Why Do I Like These Cheap, Old Megawatts So Much?

[muted]

I thought they were the worst skis I've ever owned. Floppy pieces of poop that only had one benefit: they pivoted nicely in dense trees. But I don't like to ski dense trees. I had the blue ones, and the speed limit on them was annoying as hell. Fascinating to hear how great people think they were, I mean if you love them, great, you ain't wrong! But I had the opposite experience.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

Soft skis with big tips are super fun in light untracked. Even without rocker (see Volkl Sanouks for example). Problem is in every other condition.

[mattig]

Soft skis with big tips are super fun in light untracked. Even without rocker (see Volkl Sanouks for example). Problem is in every other condition.

Can't say I skied anything untracked this weekend. It was well abused by the time I got to it. Also, the only soft part of this ski is the first 8-10 inches of floppy donkey tip.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[I've seen black diamonds!]

Can't say I skied anything untracked this weekend. It was well abused by the time I got to it.

In that case I think you're nuts.

[lrn2swim]

Dudes at Blister love em too. https://blisterreview.com/gear-revie...gawatt-188cm-2

[mattig]

In that case I think you're nuts.

Correct, although if you read the reviews (including the one referenced below), I think people like them in the chop as well. Anyway, your comment on untracked is what I was expecting. The chop performance was one of the reasons I was so impressed.

Dudes at Blister love em too. https://blisterreview.com/gear-revie...gawatt-188cm-2

Yeah, and they love the Bibby even more, which made my experience all the more puzzling.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[TeleBeaver]

I thought they were the worst skis I've ever owned. Floppy pieces of poop that only had one benefit: they pivoted nicely in dense trees. But I don't like to ski dense trees. I had the blue ones, and the speed limit on them was annoying as hell. Fascinating to hear how great people think they were, I mean if you love them, great, you ain't wrong! But I had the opposite experience.

The speed limit in chop is very easy to find, but I wonder how much better the even newer version with the orange/white tops is. They alledgedly stiffened up the tip and shortened the radius. I DO like skiing dense trees which is why I had such a great time on them, but like I said, for running out the bottom of the cirque at high speed they were a wild ride with the tips flapping all over the place. Different strokes for different folks. I'd buy protests if I were buying a new set of 120mm+ boards, but since they get used so rarely, I think I'll stick with the low speed limit MW for now.

[Bandit Man]

The speed limit in chop is very easy to find, but I wonder how much better the even newer version with the orange/white tops is. They alledgedly stiffened up the tip and shortened the radius. I DO like skiing dense trees which is why I had such a great time on them, but like I said, for running out the bottom of the cirque at high speed they were a wild ride with the tips flapping all over the place. Different strokes for different folks. I'd buy protests if I were buying a new set of 120mm+ boards, but since they get used so rarely, I think I'll stick with the low speed limit MW for now.

So, Regarding the OG version versus newer, radius went from 42-m (drool) to 35-m (still pretty enticing) and they stiffened the tips? Any other material changes? I picked up a pair of minty 2013’s in a 188 from the board and have yet to ski them. Was debating keeping them since I had no idea there was a secret cult of MW lovers...[emoji6]

[::: :::]

Other skis from the early 2010s in the “pintail” vein that you might try [..] 192 Atomic Atlas (I think)

Not sure it qualifies as pin tail...pretty squared up

[jackattack]

Similarly wouldn’t call the MW a pintail.

If that’s something someone is looking for, maybe the Cham 127? That’s a big dumb boat. I know a guy with a pair that has been trying to unload them if someone is interested in trying something like that.

[adrenalated]

The original shape (white, then blue) Megawatts are a totally different ski than the orange/white ones in the Blister review and otherwise discussed above. Like, about the only thing they had in common was the name.

