Salomon QST mounting

[Bojangles Mgillicutty]

Just to clarify, I’m looking for the recommended line on the green qst 106. My old pair were mounted +1.5 and that mount was money.

I have the green 188 106, my center line measures 85.6 cm to the tail

[altacoup]

Thank you


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[tupp_]

I have the green 188 106, my center line measures 85.6 cm to the tail

It is the exact same on the purple 106's in 189 that I just measured.

Likely dropping in at +1.5 or +2 on the 189 106s alongside 186 blanks at +1 (though still noodling, as usual). Goal is to get to a balanced ski without sacrificing too much top end. I like the "more forward mounted charger" that Altacoup talks about.

[altacoup]

My old pair of green 106s I skied on the line and +1.5. The forward mount was way better. I believe alka said he skied his at +2.

[oltrepiave]

Old 106 is very different to new 106. I hated the old one. Love the new one mounted -1cm. A lot of clients have liked it that way too.

i'd love if you could expaand on that. Just bought a pair of dirt cheap used (red topsheets) qst106, 188 length.

i'm a forward mount guy, could they work as a touring Daily Driver? i'm especially looking for playfulness and tail releasability while maintaining some decency in shitty BC-esque environments

[DigSki]

i'd love if you could expaand on that. Just bought a pair of dirt cheap used (red topsheets) qst106, 188 length.

i'm a forward mount guy, could they work as a touring Daily Driver? i'm especially looking for playfulness and tail releasability while maintaining some decency in shitty BC-esque environments

Could be a touring daily driver - the old QST (assuming you mean maroon) ones do everything well but nothing great. The new ones are substantially more playful.

If you're a forward mount guy, definitely go forward. I'm not sure how people ski them behind the line, because even on the line there's a ton of tip. I think I had the old 106 181 mounted at +4cm during my final days on them and loved them there. They're deep in a closet, I can pull them out and measure later if it'd be helpful.

[oltrepiave]

measures would be ultra helpful, thank you so much. And i did mean the maroon ones,my bad.

I kinda like the idea of a "meh" ski that does everything mediocre.

How would you "score" tip flex on those? a Blister-like numerical score is more than enough or if you want to give me some kind of comparison with other skis (eg atomic bent100 or anything else that we might both know).

[oltrepiave]

so i got the skis, got them for dirt cheap so i still might keep them or lend/give them away.

at the same time i've found some 22/23 (white topsheet) at a decent price.

With my old tracers i did enjoy the extra length in terms of (minimal) extra stabiity and a bit more surfiness (i could go even more forward than usual with the mount) particularly in shit BCesque snow.

what size would be the ideal one for the 22-23? looking at the shape i'd mount in 5/6 cm away from true center so i'm kind of leaning towards the 188. At the same time i'm not that tall or heavy and they sure can be a PITA in certain situations (even stupid shit like handling/strapping them to packs).

I hate this jump in size that brands often do (180ish to 188ish straight), 185ish has always been my sweetspot.

[DigSki]

I kinda like the idea of a "meh" ski that does everything mediocre.

How would you "score" tip flex on those? a Blister-like numerical score is more than enough or if you want to give me some kind of comparison with other skis (eg atomic bent100 or anything else that we might both know).

Tip flex...interesting... I don't really know. I can equate it to ski performance better. In pow I don't have to think about keeping the tip on top. In denser snow, it just stays on top. In lighter snow, it'll go under but it wants to come back to the top - it does not want to go to middle earth.

so i got the skis, got them for dirt cheap so i still might keep them or lend/give them away.

at the same time i've found some 22/23 (white topsheet) at a decent price.

With my old tracers i did enjoy the extra length in terms of (minimal) extra stabiity and a bit more surfiness (i could go even more forward than usual with the mount) particularly in shit BCesque snow.

what size would be the ideal one for the 22-23? looking at the shape i'd mount in 5/6 cm away from true center so i'm kind of leaning towards the 188. At the same time i'm not that tall or heavy and they sure can be a PITA in certain situations (even stupid shit like handling/strapping them to packs).

I hate this jump in size that brands often do (180ish to 188ish straight), 185ish has always been my sweetspot.

Just got them out of the closet - I'm at +2cm on both old and new 106 in 181 length.

