Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    159

    Softest Funnest mid-fat Lightweight Touring Ski?

    Like, a ski with the flex of a blade optic 104 in a 186 that weighs 1600 grams.

    Does it exist?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    4,915
    Elan Ripstick Tour 104

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    207
    Atomic Bent 110? I’ve only skied the 120, but on paper the 110 is just a skinnier version.

    Edit: overlooked the obvious and probably correct answer: Line Vision 108.
    Last edited by Jongle; 12-08-2022 at 10:37 AM. Reason: Edit

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    4,915
    Quote Originally Posted by beeshbeesh View Post
    Like, a ski with the flex of a blade optic 104 in a 186 that weighs 1600 grams.
    Blade Optic 104 isn't particularly "soft" (flex a SFB by comparison), it's just a very well-balanced ski that does pretty much everything well.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    SLC, Utah
    Posts
    3,411
    the answer to this and all other mid-fat touring ski questions is always the bmt109

    it's not a particularly soft flex but it is round and consistent and amazingly forgiving and hella hella fun

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    1,693

    Softest Funnest mid-fat Lightweight Touring Ski?

    Quote Originally Posted by gregL View Post
    Elan Ripstick Tour 104
    Yeah was gonna say my Ripstick 96 (1650g) aren’t exceedingly “soft” but they really do ski everything well and are my go to ski for general touring when I lock the heel down. They even do well in deeper powder despite being only 96. As for “fun as hell” the Ripstick is definitely a traditional shape, which may or may not fit the fun factor.

    While I haven’t skied it yet, I expect the tour 104 is an excellent all around touring ski.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    28,433
    how fat is midfat ? I remember when midfat was 70mm that worked until the next year when skis got wider
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    1,693
    These days I consider midfat to be 95-112.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    28,433
    The diff between 95 and 112 is huge and covers about 3 ski classes which is why almost everyone quotes numbers
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wasatch
    Posts
    1,693
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    The diff between 95 and 112 is huge and covers about 3 ski classes which is why almost everyone quotes numbers
    Indeed. And fun as hell could mean all sorts of things, with respect to camber, shape and directional or not etc.

    “so much to unpack here” haha

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    28,433
    Yes so much to unpack, " fun as hell " would be totally different than " fun as fuck " and are the skis Red ?
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    SLC
    Posts
    1,945
    Quote Originally Posted by jmedslc View Post
    Yeah was gonna say my Ripstick 96 (1650g) aren’t exceedingly “soft” but they really do ski everything well and are my go to ski for general touring when I lock the heel down. They even do well in deeper powder despite being only 96. As for “fun as hell” the Ripstick is definitely a traditional shape, which may or may not fit the fun factor.

    While I haven’t skied it yet, I expect the tour 104 is an excellent all around touring ski.
    The Ripstick Tour 104 is completely different than any other ski Elan makes. Rec mount is like -6cm, lots of rocker tip and tail, relatively straight sidecut. Looks like a great ski.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2021
    Posts
    209
    Quote Originally Posted by Jongle View Post
    Atomic Bent 110? I’ve only skied the 120, but on paper the 110 is just a skinnier version.

    Edit: overlooked the obvious and probably correct answer: Line Vision 108.
    Seconding this, vision 108. And the bent 110 lacks the backbone of the 120, so unlike either ski sandwiching its width, it is an absolute noodle that is easily overpowered and considering how the other skis with that name perform that's a big disappointment. And 1800g is heavier too.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Steamboat
    Posts
    255
    Yah was gonna post the Vision 108. It's literally the only touring ski I've skied, but it certainly fits the bill.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    159
    Does anyone know what the weight of the 189 Vision 108 is?

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    344
    LINE Vision 108. Love this ski, size up if questions on length.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    904
    Quote Originally Posted by beeshbeesh View Post
    Does anyone know what the weight of the 189 Vision 108 is?
    Mine was around 1680 grams for 189 length

    Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    377
    Praxis BCs. Medium soft and playful with plenty of early rise in the tip… still not a noodle in icy conditions or at higher speeds…


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    here and there
    Posts
    17,635
    TGR winning in this thread.

    Carry on.
    watch out for snakes

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Inside the Circle
    Posts
    3,466
    +1 on the Praxis BC rec.

    They're my inbounds east coast powder day ski and tour really well. Easy to ski in NE tightish trees.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by Robik View Post
    Mine was around 1680 grams for 189 length

    Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

    Yeah, that goes. I'll check out some of the other recs, but that's hard to beat.

    If anyone else has some other angles at a competitor to the vision 108. Throw 'em in the thread. Thanks!

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rossland BC
    Posts
    1,683
    G3 SEEKr 100. 1.54kg in a 186. Soft, fun, agile, lightweight.

    https://genuineguidegear.com/collect...ucts/seekr-100

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    904
    Quote Originally Posted by beeshbeesh View Post
    Yeah, that goes. I'll check out some of the other recs, but that's hard to beat.

    If anyone else has some other angles at a competitor to the vision 108. Throw 'em in the thread. Thanks!
    It's hard to beat Line's weight to performance to price ratio, they are still around $360 on Corbetts in 189.

    Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Incline Village, NV (Tahoe)
    Posts
    5,435
    Praxis Woo 2.0 (in addition to the BC.)
    Every man dies. Not every man lives.
    You don’t stop playing because you grow old; you grow old because you stop playing.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    The Wilds of Maine
    Posts
    2,788
    Quote Originally Posted by wantriot View Post
    LINE Vision 108. Love this ski, size up if questions on length.
    Second this. Had the Vision 98, which was a total hoot in pow but sketch AF on firm snow so I dumped them for a pair of Navis'. CRAZY light, imagine the 108 is the same.
    "We're in the eye of a shiticane here Julian, and Ricky's a low shit system!" - Jim Lahey, RIP

    Former Managing Editor @ TGR, forever mag.

Posting Permissions

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