Numerical Ski Rankings/Comparison

[auvgeek]

This type of comparison was started in a GS thread, and some people indicated it was useful, so I figured I'd start a thread in the proper place. Feel free to post your own rankings. I'm sure someone will take issue with the fact that we used numbers or the fact that not every ski is covered -- if you don't find it helpful, feel free to ignore this thread.

Keep in mind the numbers really don't tell you much of anything except what the person posting thinks or what suits his/her style. For example, the Jeffrey rates highly on the "charger" scale, but that's because I'm okay with a forward-mounted ski. If you like a traditional mount, you might find it doesn't charge very hard for your style. As always, YMMV.

I'll keep updating this post. There are a few skis that I need to add (185 Cochise), and a few skis I'd like to get more time on before adding (184 Wren)

____________

Me: 5'11", 160-165#, fairly athletic, decent skier, still in my 20s, stupid grad-school habit means I don't ski as much as I'd like.

The skis:
Jeffrey = 186 2015 Jeffrey 110, woodgrain top, 22 oz fiberglass, extra carbon (aka considerably stiffer than stock)
BG = 191 Billy Goat, woodgrain top, 22 oz glass (~20% stiffer than stock)
L138 = 202 Lotus 138, flex 2, rocker 2. To date, these are the stiffest skis I've hand flexed.
Bibby = stock 190 Bibby Pro, only skied a few runs
GPO = 194 GPO, med-stiff (#4 flex) MAP w. carbon, only skied a few runs
Protest = 196 Protest, stock flex and layup
L120sp = 189 L120, flex 2, pure3 from 2014
Ren = 186 Renegade (4FRNT) 2013

Mixed Chunk/Sierra Cement/Cascade Concrete
L138: 10/10
BG: 9/10
Protest: 8/10
Ren: 7/10
GPO: 6.5/10
L120sp: 6.5/10
Jeffrey: 5/10
Bibby: 5/10

Firm snow
Jeffrey: 9/10
Ren: 8/10 -- I really liked the Ren on firm snow despite the lack of camber
Bibby: 8/10
GPO: 7/10
BG: 5/10
L120sp: 5/10
L138: 4/10
Protest: 3/10 -- yes, I thought the Protest was worse than the L138

Soft snow and the ever-present tracked pow
L138: 10/10 -- just wow. Almost too much float underfoot
Billy Goats: 10/10 -- tips float, tail sinks, runs over everything
L120sp: 9/10 -- not enough mass to charge tracked pow
Protest: 9/10
Ren: 9/10 -- very balance-y but you can steer with your ankles if you keep a neutral stance, almost R/R
GPO: 8/10
Jeffrey: 7/10 -- not enough tip
Bibby: 7/10 -- not enough tip

Charging and shock absorption
L138: 10/10
BG: 10/10
Jeffrey: 8/10 -- only real issue is you can't really drive the tip in pow. 9/10 in 2D snow
L120sp: 7.5/10(pow); 5/10 firm -- not enough mass for inbounds charging but at least you can lean on the tip in pow
Bibby: 7/10
GPO: 6/10
Protest: 5.5/10 too soft, not damp enough. That ski needs a heavy core #5 flex to be like the BG and L138

Playfulness
Bibby: 9/10
GPO: 9/10
Jeffrey: 7.5/10
L120sp: 7/10(pow); 5/10 (firm)
Protest: 6/10
BG: 5.5/10
Ren: 5/10
L138: 3/10

[Banh Mi]

Deleted. I dont know what I’m talking about

[Banh Mi]

Deleted, I dont know what I’m talking about

[eskido]

Nice work, thanks!

[jdadour]

Praxis Rx

I had a feeling this was coming haha

[reckless toboggan]

Praxis Rx

I had a feeling this was coming haha

10/10.

Would bang.

[Banh Mi]

Praxis Rx

That’s all anyone really needs


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[auvgeek]

I really need to get on a pair of the Rx. Just what the doctor ordered, lol.

I hope others contribute to this thread and people find it useful.

[t-the-east]

I think this thread needs a pie chart

[Vitamin I]

I hope others contribute to this thread and people find it useful.

This thread rules, and I hope it takes off. I truly believe comparisons are the key, and I'm surprised Blister hasn't taken their Buyer's Guide's sorted Spectrum lists further. (Well, I haven't seen Blister's Deep Dives, maybe they take it further there?)

