Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 LastLast
Results 226 to 250 of 282
  1. #226
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    206
    Oooooh just seen the new limited edtion CD114. They look nice!
    https://www.downskis.com/shop/countdown-114f-2018
    Name:  CD114small.jpg
Views: 332
Size:  44.9 KB

  2. #227
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    OW
    Posts
    585
    Quote Originally Posted by McDee View Post
    Oooooh just seen the new limited edtion CD114. They look nice!
    https://www.downskis.com/shop/countdown-114f-2018
    Name:  CD114small.jpg
Views: 332
Size:  44.9 KB
    They look better in person. We just need some more snow in the background to try them out...Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20181207_160433.jpeg 
Views:	64 
Size:	148.2 KB 
ID:	258889

    Sent from my SM-G950F using TGR Forums mobile app

  3. #228
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    403
    Man those are rad! Too bad they didn't do the 196 like that!

    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

  4. #229
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by lucknau View Post
    LOL, yeah. But I installed the stomp plate so they're probably totally safe.
    Trial run for the Zeds and christening the CD104Ls


  5. #230
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    3,075
    Quote Originally Posted by lucknau View Post
    Trial run for the Zeds and christening the CD104Ls

    As someone who has that ski and that boot sitting at home. TELL ME FUCKING MORE!

  6. #231
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by doebedoe View Post
    As someone who has that ski and that boot sitting at home. TELL ME FUCKING MORE!
    Well I've got one run in now. Will expound in the evening if still in one piece!

  7. #232
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    298
    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 04:07 PM.

  8. #233
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    The Chicken Coop, Seattle
    Posts
    2,289
    Lifts need to start spinning here...


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4457.JPG 
Views:	68 
Size:	312.7 KB 
ID:	259070
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4458.JPG 
Views:	72 
Size:	328.5 KB 
ID:	259071
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4456.JPG 
Views:	73 
Size:	312.3 KB 
ID:	259072
    wait!!!! waitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwaitwait...Wait!
    Zoolander wasn't a documentary?

  9. #234
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    298
    wow - those are some pretty deep rocker lines! Must be a blast in softer snow

  10. #235
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    88
    Those are gorgeous

    Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk

  11. #236
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    3,075
    In person the throw downs are even better: like a slightly jibbier devastator.

  12. #237
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    799
    Quote Originally Posted by doebedoe View Post
    In person the throw downs are even better: like a slightly jibbier devastator.
    We find out tomorrow.

  13. #238
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    216

    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.

  14. #239
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    3,766
    Quote Originally Posted by lucknau View Post
    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 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.

  15. #240
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    6,768
    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 Tapatalk
    Last edited by Ripzalot; 12-10-2018 at 04:40 AM.

  16. #241
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    3,766
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	bnh.JPG 
Views:	55 
Size:	218.8 KB 
ID:	259620

    took the LD90s down this puppy this morning. wooooo!!!!!!!! my new couloir skis for SURE. very stoked on these.

  17. #242
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    6,768
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripzalot View Post



    Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk
    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.

  18. #243
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    206
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripzalot View Post
    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.
    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.

  19. #244
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    798
    Quote Originally Posted by McDee View Post
    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.
    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.
    Buy used mount your own skis build a quiver

  20. #245
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    798
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripzalot View Post
    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.
    Shell out. I pulled rad 2s off because too heavy. I will remount with something 300sh grams eventually
    Buy used mount your own skis build a quiver

  21. #246
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Truckee
    Posts
    995
    Do you guys ever make the throw down in larger than a 182?

    Sent from my LM-G710VM using TGR Forums mobile app

  22. #247
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Gaperville, CO
    Posts
    3,075
    Quote Originally Posted by McDee View Post
    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.
    That is pretty inherenit in something of that waist width with the Long Radius Design concept.

  23. #248
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    3,766
    Quote Originally Posted by margotron View Post
    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.
    +1 to all of this

  24. #249
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    OW
    Posts
    585
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripzalot View Post
    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.
    Dynafit Beast 14s from Sport Conrad will set you back about 200 CHFs.

  25. #250
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    216
    Quote Originally Posted by margotron View Post
    Shell out. I pulled rad 2s off because too heavy. I will remount with something 300sh grams eventually
    Zeds are pretty light.

Posting Permissions

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