Results 226 to 250 of 630
Thread: Get Down with Down (skis)
-
12-07-2018, 08:08 AM #226
They look better in person. We just need some more snow in the background to try them out...
Sent from my SM-G950F using TGR Forums mobile app
-
12-07-2018, 08:38 AM #227
Man those are rad! Too bad they didn't do the 196 like that!
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
-
12-07-2018, 01:38 PM #228
-
12-07-2018, 01:55 PM #229Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Location
- Gaperville, CO
- Posts
- 5,845
-
12-07-2018, 01:59 PM #230
-
12-07-2018, 02:46 PM #231Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2017
- Posts
- 2,282
I am not sure those would be the conditions I'd use to try out a new pair of carbon skis and tech binders, but new ski stoke is occasionally not compatible with delayed gratification I guess Or perhaps the conditions are better than what they look like. I am also very interested in feedback on those skis - I was very, very close to buying a pair before I went with some Mantras instead
CD114ltd looks nice. Would prob be even nicer if matte, but that is just like my opinion man.
edit: holy crap CD114s are priced aggressively!Last edited by kid-kapow; 12-07-2018 at 03:07 PM.
-
12-07-2018, 10:13 PM #232
-
12-08-2018, 12:22 AM #233Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2017
- Posts
- 2,282
wow - those are some pretty deep rocker lines! Must be a blast in softer snow
-
12-08-2018, 06:12 AM #234Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Posts
- 363
Those are gorgeous
Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk
-
12-08-2018, 07:40 AM #235Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Location
- Gaperville, CO
- Posts
- 5,845
In person the throw downs are even better: like a slightly jibbier devastator.
-
12-08-2018, 10:21 AM #236
-
12-08-2018, 04:10 PM #237
Get Down with Down (skis)
Got a first day in, on my CD104L setup.
Given recent drama with the G3 Zeds, I decided to spend a day at the resort in case of early catastrophic binding failure. Conditions at Mt Hood Meadows were less than ideal: Temperatures at or below freezing, no new snow in two weeks, with wind packed powder, sun crust on windpacked powder, well skied hardpack, coral reef, or tracked out refrozen crud. The CD104L did a fine job in all of this, which is great, because if I were ever to be touring on a wind scoured slope, these are the skis I intended on using.
Setup: 181 cm CD104L skis, G3 Zed bindings, Salomon MTN Lab boots
The CD104Ls have a nice interplay between rocker profile and turning radius. Turn initiation in dry powder and unfrozen chop was very intuitive, both on the flats and the steeps. Unless I stayed super focussed, and sometimes regardless, they deflected quite readily in the refrozen chop and chunked up windpack, which I expected, but being only ~1500g/ski, they were easy to get back in line. Other than on coral reef, I never really felt like I was getting thrown around on them. They're stiff enough that they do well skiing hard on higher angle slopes despite being light as a feather. I found myself really focusing on keeping legs more rigid and springy, if that makes sense, to damp out the ride and compensate for the lack of weight underfoot. At speed they seemed to carve okay, were not super chattery for me, and by the end of the day I felt confident that they wouldn’t slam me to the ground, except for the time I stopped paying attention and they did. User error.
This is by far the lightest setup I’ve ever skied on. They’ll never see the resort again, but maybe I now understand why I see so many boomers riding touring rigs at the resort. Normally I’ve got over 10 lbs hanging off of each ankle, damn near pulling my aging knees out of their sockets, so these just felt great riding the lifts.
I think they’re a great build, in terms of profile, sidecut, and stiffness, and the downsides, if you can call them that, are what you’d expect from any lightweight carbon ski. I’d love to ski the regular CD104s, and the CD114s, too, for that matter.
I mounted G3 Zeds on these skis, and learned after the first day on them that G3 is now saying their stomp pads won't avoid catastrophic failure for some boots. If this is true then my boots (Salomon MTN Lab) are are on the “won’t avoid” list.
