Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 221
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    1,002
    Whats your height/weight? I'm looking at a pair of 173 Hyper V6 for sale locally, they look like an excellent ski but worried they might ski too short with all the rocker

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    323
    Some decent deals on Dynafit (20% off), Movement (40%), and Hagan (40%) skis on S&C right now - https://www.steepandcheap.com/alpine-touring-skis:

    Hagan
    Core 84 - $450
    Ultra 87 - $470
    Boost 99 - $510

    Movement
    Race Pro 77 - $550
    Session 95 - $550

    Dynafit
    Blacklight 95 - $600
    Blacklight Pro - $640
    Blacklight 80 - $520
    Blacklight 88 - $560
    Mezzalama race ski - $520

    Also Voile WSP for 490 and Scott Superguide and BD Helios.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    SLC, Utah
    Posts
    2,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Benneke10 View Post
    Whats your height/weight? I'm looking at a pair of 173 Hyper V6 for sale locally, they look like an excellent ski but worried they might ski too short with all the rocker
    Context: Benneke10 is like 6'5" and an aspiring snowblader

    Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    1,002
    Quote Originally Posted by tgapp View Post
    Context: Benneke10 is like 6'5" and an aspiring snowblader

    Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk
    6'1.5"

  5. #80
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    8
    Re: Hyper V6 Length... I'm 5' 10" 170 lb . I feel like 173 is verging on too short. I'd like to try 178s, but if I was buying another pair I'd probably stick with 173.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Evergreen Co
    Posts
    663
    Another boot question : can anyone comment on the downhill ski performance of the F1 LT vs the Scorpius?

    i canít seem to find a Scorpius locally but have a place I can go try on the F1. Iím wondering if the 200 extra grams for the Scorpius buys you any extra downhill performance. From everything Iíve heard / read the Scorpius will likely fit me great but I want to find a way of rationalizing the extra weight.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    1,002
    I recently bought the F1 LT and Skorpius, but haven't skied the Skorp yet. The Skorp definitely feels stiffer and more supportive but the F1 LT is also really really good for its weight. Lots of reviews on the Skimo co site indicate the Skorp is notably more powerful, and I will chime in again once I use them. There are several online shops with good return policies that have the Skorpius in stock, or if you don't want to drop big $ try the Solar which is the same fit. I tried the Solar on at backcountry before I ordered when the Skorp was sold out everywhere, its a notably lower instep and wider forefoot than the F1 LT.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    SLC, Utah
    Posts
    2,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Benneke10 View Post
    I recently bought the F1 LT and Skorpius, but haven't skied the Skorp yet. The Skorp definitely feels stiffer and more supportive but the F1 LT is also really really good for its weight. Lots of reviews on the Skimo co site indicate the Skorp is notably more powerful, and I will chime in again once I use them. There are several online shops with good return policies that have the Skorpius in stock, or if you don't want to drop big $ try the Solar which is the same fit. I tried the Solar on at backcountry before I ordered when the Skorp was sold out everywhere, its a notably lower instep and wider forefoot than the F1 LT.
    +1 I haven't skied the F1LT but I do have 5 days on Skorps and I would say that they are noticeably more powerful than standard F1s (which most folks consider to be stiffer than the F1LT). Very different fit though, which IMO should be the deciding factor here.

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    1,002
    The F1 LT is probably somewhere in between the fit of the Skorpius and standard F1 in terms of total volume, and with the F1 LT having a narrower forefoot than both. I have a narrow, low volume foot with a low-ish instep and I fit well in both the Skorp and F1 LT, which is kind of wild since until those 2 boots came out I didn't fit well in any lightweight touring boots

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    7,781
    Has anyone skied any of the Hagan Ultra skis? Any good? Thinking about a pair of the 87s.

