Is everyone’s favorite ski 10x underfoot now?

[::: :::]

108, 109: seems like a sweet spot

[Conundrum]

Until it starts nuking again. I'll spend my time in the 100-108 range waiting impatiently.

[Falcon3]

The red ones

[EWG]

The red ones

Well, 108 and red. Ok, maybe more orange but still…

[::: :::]

I saw a boatload of m-frees last yr in WA especially
Marble is the new red?

[N1CK.]

I'm a big fan of the Woodsman.

[east or bust]

In Jackson so far this season it’s probably been my SLs at 65 underfoot


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[MHSP1497]

Love my Jeffrey 108’s on Mt. Hood.

[EWG]

Love my Jeffrey 108’s on Mt. Hood.

Ditto all over the Rockies.

[twat]

Yep

[adrenalated]

My favorite ski is 116 underfoot but the ones that are most versatile, especially inbounds, are 108.

10x has been the sweet spot for do it all skis for a long time.

[Bandit Man]

We have to pick just one?

Either my Katana K108 or MFree108.

[MHSP1497]

My favorite ski is 116 underfoot but the ones that are most versatile, especially inbounds, are 108.

10x has been the sweet spot for do it all skis for a long time.

Have to agree, my “favorite” skis are 122mm underfoot but the 108’s are much better on low tide and crusty days.

[SoVT Joey]

Ya. The Corvus.

[2FUNKY]

My favorite ski for the conditions are the ones on my feet that day.

[XavierD]

The best are 118 under foot. Maybe 122

I wish most of my 108s were 110…

[GoSlowGoFar]

I just bought a Declivity 102ti. Will be the first time in awhile that I’ve had a skinny ski in the quiver.

[XXX-er]

if all you got is a hammer

ever thing looks like a nail

[::: :::]

Have to agree, my “favorite” skis are 122mm underfoot but the 108’s are much better on low tide and crusty days.

remember when low tide was the same as high tide?

65

if all you got is a hammer

ever thing looks like a nail

this guy does

[detrusor]

Lp105


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[DarthMarkus]

Certainly something to be said for the 108mm skis. There are a lot of great options for a lot of people: m-free 108, woodsman, wildcat, bmx 108, k108, the list goes on... I'll go against the flow a little bit though and say that I think the correct width depends on the stature of the skier; I have a relatively narrow profile on my foot and notice that wider skis tend to have a more negative effect on me more than other friends who are a similar weight and height as me, but with wider feet.

Menace 98 and m-free 108 probably see the most use from me. But, some of my favorite skis have actually been on the narrower end of the 100mm spectrum, but with similar specs to current-day big mountain skis: peacemaker, Kastle MX98, Scott Pure (the old one, not the new one coming out), etc. I just find it pretty difficult to find that type of ski anymore. Possibly something like the MPro 99 or Ranger 102?

Anyway, that's all to say that I'm not exempt from the 108mm crowd, but I think there's something there in the layup that makes a big difference, not just the width. And I think I'd probably actually be happier on something like the m-free 99 if it could hold a stick against something like the m-free 108's stability and chargability. May change my mind if I lived somewhere with more snow, but a lot of Colorado skiing doesn't really need anything over 110mm.

Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

[Huskier]

I saw a boatload of m-frees last yr in WA especially
Marble is the new red?

Can someone tell dynastar their top sheets looks like cut-rate laminate from Home Depot? Guh.

[::: :::]

Can someone tell dynastar their top sheets looks like cut-rate laminate from Home Depot? Guh.

ha

[ejj]

Can someone tell dynastar their top sheets looks like cut-rate laminate from Home Depot? Guh.

New top sheets next year.

[phatty]

New top sheets next year.

Hey, it's actually a close up of a Japanese forest, not marble. That said, definitely not my favorite top sheet. I'm willing to deal with it for the performance, though. It's the ski I grab 90% of the time.