Daily Driver

[TAFKALVS]

Industry insider information right here, solid review.

It would be a good compliment to the RX.

[adrenalated]

Any thoughts on: Icelantic Nomads, Vanguards or Black Diamond Boundary 107s?

Nomad is a good ski, very versatile, playful, easy to ski, still has some backbone. Finish quality of Icelantic skis has historically not been great but it is improving.

I expect the Kartel 108 will do everything the Nomad does, but better.

Vanguard is a more traditional shape (a lot less tail rocker) and has a lighter weight core intended for touring. I don't think it's the ski you're looking for.

No experience with the BD Boundary 107.

[roQer]

Nomad is a good ski, very versatile, playful, easy to ski, still has some backbone.

Nomad? Who cares for a Nomad ski. That's a Nomad.

[The SnowShow]

Nomad is a good ski, very versatile, playful, easy to ski, still has some backbone. Finish quality of Icelantic skis has historically not been great but it is improving.

I expect the Kartel 108 will do everything the Nomad does, but better.

Vanguard is a more traditional shape (a lot less tail rocker) and has a lighter weight core intended for touring. I don't think it's the ski you're looking for.

No experience with the BD Boundary 107.

Thanks, very helpful. Definitely want to look more at the Kartel. What about a 108 Wren? How does that compare to a Kartel?

[cooks]

One goes forward and the other goes both ways.

More serious response: Both the kartel and wren can occupy a similar spot in the quiver but they are very different skis. Decide if you want a directional ski or a more center mounted, more rockered ski, then go from there.

[adrenalated]

What about a 108 Wren? How does that compare to a Kartel?

I mean, they're both 108 underfoot, but beyond that, they are entirely different skis. A Tacoma and a 911 both have four wheels, an engine, and some seats, but other than that they don't really do the same thing.

Wren is directional, stiff, traditionally mounted, long turn radius, fairly minimal rocker by modern standards. Kartel is twinned, medium+-ish flex, fairly center mounted, with fairly generous rocker. Much more playful and easy to ski, but won't rail a turn or bust chop like a Wren will.

[cooks]

Come to think of it, next year's 108 I have a hard time calling minimally rockered, even by modern standards. It's on the low end for sure, ie not stupidly rockered. But it does have a decent amount of rocker.

What does set it apart is a solid flex, directional sidecut and, by modern standards, a long turn radius. The kartel absolutely has a backbone and can get on it when asked, but it does not have near the same feel or demeanor as a wrenegade.

[widluk]

Anyone been on both the Wren 108 and the Invictus 108? These will be a replacement to my 12-13 Belafonte 192's. Looking for something that has a little better float if I'm finding some unexpected deep snow, and maybe just a touch easier to ski. Didn't like the feel of the Belafonte in deep snow. Both seem to fit the bill. Last year's Invictus can be had for about $450 so it's cheaper, but I love the feel of my ON3P's. I have the 191 Billy Goats for deeper days and they are my all time favorite ski.

I'm 6' 4" 225.

These will be my daily driver living in Denver next year, but moving back to MN after that and then they'll be my main travel ski.

[cooks]

I have not been on the invictus but have skied both the old belafonte and the wren 108. The wren 108 I'd say is slightly more playful feeling than the old belafonte but has a similar or even higher top speed. I know exactly what you're talking about by not loving the belafonte in deep snow and the wren 108 fixes that. For a stiff, straight "only" 108mm ski, it skies soft snow exceptionally well. Better than my old wren 112s imo.

[widluk]

I have not been on the invictus but have skied both the old belafonte and the wren 108. The wren 108 I'd say is slightly more playful feeling than the old belafonte but has a similar or even higher top speed. I know exactly what you're talking about by not loving the belafonte in deep snow and the wren 108 fixes that. For a stiff, straight "only" 108mm ski, it skies soft snow exceptionally well. Better than my old wren 112s imo.

Awesome, that's very helpful and sounds exactly what I'm looking for. Thanks.

