DPS Lotus 124 - These Look Fun

[whyturn]

Skis that make it easier to ski longer on pow days with less effort make for more days like 4-5 straight. I don't tour though so that is not a requirement in ski selection

[kootenayskier]

I love my Wailer 112s (have both Pure 2 and Hybrids), never really jived with the Lotus 138 Pures, figured the tail on Lotus 120s would be hard work, and have often thought a fatter, lighter Wailer 112 would be exceptional. Seems that where they've gone with the Lotus 124, and I'm sure they'd suit me fine, but even if I could wrangle a pro-deal they'd still be double what I'm prepared to pay for skis in these days of deals. Obviously it's a reflection on the company I keep, but I don't know anyone who'd pay retail for these.

[XavierD]

If they wanted to make the 120 more manageable why not 118? Adding 4mm to the middle isn't gonna make it easier to handle.

Honestly going past the low 120s really isn't necessary. If you can't get a 118 to 122 mm ski to float and smear, your design team needs some updating. Tip shape and rocker have really come a long way in the last couple of years. I doubt we will see many more skis released with >118mm widths in the future, with most of the fat skis at 112-116mm. The days of the super fat are coming to a close.

[covert]

poppycock

[Lindahl]

If they wanted to make the 120 more manageable why not 118? Adding 4mm to the middle isn't gonna make it easier to handle.

Honestly going past the low 120s really isn't necessary. If you can't get a 118 to 122 mm ski to float and smear, your design team needs some updating. Tip shape and rocker have really come a long way in the last couple of years. I doubt we will see many more skis released with >118mm widths in the future, with most of the fat skis at 112-116mm. The days of the super fat are coming to a close.

Says someone in the PNW

(steep dense powder)

[shroom]

gotta work with whatcha got

[XXX-er]

Are you backseating or mounting the clamps far back? I also keep my tips up most of the time, but nothing like that. Or do the 120 ski like that??

Edit: Not trying to sound rude, I'm genuinely curious. I seem to be more on plane on top of the snow (still with the tips far up)

I tend to mount forward if anything, i had my wailers at +5, I think the lotus were on the line or +1

the tips on the 120's are out of the snow most of the time in pow if I look down ... well does it look like I'm backseating?

that was 1st tracks in a meter of -15C fresh of a big pow cycle, I was guiding our yellow friend the professional recreationalist who was behind the lens

[grskier]

If they wanted to make the 120 more manageable why not 118? Adding 4mm to the middle isn't gonna make it easier to handle.

Honestly going past the low 120s really isn't necessary. If you can't get a 118 to 122 mm ski to float and smear, your design team needs some updating. Tip shape and rocker have really come a long way in the last couple of years. I doubt we will see many more skis released with >118mm widths in the future, with most of the fat skis at 112-116mm. The days of the super fat are coming to a close.

Way more to it than just the width of the waist...

I can get a narrower ski to schmear than the lotus 120, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't want to play around on something fatter....

The ski should be a bit more playful than the 120s just looking at dimensions and making a LOT of assumptions, which could make it more manageable for many people.

[rabbit]

"Tip shape and rocker have really come a long way in the last couple of years."

ROFLMAO!

[shroom]

ayy lmao

[Doremite]

I tend to mount forward if anything, i had my wailers at +5, I think the lotus were on the line or +1

+5??? Having skied 99s, 105s, and 120s, the line (tele) has worked great for me for all three. I was -1 on 99s and totally felt it. On the line $ in comparison. Not to derail the topic here but +5 threw me. ... and no, you don't appear in the back seat

[XXX-er]

demo bindings so I went as far as +6 but i seemed to like +5 ish the best, most of the 112's at the local dealer were mounted at +2

[pfluffenmeister]

IIRC a DPS rep in Canada liked his mounts way forward; like +3.

For the 120s I've skied, I like +1.


... and now that I come to think about it, when assessing whether a quiver is complete or not, I also like +1.

[XXX-er]

I was on JJ's before the 112's which is also 5point and if you line them up the mount is way forward so maybe thats why I liked +5 even tho I am an old fuck with his ski pants pulled up to his tits

[bsavery]

Does anyone actually have a rocker profile for these?

[covert]

SPECS:

Lengths: 185cm, 178cm
Dimensions: 151/124/133
Estimated Weight: 1840g
Tip Rocker Length: 407mm
Tail Rocker Length: 241mm
Radius: 23M

[bsavery]

SPECS:

Lengths: 185cm, 178cm
Dimensions: 151/124/133
Estimated Weight: 1840g
Tip Rocker Length: 407mm
Tail Rocker Length: 241mm
Radius: 23M

How much camber?

[grskier]

Nothing that hasn't been already stated, but concise.

[covert]

185s are sold out

[bsavery]

185s are sold out

Balls.

[Woolbury]

I too was curious about the 124's also,I guess a moot point now. I couldn't peg them as a Lotus(which I love) or a Wailer(not so much). The thought that you could get an even lighter weight Lotus(I use mine nearly 100% touring) that would ski across the fall line a bit better, in a 184 length had real appeal. In the right terrain and snow conditions, my 190 lotus 120's smear and swivel beautifully, but if you've got to pick them up and turn across the hill they can be a handful. I've never really clicked with my 112's though, and because of that was suspicious of what you'd be getting with the 124's.

[bsavery]

Anyone actually skiied these?

[LiveLarger]

^^

Bump!

[The Dark Side]

Anyone ski these?

[Live2play]

I hear crickets chirping on these!