Bent Chet 120

[anotherVTskibum]

What drove you to change from the Shift to the Tecton? I just bought the 2021 BC in a 184" length and am debating between those two bindings... Any advice or recommendation between the Atomic Shift and the Tecton?

Thanks!

I've said this in at least one other thread, but if you like being able to get out of your skis without involving your hands (eg carrying a load of gates, a bunch of boo, or running a toboggan), the Tectons suck, as you need to push down on the toe lever to get out. It's not a big deal for everyone, but for me, it's a deal killer.

Otherwise, I've been happy with release, retention, and skiing characteristics of both those bindings. I probably put a dozen days on a pair of Tectons before selling them with the attached skis, and I replaced that with a shift-equipped pair and have since added another pair of Shifts to my quiver. Having to pull the shift off my boot to switch to ski mode bothers me philosophically, but after living with them for a while, it doesn't seem to have any material impact on transition time.

Oh, the Shifts can be skied downhill with a non-pin boot, if that matters to you.

Sent from my SM-G892A using TGR Forums mobile app

[SupreChicken]

Tectons rule on this ski. Only issue I had with this setup was the crampons don’t fit over the bent chet

This is why I went shifts over tectons. Maybe not a great reason, but still...a reason

[GravityDT]

Have a or of 184s I’ve had mounted with some Shifts for mostly inbounds use. Going to remount with a pr of MTNs for the deep day BC/tour setup. Any idea on mount location for BC and more of a directional use? Will be a 25.5 boot if it matters. Thanks a Ton!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[thurmondmb]

What drove you to change from the Shift to the Tecton? I just bought the 2021 BC in a 184" length and am debating between those two bindings... Any advice or recommendation between the Atomic Shift and the Tecton?

Thanks!

I was using this setup for touring only and I think the shifts suck to tour on. Where I live we don't have a lot of great side country options so I have to walk to get to the good terrain. I also don't spin, but I like to hit cliffs, nothing huge, so decided to go with the tecton. I was also considering the moment voyager as well since this setup is only used for touring and soft snow.

Hope this helps!

[thurmondmb]

Have a or of 184s I’ve had mounted with some Shifts for mostly inbounds use. Going to remount with a pr of MTNs for the deep day BC/tour setup. Any idea on mount location for BC and more of a directional use? Will be a 25.5 boot if it matters. Thanks a Ton!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I remounted mine from -0.5 to -2 and like them. Not AS surfy compared to the original mount , but still pretty dang surfy. They tour better at -2 than the recommended line. And having more tip out front has been good for hitting cliffs with a backpack on. I've definitely still gone over the handlebars due to pilot error though

[goolick]

Has anyone skiied both BC120 and Kartel 116 and can compare? I have a 191 K116 as my soft snow ski but I'm interested to try out the new (light) bentchetlers for a 50/50 powder ski. Main hesitation being that the kartels are really good for chopped up snow and runouts after drops. But kartels + pivots are pretty heavy for jibbing around and trying to spin.

[cydwhit]

Has anyone skiied both BC120 and Kartel 116 and can compare? I have a 191 K116 as my soft snow ski but I'm interested to try out the new (light) bentchetlers for a 50/50 powder ski. Main hesitation being that the kartels are really good for chopped up snow and runouts after drops. But kartels + pivots are pretty heavy for jibbing around and trying to spin.

Yeah, I have. They're RADICALLY different skis. Like, any conversation that compares them is inherently flawed at some level. The BC 120 is nowhere near the K116 in anything short of perfect pow. It's much less damp. much more squirrely, and generally more work to ski fast. I'm still convinced that the BC 120 should be treated more as a touring ski. Inbounds bindings are a waste on that ski IMO.

K116 and BC 120 are actually pretty close to being the opposite ends of a spectrum when it comes to jibby pow skis. There are a few heavier, damper skis than the K116 but not many, and there are a few lighter, sketchier skis than the BC 120, but again, not many.