[XavierD]

XavierD -- I'm looking for a ski in the 105-110 range to handle inbounds powder and leftovers and would like to go with ON3P. I ski at Baker, and really need a ski to deal with the heavy chunder but ideally one that doesn't mind if I'm not maching at all times. Have you had the Kartel in these conditions much? How about the Wren 108? I realize they're very different skis, but wonder how much Wren crud busting you give up for the more playful Kartel. Thanks.

Both are capable skis that can handle our heavy left over mash potatoes after they start to consolidate. For off piste, your choice should depend on how you like to initiate the turn and manage the ski. If you like to power the tips and drive through the boot, the Wren is your best choice. If you prefer a more centered stance and initiate the turn through subtler drive and rolling weight across your foot and ankle the Kartel is your choice.
I found the Kartel was quicker in tight bumps and the tail rocker helped it adapt to awkward and uneven micro terrain.
The Eliptical radius carves better on hard snow and is quicker to initiate. If you really drive the tips however it can over respond, which is why hard drivers should look at the Wren.

I got the Kartel over the wren for the firm snow capability and working micro terrain. If I was looking to power through open terrain I would likely go Wren, but I also have a 192 Cochise for those days.

[mtb]

XavierD

XavierD -- I'm looking for a ski in the 105-110 range to handle inbounds powder and leftovers and would like to go with ON3P. I ski at Baker, and really need a ski to deal with the heavy chunder but ideally one that doesn't mind if I'm not maching at all times. Have you had the Kartel in these conditions much? How about the Wren 108? I realize they're very different skis, but wonder how much Wren crud busting you give up for the more playful Kartel. Thanks.

Both are capable skis that can handle our heavy left over mash potatoes after they start to consolidate. For off piste, your choice should depend on how you like to initiate the turn and manage the ski. If you like to power the tips and drive through the boot, the Wren is your best choice. If you prefer a more centered stance and initiate the turn through subtler drive and rolling weight across your foot and ankle the Kartel is your choice.
I found the Kartel was quicker in tight bumps and the tail rocker helped it adapt to awkward and uneven micro terrain.
The Eliptical radius carves better on hard snow and is quicker to initiate. If you really drive the tips however it can over respond, which is why hard drivers should look at the Wren.

I got the Kartel over the wren for the firm snow capability and working micro terrain. If I was looking to power through open terrain I would likely go Wren, but I also have a 192 Cochise for those days.

Thanks, I appreciate the insight. Now it's time to do some thinking, but not too much...

[cooks]

The Eliptical radius carves better on hard snow and is quicker to initiate. If you really drive the tips however it can over respond, which is why hard drivers should look at the Wren.

I totally agree with pretty much everything you said, but this intrigues me. Not to totally derail the thread, but the wren is... interesting with its multi-radius sidecut. I've found it does require a somewhat traditional initiation by weighting the front of the ski, but through the middle of the turn, I had to force myself to kind of feather the ski with very little angulation to avoid the front end hooking much harder than I wanted or just washing out. It felt somewhat easy to overpower the initiation, very easy to overpower the middle of the turn, and the bottom of a turn was fine (never did anything weird, but not particularly engaged either). Basically the end result was a 27m radius ski that either wanted to snap slalom turns or skid. I had always just written it off as something you get with rockered skis.

But you mentioning you think the elliptical sidecut behaves better on hard snow got me thinking about it again. From how I understand their bi-radius sidecut is done, it seems like that may have caused a lot of what eventually left me scratching my head with the wrenegade?

[adrenalated]

The elliptical sidecut hooks up even harder when you drive into it than the bi-radius sidecut.

[auvgeek]

It felt somewhat easy to overpower the initiation, very easy to overpower the middle of the turn, and the bottom of a turn was fine (never did anything weird, but not particularly engaged either).

The sentence before made me think that your main complaint was the difference in difficulty between initiating the turn and the middle of the turn, but the quoted sentence makes it sound like you just overpower the ski...

One thing we have to keep in mind with comparing a Wren with a Kartel (especially since both skis are now available in exactly the same width) is the difference in rocker and mount point not just the elliptical vs bi-radius. To do that, you'd have to ski an old Jeffery 110 and Jeffery 114 (or some other combo where minimal other changes to sidecut/rocker/etc are made). My guess is the actual differences in on-snow feel are small.

FWIW, I spent more time on the Jeffrey 110 (probably a less-refined version of the K108), and I find them extremely intuitive. They are the best combo of stable and playful that I've personally skied. My only complaint with them is they definitely prefer a neutral stance in 3D snow—you can't really drive the tips too hard. I definitely prefer the Billy Goat in anything over like 4".

[cooks]

I mean, I guess overpowering it was a lot of the problem, but it happened in weird ways. The ski generally felt very nicely balanced when just skiing around or billy goating, but when you get on it, the ski felt "hinge pointy" in its sidecut, but not flex, if that makes sense. It took a pretty good amount of force to get the front of the ski to understeer at initiation (usually pushed rather than hooked), but then took a much more delicate touch through the middle of the turn. The extra stiff 108 protos that I got to try felt a lot better in that regard, but I couldn't make the tail work to save my life. Seemed like you had to make a very exaggerated, early unweighting which I had an impossible time figuring out. That's not to take anything away from the ski - I'm sure it was 100% lack of talent on my end since it seems like most others had no issue figuring it out.

I think mount point definitely plays a big part too, and not just relative to the length of the ski. The wren mount point places boot center over center of sidecut I believe, as I came to find out the other day. I always felt like the meat of the sidecut was under my midfoot/heel, which sorta makes sense now I guess (had to just stand there in the middle of a turn vs still trying to bend the middle of the ski). The skis I'm on now as a daily driver I mounted so the center of the sidecut and camber are basically under my met arch/ball of foot and it feels a lot smoother bending the front, middle, and back of a ski through a turn.

[schindlerpiste]

My favorites for the intermountain west:
Kastle MX98 184 (pure GS big-mountain power)
Salomon Q-Lab 183 (tip rocker to float, camber to carve)
Kastle BMX108 188 (wide enough for shin deep, a bit of tip rise to kill chalk, crud and variable snow, camber for carving)
Volkl Katana 184 (a bit too flat for everyday, but great power and float).

All these skis carve, as opposed to slarve. ...but who wants to slarve, any way?

[swissiphic]

I mean, I guess overpowering it was a lot of the problem, but it happened in weird ways.

etc....

Just curious if you get good progressive forward ankle flex from your boots, experimented with a bit more forward lean, plugged a bit of heel rise in boots to increase in boot forward ramp just a hair, etc...? From your full description; I've had similar issues with skis but it came down to tweaking the body balance/stance angles juuuust right...along with edge sharpness/base bevel/detuning skis juuuuust right and optimizing mount point. Adding tip extenders for float, adding stiffening aluminum strips to parts of the ski....so many variables and some skis just don't ever feel juuust right but just thought I'd ask. I think these factors along with basic height/weight/style, etc... go a long ways in factoring in what skis feel best for individual skiers and why the somewhat 'varied' reports of how the same ski feels with different drivers at the wheel...unless, the answer, truly...is....Praxis RX?

[cooks]

I have spent an ungodly amount of time fiddling with boots. I'm sure adrenalated can step in and vouch for me here haha. I switched boots again at the beginning of the year, finally got them pretty much perfect midway through year, but then cracked the cuff. It's been a downward spiral since then - tried to keep skiing with cranking the buckles to compensate for the cuff, which just ended in fucking up my feet even more. Eventually got a new pair on warranty and swapped the cuffs, but my lowers are now super cracked, so I have to deal with making the new lowers fit now..

But yeah, my feet are hopelessly misshapen and no ski boots fit off the shelf. Also trying to compensate for some missing ligaments, which I am sure doesn't help. The end result, after spending way too many hours with heat guns, foredoms, and presses is a scorpion 150 (narrowest plug boot midfoot back I could find, short of the actual dalbello WC boot), downsized to a toes lightly curled shell fit, one boot filled with jb weld and duct tape for moar narrow, zipfits, and canting plates.

The boots and skis I've found now are pretty much ski gear nirvana or close enough as far as I'm concerned. Hence my recent effort to get more people to go in on a fully cambered mold for ON3P...

Or I could give up and go Praxis Rx. And spend months agonizing over mounting .9cm or 1.2cm back..

[Lindahl]

FWIW, cooks, you're not the first person to suggest that the 108 isn't quite the charger and has some issues. Haven't skied them myself, yet, though.

I always felt like the meat of the sidecut was under my midfoot/heel, which sorta makes sense now I guess (had to just stand there in the middle of a turn vs still trying to bend the middle of the ski). The skis I'm on now as a daily driver I mounted so the center of the sidecut and camber are basically under my met arch/ball of foot and it feels a lot smoother bending the front, middle, and back of a ski through a turn.

Thats how a directional ski is supposed to be - center of sidecut under the ball of the foot. Otherwise it just feels wierd in a turn when laying into them. Had that issue with the pre-production Wailer T2 105s until I moved the mount back. It didn't have the wierd hookup you described though, but it did feel wierd and off centered in a turn.

I have felt that hookup issue though. Usually more exaggerated in denser untracked snow. Its been with softer skis, generally (forebody, really). But I also had that issue with older ON3P Billygoats. The Katanas are some of the best skis I've used in avoiding that issue, as are my Kusalas. I think stiff reverse camber skis are the shit in terms of feeling solidly uniform and dependable through a turn (but bases flat and in between turns on hardpack can feel pretty vague, which I dislike).

[adrenalated]

I can vouch for cooks doing a lot of fucking with boots, as well as that he does not get "good progressive forward ankle flex" because he cannot flex said boots.

[cooks]

Adrenalated - Since you don't actually ski anymore, just ski tour lou dawson style, you haven't seen me since like day 2 on those boots . I realized shortly after that zipfits made the boot more like a stout 160 and there was no way I'd ever learn to actually ski it unless I gained like 100lbs. I actually can flex them now, after softening them back down to 145ish and have skis that aren't completely overpowered when I do flex the boot. And having nothing to do but ski ice bumps all year kinda helped provide some motivation to figure out technique/how to not get wrapped around a tree learning to ski gear I had no business being on lol.

Lindahl - I do think the wren 108 is a charger for sure, but I would agree that it is not the same "comp style ski" that the wren 112 is. It definitely has a playful side that the 112 doesn't quite have. Not having skied the stock flex, I can't say for sure, but I don't think it gave up anything on the top end. Provided you can adapt your style to suit the ski, which I could not. I also don't think the mount point on either of the wrenegades was wrong or that they were bad skis (I think its probably one of the most dialed skis I've been on 90% of the time, its just the upper 10% things get weird), more just that I couldn't adapt my skiing to suit the ski.

[XavierD]

The Wren 108 can pivot in tight places in ways the 112 an 113 couldn't. In soft snow you can slarve where before you needed to 'carve.'
It still handles funky snow at speed just fine.

[The SnowShow]

Wanted to resurrect this thread: I may be able to grab a pair of '13-14 190 Line SFBs used but in great shape. For those who have skied the SFBs, what are your thoughts? Are they noodles? Do they ski floppy and squirrelly? How do they handle hard pack, groomed, and low amounts of chopped powder? Trees? Moguls? Any help is appreciated.

[ScrewYou]

Whats makes a good daily driver for Mt Baker and Whistler? I figure its colder up there than here in tahoe, but the elevation is lower.. So is the snow fairly similar? Sierra cement vs cascade concrete?

I have a 191 Billy Goat for charging chunky/heavy snow, 189 shreditor 112 for natural terrain jibs/park, and a 192 sick day 125 for the deepest days.

Im moving up to Bellingham for school next month, wondering what should I look for in skis 94-104mm, to work best for firm PNW snow.