    Since my earlier rant about how I no longer have much use for skinny skis I've taken a good look at the lack of snow in CO and the lack of snow in the long term forecast. It's looking like covering a whole bunch of ground on dirt, snow and rock might be the best way to entertain myself in the mountains for the next while.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    1,002
    I had the Ultra 82s last year in 170. I am somewhat new to skiing and they were my first skinny ski, and they were very wrong for me. Super stiff, cambered, and very rearward mount made them a handful in tight places. They were damp for their weight and could charge groomers, but that was the only thing my mediocre skills could get them to do. You are more familiar with this kind of ski than I am, but even for a skinny ski they have a long running length and I would have had a lot more fun on the 163. I could not bend the shovels at all on mine.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    7,781
    Quote Originally Posted by Benneke10 View Post
    I had the Ultra 82s last year in 170. I am somewhat new to skiing and they were my first skinny ski, and they were very wrong for me. Super stiff, cambered, and very rearward mount made them a handful in tight places. They were damp for their weight and could charge groomers, but that was the only thing my mediocre skills could get them to do. You are more familiar with this kind of ski than I am, but even for a skinny ski they have a long running length and I would have had a lot more fun on the 163. I could not bend the shovels at all on mine.
    Thanks for that. Sound like it's not quite what I'm after.

    I don't need the lightest ski. Want something 90mm or less. About 175 in length. Prefer something damper, not too turny, but not too locked in. Haven't been paying attention to this category recently. Cheap would be good too. Anybody selling?

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    323
    Quote Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds! View Post
    Thanks for that. Sound like it's not quite what I'm after.

    I don't need the lightest ski. Want something 90mm or less. About 175 in length. Prefer something damper, not too turny, but not too locked in. Haven't been paying attention to this category recently. Cheap would be good too. Anybody selling?
    I have the perfect ski for you: Dynafit Speed 76 in a 176 length. This ski seems purpose built for resort skinning and other hard snow applications.

    I reviewed it here: https://skimo.co/dynafit-speed-76-ski

    Selling with Ski Trab mohair skins for 305: https://imgur.com/a/PeP14OO

    Edit: looking back, I think I undersold how damp they feel. They were very damp for the weight imo.

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Evergreen Co
    Posts
    663
    Thanks! Skorpius sounds like the best boot for me. I want a bit more power and I have a super low instep.

    I have a scarpa discount… so I’m going to slip those on first and see what I think.

    Once you get some days on them post with some updates on how they ski and what type of ski you can drive with them. I’m wondering if a 1600 gram ski would be more than the boot is happy with.

    Quote Originally Posted by Benneke10 View Post
    I recently bought the F1 LT and Skorpius, but haven't skied the Skorp yet. The Skorp definitely feels stiffer and more supportive but the F1 LT is also really really good for its weight. Lots of reviews on the Skimo co site indicate the Skorp is notably more powerful, and I will chime in again once I use them. There are several online shops with good return policies that have the Skorpius in stock, or if you don't want to drop big $ try the Solar which is the same fit. I tried the Solar on at backcountry before I ordered when the Skorp was sold out everywhere, its a notably lower instep and wider forefoot than the F1 LT.

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    SLC, Utah
    Posts
    2,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Tailwind View Post
    Thanks! Skorpius sounds like the best boot for me. I want a bit more power and I have a super low instep.

    I have a scarpa discountÖ so Iím going to slip those on first and see what I think.

    Once you get some days on them post with some updates on how they ski and what type of ski you can drive with them. Iím wondering if a 1600 gram ski would be more than the boot is happy with.
    I have 3 days with Skorps on Down CD104L (a 1525g ski). They might be a touch underpowered for that ski but not by much.

    Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

  16. #91
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    648
    I skied the skorpius with a line vision 98 186 and a black Crows atris 189 last year. They seemed to pair very well with the lines. They were fine with the atris in good snow, but it was easy to blow through the flex in bad snow.

    I ended up snapping the tongue and skiing Fischer travers carbons for the second half the season while the skorps got warrantied. Now, having skied both back to back, the skorps are way more powerful.

  17. #92
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Evergreen Co
    Posts
    663
    Thatís a helpful comparison. The Ďfunctionalí but not exciting ski Iím looking at is the MTN 95 which is likely okay as itís only a little heavier but is slightly narrower. Iím tempted by the Woodsman 102 tour and based on this I would imagine the 182cm would be pushing it (1600 grams) and the 187 (1700 grams and longer) is likely a no go.

    Quote Originally Posted by tgapp View Post
    I have 3 days with Skorps on Down CD104L (a 1525g ski). They might be a touch underpowered for that ski but not by much.

    Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

  18. #93
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    1,002
    Quote Originally Posted by Tailwind View Post
    Thanks! Skorpius sounds like the best boot for me. I want a bit more power and I have a super low instep.