I'm waiting to publish my personal rankings in my own website (not yet built). I have not yet finalized my format (I will seek input from maggots soon), but surely my website will be easy for users like auvgeek & Betelgeuse to look at their own rankings in this thread and they can copy the essence of some of their comparison data into their user accounts on my website---and I hope they will someday!

For now, this thread rules.

.

[MTT]

This type of comparison was started in a GS thread, and some people indicated it was useful, so I figured I'd start a thread in the proper place. Feel free to post your own rankings. I'm sure someone will take issue with the fact that we used numbers or the fact that not every ski is covered -- if you don't find it helpful, feel free to ignore this thread.

Keep in mind the numbers really don't tell you much of anything except what the person posting thinks or what suits his/her style. For example, the Jeffrey rates highly on the "charger" scale, but that's because I'm okay with a forward-mounted ski. If you like a traditional mount, you might find it doesn't charge very hard for your style. As always, YMMV.

I'll keep updating this post. There are a few skis that I need to add (185 Cochise), and a few skis I'd like to get more time on before adding (184 Wren)

____________

Me: 5'11", 160-165#, fairly athletic, decent skier, still in my 20s, stupid grad-school habit means I don't ski as much as I'd like.

The skis:
Jeffrey = 186 2015 Jeffrey 110, woodgrain top, 22 oz fiberglass, extra carbon (aka considerably stiffer than stock)
BG = 191 Billy Goat, woodgrain top, 22 oz glass (~20% stiffer than stock)
L138 = 202 Lotus 138, flex 2, rocker 2. To date, these are the stiffest skis I've hand flexed.
Bibby = stock 190 Bibby Pro, only skied a few runs
GPO = 194 GPO, med-stiff (#4 flex) MAP w. carbon, only skied a few runs
Protest = 196 Protest, stock flex and layup
L120sp = 189 L120, flex 2, pure3 from 2014
Ren = 186 Renegade (4FRNT) 2013

Mixed Chunk/Sierra Cement/Cascade Concrete
L138: 10/10
BG: 9/10
Protest: 8/10
Ren: 7/10
GPO: 6.5/10
L120sp: 6.5/10
Jeffrey: 5/10
Bibby: 5/10

Firm snow
Jeffrey: 9/10
Ren: 8/10 -- I really liked the Ren on firm snow despite the lack of camber
Bibby: 8/10
GPO: 7/10
BG: 5/10
L120sp: 5/10
L138: 4/10
Protest: 3/10 -- yes, I thought the Protest was worse than the L138

Soft snow and the ever-present tracked pow
L138: 10/10 -- just wow. Almost too much float underfoot
Billy Goats: 10/10 -- tips float, tail sinks, runs over everything
L120sp: 9/10 -- not enough mass to charge tracked pow
Protest: 9/10
Ren: 9/10 -- very balance-y but you can steer with your ankles if you keep a neutral stance, almost R/R
GPO: 8/10
Jeffrey: 7/10 -- not enough tip
Bibby: 7/10 -- not enough tip

Charging and shock absorption
L138: 10/10
BG: 10/10
Jeffrey: 8/10 -- only real issue is you can't really drive the tip in pow. 9/10 in 2D snow
L120sp: 7.5/10(pow); 5/10 firm -- not enough mass for inbounds charging but at least you can lean on the tip in pow
Bibby: 7/10
GPO: 6/10
Protest: 5.5/10 too soft, not damp enough. That ski needs a heavy core #5 flex to be like the BG and L138

Playfulness
Bibby: 9/10
GPO: 9/10
Jeffrey: 7.5/10
L120sp: 7/10(pow); 5/10 (firm)
Protest: 6/10
BG: 5.5/10
Ren: 5/10
L138: 3/10

Trustafarian ?

[auvgeek]

Trustafarian ?

I wish. That sounds pretty cushy.

i have an extra pair you can get on next time we ski together.
nttiawwt

Definitely! One of these years, I’ll graduate and start skiing for real again.

[auvgeek]

I'm surprised Blister hasn't taken their Buyer's Guide's sorted Spectrum lists further. (Well, I haven't seen Blister's Deep Dives, maybe they take it further there?)

Ski alper mag does something like this, and IIRC Lindahl (who now writes for Blister) got into it with them over it.