If you're not planning on primarily touring I'd recommend something closer to the middle of that spectrum. A Moment Wildcat splits that difference pretty well. 4FRNT Inthayne does too. By the book, the Armada White Walker should too, although I haven't skied that one.

I only have the numbers/context for the 18x cm versions, but a K116 is like a 2400 g ski, and the BC 120 is around a 1700 gram ski. A 2000-2100 gram ski like the ones I listed will get you that easier to spin and jib feeling, while giving up much less of what makes the K116 great. Or just ball out and get a J116 tour custom!

[goolick]

Yeah, I have. They're RADICALLY different skis. Like, any conversation that compares them is inherently flawed at some level. The BC 120 is nowhere near the K116 in anything short of perfect pow. It's much less damp. much more squirrely, and generally more work to ski fast. I'm still convinced that the BC 120 should be treated more as a touring ski. Inbounds bindings are a waste on that ski IMO.

K116 and BC 120 are actually pretty close to being the opposite ends of a spectrum when it comes to jibby pow skis. There are a few heavier, damper skis than the K116 but not many, and there are a few lighter, sketchier skis than the BC 120, but again, not many.

If you're not planning on primarily touring I'd recommend something closer to the middle of that spectrum. A Moment Wildcat splits that difference pretty well. 4FRNT Inthayne does too. By the book, the Armada White Walker should too, although I haven't skied that one.

I only have the numbers/context for the 18x cm versions, but a K116 is like a 2400 g ski, and the BC 120 is around a 1700 gram ski. A 2000-2100 gram ski like the ones I listed will get you that easier to spin and jib feeling, while giving up much less of what makes the K116 great. Or just ball out and get a J116 tour custom!

Thanks for the feedback. Vision 118 also might fit the bill of the light-but-not-too-light playful powder ski. It's 2mm narrower than the BC120 and about 150g heavier

[cydwhit]

Thanks for the feedback. Vision 118 also might fit the bill of the light-but-not-too-light playful powder ski. It's 2mm narrower than the BC120 and about 150g heavier

Totally! As I was typing I knew I was missing a ski or two but couldn't think of them haha. Line Outline would probably fit the bill as well.

[DGamms]

Anyone weigh this years BC120s unmounted? I only ask because my 2020 pair weigh around 1850 gm per ski, so 150 gm or so heavier than Blisters stated weight.

I’m not unhappy with the weight at all, they still feel good on the skin track for being such a big ski, especially when paired with lighter boots and bindings. Just curious if I got an unusually heavy pair or not.

[margotron]

That’s right. Mine don’t touch blister weights either

[noslow]

According to Evo ski weight chart, the Bent 120 went from around 1725gr in the 184cm in 2019 to the 1830gr range in the 2020 and 2021 versions.

[margotron]

According to Evo ski weight chart, the Bent 120 went from around 1725gr in the 184cm in 2019 to the 1830gr range in the 2020 and 2021 versions.

Thanks for the reference. All the 2019 numbers must be overly optimistic then because the 2019 weights are wrong.

My skis weighed:
Year: 2019
Length: 192cm
Weight: 1900g

Do a little multiplication and division and you get the following:
Length: 184cm
Estimated Weight: 1820g

[noslow]

Thanks for the reference. All the 2019 numbers must be overly optimistic then because the 2019 weights are wrong.

My skis weighed:
Year: 2019
Length: 192cm
Weight: 1900g

Do a little multiplication and division and you get the following:
Length: 184cm
Estimated Weight: 1820g

Both weights could be right as they must have made some type of change in construction/process/part supplier etc between early 2019 versions and early 2020 ones for the weight difference and you might have a “late 2019 build” that incorporated that change in their build that continued into 2020 and 21. 🤷

[margotron]

Both weights could be right as they must have made some type of change in construction/process/part supplier etc between early 2019 versions and early 2020 ones for the weight difference and you might have a “late 2019 build” that incorporated that change in their build that continued into 2020 and 21. 路

anything is possible...

