall I think. Shoot him a message.

  9. #1459
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    inw
    Posts
    869
    Quote Originally Posted by HAB View Post
    Where's the recommended line for the OG 185 Cochise? If there was ever a mark on the pair I just picked up, it's no longer obvious.
    Quote Originally Posted by SoVT Joey View Post
    NTBlanks I think still has a pair of my old ones. They still had the mark on the sidewall I think. Shoot him a message.
    I'm on it - 102.55cm (40 3/8") from tip, straight pull.

  10. #1460
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Mid-tomahawk
    Posts
    1,176
    Quote Originally Posted by ntblanks View Post
    I'm on it - 102.55cm (40 3/8") from tip, straight pull.
    Thank you!

  11. #1461
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    2,402
    Question about Blizzard warranty these days. I've had awesome experiences with Blizz warranty, but usually where there was a delamination at issue (early gen Cochise).

    But today...I broke my skis. It was user error. Unless the skis are designed to break rocks, rather than vice-versa. Will Blizzard give me a new pair? Doubt it, but figured I should ask. Broke at the changeover from titanal to plywood.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20210315_191058081.jpg 
Views:	193 
Size:	1.71 MB 
ID:	367521

    Love these skis...
    sproing!

  12. #1462
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    1,047
    ^^^ I bet they find your honesty refreshing

  13. #1463
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,861
    Quote Originally Posted by meter-man View Post
    Question about Blizzard warranty these days. I've had awesome experiences with Blizz warranty, but usually where there was a delamination at issue (early gen Cochise).

    But today...I broke my skis. It was user error. Unless the skis are designed to break rocks, rather than vice-versa. Will Blizzard give me a new pair? Doubt it, but figured I should ask. Broke at the changeover from titanal to plywood.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20210315_191058081.jpg 
Views:	193 
Size:	1.71 MB 
ID:	367521

    Love these skis...
    Thatís at least the 6th pair Iíve seen broken in that same spot, canít hurt to take them to a Blizzard rep and try?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  14. #1464
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,247
    Tribulations of the balsa cored resort ski....

  15. #1465
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,589
    Tribulations of a ski with material properties which change suddenly and dramatically while generally gets used by people who ski on the faster end of the spectrum.

    I’ve completely snapped the core at that same spot, I hit a tree at ~25mph or so and my hip felt like it got ripped out of the socket. A buddy broke his at the same spot doing more or less the same thing. Both of us got new pairs for the same reason. Great ski.

  16. #1466
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,247
    Spin it up how you want doc. Either way, you still have a ski w/ a core w/ suspect durability for long term resort use. Especially if 'better' skiers are the target audience.
    Agreed! It is a great ski. Just be prepared to buy another pair

  17. #1467
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Cruzing
    Posts
    11,153
    Fwiw meter man, years ago I drove my k2 snowboard into refrozen Avi debris and buckled the board. Called K2 explained what happened and they sent me a new board. Even tho my broken board was an El Dorado and no longer even being produced. Sometimes these companies just want to help out and Lee chargers on their equipment.

  18. #1468
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins
    Posts
    408
    If it was an ON3P it wouldn't have snapped I bet.

  19. #1469
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    ut
    Posts
    870
    Quote Originally Posted by tuco View Post
    Spin it up how you want doc. Either way, you still have a ski w/ a core w/ suspect durability for long term resort use. Especially if 'better' skiers are the target audience.
    Agreed! It is a great ski. Just be prepared to buy another pair
    Ainít no balsa in that core

    You want a ski to hit that weight... it wonít last forever. There are always compromises.

  20. #1470
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,247
    Quote Originally Posted by wasatchback View Post
    Ain’t no balsa in that core

    You want a ski to hit that weight... it won’t last forever. There are always compromises.
    What's the wood in there that turns to dust upon impact?
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20210316_225658494.MP.jpg 
Views:	128 
Size:	1.25 MB 
ID:	367669This stuff?

    I know. I get it.
    You understood the "long term resort durability" part then, correct?

  21. #1471
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    ut
    Posts
    870
    Quote Originally Posted by tuco View Post
    What's the wood in there that turns to dust upon impact?
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20210316_225658494.MP.jpg 
Views:	128 
Size:	1.25 MB 
ID:	367669This stuff?

    I know. I get it.
    You understood the "long term resort durability" part then, correct?
    Completely understand the long term resort durability part... do you understand the performance part?

    The cores of those skis are designed to hit target weight and performance goals not because certain materials are ďcheapĒ or save the manufacturer money. At least not this manufacturer. Someone creates that narrative cause it was their point of differentiation... and good on them for doing so. It worked

    You want a ski thatís indestructible and skis like that? Tough shit. It doesnít exist. Plain and simple

  22. #1472
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    746
    Quote Originally Posted by meter-man View Post
    Question about Blizzard warranty these days. I've had awesome experiences with Blizz warranty, but usually where there was a delamination at issue (early gen Cochise).

    But today...I broke my skis. It was user error. Unless the skis are designed to break rocks, rather than vice-versa. Will Blizzard give me a new pair? Doubt it, but figured I should ask. Broke at the changeover from titanal to plywood.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PXL_20210315_191058081.jpg 
Views:	193 
Size:	1.71 MB 
ID:	367521

    Love these skis...
    That won't happen with the Bodacious.

    They'll be picking up the pieces of my body in a basket, while the next dude can just wipe the blood off the top-sheets (or not; they'll be red, after all), step in and keep ripping!
    LOL

    Sorry dude, hope they give you new ones.

  23. #1473
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,648
    If it were me I wouldnít even ask for a replacement. Iíd ask if I could buy a single. They might then offer a replacement if you donít seem entitled from the start.

  24. #1474
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,247
    Quote Originally Posted by wasatchback View Post
    Completely understand the long term resort durability part... do you understand the performance part?

    The cores of those skis are designed to hit target weight and performance goals not because certain materials are “cheap” or save the manufacturer money. At least not this manufacturer. Someone creates that narrative cause it was their point of differentiation... and good on them for doing so. It worked

    You want a ski that’s indestructible and skis like that? Tough shit. It doesn’t exist. Plain and simple
    Hahaha. You're trippin'. Point to one post where I said they did not perform. Point out the post where I said they were cheap. I've only had good words as to their performance, on complete shit snow for that matter. I even said I'm interested in picking up a 192. Interesting how you can miss words that are right there and come up with some sort of meaning that is not there....
    Indestructible skis? WTF?
    Now, back to the damn skis. What is the lightweight wood in the core then?

  25. #1475
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    2,402
    I loved the ski. Gaijin, that's a good approach - ask to buy a single. Really though they are way out of warranty (3-4 seasons old), and I broke them by skiing into a rock. Performance/weight/rock-destroying-capability balance.

    All the ad copy I've seen says core of "balsa, paulownia, poplar and beech wood." None of those woods make me feel like a manly man like maple or ash or...**karuba** (whatever the fuck that is), but those R11s made me feel like Leo Slemmet on crack. So, if you ask me, whatever juju they put in there, it was a damn awesome build. It was so easy to ski and so fun, I might have to try it in 192.

    Or just get a Bodacious finally, after all these years...
    sproing!

Posting Permissions

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