My two cents - I'd say get the 22/23, it's a way more playful ski (for me playful means looser / more pivoty and more pop when making slalom turns in pow)

For reference on length - I'm 5'8 ~150lbs and ski on the 181. I ski in the Wasatch and ski fairly hard. I generally trend towards lots of tight turns in steep terrain. If the pow is deep, I like being able to dive the ski so I'm up to my nipples in the apex of the turn. I jump off some stuff, but nothing huge. I've never once wished I was on a longer ski, but a couple times I've thought a shorter version would be fun. I had the maroon 188 and they just felt like too much for me (I kept nicking the tails on trees and couldn't pivot as fast as I wanted). I think if I was focused on 40 footers and straight lines I'd probably want a bigger ski.

[oltrepiave]

[/COLOR]
Tip flex...interesting... I don't really know. I can equate it to ski performance better. In pow I don't have to think about keeping the tip on top. In denser snow, it just stays on top. In lighter snow, it'll go under but it wants to come back to the top - it does not want to go to middle earth.

My two cents - I'd say get the 22/23, it's a way more playful ski (for me playful means looser / more pivoty and more pop when making slalom turns in pow)

For reference on length - I'm 5'8 ~150lbs and ski on the 181. I ski in the Wasatch and ski fairly hard. I generally trend towards lots of tight turns in steep terrain. If the pow is deep, I like being able to dive the ski so I'm up to my nipples in the apex of the turn. I jump off some stuff, but nothing huge. I've never once wished I was on a longer ski, but a couple times I've thought a shorter version would be fun. I had the maroon 188 and they just felt like too much for me (I kept nicking the tails on trees and couldn't pivot as fast as I wanted). I think if I was focused on 40 footers and straight lines I'd probably want a bigger ski.

Thank you so much for the write up.

Yeah tip flex can be quite misleading but your description sounds good enough for me.
I like a soft flex (everywhere but under the bindings) simply to handle shit snow and tight spaces a bit better (especially on a strictly-touring daily driver in the Alps) and to releae/throw my skis around as much as i can.

Also during the years i've found that skiing mostly in low-elevation areas (and with increasingly hotter winters) allowed me to bring softer, non directional skis on "bigger" objectives without suffering too much.

My favourite ski ever is the old benchet120. Before the QST and the tracer i was on bent100 (180 l.) and menace 98 (181 l.) mainly. They did both feel short sometimes. The (188) tracers i got were the longest ski i ever had and they did surprise me: mainly the flex (they did feel softer) but also the added length which made everything a bit smoother.

BTW i'm 5'11with approx. 150 libs so kinda similar to you. I generally mount all my touring skis 5/6 cm behind true center. My BC120 are mounted on the line so a bit further forward.

I feel like the 181 could still be a bit extra agile in awkward BC situations (side stepping into couloirs, putting them on backpacks, the usual stuff ) while not sacrificing too much in ski-ability.
At the same time i really enjoyed having the extra length/tail because i felt like that the length coupled with a forward mount would help me release the tails and fuck around even more,with also a (slightly) higher speed limit in open terrain. That said, i definitely do not have an aggressive directional style and i'm not that heavy of a guy so i do feel like i could do just fine with the 181.

Thanks for measuring the skis btw, appreciate it.

[Bandit Man]

Either length will be fine. The new 106 really shines in soft snow. There is a fair bit of tail and tip rocker compared to earlier iterations (I owned the maroon 188 briefly) and it is a welcome and noticeable change. The newest iteration is still capable on groomers, but not great in firmer variable. Decide if you want a bit more maneuverability and agility (181) or float and stability (189). Either way, it’s not a demanding ski.


I was really stoked on picking up some 189’s at the end of the season, so I demoed a pair on a late pow day at Whistler. Loved the soft snow performance but the weakness in firmer conditions was off-putting for me. Glad I demoed them before buying a pair. YMMV

[MMMSKI]

I had the green generation of the QST 106 mounted +1.5. The new version of the ski is certainly a tad more playful.

[yeahman]

I had the green generation of the QST 106 mounted +1.5. The new version of the ski is certainly a tad more playful.

That's the sweet spot for the new gen too IMO.

[oltrepiave]

update: so I ended up giving away my previous-gen QST since I found a good deal on last year (white/silver) QST106, 181 length.

As soon as i felt them in my hand my heart sank and i thought "there's no way these actually weigh 1980 g like the specs sticker says". I got myself a scale and the fuckers come at 2240ish g.

