Head Monster 108

[Self Jupiter]

I remember those skis, for sure. But question is were they any more capable than the newest monster 108, LEgend pro rider, down skis etc iterations of today?

[Self Jupiter]

This is what I dont understand? How the F can you get anything burlier? My 191 108s are uber heavy, and planky stiff. Burliest skis I have ever owned/seen.

You arent the only one to say this though. What the heck was in those im103s? They were made of 2x4s and steel?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

No rocker

[Ville]

So much metal.. sometimes it would respond to turn inputs with "I'll take that underadvisement, but my preference is STRAIGHTLINE!"

I like my Rossi RC112 better

Haven't tried those Rossi's. Heard they are good skis too. Head A-star is my goto ski now, easy to ski, but still very cabable ski.

Sent from my PLK-L01 using TGR Forums mobile app

[altacoup]

Might have to reconsider my pair. I was skiing 103m team edition to start my season just the other day and they felt pretty easy. If Tuco claims these are girly boards compared to those they must be pretty easy to ski.

[summit]

Haven't tried those Rossi's. Heard they are good skis too. Head A-star is my goto ski now, easy to ski, but still very cabable ski.

Sent from my PLK-L01 using TGR Forums mobile app

The little bit of rocker made them less likely to submarine at sub-mach speeds... also a little less shocky in bumps. It's basically an M103 that is a little wider with slight tip rocker.

[Banh Mi]

No rocker

The 16 and 17 ones still barely have any rocker. Maybe 10-15cm? Almost full camber.. I like this type of design.

Might have to reconsider my pair. I was skiing 103m team edition to start my season just the other day and they felt pretty easy. If Tuco claims these are girly boards compared to those they must be pretty easy to ski.

They are pretty darn easy to ski for how burly they are. It’s surprising. Must be the sidecut and that 10cm of tip rocker.

I spoke too soon on my 184 Monster 98s.. I should have waited to judge them once I got my ski legs under me. I got another day on them today, and had a much better time in bumps than the past two days. AND the bumps were larger and more uneven today! They can “slarve” when you need them too, even though the design of the ski would have you thinking otherwise. Also, they slay ice like its not even there.

I came away from today really enjoying them, and definitely reconsidering keeping them.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Self Jupiter]

The 16 and 17 ones still barely have any rocker. Maybe 10-15cm?

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

The rocker makes the difference, even that little. that’s my uneducated opinion

[Nevada29er]

I doubt the 191s are as burly as my old RC112 198s. Those were true race room fat skis with a bit of tip rocker. NO speed limit.

[Banh Mi]

I doubt the 191s are as burly as my old RC112 198s. Those were true race room fat skis with a bit of tip rocker. NO speed limit.

Blister thinks the 184 Monster 108 is burlier than the 188 RC 112.. The 198 might take the cake over the 191 Monster though. It’s close however.

I have hand fiddled 198 RC112s, but never skied them. They hand flex similarly to the 191 Monsters, but have more rocker. The length is where the 198 would be more burly. The Monsters have a lot of camber, but aren’t hard to ski.

Multiple, very reputable mags have told me the old IM 103s are significantly burlier than the new Monsters. I really want to try a pair of those.

What were Line Motherships like? I’ve read they were over 3000g/ski, but were they soft or stiff?

What changed in 6 years, that companies no longer make skis like this?? It seems like between 1999-2011, companies made UBER burly planks, and still sold them without issue. Now, they just dont sell. What happened?



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[jackattack]

What happened?

Newschoolers

[2FUNKY]

Blister thinks the 184 Monster 108 is burlier than the 188 RC 112.. The 198 might take the cake over the 191 Monster though. It’s close however.

I have hand fiddled 198 RC112s, but never skied them. They hand flex similarly to the 191 Monsters, but have more rocker. The length is where the 198 would be more burly. The Monsters have a lot of camber, but aren’t hard to ski.

Multiple, very reputable mags have told me the old IM 103s are significantly burlier than the new Monsters. I really want to try a pair of those.

What were Line Motherships like? I’ve read they were over 3000g/ski, but were they soft or stiff?

What changed in 6 years, that companies no longer make skis like this?? It seems like between 1999-2011, companies made UBER burly planks, and still sold them without issue. Now, they just dont sell. What happened?



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I've owned both the RC112 198 and the IM103. They were absolute crushers. I cannot compare them to the M108 as I have not skied them but the previous two where the ski I would bring out when there was big vert with skied out snow to be destroyed. They instilled pure confidence if you had the quads and balls to ride the rails.

Newschoolers

Word, damn skidders.

[NW_SKIER]

I've owned both the RC112 198 and the IM103. They were absolute crushers. I cannot compare them to the M108 as I have not skied them but the previous two where the ski I would bring out when there was big vert with skied out snow to be destroyed. They instilled pure confidence if you had the quads and balls to ride the rails.


Word, damn skidders.

#tailgunner4lyfe

[Deep Days]

I️ have kept a delammed pair of iM103s around for Wagner to emulate for me one day when I’ve got the dollars, stones, and legs.

Would be nice if I️ didn’t have to!

Anybody ski both old M103s and new 98 and/or 108s? Which is more similar?

When my legs worked back in college it was soooo fun destroying shitty snow at speed on those 103s... now I️ slarve on wailer 105s cuz I️ got fat in med school...

