Bent Chet 120

[SupreChicken]

PSA: all sizes NIP 21/22 model at Utah skis. $472

[PeachesNCream]

2015’s…Evo lists the 185 as 2190 grams. Not the light ones.

medium ones, the OG was another 300g per ski, new ones are like 1800-1700g

Are they good ones? Don’t know much about them but there a cheap local deal


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SupreChicken]

Are they good ones? Don’t know much about them but there a cheap local deal


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah. These were a decent ski. But they weren’t light and they didn’t have metal which IMO are the best qualities of the current iteration.

[bamboocoreONLY]

selling my 22/23 model w/STH2 16 if anyone is interested. Mounted for 305mm. Only skied 5 days but I did give them a full tune (grind, structure, etc.) so there are two black ptex-filled deep base scratches. Hit me up!

[NotSoBright]

Anyone had a chance to ski the BC 120 and any of the Whitewalker, Nocta, or CT 5.0, and can compare them?

I've skied the JJ, the Whitewalker, and the Magic J - got along with them all really well, despite all skiing somewhat differently. Seemed to prefer the added stiffness of the last two.

I'm doing the dumb-shit, endless navel gazing instead of just pulling the trigger on some skis.

Been wondering where the BC stands - sounds like it could be a really fun option, and found some for cheap.

Would be primarily used for cat skiing (I know, I know...), and the occasional mega day at Whistler.

[eSock]

Does anyone mount these with lightweight pin bindings? Seems like I only ever see them with shifts...

[skisurfmirth]

Does anyone mount these with lightweight pin bindings? Seems like I only ever see them with shifts...

I’ve got MTN on mine. A pretty fun, deep day touring rig. Good displacement underfoot but can be a little tricky with progressive mount and rockered tails on steep switch backs. I drilled a hole through the tail and made a homemade hoji lock system so skins don’t fall off.

[eSock]

I've got CAST on my BC120s right now, but I just got some Revolt 121s for inbounds pow duty, so I'm contemplating just throwing pin bindings on the BC120s to make them an even more efficient touring rig.

However, I'm also planning a Japan trip next season and that seems like a great place for BC120s, but would I want to be traveling/skiing Japan with pin bindings only though?

Decisions, decisions....

[skisurfmirth]

I brought my older 2nd gen BC120 to Japan with Ions a few years back. They were fine. Skied the 4 meters in 5 days we got great! Didn’t ski too many groomers/bumps that trip. Cast sounds like a great solution too.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[obi wan kenobi]

I have Beast 14s on my 192cm BC. Works great for touring and inbounds. Friend of mine has ATK 14s on his BC and that works great for him too.

[obi wan kenobi]

Anyone had a chance to ski the BC 120 and any of the Whitewalker, Nocta, or CT 5.0, and can compare them?

I've skied the JJ, the Whitewalker, and the Magic J - got along with them all really well, despite all skiing somewhat differently. Seemed to prefer the added stiffness of the last two.

I'm doing the dumb-shit, endless navel gazing instead of just pulling the trigger on some skis.

Been wondering where the BC stands - sounds like it could be a really fun option, and found some for cheap.

Would be primarily used for cat skiing (I know, I know...), and the occasional mega day at Whistler.

I read that you have to own a BC once in your life. Bought one. Yes, they are fun and yes you should buy that BC.

[NotSoBright]

I read that you have to own a BC once in your life. Bought one. Yes, they are fun and yes you should buy that BC.

And dang, lots out there for cheap these days...

Lots of mixed messages about the BC - some people claim they're noodles, others seem to think they've got a burly backbone and are stiff underfoot, albeit soft tips and tails.

I know I love the Whitewalkers, but the BCs sound pretty similar?

[jackstraw]

Anyone had luck with a 115mm brake on the bent 120?

[SnowMachine]

And dang, lots out there for cheap these days...

Lots of mixed messages about the BC - some people claim they're noodles, others seem to think they've got a burly backbone and are stiff underfoot, albeit soft tips and tails.

I know I love the Whitewalkers, but the BCs sound pretty similar?

My opinion of the current BC 120 is that it is stiff under foot and has plenty of backbone, but that it is a very light ski. Definitely not damp. It skis short.

I've had a lot of great days on them, but right now I'm preferring a less progressive mount and some more weight to bash.

[SnowMachine]

Anyone had luck with a 115mm brake on the bent 120?

I think you'll be fine.

[SnowMachine]

Pre-pop. Deleted.

[jackstraw]

I think you'll be fine.

Thanks. I found a 130 and just went with that.

[ClarkleberryFinn]

What's the furthest back anyone's mounted the BC120 and not ruined the ski?