Frankly, I don't find pure numbers nearly as helpful as comparing 2-3 very similar skis with words (like Blister does), but the numbers do help make broad generalizations and aid those with short attention spans. I used to write long, detailed reviews but it didn't seem that helpful and I kind of lost interest. Plus I stopped buying so many skis.

The bottom line is you can't please everyone. Aeverjuice did this for a few skis and people said it was helpful so I figured it deserved it's own thread.

[Tailwind]

At the end of the days skis are subjective... How people feel about them will depend so much on location and style that numbers get to be really tough. Even powder performance is really not easy to quantify with a number. I have Renegades, Squad 7's and Pescado's as three setups and how much I like them in soft snow really vary's based on location and how I feel like skiing for the day. Then you can start to argue height and weight variations and it gets even tougher. Even something like 'how well does a ski charge' will vary based on your weight. I'm 6'2" and 165lbs, I ski fast but I really don't think I would do well on a Super Goat because it would likely feel a little harsh at my weight.

[Banh Mi]

Like auvgeek said, comparing two or three skis together in writing is the best IMO. My numbers might only help someone of the same size, ability, and style. Even then, it’s still all subjective.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[auvgeek]

Put simply, the Rx are the most versatile and most confidence inspiring skis I have ever been on. They only scored 1 point more than 2nd and 3rd place, but in my heart they have a perfect 50 score!

The Billy Goats at 43 proves they can be very versatile if you can figure them out on firm. I personally like them on firm, and I have seen more and more people using them like “daily drivers”. As On3p continues to enhance the shape, I’m sure they will move up in the versatility ranks.

So just for grins, imagine if you blended the best qualities of the SG and BG -- I bet you'd end up with a 44 or 45 on your scale. And if you skied more in the PNW where it snows quite a lot and the snow is higher density, I bet you'd want to ski them as a daily driver...which is why the 191 BG is my most favorite ski evar. (But I'd still love to try a 189 RX in a heavy core layup and 4+ or 5 flex.)

What's your bsl, again, Aever?

[eskido]

At the end of the days skis are subjective... How people feel about them will depend so much on location and style that numbers get to be really tough. Even powder performance is really not easy to quantify with a number. I have Renegades, Squad 7's and Pescado's as three setups and how much I like them in soft snow really vary's based on location and how I feel like skiing for the day. Then you can start to argue height and weight variations and it gets even tougher. Even something like 'how well does a ski charge' will vary based on your weight. I'm 6'2" and 165lbs, I ski fast but I really don't think I would do well on a Super Goat because it would likely feel a little harsh at my weight.

Wholeheartedly agree but the cool thing about this is you really get a very good idea what each skier likes or dislikes about a ski based on where they rate them compared to other skis, one of which may or may not be a ski you’ve skied. If you take the time to go through the numbers it says A LOT. Yes, one skier rating one ski on a (insert your scale here) number scale doesn’t say shit, but when a skier rates several skis in several conditions it tells you a ton about what a skier likes or dislikes in a ski and how it compares to other skis based on their specific tastes. I certainly do NOT agree with several ratings here but if you take the time to go through the numbers you can get a crapload of beta knowing much more about said skiers specific tastes. Sure, a write up says a lot more about what said skier likes n dislikes about a stick but gives you nothing to compare that skiers tastes/preferences to. Personally I think as this (if this) grows a cat can learn a lot more about skis vs skiers tastes and how that applies to whether you may or may not like be interested in a reviewed ski. Numbers say a lot if you take the time to go through them.

[Banh Mi]

Rx slay the deep and heavy really well too. We get some chunk and crust at Squaw. That 32m radius, with just enough rocker, and pintail really makes them simple to break free in difficult snow. They make those conditions fun, like a Katana or Billy Goat. I bet a 4+ Rx would score 45.

In the right conditions, the Jeffrey 114s and Kartel 116s make me feel on top of the world. In the worst conditions though I can barely ski them. They are so smooth and predictable in anything soft though, the design isnt far off from perfect.. If On3p designs that ski you’ve been talking about, and makes em’ more versatile for firm snow, I think they could acore 45 or 46. That’s really the type of ski I’m looking for, and theoretically the MVPs could score up there as well.

