Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 42 of 42
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,128
    Hmmm thanks all, was thinking it might work in the name of those that say your touring ski should be shorter for tight spaces, but maybe this is too short...:
    Do I detect a lot of anger flowing around this place? Kind of like a pubescent volatility, some angst, a lot of I'm-sixteen-and-angry-at-my-father syndrome?

    fuck that noise.

    gmen.

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,155
    Has anyone tried mounting these skis back from the line? I find that I get tip dive issues and I've really got to lean heavily on the tails to get them to plane up. Right now I'm at +.6cm from the line based on the previous mount.

    I'm thinking about remounting at -.5cm or maybe -1cm. Thoughts?

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    264
    Quote Originally Posted by thejongiest View Post
    Has anyone tried mounting these skis back from the line? I find that I get tip dive issues and I've really got to lean heavily on the tails to get them to plane up. Right now I'm at +.6cm from the line based on the previous mount.

    I'm thinking about remounting at -.5cm or maybe -1cm. Thoughts?
    The huge range of tourable boots and bindings available now can play a big role in fore-aft balance. I would check forward lean and ramp of the set up you ski the Beasts with and compare to another set up that works for you before drilling more holes. Too much or too little of either variable can make an otherwise great set up ski like shit.

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,155
    Quote Originally Posted by Reformed View Post
    The huge range of tourable boots and bindings available now can play a big role in fore-aft balance. I would check forward lean and ramp of the set up you ski the Beasts with and compare to another set up that works for you before drilling more holes. Too much or too little of either variable can make an otherwise great set up ski like shit.
    That's a good point, I don't know too much about it, but basically I would probably have to get some spacers for the toepiece to reduce my effective forward lean.

    I did hear though that Hoji-esque skis (which I believe these Beasts have this full rocker and mount point similar to Hoji skis) are very sensitive to mount point - especially being forward of the line.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    32
    Reviving this one again.

    Anyone been on the newer 20/21 version? Supposedly has some camber underfoot. And they are really hyping up the big mountain ability of it (cliffs, steeps, etc). Can anyone speak to this in real life or is it just their marketing hype?

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    4,194
    Quote Originally Posted by powderdetective View Post
    Reviving this one again.

    Anyone been on the newer 20/21 version? Supposedly has some camber underfoot. And they are really hyping up the big mountain ability of it (cliffs, steeps, etc). Can anyone speak to this in real life or is it just their marketing hype?
    Ugh... why do most of the full reverse offerings end up putting camber in?

    It makes it tough to know what model I'm losing at and what I want to buy. People who want full reverse, want full reverse.

    If you want a cambered ski, give it a new name so I know what I'm looking at.

    /end rant

    Sent from my SM-A505W using Tapatalk
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,155
    Quote Originally Posted by Shorty_J View Post
    Ugh... why do most of the full reverse offerings end up putting camber in?

    It makes it tough to know what model I'm losing at and what I want to buy. People who want full reverse, want full reverse.

    If you want a cambered ski, give it a new name so I know what I'm looking at.

    /end rant

    Sent from my SM-A505W using Tapatalk
    Itís appealing to the masses to have camber.

    As for full reverse - how sensitive is it to mount point?

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    250
    Quote Originally Posted by Shorty_J View Post
    If you want a cambered ski, give it a new name so I know what I'm looking at.
    I like how WNDR has camber and no-camber versions of its two skis. Although probably easier when you're a small co. with only two models
    It's similarly confusing with like the BC Corvus which (I think) went back and forth between camber and flat/reverse over a few years. That makes a pretty big difference!

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    250
    And on reverse camber mount point. I agree with above that going to a hoji-like recommended line works, but any further forward can really not work (at least for me). I had an old pair of 4frnt Rens that I had to remount and had to put them a bit forward and there was suddenly way too much stiff tail

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Somewhere else
    Posts
    4,194
    Quote Originally Posted by thejongiest View Post
    Itís appealing to the masses to have camber.

    As for full reverse - how sensitive is it to mount point?
    Right but there are already a lot of those kinds of skis for the masses.