    I have a scarpa discountÖ so Iím going to slip those on first and see what I think.
    I might be able to get you a discount on Skorps if you want, send me a message

  19. #94
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by NWFlow View Post
    I ended up snapping the tongue and skiing Fischer travers carbons for the second half the season while the skorps got warrantied. Now, having skied both back to back, the skorps are way more powerful.
    How's the range of motion compared to the Travers? I'd imagine with the plastic tongue it would have alot more resistance than the Travers or F1LT.

  20. #95
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    SLC, Utah
    Posts
    2,759
    Quote Originally Posted by gustav View Post
    How's the range of motion compared to the Travers? I'd imagine with the plastic tongue it would have alot more resistance than the Travers or F1LT.
    Again, no point of reference against those boots, but I would say that the Skorps walk 90-95%% as well as boots like Sytrons, Alien RS, etc (much better than standard F1's).

    Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Aspen
    Posts
    1,871
    Quote Originally Posted by NWFlow View Post
    I skied the skorpius with a line vision 98 186 and a black Crows atris 189 last year. They seemed to pair very well with the lines. They were fine with the atris in good snow, but it was easy to blow through the flex in bad snow.

    I ended up snapping the tongue and skiing Fischer travers carbons for the second half the season while the skorps got warrantied. Now, having skied both back to back, the skorps are way more powerful.
    1000g boot driving a 2200g ski. Props my man!

  22. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Alta
    Posts
    1,696
    Quote Originally Posted by Tailwind View Post
    Thatís a helpful comparison. The Ďfunctionalí but not exciting ski Iím looking at is the MTN 95 which is likely okay as itís only a little heavier but is slightly narrower. Iím tempted by the Woodsman 102 tour and based on this I would imagine the 182cm would be pushing it (1600 grams) and the 187 (1700 grams and longer) is likely a no go.
    MTN has nothing but good reviews from blister. And people I know whoíve skied really like it also.

  23. #98
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    1,002
    I love Blister but I wouldnít consider them to be an authority on lightweight touring skis. Iím sure the MTN is good but there are probably 10 other skis in the same weight class that are at least as good

  24. #99
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    1,002
    Name:  boot1.jpg
Views: 290
Size:  178.3 KBName:  boot2.jpg
Views: 291
Size:  172.2 KBName:  boot3.jpg
Views: 289
Size:  147.2 KBName:  boot4.jpg
Views: 290
Size:  118.3 KBName:  boot5.jpg
Views: 293
Size:  130.2 KB

    I own the Quantum Asolo 27.5, F1 LT 28, and Skorpius 27.5 right now, I thought some of you might appreciate a comparison. The Quantum and Skorpius have stock footbeds, and the Skorpius also has tags on but they probably weigh less than 5g. The F1 LT has the buckle mod and Superfeet blue footbeds, if I remember correctly it weighed around 1120g stock.

    Cuff height is standard for a 1kg boot on the Quantum, and the F1 LT and Skorp are much higher than anything else in the category. The F1 LT cuff is slightly higher in the back, and the Skorp is slightly higher in the front. I'm trying to justify a reason to keep the F1 LT and the Skorp and will probably sell the Quantum which has the best walk mode by far, easiest transitions, and fits amazing in the midfoot and forefoot, I appreciate the higher cuffs and stiffness of the other 2 boots. The Quantum walks like a true race boot though, best in class. Maybe I should sell all 3 and get Pierre Gignoux Mountain boots, but haven't had a chance to try them on yet.

  25. #100
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    648
    Quote Originally Posted by alpinevibes View Post
    1000g boot driving a 2200g ski. Props my man!
    To be fair, I'm guessing that's why they broke...

    Quote Originally Posted by gustav View Post
    How's the range of motion compared to the Travers? I'd imagine with the plastic tongue it would have alot more resistance than the Travers or F1LT.
    Yeah, I'd say the ROM is appreciably diminished compared to the traverse. They are still a light, easily walkable boot, but there is a noticeable difference.

    Overall, I struggled to get the Skorpius to be comfy and fit my foot, the Travers more or less fit out of the box. Guess i've gotten old, but at this point I'll take the comfort and walkability of the Travers and accept the decrease in skiability.

    On that note, anyone here have any time on the new Fischer Transalp?

Posting Permissions

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