[summit]

Get your very own RC112 188s here: https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...nafit-Crampons

[tuco]

The rocker makes the difference, even that little. that’s my uneducated opinion

Nope. I already detailed a little before but, hand fondle difference:iM103--2 thick sheets titanal(108 has 1), core measures significantly thicker underfoot than 108. old skool flat square tail(sidecut ends 7/8" from tail),longer running length. Way straighter too--103 measures 126-103-118=41.5tr---108 measures 144-110-129=27.6tr
iM103 also has piezo chip, which makes them space age n shit
Like I said, girls skis compared

Blister thinks the 184 Monster 108 is burlier than the 188 RC 112.. The 198 might take the cake over the 191 Monster though. It’s close however.

I have hand fiddled 198 RC112s, but never skied them. They hand flex similarly to the 191 Monsters, but have more rocker. The length is where the 198 would be more burly. The Monsters have a lot of camber, but aren’t hard to ski.

Multiple, very reputable mags have told me the old IM 103s are significantly burlier than the new Monsters. I really want to try a pair of those.

What were Line Motherships like? I’ve read they were over 3000g/ski, but were they soft or stiff?

What changed in 6 years, that companies no longer make skis like this?? It seems like between 1999-2011, companies made UBER burly planks, and still sold them without issue. Now, they just dont sell. What happened?



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Never skied RC, but I've fondled them and I would say the build is more similar to the 103. Bliste3r might be full of shit on that one

I️ have kept a delammed pair of iM103s around for Wagner to emulate for me one day when I’ve got the dollars, stones, and legs.

Would be nice if I️ didn’t have to!

Anybody ski both old M103s and new 98 and/or 108s? Which is more similar?

When my legs worked back in college it was soooo fun destroying shitty snow at speed on those 103s... now I️ slarve on wailer 105s cuz I️ got fat in med school...

Sidewalls popping off?

[tuco]

Might have to reconsider my pair. I was skiing 103m team edition to start my season just the other day and they felt pretty easy. If Tuco claims these are girly boards compared to those they must be pretty easy to ski.

Little embellishment there, but now that I've got both skis next to each other, its true. Without skiing them, I can tell they are much more user friendly. Keep those bitches! You still slayin those C&D's I sold you? Those were badass skis!

[Nevada29er]

With the RC112 198s, boots become the limiting factor, at least in my case. Typical 130 flex is not going to drive those skis, you need a real plug boot.

[fat yeti]

Because Chuck used to rip on the 103 https://youtu.be/xHFF9BeZNPs

[Self Jupiter]

Nope. I already detailed a little before but, hand fondle difference:iM103--2 thick sheets titanal(108 has 1), core measures significantly thicker underfoot than 108. old skool flat square tail(sidecut ends 7/8" from tail),longer running length. Way straighter too--103 measures 126-103-118=41.5tr---108 measures 144-110-129=27.6tr
iM103 also has piezo chip, which makes them space age n shit
Like I said, girls skis compared

Do the m103s flex stiffer? Been a long time since I’ve fondled a pair of those. Also monster 108 has sight tail rocker, which I imagine loosens the tail significantly on snow vs m103.

[Banh Mi]

All the videos on youtube of the Monster 98 and 108 say they have two sheets of titanal.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[abraham]

Because Chuck used to rip on the 103 https://youtu.be/xHFF9BeZNPs

So did Kenjiro

[tuco]

All the videos on youtube of the Monster 98 and 108 say they have two sheets of titanal.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Haha, it appears I talked out my ass! Top metal is not full width and covered up by the topsheet. I didn't even fact check Core profile is still thinner. Must be the graphene because......

Do the m103s flex stiffer? Been a long time since I’ve fondled a pair of those. Also monster 108 has sight tail rocker, which I imagine loosens the tail significantly on snow vs m103.

they definitely flex stiff. My 103's have delammed sidewalls so they will not flex true to their nature. Personally, I think these look more fun---like I said, the 103 was a true bottom feeder!

[Self Jupiter]

Haha, it appears I talked out my ass! Top metal is not full width and covered up by the topsheet. I didn't even fact check Core profile is still thinner. Must be the graphene because......

they definitely flex stiff. My 103's have delammed sidewalls so they will not flex true to their nature. Personally, I think these look more fun---like I said, the 103 was a true bottom feeder!

Haha yeah, I’m just armchair QBing my POV on the difference on snow.

I blew the sidewall out on my DP Pro +s from the same vintage- also stiff as fuck, also bottom feeders. My uneducated unsubstantiated bs opinion on the matter is these skis were all too stiff to last all that long - break, not bend - how’s that for engineering know how? 🧐

And yeah bottom line the new skis seem like more fun and just as capable on anything but maybe rock hard ice.

[altacoup]

"I blew the sidewall out on my DP Pro +s from the same vintage- also stiff as fuck, also bottom feeders. My uneducated unsubstantiated bs opinion on the matter is these skis were all too stiff to last all that long - break, not bend - how’s that for engineering know how?"

Did the same thing to 3 pair of Stockli and 2 m103. Problem has less to do with stiff flex and more with construction. They basically took race construction and made them wider. Stockli had ceramic sidewalls that were very fragile. As cool as race room construction sounds it's actually not very good at all when skiing through rocks. Other similar skis had the same problem. Race room construction grips hard snow great but isn't durable.

"You still slayin those C&D's I sold you? Those were badass skis!"

Still break them out every so often, coolest topsheet ever. When the snow is heavy they're my go to. But I ski 4frnt renegades on most pow days. Complete opposite construction of skis mentioned in this tread. I've gone 20 ft to rock on those with out even a core shot, where as I've broken stockli and old heads with minimal rock impact. For durability ON3P cannot be beat. Praxis comes close but not the same.

[fat yeti]

So did Kenjiro

Yes he did he ripped on those things as well. Lars used ski on the 193 as well