    Sent from my SM-A505W using Tapatalk
    Goal: ski in the 2018/19 season

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,155
    Quote Originally Posted by m104da View Post
    And on reverse camber mount point. I agree with above that going to a hoji-like recommended line works, but any further forward can really not work (at least for me). I had an old pair of 4frnt Rens that I had to remount and had to put them a bit forward and there was suddenly way too much stiff tail
    That's exactly how I feel.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by m104da View Post
    I like how WNDR has camber and no-camber versions of its two skis. Although probably easier when you're a small co. with only two models
    It's similarly confusing with like the BC Corvus which (I think) went back and forth between camber and flat/reverse over a few years. That makes a pretty big difference!
    Yeah the corvus (non-freebird) is flat underfoot with rocker tip and tail. It rips. I was hoping to find something similar for the backcountry. Beast 108 seems promising?

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,155
    Quote Originally Posted by powderdetective View Post
    Yeah the corvus (non-freebird) is flat underfoot with rocker tip and tail. It rips. I was hoping to find something similar for the backcountry. Beast 108 seems promising?
    Based on rocker pics and mount point it seems very similar. But I would say the Beast 108 are stiffer compared to Blister's report. As I've noted above, I found tip dive to be an issue in the backcountry, but I am .6cm forward of the line which it may be very sensitive to.

    I'm hemming and hawing about a remount.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by thejongiest View Post
    Based on rocker pics and mount point it seems very similar. But I would say the Beast 108 are stiffer compared to Blister's report. As I've noted above, I found tip dive to be an issue in the backcountry, but I am .6cm forward of the line which it may be very sensitive to.

    I'm hemming and hawing about a remount.
    This article is in reference to hojis/rens, but I think generally would apply to all full reverse skis. If you have a larger BSL than average (who knows what the Beast 108 line was referring to as average, in the case of the hoji he was just using his BSL), or are a bigger guy, you want to mount back of the line slightly. I am on the line on my rens and hojis and love them there, but am a light guy (145 lbs), with a relatively small BSL (305 mm). If I was larger I could see myself moving back to keep the tips up, and agree that full reverse are definitely very sensitive to mount point, especially if moving forward.

    http://mtnguiding.com/media/2017/1/4...adesravens-too

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,155
    Quote Originally Posted by dub2 View Post
    This article is in reference to hojis/rens, but I think generally would apply to all full reverse skis. If you have a larger BSL than average (who knows what the Beast 108 line was referring to as average, in the case of the hoji he was just using his BSL), or are a bigger guy, you want to mount back of the line slightly. I am on the line on my rens and hojis and love them there, but am a light guy (145 lbs), with a relatively small BSL (305 mm). If I was larger I could see myself moving back to keep the tips up, and agree that full reverse are definitely very sensitive to mount point, especially if moving forward.

    http://mtnguiding.com/media/2017/1/4...adesravens-too
    Basically it sounds like the idea is you want the ball of your feet in exactly the right position. This makes complete sense. On the Beast the mount point is already -7.75cm which is farther back than Hoji skis usually are - but also, this ski is not designed by Hoji.

    My feeling with how it skis is that my centered stance definitely weights too much on the tips of the skis. I may try and get some demo plates and mount with those to really dial in the mount point.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by thejongiest View Post
    Basically it sounds like the idea is you want the ball of your feet in exactly the right position. This makes complete sense. On the Beast the mount point is already -7.75cm which is farther back than Hoji skis usually are - but also, this ski is not designed by Hoji.

    My feeling with how it skis is that my centered stance definitely weights too much on the tips of the skis. I may try and get some demo plates and mount with those to really dial in the mount point.
    Demo plates would probably be a smart move. Reverse camber skis are just sensitive to a variety of factors. What a centered stance means for you and how you weight your skis through a turn is going to be different than how I or others ski, and dialing in that balance point takes a little bit of trial and error. I was lucky that the recommended line worked straight away for me on hojis, then I bought some rens and already knew I would like them on the line. But there are plenty of stories on here of people moving mount point back and preferring them there.

    It also makes sense that if the beast does have a stiffer shovel, the mount point is going to need to be back of the hoji for similar float.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by thejongiest View Post
    Based on rocker pics and mount point it seems very similar. But I would say the Beast 108 are stiffer compared to Blister's report. As I've noted above, I found tip dive to be an issue in the backcountry, but I am .6cm forward of the line which it may be very sensitive to.

    I'm hemming and hawing about a remount.
    That sounds like it could be what I looking for then. If they need a centered stance though they may be more similar to the 4FRNTs than the corvus. Corvus need to be driven through the tips mostly.

Posting Permissions

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