No, but the Intermountain Rep will be.
"He thinks the carpet pissers did this?"
I thought I saw a pair or two of Protos in the tram line, but wasn't sure. Guess I should of asked if I could take them for a spin.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using TGR Forums mobile app
Good news for Pro Rider hoarders, just saw a pair of Pro Riders with next years Dynastar graphic
How heavy are the Protos?
Edit: PSA - Pro Riders at good price. Haven't checked shipping.
https://www.ski-discount34.com/p-324...lle-192cm.html
307
Got my first real day in soft, chopped up snow with the Legend Pros.
Holy fuck are these things missiles and absolutely destroy it. They're great. Took like 4 turns total down the Cirque. My lunch almost came up, but the skis crushed it.
Pretty easy to pivot too if you're forward.
Has anyone compared the Legend X106 against the X96?
I only have access to a 96 demo, which I'll likely take out on Wednesday.
.... Thom
Galibier Designcrafting technology in service of music
I can't say enough good things about the Legend Pro's. Those things fucking kill it.
If the current Legend Factory and next years Proto are anything like the Legend Pro, I need a pair.
what's orange and looks good on hippies?
fire
rails are for trains
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for problems caused by the government I'd be a rich fat film maker in a baseball hat.
www.theguideshut.ca
what's orange and looks good on hippies?
fire
rails are for trains
If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for problems caused by the government I'd be a rich fat film maker in a baseball hat.
www.theguideshut.ca
So, I got out on a pair of 178 cm Legend X96's yesterday in crap, refrozen, low tide conditions - basically the sort of snow I slotted for this ski.
TLDR: This is a ski that loves to rail - as much as a 98 ON3P Wren, but with a bit less tip and tail release. Dynastar's racing heritage shows. Since the ski has an all mountain reputation, I would have expected it to be a bit more slarvy when called upon - like the Wren. This might have been the tune (see below), but I think the amount of camber is primarily responsible for this. If you like to rail on groomers then this ski should be on your short list, but that's not a description of me.
Me: 5'10" 165 Lbs., 67 years old, aggressive but smooth. I don't take air on purpose and don't do spinny/jibby stuff. Refrozen reef and bumps beat up my knees and I try to avoid them, but invariably, I let myself get suckered into them - for example Pali at A-basin and Flipper at Bridger Bowl (first timer there, last week). I'm trying to be kind to my body and ski until the planet gets even with us and stops dumping white stuff from the sky.
Ever the geek, I checked the tune the night before. It makes no sense to critique a poorly tuned ski (this ain't no Blister after all). The bases were dead flat, and I used my SVST bevel guides to ensure my normal 1/1 bevel was laid on. They were close before I fixed 'em. I detuned to the tip and tail taper points - heavily rounding off the edges.
It's possible that I needed to go a bit past the taper points, but I suspect the difficulty in releasing the tips/tails mostly has to do with the camber. It's been a while since I've been on a ski with a healthy amount of camber (maybe 10mm on these skis?) and I think this contributes to that characteristic, as well of course to their ability to lock into a turn like they mean it.
I'm still in a mystery about the X106's (can't find a place that has 'em mounted up). Looking at the rocker photos on Blister, it appears as if the X106's also have a healthy amount of camber, so I don't have confidence that I'll be able to release the tips and tails the way I've grown to love.
I'm thinking that what I'm after may be my long ignored, Atomic Automatic 109's which are a bit softer than most skis in my quiver and won't beat the crap out of me when the conditions suck. I'll take them out next week for a reality check as the snow looks is if it will continue to suck here in the Front Range (with the possible exception of a light dump on Sunday).
I think what I'm telling myself is that when the conditions are like this, it's time to slap on the skins and get away from the area, 'coz I hate groomers even more than I hate torturing myself on refrozen bumps.
... Thom
Galibier Designcrafting technology in service of music
The Legend X-series are carvy when called upon, not slarvy. That said they are easier going than the original LP and the 5-point sidecut and rocker profile makes them easier and more intuitive to ski, but it's true they don't release the tails like heavily rockered designs. I like a nice supportive tail, but I too have thought of lightly detuning the tail contact point on my x106 for ease in skiing tight bumps.
I got out on my very own 180 x88's today. They straight rail groomers, initiate turns very smoothly and have tons of pop. The x106 tail is loose in comparison. I haven't studied the x96 rocker profile too closely, but I know it has metal, so it may be more similar to the x88 than the x106 in that regard.
I'll take a closer look tomorrow, and get some other maggot opinions, but to my eye the x106 has less camber than the metal skis. Also, I think your stated 10mm is very high (possibly base to base?).
I was eyeing some legend 96 and 106 side by side and I swear the 96 had a touch more tip rocker than the 106.
Probably operator error as they might have been different length skis but it sure seemed to be true.
Common sense. So rare today in America it's almost like having a superpower.
Last edited by galibier_numero_un; 03-02-2018 at 02:36 PM.
Galibier Designcrafting technology in service of music
If anyone spots a decent pair of 190 LP 105s, let me know. I've been looking for a while.
Bookmarks