Never been a weight weenie but given how I intend to mount/use them (brakeless MTNs, Ultra XTD 130) i kinda feel dumb keeping them.

Salomon essentially told me to go fuck myself since i bought the ski (new, still wrapped) from someone else and thus it qualifies as "second-hand" for them.

The shape feels nice and i do feel like wanting to give them a shot. Would i regret it with this difference between stated and actual weight? Has this happend to anyone else?

I totally expected some variation (approx. 150ish grams or less would have been ok) but not this much.

[Bojangles Mgillicutty]

260 grams over? Lame

[yeahman]

That seems really weird. No way mine weigh that much.

[Skiwald]

update: so I ended up giving away my previous-gen QST since I found a good deal on last year (white/silver) QST106, 181 length.

As soon as i felt them in my hand my heart sank and i thought "there's no way these actually weigh 1980 g like the specs sticker says". I got myself a scale and the fuckers come at 2240ish g.

Never been a weight weenie but given how I intend to mount/use them (brakeless MTNs, Ultra XTD 130) i kinda feel dumb keeping them.

Salomon essentially told me to go fuck myself since i bought the ski (new, still wrapped) from someone else and thus it qualifies as "second-hand" for them.

The shape feels nice and i do feel like wanting to give them a shot. Would i regret it with this difference between stated and actual weight? Has this happend to anyone else?

I totally expected some variation (approx. 150ish grams or less would have been ok) but not this much.

If you decide to sell LMK.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[oltrepiave]

i would consider it but i'm italian.

Also season is coming up and at this point i'll just mount em.

Glad my beefed-up 2010s-inspired QSTs are piqueing people's interest though.

[yeahman]

I have really bonded with my 181 QST 106. They're not flashy, they don't WOW you right off the bat. But they truck through all conditions easily and pretty much unfazed. I like that.

[oltrepiave]

so i did end up mounting them and using them as my daily driver this season. Usual combo as far as boots + bindings go (pre-BOA hawx ultra XTD, MTN with atk spacers).

The hefty weight ends up boosting their performance on all kinds of tracked out stuff. At the same time it is not a charger indeed and given the specs, the shape and the geometry it still won't bulldoze through anything anytime.

I did have to detune them a lot and still i feel like they slarve "just fine" but not like what i would expect from a full "PlAYfuL" ski (whatever the standards are these days, it's so subjective and marketing jargon all at the same time at this point). I do like the overall balance of the flex and I do appreciate some decent sort of liveliness and pop when engaged,

I feel like some of the reasons why it took me a while to adjust myself to them is the mountpoint. I went +3 given my preferences and how i felt about the shape and in certain situations/turn shapes that tip shovel is a bit of a PITA. Pretty peculiar also how that same tip shovel and the topsheet material have me lifting 5 tonnes of snow anytime i am touring in deeper snow. I brought it on myself i guess.

It does feel alright on steeper stuff and overall it's not a bad ski for what i envisioned it to be. Taking all those cm in length off (compared to my previous touring daily driver) also doesn't make me notice the stupid increase in weight that much. I have been able to clock in some big-vert days with them.

Bit of a frankenstein experiment so i won't really extend my judgement on the model as a whole. I do understand how/why they felt the need to put out the Echo version.

[yeahman]

Interesting observations. I also have the Echo 106 and it's become my favorite groomer ski, believe it or not. So quick and edges well. More pop than the regular QST. Easy on the knees. I know that's not what it's intended for but it reminds me of the Ripstick 106, another ski I really loved on groomers.

[oltrepiave]

So end-of-season thoughts.

I don't really jive with this ski.

I ended up skiing more steep, far-off stuff and there's something about the tip and tail shape as well as the weight (not its fault per se) that I don't really f with.

I used to have an old bentchet 100 which I loved on this kind of stuff (all-round touring, many days, all kinds of shitty snow, hybrid boot) but that tip profile and the combination with the aggressive camber gave it a lot of pop and a lot more slarviness.
I could really throw em sideways everywhere.

This QST might be hindered by the mountpoint I picked but I've detuned the fuck out of those tails and it still doesn't feel enough.

Any ski that might be more up my street? 90-105ish width, 2 kg max, early rise in tails (nothing crazy), medium-soft flex at least in the tips.