Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 41 of 41
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    49
    Well.

    I picked up a pair of G3 Synapse 109s on eBay. And GOODNESS GRACIOUS. I am so glad I went with full rocker; these skis are revolutionary.

    On Saturday, WhetherMan and I toured a pleasant zone near Tahoe. We targeted 25-30 degree terrain; some tighter trees, some open shots. The snow was 3-day old dense pow; you never felt the bottom but it wasn't breaking over your knees either. Some areas were wind affected and a bit punchy.

    On my Chargers, this terrain would have been fun (I mean, we're skiing pow in the backcountry, come on) but I would have burned up my quads struggling to break the skis out of their sidecut to avoid trees. Noodling in low-angle punchy snow, I would have felt that knee-tweaking grabbiness as the strong, flat tail got stuck between layers. Navigating between tight trees would have required a jump to unlock the ski from its turn radius and get going in a different direction.

    Not so on the Synapses. I experienced all of the advantages mentioned in this thread, and so far none of the downsides. They made predictable arcs at speed. When a tree got in the way of my turn, I just rolled my ankles, slid sideways, then resumed my carve. They landed mini golf drops stably and predictably. I could ski them forward, centered, or even in the backseat without feeling any quad burn. Even downhill adventure skinning on breakable crust through willows felt easier than it should have.

    On the uphill, I experienced no abnormal slippage, even allowing for the fact that this was my first tour of the season. Oh yeah, and they're 100g lighter despite being a little longer.

    Caveats: Conditions were pretty darn good. I didn't ski any firm snow where camber might have been nice. Nor did I drop any steep couloirs where a strong tail might have given me more support. The skin tracks we used were moderately graded and not refrozen. I wasn't maching down open slopes, so I didn't push any speed limits.

    But who cares! I'm sold. This was one of my best days touring in recent memory and I credit the skis quite a bit.

    I'll put my Chargers on gear swap soon. How does $225 sound for local pickup in the Bay or Tahoe?

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    livin the dream
    Posts
    3,631
    Bump.

    Looking at:
    Meridian tour
    Raven
    BMT109

    Fully rockered G3 doesn’t exist anymore....

    Any reviews on the Meridian Tour?

    Anything else out there I am missing? Full rocker, 108 class, 190ish, tour light....


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Best Skier on the Mountain
    Self-Certified
    1992 - 2012
    Squaw Valley, USA

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Squaw valley
    Posts
    2,723
    Vwerks Katanas

    Sent from my Armor_3 using Tapatalk

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    1,485
    BC Corvus 188
    2050g per w/ metal

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    in the trench
    Posts
    9,795
    Id imagine if Keith was going to press up some gpo's he might be able to do a pair in the rrc or rcc or whatever that abreviation was. Disclaimer:im not sure how ez that is to do but it was an option for the gpo/reverse camber. Always thought theyd make my fave touring ski even more magic. Too bad neckbeard wasnt still around. Last i saw , he was still using his day in day out

    Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    1,603

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    livin the dream
    Posts
    3,631
    Quote Originally Posted by grinch View Post
    Id imagine if Keith was going to press up some gpo's he might be able to do a pair in the rrc or rcc or whatever that abreviation was. Disclaimer:im not sure how ez that is to do but it was an option for the gpo/reverse camber. Always thought theyd make my fave touring ski even more magic. Too bad neckbeard wasnt still around. Last i saw , he was still using his day in day out

    Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app
    Skinny GPO UL RRC is my dream do it all touring setup. Just $$$$$$


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Best Skier on the Mountain
    Self-Certified
    1992 - 2012
    Squaw Valley, USA

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    363
    Moment Deathwish Tour looks pretty awesome too. Never skied it so just speculating. But flat underfoot foot and 1650gm in a 184, progressive mount point, straight shape/long turn radius, and lots of tip/tail splay without too much taper. As a fan of flat/subtle reverse camber skis with mount points of -4 to -6cm from TC, I want to try it!

    That new WNDR Intention 110 in the reverse camber looks awesome too. Less tip/tail taper than 4FRNTs current offerings, looks like a lighter and slightly narrower EHP by the rocker profile to me. Long flat section underfoot. A little more sidecut than the EHP too. All of which sounds amazing as a midwinter UT touring ski. But very expensive!

    The only thing closer to the old EHP dimensions in a touring layup would be the SGN Togga. Maybe wider than what you want. Specs look money though! More rocker than the EHP and the Intention 110 by the pics. Also very expensive.

    https://sgnskis.com/products/togga?v...14249640886331

    The BMT 109 and V-Werks Katana, and the Moment Merdian Tour 107 all seem like good flat/subtle reverse touring options too.