I truly enjoyed the K2 shreditor 112s. They were perfect in every way, except for flex. They were noodles. They were plenty damp, but too soft. That affected their ratings substantially. If they were stiffer, they would have been amazing. 21m turn radius, but I had no issues making longer turns with them. They had lots of taper, but it felt very gradual and I had no issues on ice with them. That is how I want the new On3p twin to ski, except be stiffer and with On3ps core feel.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[Norseman]

So just for grins, imagine if you blended the best qualities of the SG and BG -- I bet you'd end up with a 44 or 45 on your scale. And if you skied more in the PNW where it snows quite a lot and the snow is higher density, I bet you'd want to ski them as a daily driver...which is why the 191 BG is my most favorite ski evar. (But I'd still love to try a 189 RX in a heavy core layup and 4+ or 5 flex.)

What's your bsl, again, Aever?

PREACHA I AM SAVED

FNKA

[auvgeek]

PREACHA I AM SAVED

FNKA

yeah, I laid it on little thick. I just get excited and I miss the PNW. I’ll shut up now.

[Banh Mi]

What's your bsl, again, Aever?

Mainly 315mm Salomon, or 317 Lange. I also have some 327mm Lange too, but I havent got that boot perfected yet. I am going on a full on bootventure next season, trying to take up space in some boots and create space in others..trying to find the perfect fit and performance.

If I was at a place with 600” a year, and super manky snow, I could easily see myself daily driving the BG. For sure. The 2016 and 2017 189 BGs, pre asym but with the blended sidecut to RES, are a little stiffer than the stock 191s from previous years. I am never selling my 2017s.

Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[Vt-Freeheel]

Come this fall i'll just ski.

[Norseman]

yeah, I laid it on little thick. I just get excited and I miss the PNW. I’ll shut up now.

No, I was serious. You know my fandom.

BGs have been my daily winter jam in the PNW for five years and they fucking slay. Made me a way more dynamic skier, and faster. If the faucet is on, they are a prime tool.

[1000-oaks]

Charging and shock absorption
L138: 10/10

Interesting how the L138 changed over the years, the 138 Spoon is a very different ski than the rocker-1. The R1 is stiff but quite light, virtually no sidecut, with a flat underfoot and lots of tip and tail rocker. The 138 Spoon has a lot less rocker but it's continuous (no flat), a lot more sidecut, and is definitely a heavier beast. It's like comparing a radical touring ski to a big inbounds pow gun. Couldn't imagine putting tech bindings on the 138 Spoon, but they almost seem fitting for the R1. (Haven't skied the 138 Spoon yet, just got it last season.)

[auvgeek]

Interesting how the L138 changed over the years, the 138 Spoon is a very different ski than the rocker-1. The R1 is stiff but quite light, virtually no sidecut, with a flat underfoot and lots of tip and tail rocker. The 138 Spoon has a lot less rocker but it's continuous (no flat), a lot more sidecut, and is definitely a heavier beast. It's like comparing a radical touring ski to a big inbounds pow gun. Couldn't imagine putting tech bindings on the 138 Spoon, but they almost seem fitting for the R1. (Haven't skied the 138 Spoon yet, just got it last season.)

Yeah, the 202 L138 R2 is a different beast than any other L138 I've skied or fondled, including the 202 L138 R3.2, which Marshall kind of talked me into since I loved the 202 R2 so much. For my 5'10"-5'11", 165# frame, the 202 R2 is so big*, so stiff, and it seems damp, even though it's DPS' old school "pure" construction. I was pretty skeptical but it seems to work for the ski...or at least that's what I recall, been a couple years since I skied them. Minimal tail rocker, long flat spot, lotsa top rocker. I think I have a rocker profile pic somewhere if anyone's interested. Marshal knows how much I love that rocker profile and reached out a few years back to tell me he lobbied hard and got the flatter tail for the spooned version.

I'd like some other/bigger mags to get some time on them at some point, maybe I'll make it to a BBI or something in the next few years. Just need to finish up school on the East Coast, so I can start making some money and get back to skiing regularly again.

*It's not really that big -- straight tape pull is 197.X.

Rocker pics:
Attachment 153707

No, I was serious. You know my fandom.

BGs have been my daily winter jam in the PNW for five years and they fucking slay. Made me a way more dynamic skier, and faster. If the faucet is on, they are a prime tool.

Haha, I hear you. I also know my biases come through very strongly.

You're like 6'2" and 185# right? I'd love to get your thoughts on the 202 L138 and woodgrain BGs, but I don't think they'll adjust enough for your larger boots. I think the max they go is 315. My brother had a 320 bsl a few years ago, and the forward pressure was def not to spec.