Page 78 of 90 FirstFirst ... 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 ... LastLast
Results 1,926 to 1,950 of 2248
  1. #1926
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    653
    Quote Originally Posted by brundo View Post
    I was planning on unloading a pair of veneer 193s once the season is over. 1 mount, maybe 10 days on em, great condition. Let me know if you're interested
    PMd

  2. #1927
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by eskido View Post
    Which core did you go with?
    Enduro #4 flex

  3. #1928
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,346
    Quote Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds! View Post
    I did. Skied them quite a bit. Now I want UL protests. You've heard me complain about "slow snow" when meadow skipping on my UL GPO's. Not an issue with the Protests. Now I'm convinced that if you're a BC skier in CO who doesn't think he can outsmart PWLs, you owe it to yourself to get something fat. Big ass skis may low angle terrain more fun. It's not about float. It's about speed.
    Been chatting quite a bit with @grinch (he's a bad influence) and he pointed out that BPS is a fat GPO with a more rearward mount, longer turn radius, and that crazy compound camber.

    With the custom sale, I can configure it with std. camber.

    ... Thom
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  4. #1929
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    F'n Midwest again
    Posts
    2,324
    That sounds like a pretty good idea^^^

    although quite a bit less taper in tip/tail than the GPO.
    Aggressive in my own mind

  5. #1930
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Location
    Renton, WA
    Posts
    120
    Anyone else have experience with the RX 116? They aren't bad skis, but I prefer BGs. RX felt a lot lighter than the BGs, they're fun in the air and whipping around. I could not find their sidecut radius for the life of me though. I was not able to set edges on firm snow, not that anyone should really care about a powder ski's carving performance.

    Am I just doing something wrong or what?

  6. #1931
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by N1CK. View Post
    damn. that is SUCH a great shape and now the perfect in-between length. I'm tempted to build a resort version. 185cm, HH/carbon/veneer would be money.
    Agreed, even though I could do glass HH without the carbon.

  7. #1932
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    354
    Anyone ever build up a -1 protest with HH core? Looking for a longer black ops 118-like not too directional chargy ski and the protest profile is fairly similar. Crazy or brilliant?

  8. #1933
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,346
    Quote Originally Posted by Westcoaster View Post
    Anyone ever build up a -1 protest with HH core? Looking for a longer black ops 118-like not too directional chargy ski and the protest profile is fairly similar. Crazy or brilliant?
    So, a heavy hitter Wootest 2.0?
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  9. #1934
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,346
    Quote Originally Posted by hoarhey View Post
    That sounds like a pretty good idea^^^

    although quite a bit less taper in tip/tail than the GPO.
    About my only concern (and I'll be asking Keith), is whether I'll like the BPS's 31m radius in tight trees. Maybe an Ullr is closer to a fat GPO? I may be splitting hairs, and if demoing were possible, the traffic on this thread would be 50% of what it is ;-)

    ... Thom
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  10. #1935
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Hyperspace!
    Posts
    1,242
    thinking about a 165 gpo for the mrs' pow ski. anyone have experience with this size?
    wondering if they run short?

  11. #1936
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    F'n Midwest again
    Posts
    2,324
    Quote Originally Posted by wendigo View Post
    thinking about a 165 gpo for the mrs' pow ski. anyone have experience with this size?
    wondering if they run short?
    I can measure my 175s when I get home and post up that info

  12. #1937
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,346
    Run short or ski short?

    Straight pull on a 165 ought to be about 163.5.

    ... Thom
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  13. #1938
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    84
    How bad do I need a pair of custom Protests? How often will I reach for them instead of my Billy Goats? If I get them should I modify the flex one way or the other? How much shorter do they ski than the length would suggest? How many questions can I come up with to stop myself from buying another pair of skis?

  14. #1939
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    F'n Midwest again
    Posts
    2,324
    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    About my only concern (and I'll be asking Keith), is whether I'll like the BPS's 31m radius in tight trees. Maybe an Ullr is closer to a fat GPO? I may be splitting hairs, and if demoing were possible, the traffic on this thread would be 50% of what it is ;-)

    ... Thom
    My og pair of 183 BPSs were pretty cumbersome in tighter spaces

    UL core might help that

    My 182 GPOs are much more nimble.

    Fat GPO?

  15. #1940
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    2,279
    I'll throw this out there. I have 192 #4 Protests and if I could do it over I'd go back to 187s. Mine are those red transparent over olive ash veneer beasts I've posted up before.
    If anyone starts thinking about order a 192 in a #4 flex, I'll make you an offer you can't refuse!