    Lastly, this isn’t billed as a flat camber ski but the rocker/camber profile pics suggest otherwise. I am willing to bet it would feel like a flat camber touring ski with a little home decambering.

    https://blisterreview.com/gear-revie...ine-vision-108

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    1,914
    I had the 184 Raven at 6' 190#. I think I would have really liked the 190. The 184 felt too short to me, except on hardpack, so I suggest you go for the 190. I haven't skied enough full rocker skis to know, but I'm guessing you'd want to err on the longer side for any fully-rockered ski. The Ravens were really fun on hardpack but required loading up the skis to really get all the juice out of them. Damn I wanna go skiing!!

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Squalpine
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by meter-man View Post
    I had the 184 Raven at 6' 190#. I think I would have really liked the 190. The 184 felt too short to me, except on hardpack, so I suggest you go for the 190. I haven't skied enough full rocker skis to know, but I'm guessing you'd want to err on the longer side for any fully-rockered ski. The Ravens were really fun on hardpack but required loading up the skis to really get all the juice out of them. Damn I wanna go skiing!!
    Did you ever feel like the 184 was folding up on you in deeper snow?

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    1,914
    Quote Originally Posted by WhetherMan View Post
    Did you ever feel like the 184 was folding up on you in deeper snow?
    What's up TC! I don't know if fold up is exactly the right word... They were stiff, but they just felt a little too short and too little surface area for our medium-heavy Sierra snowpack and I had to ski a lot slower as a result. It might be because the tips are not wide at all (only 120!). They were really fun in hardpack, but just felt on I was on waterskis that were a touch too short in 3-D snow. They felt wide and long enough in blower low-density pow, especially on flatter/less steep pitches.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    867
    Quote Originally Posted by JRainey View Post
    Beast 108 should be in the mix. I'm gonna try a pair this year. I've been touring on Hoji's (super rc) with pure mohair and it's been fine. Just tread lightly on the sketchy bits.
    How’d that go? About to drill a pair I found super cheap...

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    tahoe de chingao
    Posts
    540
    I’d be interested to hear takes on some of the bigger fully rockered touring skis.

    How does the bmt 122 compare to the renegade and the nocta in similar lengths? Anyone tour on inthaynes?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    5,552
    Wootest kusala


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    I need to go to Utah.
    Utah?
    Yeah, Utah. It's wedged in between Wyoming and Nevada. You've seen pictures of it, right?

    So after 15 years we finally made it to Utah.....


    Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues

    8, 17, 13, 18, 16, 18, 20, 19, 16

    2018/2019 (24/32)

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    567
    Quote Originally Posted by DGamms View Post
    The only thing closer to the old EHP dimensions in a touring layup would be the SGN Togga. Maybe wider than what you want. Specs look money though! More rocker than the EHP and the Intention 110 by the pics. Also very expensive.
    https://sgnskis.com/products/togga?v...14249640886331
    I did a few tours on the Togga last year. Not the tour, but the standard lay-up.
    - light for the size
    - it's as reverse as dps 138 etc......a shit ton of rocker. Extremely maneuverable
    - for me sizing is a bit off. Bought 186 since 194 would be too long for kick turns, but 186 is like snowblades. Mounted 1,5 back, still a bit less float than I would like for a ski like this, especially in heavier snow. In fresh pow they were excellent.
    - smooth flex. The tour is far stiffer. My guess is it could be a bit harsh....

    I expected it to ski more like a EHP than it does. Really, it skis more like a dps 138 / Protest etc than the EHP.

    I put some rocker pics in the SGN-thread https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...ight=sgn+togga

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Squalpine
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by meter-man View Post
    What's up TC! I don't know if fold up is exactly the right word... They were stiff, but they just felt a little too short and too little surface area for our medium-heavy Sierra snowpack and I had to ski a lot slower as a result. It might be because the tips are not wide at all (only 120!). They were really fun in hardpack, but just felt on I was on waterskis that were a touch too short in 3-D snow. They felt wide and long enough in blower low-density pow, especially on flatter/less steep pitches.
    D! What's up?! I had a very similar experience on the 190 actually. I tend to judge all skis by waist width, but just like you're pointing out, the raven has way less width in the tip in tail than a lot of ~104 underfoot skis. Not enough surface for the Sierra. But totally fun in low angle low density. Also, for a pure touring ski, pretty fkn heavy for the surface area. 1900g for the 190 i think? These days, that's not great.

Posting Permissions

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