Picked up some 184's this season, mounted with Shiftts at -2 from recommended (so -5 from centre). There's lots that I like about them, but I'm finding the tips are REALLY sensitive, and especially in deep snow rather than just 'skiing centred' I have to ski tentatively to not overwhelm and dive them.

I'm 5 foot 9 and ~70 kg (so not exactly big), would still normally want the 192s but wanted them for good snow touring as much as resort hence the 184, actually quite used to short-ish centre-ish powder skis (my last two inbounds pow skis have been 185 Down TD125s which - albeit also mounted behind recommended - feel way more substantial and I have 0 tip dive issues with).

Thinking re-mount another 2cm back, so -4 from recommended and -7 from centre. Further back than that seems too much for this type of ski... Or?

[jackstraw]

Just mounted 192's -3 and they ripped surprisingly well on firm snow. Looking forward to getting them in powdah.

[JRainey]

I just upgraded from 184 --> 192.

Mounted -3 from true center (same as 184), which is basically on the line. This years, not next (next years get different construction).


I have a feeling I might need to go back on these. They are quite a bit stiffer in the tips, so even though I didn't change tip/tail proportion, they don't porpoise the same. Also tip splay seems to be a little less than my 20/21 models.

Overall I like the springiness, where the 184 was more like a marshmallow, crispy mashmallow (carbon backbone). These ski more like the 188 bent 110 = poppy

Maybe my problems are solved at -5cm and I just ski them there. But if I like the character at two spots in different conditions, I might do inserts for two mount points.

Today it was THIKKK pow, still cold, but super dense 1+ foot on top of 6" of old styrofoam snow. So when the tips when under you felt it.

I was skiing faster in general, but the tip flex seems tuned for freeride instead of powder. Maybe that's just the changes on the later models. If Clarky is complaining about fore aft balance (tip dive), that's what I was feeling. Which is something I seldom had a problem with on the older model 184.

Super solid and fun though, and because the snow is only like this (dense and deep) maybe two or three days a year, it might be worth the trade off. But what's the point of an oversized fat ski (I'm 5'8") if it doesn't float in the thikkk pow?

Also riding on Sender Free 110 184 from this year, and the stiffer flex of the 192 Bents makes them feel almost identical in "juice". A good pairing.

What I didn't like about the Marshmallow Bent 184 was I couldn't really pop off of features, just "go" off. The bent 110 was much more fun in this regard, and the Sender too. The Sender has the benefit of not sucking in hard snow.

Still have a hankering to try the BlackOps 118, so we'll see.

First ski over 190cm though (lots at 186-189), and the size was a total non issue. Well, it was great: faster, stompier, snappier. Rocked the only section of deeper crud moguls I could find, no problems with excess tail. Still that easy to ski Bent Chetler shape.

Maybe I just "relax" the tips with some boards, clamps, and a hair drier. The tail doesn't really need a change. I like it stiffer (except when leaning back to make up for the tips).

Other total hair-brained idea is to DIY some swallow tail, but in general I love skis that ski parallel to the snow surface. Renegade, EHP, etc. And I think swallowtail, like pintail, might remove too much surface area from the tail. I noticed the snowboarders have been doing that. More freestyle shape, but with a swallow tail for the float. Will research.

Carry on!

[jackstraw]

I skied mine in some boot high and into knee deep dense powder for the first time. There was a bomber crust underneath that was quickly the surface on steeper sections so I still have not properly tested them as I was skiing pretty conservative ready for hitting a crust or an avi debris layer buried. But the conservative turns on pow seemed great and when I was on the crust they were confidence inspiring. I am 6' and was probably 175 with a light pack on this trip.

[JRainey]

Got another day on the 192. High alpine, post big snow, fwq 4* boys and girls rolled through town, then add big wind. So soft crud and windboard.

I just think these skis are too stiff for me.

Compared to the 184, the tip and tail rocker/rise is identical, so the increased length is 100% camber, and it's stiff.

For a big mountain ski, sure. But for a super light "pow" ski, it seems like they might have tuned everything for the 184 and the 192 is an afterthought. I could see people liking the camber at 200lbs, but at 5' 8" 170lb, I'm going fast enough to bend the ski, but it won't let the snow bend it.

I actually like the length and even the stiffness, but with that camber constantly reminding the tips to go down, there's a bit of a conflict. When the 184s hit something hard, they deform and go over it. When these do it, the camber drives it deeper and they deflect. This is why I got into EHPs and Renegades and such, BC120 184 brought me back into camber.

For wind board, they have that same balanced feel, all good. But it's more in the pure variable, the tip is just a bit of a liability (for me). Don't even need the tip softer, just the whole forebody of the ski, or just flat camber. I would love this ski with flat camber.