[auri3456]

Hello everyone,

I love my BC 120 for powder days but am looking for something skinnier as a playful all-mountain ski.
From what I gathered so far the BC 100 is not that similar to the 120 and I was wondering if someone had a recommendation for a ski that is similar to the 120, i.e. playful and surfy feel in soft snow, likes to be thrown sideways, but can handle non-pow days.

From my research so far I thought the Völkl Revolt 104 looks quite interesting.
Potentially also the K2 Reckoner 102 but I am afraid that that one might be a bit too soft for an all-mountain ski.

[JRainey]

Hello everyone,

I love my BC 120 for powder days but am looking for something skinnier as a playful all-mountain ski.
From what I gathered so far the BC 100 is not that similar to the 120 and I was wondering if someone had a recommendation for a ski that is similar to the 120, i.e. playful and surfy feel in soft snow, likes to be thrown sideways, but can handle non-pow days.

From my research so far I thought the Völkl Revolt 104 looks quite interesting.
Potentially also the K2 Reckoner 102 but I am afraid that that one might be a bit too soft for an all-mountain ski.

I was on the same quest and got the revolt 104.

It's a good ski, but it has a little less camber running surface. It carves like a motherfucker though. Good in bad snow, heavier than BC120 so it tracks ok.

I got the 180, but easily could have gone 188. But the length has benefits for 360s, and it imposed a speed limit.

[goolick]

Anyone have skin-sizing advice for the 192s? 140mm wide enough?

[goolick]

My 2020 192s (the white ones with a tree) are 1956g

[margotron]

My 2020 192s (the white ones with a tree) are 1956g

yep. im at 1900, so that's correct

i went BD 140 and it was perfect

[phatboy64]

I was on the same quest and got the revolt 104.

It's a good ski, but it has a little less camber running surface. It carves like a motherfucker though. Good in bad snow, heavier than BC120 so it tracks ok.

I got the 180, but easily could have gone 188. But the length has benefits for 360s, and it imposed a speed limit.

Also got a pair of the 104’s...really fun ski....

[RonnieM]

My 2020 192s (the white ones with a tree) are 1956g

I ride the 184 and it's plenty of ski. 192 is a lot of ski even though they ski short.

[powderdetective]

Thanks for the feedback. Vision 118 also might fit the bill of the light-but-not-too-light playful powder ski. It's 2mm narrower than the BC120 and about 150g heavier

Did you pull the trigger on a ski? I am on the 184cm BC120. It’s a ton of fun but I wish it was a bit more chargey and a touch longer most the time. Trying to decide if upsizing to the 192cm would solve this issue or if I should also look for a bit heavier ski as well. The 189cm vision 118 looks pretty sweet


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[goolick]

Did you pull the trigger on a ski? I am on the 184cm BC120. It’s a ton of fun but I wish it was a bit more chargey and a touch longer most the time. Trying to decide if upsizing to the 192cm would solve this issue or if I should also look for a bit heavier ski as well. The 189cm vision 118 looks pretty sweet


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I got a pair of 192s and have ridden it once in wet spring skiing conditions so can't really give any good feedback. I'm generally not trying to charge very hard and favor jibbing and tricking so that's why I was after a lighter ski for 50/50 and powder. I've ridden the vision 108s and they felt a little flimsy to me (also have a friend whose vision 108s delaminated very quickly) so I wasn't that interested in the Vision 118.

[powderdetective]

I got a pair of 192s and have ridden it once in wet spring skiing conditions so can't really give any good feedback. I'm generally not trying to charge very hard and favor jibbing and tricking so that's why I was after a lighter ski for 50/50 and powder. I've ridden the vision 108s and they felt a little flimsy to me (also have a friend whose vision 108s delaminated very quickly) so I wasn't that interested in the Vision 118.

Awesome. Thanks for the feedback. That was my concern with the visions. I think I’ve settled on going for something even heavier like the anima or wildcat since these will be much more of an inbounds ski


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums