Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,184

    WTB Atomic Backland FR 109 (182 or 189)

    Would be mounting shifts on them at +2cm for a 305 BSL. Prefer something in pretty good condition.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    BC to CO
    Posts
    4,864
    I have some 182 Atomic 109 Automatics mounted with Dynafit 2.0 @ 306 @+1.5. This was a sub 2000g ski before they named it the Backland the next season.
    Can dig up some photos/weights skin info if you’re interested.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    13,985
    Quote Originally Posted by Dee Hubbs View Post
    I have some 182 Atomic 109 Automatics mounted with Dynafit 2.0 @ 306 @+1.5. This was a sub 2000g ski before they named it the Backland the next season.
    Can dig up some photos/weights skin info if you’re interested.
    These are a really good ski fwiw. Well balanced. Shone in pow

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,184
    Quote Originally Posted by Dee Hubbs View Post
    I have some 182 Atomic 109 Automatics mounted with Dynafit 2.0 @ 306 @+1.5. This was a sub 2000g ski before they named it the Backland the next season.
    Can dig up some photos/weights skin info if you’re interested.
    Yeah I would be, what would you be looking for them $$ wise?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,184
    Quote Originally Posted by LeeLau View Post
    These are a really good ski fwiw. Well balanced. Shone in pow
    How do the Auto 109's compares to the Backland? I have the 186 Backland FR 117 and I think I like them, but what something more versatile for side country. They feel just like a bit of a handful unless I'm skiing down open faces.

    The Auto's seem like a cool mix where it will be a little heavier and better for inbound use but still tour well. I was just hoping to get some skis that are a bit newer in age.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Vancouver/Whistler
    Posts
    13,985
    Quote Originally Posted by thejongiest View Post
    How do the Auto 109's compares to the Backland? I have the 186 Backland FR 117 and I think I like them, but what something more versatile for side country. They feel just like a bit of a handful unless I'm skiing down open faces.

    The Auto's seem like a cool mix where it will be a little heavier and better for inbound use but still tour well. I was just hoping to get some skis that are a bit newer in age.
    The 109s are what you seek. One of the easiest skiing powder skis I've used but still with a bit of stiffness an# kick to mid and tail so you could play with the flex.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    BC to CO
    Posts
    4,864
    As Lee says its an easy skiing pow killer. I use to get my skis from the same source as Lee. Thanks Steve!
    Hers the specs:
    2016-2017 Atomic Automatic 109
    182 - 134-109-124 - 18.5r - Sub 1970g
    2018-2018 Atomic Backland 109
    182 - 135-109-124 - 18.5r - 1860g
    The only differences are the HRZN tip design and some lighter wood in the layup.
    Other than that its the same shape, same size, same rocker/camber profile.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,184
    Quote Originally Posted by Dee Hubbs View Post
    As Lee says its an easy skiing pow killer. I use to get my skis from the same source as Lee. Thanks Steve!
    Hers the specs:
    2016-2017 Atomic Automatic 109
    182 - 134-109-124 - 18.5r - Sub 1970g
    2018-2018 Atomic Backland 109
    182 - 135-109-124 - 18.5r - 1860g
    The only differences are the HRZN tip design and some lighter wood in the layup.
    Other than that its the same shape, same size, same rocker/camber profile.
    Any idea how the tip stiffness compares? I wish the 117s I have were a little softer in the tips to be able to throw butters occasionally and just be a bit more playful.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    BC to CO
    Posts
    4,864
    I have both a Backland 117 and the 109.
    The 117 have directional carbon stringers in the tip and tail. They are stiffer.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,184
    Bump, anyone holding? Preference is for a 182 Backland FR 109. Going to put Tectons on it now...

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    2,668
    you should tour on those 108s you got

    Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,184
    Quote Originally Posted by SirVicSmasher View Post
    you should tour on those 108s you got

    Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
    Yeah that’s my plan, I’m just going stir crazy inside and taking it out with gear whoring


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,673
    Just a crazy ass request but is anyone holding a NIP of the backland 109 or automatic 109 (not looking for 107)
    Do I detect a lot of anger flowing around this place? Kind of like a pubescent volatility, some angst, a lot of I'm-sixteen-and-angry-at-my-father syndrome?

    fuck that noise.

    gmen.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    2,184
    I ended up snagging some 182 Backland 109 thanks Huskydoc! The question is now - Shifts or Tectons? Decisions...decisions...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    16,124
    Dee hubs how much are are you looking to ghet for those automatics? and are those with the dynafits or flat? And if with, could i just move the heel back and mount at center for 314?
    powdork.com - new and improved, with 20% more dork.

Posting Permissions

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