There's approximately 3 mm of open space between the sole and the stomp pad, rendering the pad effectively useless. G3 says that they'll provide taller stomp pads free to all purchasers of this binding, starting on 12/19/2018. I really don’t see how this will solve any problems, as the point of the stomp pad is not structural integrity, but rather just a place to put your heel when in walk mode. My first turn of the day, I immediately pre-released from the Zed. I normally set my DIN at around 7 early on in the year, because I'm old, out of shape, and have big feet. When setting these up initially they felt really loose to me so I set them at 8. After losing a ski on my first turn I timidly skied down to a flat place and bumped them up to 10, which seemed okay. I haven’t run a 10 DIN for over 20 years, though. I realized during the day that when I turn I put most of my weight on my heels, and maybe that's wrong, or at least it doesn't jibe with pin bindings, or at least with these pin bindings. I adjusted my technique to put more weight on my toes, or on my whole foot through the turns, and didn't have any more pre-releases. I did this also because I was pretty freaked out about blowing up the turrets. When I bumped up the DIN, the heels also moved forward slightly, and I had to move them back a half turn on their tracks in order to get my boot to fit. I thought that was kind of odd. For the half-day I was out there I put 21000 vertical feet on the bindings, and they’re still intact. That’s probably the equivalent of half to three quarters of a year of downhill for me, touring-wise, so I’m glad I did it, just to get used to them.
-
12-08-2018, 05:29 PM #238
I have pretty damn imperfect form and get in the back seat more than I'd like, and I've skied at least half a dozen tech bindings (Rad 1.0, Speed Rad, SSL1.0, Gara Titan, Plum 150, Kreuzspitze, Ion 1.0, possibly others I am forgetting) without ever worrying about that or having any prerelease / binding destruction issues. It's a bummer that you ended up with these clamps, I certainly won't be buying them anytime soon after hearing about the failures + prereleases.
eta: skied my LD90s in pretty deep settled-ish pow (10") the other morning and they were great, much better than expected at those dimensions. Also skied some variable, some mank, some crust, etc and as expected they were outstanding. Hopefully gonna get them some steeper looks this week.
-
12-10-2018, 01:00 AM #239
First time out on my new showdown 95s - skied like butter thru everything. Definitely gonna be my low viz ski, so nimble and carves strong.
And before I retire my cd3s, thought I'd take a pic if them all together.
Sent from my SM-A600FN using TapatalkLast edited by Ripzalot; 12-10-2018 at 03:40 AM.
-
12-11-2018, 11:04 AM #240
-
12-12-2018, 02:20 AM #241
opinions wanted. i have two options for my new 102s - install a dynaduke plate and have swap compatibility with my dukes that are on my cd2s. seems like it will be a lot of extra weight but it will cost me $0, already have a second set of plates. OR, shell out $300-400 for a proper dynafit touring binding. something compatible with my old but lightly used garmont megarides. suggestions for compatibility would be appreciated as well.
-
12-12-2018, 03:52 AM #242Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Posts
- 343
Personally i wouldn't want to put the Dukes on the them, seems like an overkill. How much does one set of Dukes weigh in? According to the Website the Lowdowns come in at 1700 per ski? I'd definetly mount something lighter on them. No clue what though
They look really nice though, want to replace my daily tourers with them at some point. I just worry that 122 in the tip is too narrow for 102 in the middle. Convention seems to dictate it should be around 132, but that doen't really mean anything if they ski well. I'll just have to try them.
-
12-12-2018, 08:17 AM #243
It’s not too narrow. It’s perfect — and deliberate. The radius is like 40m consequently. They don’t catch and are UBER predictable. I love it. Inbounds yeah, give me a fatter tip and some radius so I can carve.
For comparison, go look at how Hoji designed his skis. It’s identical. I own 4frnt ravens and ld102s and the shape is the same. Like almost down to the mm.
-
12-12-2018, 08:19 AM #244
-
12-12-2018, 09:44 AM #245Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- Truckee
- Posts
- 1,041
Do you guys ever make the throw down in larger than a 182?
Sent from my LM-G710VM using TGR Forums mobile app
-
12-12-2018, 09:48 AM #246Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2014
- Location
- Gaperville, CO
- Posts
- 5,845
-
12-12-2018, 10:26 AM #247
-
12-12-2018, 10:39 AM #248
-
12-12-2018, 11:03 AM #249
-
12-12-2018, 11:11 AM #250
We may. The TD is selling pretty well this year, and may warrant a longer length. Will keep the dimensions in that case, not change them (which we did on the 172, 99mm waist).
189 OK?
Sent from my SM-G950F using TGR Forums mobile appsimen@downskis.com DOWN SKIS
Bookmarks