OG Megawatt shape:
153-125-130
42m radius
huge tip rocker and flat-ish tail
Note that this has 23mm of taper from tip to tail and big tip rocker. It also had a relatively aft mounting point. Most people would consider this a pintail ski.
Cap construction, wood core, no metal.
IIRC these were built in Atomic's factory.
https://www.evo.com/outlet/skis/black-diamond-megawatt

2nd gen Megawatt (orange/white):
151-125-131
35m radius
tip and tail rocker
more forward mount point
Sidewall construction, wood core, no metal
Made in BD's factory in China
Note that it now has 20mm of taper tip to tail, and the addition of tail rocker. It's still pintailed like the BG, but more of a 5-point shape than the original ski

[mattig]

So, Regarding the OG version versus newer, radius went from 42-m (drool) to 35-m (still pretty enticing) and they stiffened the tips? Any other material changes? I picked up a pair of minty 2013’s in a 188 from the board and have yet to ski them. Was debating keeping them since I had no idea there was a secret cult of MW lovers...[emoji6]

probably shouldn't keep those. I'll take em off your hands. It's for the greater good...

[XXX-er]

I think pintail is not refering to the shape of the tail, I think it means the ski has not so much side cut and a narrower width of tail

Lotus120 is 140-120-125 for a 184 with a 38 M (?) turning radius

the Koala is 143/119/130 for a 184 with a 23M turning radius

so the waist is almost identical but the Koala has wider tip & tail which makes for more side cut which it will use to make the smaller turns

Lotus has less side cut but more early rise which will it will use to turn by slarving

[::: :::]

I think pintail is not refering to the shape of the tail, I think it means the ski has not so much side cut and a narrower width of tail

Ah, ok
always thought it was tail taper behind the binding

[Norseman]

Correct on the pintail terminology.

White chainsaw Megawatt fan here! Great pow ski. Usurped by more modern shapes but damn, I had a lot of fun on those skis.

My set became reverse-cambered with heavy use.

[XXX-er]

Ah, ok
always thought it was tail taper behind the binding

well I thot you were refering to the squared off tails in the pict of those atlas (great ski BTW) as opposed to some that looks more pointy ?

It sounds like we are talking about the same thing

[jackattack]

The original shape (white, then blue) Megawatts are a totally different ski than the orange/white ones in the Blister review and otherwise discussed above. Like, about the only thing they had in common was the name.

OG Megawatt shape:
153-125-130
42m radius
huge tip rocker and flat-ish tail
Note that this has 23mm of taper from tip to tail and big tip rocker. It also had a relatively aft mounting point. Most people would consider this a pintail ski.
Cap construction, wood core, no metal.
IIRC these were built in Atomic's factory.
https://www.evo.com/outlet/skis/black-diamond-megawatt

OK on the pintail assessment. I never thought of them that way, rather a GS ski with a bloated tip.

However, I can attest they do have metal, having drilled my pair many times. Is that just a mounting plate?

[mattig]

The original shape (white, then blue) Megawatts are a totally different ski than the orange/white ones in the Blister review and otherwise discussed above. Like, about the only thing they had in common was the name.

OG Megawatt shape:
153-125-130
42m radius
huge tip rocker and flat-ish tail
Note that this has 23mm of taper from tip to tail and big tip rocker. It also had a relatively aft mounting point. Most people would consider this a pintail ski.
Cap construction, wood core, no metal.
IIRC these were built in Atomic's factory.
https://www.evo.com/outlet/skis/black-diamond-megawatt

2nd gen Megawatt (orange/white):
151-125-131
35m radius
tip and tail rocker
more forward mount point
Sidewall construction, wood core, no metal
Made in BD's factory in China
Note that it now has 20mm of taper tip to tail, and the addition of tail rocker. It's still pintailed like the BG, but more of a 5-point shape than the original ski

Jeez, 42m sidecut... Really drives home the point about sidecut vs ski flex creating turn shapes. Guess I missed that when I looked them up. Most people wouldn't equate 42m with turning on a greasy nickel, but that's about all the space you need.

That evo page says "revamped for 2010," so those fisty windmills should technically be 2nd gen? This review seems to hit on the changes: https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...egawatt-Review

And then the bigger change happened for 2011-2012 (and carried over to 2013-14)?

In conclusion, I have fisty windmill MWs from 2010-11, which added a touch of camber, torsional rigidity, and stiffness, but still retained the floppy donkey dick tip that I just can't get enough of? Yes, I think this is right.

[adrenalated]

However, I can attest they do have metal, having drilled my pair many times. Is that just a mounting plate?

It must be. The first BD skis to feature full length metal were the blue Zealot and red Verdict that were made in BD's factory (same year that the orange/white MW came out). It was a big deal at the time. I didn't think the white/blue MW had any metal at all but I don't think I ever personally drilled into a pair so you may be right that there's a mounting plate in there.

[auvgeek]

Jeez, 42m sidecut... Really drives home the point about sidecut vs ski flex creating turn shapes. Guess I missed that when I looked them up. Most people wouldn't equate 42m with turning on a greasy nickel, but that's about all the space you need.

It's more than just ski flex for turn shape in 3D snow. It has to do with the rocker and overall shape as well. Overall pintailed skis with a softer tip + tip rocker are super easy to turn in 3D snow because the tail digs in and the tip floats up. Dump speed and turn on a dime just by digging your heels in and then pivoting the ski sideways. A big advantage of a huge radius is they're not hooky when sliding sideways.

And a bit off topic, but the advantage of an overall pintailed shape vs an R/R shape is the pintail lets you drive the tip and have a more traditionally stance in 3D snow, while R/R requires a pretty neutral stance. Of course the trade off is that the R/R is much more slarvey than a pintail.

Neither a pintail or R/R are super fun on firm snow because of the hudge radius. Pintail is more manageable -- less apt for the spatula splits -- but still not much energy on 2D snow; you mostly have to slarve your turns instead of carving them. That's where the 5-point design with the uber short radius came in (Armada JJ, DPS Wailer 112, etc) came in. Really, the R/R and pintail is kind of old tech compared to the modern pow shapes that provide 90%-99% of the pow performance while being loads more versatile. But some people love that old school tech cuz they ski pow so well.

And again, all lines of R/R, pintail, and 5-point have pretty much been blurred at this point so there's not much use in categorizing modern pow shapes into these 3 bins. Even the idea of an asymmetric shape is an attempt to blur lines even further -- they try to maintain more effective edge on the inside edge with more taper on the outside edge so it's less hooky. At least in theory, this maintains most of the benefits of taper while minimizing the drawbacks.

Ah, ok
always thought it was tail taper behind the binding

Not saying other people don't use different terms, but that's why I tried to define my terms in my original post:

tapered (widest point substantially inset from the tip/tail) [...] pintailed (tail is narrow relative to the tip/waist)

[swissiphic]

It's more than just ski flex for turn shape in 3D snow. It has to do with the rocker and overall shape as well. Overall pintailed skis with a softer tip + tip rocker are super easy to turn in 3D snow because the tail digs in and the tip floats up. Dump speed and turn on a dime just by digging your heels in and then pivoting the ski sideways.

IME; 3D snow conditions play a HUGE factor in altering the subjective feeling of how skis perform and what turn shape they feel natural at. I recall back in the day skiing my Atomic REX 185cm pencil sticks in certain perfect snow conditions and they slarved, pivoted and schmeared just fine and one could alter turn shape at will. But put em into punchy snow and they could only make short radius cookie cutter z shaped turns. Similar results with modern shapes and fatter widths to up to a point these days when thinkin' about the skis i've been on. I think there's a critical width where the game changes though. Don't know what that number is but...for reference: Feb 2014 we had a week of stiff boot top deep ski pen snow where armada jj's felt like cookie cutters and couldn't slarve or pivot worth a damn. Skied all sort of terrain and had the most dissapointing turns on steep spines where i had to jump turn instead of pivot and slarve. Did some a/b comparos with my k2 darksides with 128mm underfoot and the sensation disappeared...got back to ops normal.

Lots of love for the K2 Darksides...custom modded with spooned tips, bent more rocker into them, pulled back the front rocker contact point and the flex has been battle softened with a decade of use. Pivot, slarve and schmear machines...not by 'digging in the heels' and throwing em sideways, but, by subtly shifting weight forward fully onto falls of feet and bending the tails up for eezee release and sideways skiing if desired...if not, sink back down into ops normal position and carve or slarve the rest of the run away....in most 3D snow conditions.

[SupreChicken]

Sorry, long post, but skip to the meat at the bottom if you've been on 2010-2013 Megawatts and late models BGs...

Calling on the collective wisdom to help me learn a bit more about my preferences. I realize they're "my" preferences, but many maggots have spent much more time on many more skis than me. I finally have enough A/B time on a few popular skis to provide relevant variables.

me:

• 39yo, 6'00, 220lb, big upper body, short legs
• can ski anywhere inbounds, but not a big sender.
• Like driving tips more than neutral stance.
• Ski 95% Mt. Hood, OR
• Haven't been on many skis since getting back in the groove 5 or 6 years ago and can't usually demo what I want when I want due to schedule restrictions

Skis I hated:

Bibby Pro 190 (the older, more popular layup)

• Couldn't figure this ski out. Bases were true and they were aggressively and progressively detuned as I tried to figure them out. Had lots of luck on soft groomers in a neutral stance, but on wind-scour or dust on crust, they were squirrely again. Biggest issues were tip dive in pow and difficulty controlling/predicting turn shapes in pow. Seemed very sensitive to stance and lean angle in a squirrely and unsettling way.
• If you guys were to tell me that these only really come alive with speed or that the mount is too progressive for a top-heavy dude that doesn't ski switch, I could see that.
• Boots could be a third variable. I'm in Rossi Allspeed 120s (sister boot to Lange RX 120s I think?). I've been wanting to try a stiffer boot.

ON3P Wren 98 (in its defense, I was on a size too small and was +1cm due to previous mount)


Skis I like:

Peacemaker 186

• love it as a slow speed, low tide tree ski or noodling around with the fam. Really easy and intuitive for everything. Jack of all trades, master of none

Gunsmoke 193

• love it if I'm not turning much, but otherwise it's a bit too much to throw around in cascade concrete.
• It didn't seem to love PNW leftovers. Best day I had on them was deep, dry, and arcing bigger turns away from the trees (go figure....)

Skis I love:

MX98

• my favorite 95-105mm ski in a 184, never skied the 194
• Serious, no sense of humor, no early rise, 2 sheets of metal, out-bonafides the bonafide and Monster 98, both skis I like a lot, but that weren't as serious as the Kastle. Also skied (and liked) Brahmas and Mantras in search of this ski.
• Crazy thing is that the tails will release and slarve on command, but absolutely rail and finish turns when on edge.
• Despite being serious, I don't understand why people say they'll punish sloppy form. I don't view my form as the greatest, and they've never given me a scare.
• Once the fresh snow gets over boot deep, my love begins to wane

Dynastar Speedzone 12ti

• for strict groomer duty as needed, but not so focused that I die if I chase my kid through the trees or bumps.

BGs (2017/18 - 189)

• Been waiting a long time to get on these on a pow day. It wasn't quite the instant euphoria TGR led me to expect, but it was sooooo much better than the bibby and 10 times more intuitive.

The Meat:

Most of the reason for writing this was the weekend I just had on the Megawatts, which included a few runs on BGs in the same snow. The MWs blew my mind all weekend. So pivoty. Floppy tips popped the stiffer forebody up and out of snow whether it was blower or tracked out, regardless of my attention to body position. Tapered shovels didn't get deflected by 2pm resort chop. Turn shapes were intuitive and predictable. Moderate camber wasn't noticeable in pow, but pleasantly noticeable on groomers.

When I A/B'd with BGs, I actually preferred the Megawatts by a very small margin, although if I had to pick one of them to be the wide ski in a 2 ski quiver, the BG would be the easy choice (much more daily driver potential 'round here).

Questions:

1. Why aren't megawatts more popular? The reviews I dug up here all had similar feedback (i.e. people really loved this ski). Is this a black diamond (no real marketing? too backcountry focused to catch on at the resort? No consistently well-received line-up over the years?)
2. What does my love for this ski tell you about my preferences? Serious question, because I figure several of you will know me better than I know myself. For instance, I wouldn't be surprised to hear something like: "You like a traditional mount and have put too much stock in what the internet tells you regarding ski size/flex and body weight. You're not a good enough skier to make use of a 190cm+ ski that's relatively stiff throughout. You like this ski because it's the first pow ski you've tried with serious tip rocker and super soft, tapered shovels, but one that retains enough rigidity the rest of the way down the ski to support your fat, sexy ass the way you thought only a 190+ ski could."
3. The big one: what other skis do I need to try, either pow-specific or more versatile 115+ skis?

Thanks in advance for any lightbulbs. Also, WTB your old Megawatts...

Great post.
1) they are popular, but they don’t get invited to every party these days.

2) 2 things you said early that check out regarding your love for the MW and your hatred of the bibby.

-prefer driving the tips
-your favorite low tide ski is no fun.

The MW has more in common with your DD than either the billy goat or the bibby.

You need/want more tip in front of you at your size than you get with the 190 bibby. Though, I wonder if it’s worth another lap on it if you can ride some for free.

[Dervan]

Nice job Mattig. Megawatt futures are up big in the aftermarket. I also had a good time on your megawatts. nice ski. stiff enough underfoot but not a lot of work and that soft shovel which planes nicely, is like watching a flapping donkey dong through the chop which is always fun.

No wonder why my a guy at the local meet up likes his Megawatt so much. Will definitely consider a Megawatt for my next ski.

[rangerjake]

The original shape (white, then blue) Megawatts are a totally different ski than the orange/white ones in the Blister review and otherwise discussed above. Like, about the only thing they had in common was the name.

OG Megawatt shape:
153-125-130
42m radius
huge tip rocker and flat-ish tail
Note that this has 23mm of taper from tip to tail and big tip rocker. It also had a relatively aft mounting point. Most people would consider this a pintail ski.
Cap construction, wood core, no metal.
IIRC these were built in Atomic's factory.
https://www.evo.com/outlet/skis/black-diamond-megawatt

2nd gen Megawatt (orange/white):
151-125-131
35m radius
tip and tail rocker
more forward mount point
Sidewall construction, wood core, no metal
Made in BD's factory in China
Note that it now has 20mm of taper tip to tail, and the addition of tail rocker. It's still pintailed like the BG, but more of a 5-point shape than the original ski

Those first 2 iterations of the MW (white with some orange highlighting, and then the blue with the link) were post-Atomic factory, made in China, but before their own factory when they started building sidewall skis. The Atomic factory skis were all foam core (crossbows, 1st gen Verdicts). These were just a single species wood core 3d routed for flex pattern and laid up with fiberglass. In the last year prior to moving into their own Chinese factory they started to mess around with carbon- 1st gen Carbon MW and 2nd gen Justice.

One thing about this particular generation of BD skis was that they were insanely prone to delamination- particularly the topskin. And in the carbon versions (MW/Justice) it was like every other pair. Those carbon versions were crap skis, crap build, just bummers all around. Early MWs do have a mini cult following, as evidenced here.

[Vitamin I]

My white/orange O.G. Megawatt is super-fun on hot slush Spring days, too. Even on end-of-day groomers with slush piles all over them.

.