  16. #1941
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,346
    Quote Originally Posted by hoarhey View Post
    My og pair of 183 BPSs were pretty cumbersome in tighter spaces

    UL core might help that

    My 182 GPOs are much more nimble.

    Fat GPO?
    I'm wondering as well. I just wrote Keith one of my long-winded emails, and one of my questions was just that - whether I'm looking at a +10 GPO. This, and an Ullr with a shorter effective edge and turn radius seem to be pulling ahead.

    ... Thom
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  17. #1942
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Hyperspace!
    Posts
    1,242
    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    Run short or ski short?

    Straight pull on a 165 ought to be about 163.5.

    ... Thom
    ski short - she is usually on 160-165 and this will be targeted as a 50/50 pow ski

  18. #1943
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    354
    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    So, a heavy hitter Wootest 2.0?
    I guess? Theyre not pressing the wootest anymore are they?

  19. #1944
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    4,346
    Maybe a phone call and an offer for a "most difficult" build would get it done.
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  20. #1945
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    13,018
    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    Been chatting quite a bit with @grinch (he's a bad influence) and he pointed out that BPS is a fat GPO with a more rearward mount, longer turn radius, and that crazy compound camber.

    With the custom sale, I can configure it with std. camber.

    ... Thom
    Haaa, whose the bad influence!? Every convo i think of a new ski "i" want. So confused, isnt it the ullr thats the fatter gpo like ski and the bps with the funky camber? I guess for the light fat touring option the crc(or crr or ccr/whatever its called)camber option, if possible, would work in the tighter trees along with the extra width

    Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

  21. #1946
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    308
    Quote Originally Posted by Self Jupiter View Post
    There is a new MVP?
    Im liking the changes on paper, and Im definitely ordering an MVP 108. On my older MVP (110mm uf) I really did like the long radius and heavy taper combo in soft 3D snow but had some issues with icy mornings and running length. I think the increased camber length and decreased taper makes sense for 1-3 days after a storm or as a travel ski. It may not be as loose in deeper snow, but anything over 15 and Im on another ski anyway. Overall this new 108 looks like it has a bigger wheelhouse for conditions and ideal use situations.

    The weights went up significantly too, which along with better edge engagement should really help chop/chunder and crud blasting.

  22. #1947
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    13,018
    Quote Originally Posted by wendigo View Post
    thinking about a 165 gpo for the mrs' pow ski. anyone have experience with this size?
    wondering if they run short?
    Steered a friends wife to a 175 gpo for a 50/50 ski. She's usually on a 170ish ski , 5"5'/5"7' and probably 110/120lbs, technical skier every condition, small airs , now a weekender. She got on straight away with the gpo at -1. Really likes it. Cant remember but pretty sure tectons and for sure a technica zero scout boot. I thought theyd be a good fit but surprised how much she's stoked on them. The 175 and 165 may be the lighter 3 flex?

    Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

  23. #1948
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    480
    Anyone been on a CCR Protest? Also, anyone have a weight on the 187 UL Protests?

  24. #1949
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    181
    Quote Originally Posted by N1CK. View Post
    I'll throw this out there. I have 192 #4 Protests and if I could do it over I'd go back to 187s. Mine are those red transparent over olive ash veneer beasts I've posted up before.
    If anyone starts thinking about order a 192 in a #4 flex, I'll make you an offer you can't refuse!
    Where was this a year ago?
    I bought a 192 #4 last year. At 62 205lbs they seem right for me. They were fun at the Bird today

  25. #1950
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    13,018
    Quote Originally Posted by YaBoyBlue View Post
    Im liking the changes on paper, and Im definitely ordering an MVP 108. On my older MVP (110mm uf) I really did like the long radius and heavy taper combo in soft 3D snow but had some issues with icy mornings and running length. I think the increased camber length and decreased taper makes sense for 1-3 days after a storm or as a travel ski. It may not be as loose in deeper snow, but anything over 15 and Im on another ski anyway. Overall this new 108 looks like it has a bigger wheelhouse for conditions and ideal use situations.

    The weights went up significantly too, which along with better edge engagement should really help chop/chunder and crud blasting.
    All of that description sounds like the missing ski ive been trying to find. Built one up with veneer. Leave it sit in my cart for now but i like everything about it

    Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

Posting Permissions

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