So I think I'll be moving on. If I get another nice pow day, I'll try them out if they aren't sold. But even in deeper alpine pow, they work against you. Like a big windlip, untracked, they just don't flex enough not too spear into the jump. The times I didn't spear in, I loved the pop, just like the bent 110, but if I get snagged. I bought this ski so I could better blast off natty windlips (weird but true), so they don't meet the spec.

Maybe going back a few cms would help, but it's still doesn't make up for the fact that the ski isn't bending with the snow.

Again, I got this a quiver, fresh snow euro ski. Where I ski I get like 5-10 laps basically untracked, then go home. I've got the sender free 110 for cleanup duty, and today the sender 110 would have been the choice, but we're in it for the science. I could just keep it, but I'm just not sure if I wouldn't want to ski the 184 more on the biggest days. So whats the point.

So what skis am I looking for? Bigger than BC120 184, pow day only, center mounted, medium flex (in the long lenght)? Revolt 121 191, Renegade 191, Candide AK 190, BlackOps 118. I do 180s and ski them to the road.

Again, I know a lot of people have liked this ski, I would just say it's a different character than the 184. Shape and everything is super dialed, I just need it to bend a little more.

[SnowMachine]

Got another day on the 192. High alpine, post big snow, fwq 4* boys and girls rolled through town, then add big wind. So soft crud and windboard.

I just think these skis are too stiff for me.

Compared to the 184, the tip and tail rocker/rise is identical, so the increased length is 100% camber, and it's stiff.

For a big mountain ski, sure. But for a super light "pow" ski, it seems like they might have tuned everything for the 184 and the 192 is an afterthought. I could see people liking the camber at 200lbs, but at 5' 8" 170lb, I'm going fast enough to bend the ski, but it won't let the snow bend it.

I actually like the length and even the stiffness, but with that camber constantly reminding the tips to go down, there's a bit of a conflict. When the 184s hit something hard, they deform and go over it. When these do it, the camber drives it deeper and they deflect. This is why I got into EHPs and Renegades and such, BC120 184 brought me back into camber.

For wind board, they have that same balanced feel, all good. But it's more in the pure variable, the tip is just a bit of a liability (for me). Don't even need the tip softer, just the whole forebody of the ski, or just flat camber. I would love this ski with flat camber.

So I think I'll be moving on. If I get another nice pow day, I'll try them out if they aren't sold. But even in deeper alpine pow, they work against you. Like a big windlip, untracked, they just don't flex enough not too spear into the jump. The times I didn't spear in, I loved the pop, just like the bent 110, but if I get snagged. I bought this ski so I could better blast off natty windlips (weird but true), so they don't meet the spec.

Maybe going back a few cms would help, but it's still doesn't make up for the fact that the ski isn't bending with the snow.

Again, I got this a quiver, fresh snow euro ski. Where I ski I get like 5-10 laps basically untracked, then go home. I've got the sender free 110 for cleanup duty, and today the sender 110 would have been the choice, but we're in it for the science. I could just keep it, but I'm just not sure if I wouldn't want to ski the 184 more on the biggest days. So whats the point.

So what skis am I looking for? Bigger than BC120 184, pow day only, center mounted, medium flex (in the long lenght)? Revolt 121 191, Renegade 191, Candide AK 190, BlackOps 118. I do 180s and ski them to the road.

Again, I know a lot of people have liked this ski, I would just say it's a different character than the 184. Shape and everything is super dialed, I just need it to bend a little more.

I skied the 184 and while I loved touring on it, I didn't think it was enough ski inbounds. The 191 Renegade solved that problem. It's a grin machine. If I know I'm getting soft tracks it comes out. If I know I'm skiing all day and will get into chop, I grab the Line Blade Optic 114 (186).

I love both of those skis and could be totally happy with either on soft days. The Ren is more fun for me. They turn sideways and drift, love turning into the fall line and are crazy quick in the trees/tight spots. The Blade Optic loves making GS turns over chop. They're stable and confidence inspiring. Totally different from a BC120.

[JRainey]

Yeah, I've got some OG Rens in the cellar, which I might remount for the next powder day. I'm sure the new ones are a little more civilized.

184 Bent was right on the edge for me, but it's a floater so I stuck with it. I got through the Reckoner thread and the 122s are in contention. Every once in a while I'll blast off a windlip backwards, so the twin can be nice. But the new Ren has quite the tail on it.

Plan for the 184 bents is pow touring duty.

[jvskier]

Sounds like you might like the Line Bacon 115. The tip will bend but it is sturdier underfoot. Comes in 188. Or you could try the Line Outline, great powder ski but maybe not enough extra over the 184 Bent?