Page 28 of 31 FirstFirst ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 LastLast
Results 676 to 700 of 759
  1. #676
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    2,015
    X106 is a great candidate for a 1 ski quiver and is a fantastic travel ski. They’ll pretty much make any turn shape but still require a forward committed skiing style. This doesn’t make them a breeze in the trees, but short turns are easier than the comparable length x88. Not as good in firm or icy conditions as the x88, better in pow and spring conditions.

  2. #677
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ne pennsylvania
    Posts
    3,309
    ^^^thanks, thats all i need it for. dedicated e.c. pow ski.
    fwiw, 6-2, 195#...always like pressuring the front of boot. most likely going 188 like my x88s...anything 180-182 feels like i'm an over the bars candidate.

  3. #678
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Spokane/Schweitzer
    Posts
    5,105
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    X106 is a great candidate for a 1 ski quiver and is a fantastic travel ski. They’ll pretty much make any turn shape but still require a forward committed skiing style. This doesn’t make them a breeze in the trees, but short turns are easier than the comparable length x88. Not as good in firm or icy conditions as the x88, better in pow and spring conditions.
    Quote Originally Posted by cinnepa View Post
    ^^^thanks, thats all i need it for. dedicated e.c. pow ski.
    fwiw, 6-2, 195#...always like pressuring the front of boot. most likely going 188 like my x88s...anything 180-182 feels like i'm an over the bars candidate.
    I had both the x88 and x106. I loved the x106 but wasn't as fond of the x88 but couldn't really pinpoint why (coming from Rossi Exp88, which I loved). I sold those and got a pair of x96 as my daily, mostly for groomer days and screwing around in untracked. They ski pretty much the same as the x106 without heating up my knees by the end of the day on harder snow. I love the x106 in crud, powder, trees, etc. but they just worked my knees too hard as a daily. On harder charging days in chutes and crud, the 96 isn't as stable as the 106 so the 106 is better for those days.

    I'm 5-11, 175 and ski both in the 180+- length (178 and 182).

  4. #679
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ne pennsylvania
    Posts
    3,309
    ^^^^how about the 96 as possible e.c. pow ski, day after ski? maybe im overkill thinking 106.

  5. #680
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Alpental
    Posts
    5,374
    Also have the x106 with shifts as a travel ski. It is a great all around ski, an aggressive detune of the tip and tail will almost make it great for trees and slower, tighter turns in variable snow but at the expense of some hard pack performance. I eas hooking up a bit in nasty breakable crust but the ski slarves great in any soft snow. Not as nimble as my L120s in trees etc but then nothing really is.
    Move upside and let the man go through...

  6. #681
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Spokane/Schweitzer
    Posts
    5,105
    Quote Originally Posted by cinnepa View Post
    ^^^^how about the 96 as possible e.c. pow ski, day after ski? maybe im overkill thinking 106.
    Yes, definitely good for that. It skis powder just fine, just not as stable as the 106 at speed in chop, in my experience. The 106 can handle the deepest of pow so for e.c. conditions the 96 would likely be a great choice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mofro261 View Post
    Also have the x106 with shifts as a travel ski. It is a great all around ski, an aggressive detune of the tip and tail will almost make it great for trees and slower, tighter turns in variable snow but at the expense of some hard pack performance. I eas hooking up a bit in nasty breakable crust but the ski slarves great in any soft snow. Not as nimble as my L120s in trees etc but then nothing really is.
    I never detune any of my skis. The 106, detuned, turns great on groomed and I don't have any issues in the trees. It releases out of turns so easily, detuning them never crossed my mind.

  7. #682
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    2,015
    Quote Originally Posted by cinnepa View Post
    ^^^^how about the 96 as possible e.c. pow ski, day after ski? maybe im overkill thinking 106.
    You’re not. The X96 is the dumbed down version of the x106 imho. At your size the 188 x106 should be a breeze to ski in any terrain. If you can handle the 186 x88, you’ll dig the “big” ski.

  8. #683
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ne pennsylvania
    Posts
    3,309
    ^^^what was i thinking???!!!

  9. #684
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Der Town
    Posts
    6,382
    x96 is dental

  10. #685
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    6,854
    Quote Originally Posted by cinnepa View Post
    so for someone not looking for a charger...but like to poke around in the trees, short turns preferred - this is the ski? might be pulling the trigger on a pair...got the x88s for any charging days.
    I wrote a review of the x106 a few pages back as well as an updated one from my Europe trip. It’s a great ski and skis trees just fine. It’s super easy to ski, more playful than charger but can haul ass if that is kept in mind.
    If Dynastar stiffened the tip some, added metal, put a 25m turn radius on it, it would be a badass charger and make other 106 class skis obsolete IMHO.

  11. #686
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Spokane/Schweitzer
    Posts
    5,105
    Quote Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier View Post
    x96 is dental
    What about someone who isn't a dentist and loves both the 96 and 106? Just different skis for different situations. Granted, the 96 isn't the stronger charger that the 106 is but it's still a fun ski.

  12. #687
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Spokane/Schweitzer
    Posts
    5,105
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    I wrote a review of the x106 a few pages back as well as an updated one from my Europe trip. It’s a great ski and skis trees just fine. It’s super easy to ski, more playful than charger but can haul ass if that is kept in mind.
    If Dynastar stiffened the tip some, added metal, put a 25m turn radius on it, it would be a badass charger and make other 106 class skis obsolete IMHO.
    But then it wouldn't be the same ski. Nothing wrong with what you suggest but isn't that basically the Pro Rider?

  13. #688
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Der Town
    Posts
    6,382
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldMember View Post
    What about someone who isn't a dentist and loves both the 96 and 106? Just different skis for different situations. Granted, the 96 isn't the stronger charger that the 106 is but it's still a fun ski.
    I prefer the Menace 98/Slicer over the X96 personally. The x96 feels too soft for me.
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldMember View Post
    But then it wouldn't be the same ski. Nothing wrong with what you suggest but isn't that basically the Pro Rider?
    No. The prorider is more like 30m radius, very traditional shape, metricfucktonne of camber, basically zero rocker, dead until 55mph, etc. 2funk is talking about a bridge ski between the easygoing x106 and the hatefilled LP105.

  14. #689
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    6,854
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldMember View Post
    But then it wouldn't be the same ski. Nothing wrong with what you suggest but isn't that basically the Pro Rider?
    No. In addition to the X106. Maybe call it the X106M. M= Manly edition.
    Quote Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier View Post

    No. The prorider is more like 30m radius, very traditional shape, metricfucktonne of camber, basically zero rocker, dead until 55mph, etc. 2funk is talking about a bridge ski between the easygoing x106 and the hatefilled LP105.
    Yup. Plus the X106 is better in pow. Each has their place.

  15. #690
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Der Town
    Posts
    6,382
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    No. In addition to the X106. Maybe call it the X106M. M= Manly edition.
    XXX106

  16. #691
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Spokane/Schweitzer
    Posts
    5,105
    Quote Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier View Post
    I prefer the Menace 98/Slicer over the X96 personally. The x96 feels too soft for me.
    Two things: How big are you and how old are you? My guess is that you're bigger and probably younger than me. Could be part of the difference as the 96, while not stiff, it's not too soft in my opinion. That said, one day this year when skiing with a younger, hard-charger, ex-racer friend of mine, I was really wishing I was on the 106. The 96 didn't have that level of charge in it but I survived it and normally don't ski quite that fast. But, that's just me.

    I haven't sked the Menace/Slicer so can't compare.

    No. The prorider is more like 30m radius, very traditional shape, metricfucktonne of camber, basically zero rocker, dead until 55mph, etc. 2funk is talking about a bridge ski between the easygoing x106 and the hatefilled LP105.
    Again, haven't skied these so can't compare.

  17. #692
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    4,524
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldMember View Post
    I never detune any of my skis.
    Insanity, IMHO.
    PE, Mechanical Engineering
    University of Bridger Bowl Alumnus
    Alpental Creeper

  18. #693
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Der Town
    Posts
    6,382
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldMember View Post
    Two things: How big are you and how old are you? My guess is that you're bigger and probably younger than me. Could be part of the difference as the 96, while not stiff, it's not too soft in my opinion. That said, one day this year when skiing with a younger, hard-charger, ex-racer friend of mine, I was really wishing I was on the 106. The 96 didn't have that level of charge in it but I survived it and normally don't ski quite that fast. But, that's just me.

    I haven't sked the Menace/Slicer so can't compare.



    Again, haven't skied these so can't compare.
    200 lbs and almost 30.

    x96 didn't gel with me skiing alpine. I think it would be a good touring stick though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Insanity, IMHO.
    Thank you for talking my wife in to detuning her skis.

  19. #694
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Spokane/Schweitzer
    Posts
    5,105
    Quote Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier View Post
    200 lbs and almost 30.

    x96 didn't gel with me skiing alpine. I think it would be a good touring stick though.

    Yeah, that's kind of what I figured. You've got me by over 25 lbs and I won't even tell you how many years...

  20. #695
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Spokane/Schweitzer
    Posts
    5,105
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldMember View Post
    Yeah, that's kind of what I figured. You've got me by over 25 lbs and I won't even tell you how many years...
    Forgot to add to my post. Yes, I also think it would be a great touring ski. I was thinking of putting Shifts on them but went ahead and put Pivots on. I may remount them next year.

  21. #696
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    6,854
    Quote Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier View Post
    XXX106
    I thought the same thing then this movie popped into my head
    Name:  IMG_0930.JPG
Views: 377
Size:  26.7 KB
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Insanity, IMHO.
    No kidding. No way I was going to ski my X106 out of the wrapper without massive detuning of the tips and tails. That pretty much goes for any ski really.

  22. #697
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Spokane/Schweitzer
    Posts
    5,105
    ^^ Meh, to each their own. I think the tip and tail shape mitigate the effects of sharp edges, tips and tail.

  23. #698
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,377
    I'm genuinely confused about this black & white attitude towards detuning tips and tails. I've also never detuned. Ever. I don't necessarily tune beyond contact points, but I've never understood the active rounding of edges beyond contact points?

    What am I missing?

  24. #699
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hell Track
    Posts
    8,499
    Quote Originally Posted by gaijin View Post

    What am I missing?
    The ability to easily release and smear the ski, especially in mediocre snow.

  25. #700
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    4,014
    its worth mentioning, I find Dynastars have gernally been ready to go out of the wrapper and require less of an initial tune/detune than many other skis.

Posting Permissions

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