Quiver - 2 skis only

**Rontele** · 10-10-2007, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark

sploders and seths for inbounds quiver.

arent they practically the same ski?

**pechelman** · 10-10-2007, 03:33 PM

they may have a similar waist dimension, but thats it

for me it would be
sploders 4" or less days
seths everything else days

but really for me
its just the LP. i have such a hard-on for that ski if people haven't noticed already.

**Rontele** · 10-10-2007, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by pechelman

its just the LP. i have such a hard-on for that ski if people haven't noticed already.

NO WAI

**pechelman** · 10-10-2007, 03:39 PM

farnsworth helped me mount some skis last night...if you know what i mean

ie he was walking all over them while i was trying to measure stuff

**Rontele** · 10-10-2007, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by pechelman

farnsworth helped me mount some skis last night...if you know what i mean

ie he was walking all over them while i was trying to measure stuff

i was going to say, if by help you mean that he knocked everything off the work bench...

He is such a yenta.

**MakersTeleMark** · 10-10-2007, 04:18 PM

Originally Posted by Rontele

arent they practically the same ski?

Actually they are very different. Sploders are really stiff, poppy, and straight. Hippies are twins, shapely, turny, and soft (longitudinally). While their respective midsection's may indicate some similarity (95 vs. 98), they could not be more different of a ski.

**powbmps** · 10-10-2007, 04:22 PM

175 Dynastar Twister (for bumps)
184 Scott P3 (for all that EC pow)

Wait, something tells me I don't belong here........

**Rontele** · 10-10-2007, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark

Actually they are very different. Sploders are really stiff, poppy, and straight. Hippies are twins, shapely, turny, and soft (longitudinally). While their respective midsection's may indicate some similarity (95 vs. 98), they could not be more different of a ski.

I should know that considering I used to ski on both (though different seasons)

Guess I wasn't paying attn.

**shasti** · 10-10-2007, 05:15 PM

There sure are some different opinions out there.....I appreciate the info. It seems there are 2 main points of view

1) Pick a narrower all-mountain ski since you'll be on the Lotus if there's fresh
2) Pick a wider all-mountain ski that can handle pow better if you dont think you need the lotus but then find surprise pow (held chair opens, late dump, ect.)

option 1 leaves you with LP, Explosiv, 188 BRO, Iggy FFL, or Tanker (BTW thanks for the suggestions, I hadnt even considered any of these)
option 2 leaves you with XXL, Goliath, ANT, Gotama (or keep squad)

I'm leaning towards squads or gotamas and split the difference. but...the dealbreaker could be - can LPs handle highs speeds in Sierra Cement ? and can XXLs or Goliaths handle tight technical lines or hold edge on hardpack ?

This is some heavy analysis but I have jack to do till squaw opens

**pappag** · 10-10-2007, 05:19 PM

The LP is not a powder ski (unless you're super light).

**milkman** · 10-10-2007, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by shasti

I'm leaning towards squads or gotamas and split the difference. but...the dealbreaker could be - can LPs handle highs speeds in Sierra Cement ? and can XXLs or Goliaths handle tight technical lines or hold edge on hardpack ?

This is some heavy analysis but I have jack to do till squaw opens

Check out these Goliath reviews:

http://www.biglines.com/blarticles/3...i_Review_VIDEO
http://doglotion.com/gear-review-movement-goliath-skis

It sounds like they'll be fine in tight lines....

**xtrmjoe** · 10-10-2007, 05:56 PM

I personally went with the Lotus 138 192 flex 3, and the Moment Ruby 188. Lotus will get 914/916, Still in the air about binders on the Ruby FR+/Naxo21/914 w treckers. I also have beat Pocket rockets with Naxo 01 for rocks, early/late season stoke.

**Core Shot** · 10-10-2007, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by Nick Pappagiorgio

The LP is not a powder ski (unless you're super light).

How quickly things have changed.

**pechelman** · 10-10-2007, 07:26 PM

In my experience the 186 legend pro at 170ish 5'10 is the 2nd most fun powder\crud ski ive ever been on.

Second to the axiom.

I like how the spat skis in both of those scenarios, but i just dont have as much fun. It doesnt have the rebound between turns i love. The spats though are by far the most fun ski ive ever skied on in crappy snow, ie breakable crust, and in trees.

id probably add that depending on your skiing style, most any ski under 110mm isnt a powder ski.
if you have really stiff boots and need to really lever your weight on the tounge to flex them or like to always drive the tips, the LP probably wont work well for you in the pow.

**addict** · 10-10-2007, 07:37 PM

I would say the Squad is about similar in pow characteristics as the LP no? The squad is a cool 2nd ski. It feels really quite narrow for it's girth. I would compare it to a G4 in how wide it feels. Seems like a good quiver, why mess with it.

**pechelman** · 10-10-2007, 08:22 PM

I wouldnt think so

The 189 squad hand flexes a lot stiffer and has a much smaller shovel from what i remember. I also remember the squad feeling a bit more lively in comparison to the damp feel of the LP. Also, theres a smoothness to the ride quality of a legend pro of which ive never felt before. supple\stiff\damp\smooth

Id think the squad to ski more like the mojo103 without being as damp or as unruly (due to the heads rearward mount point and less sidecut)

**addict** · 10-10-2007, 09:46 PM

True, I guess the squad doesn't feel very damp. You can definitely feel the "foaminess" of it.

**shasti** · 10-10-2007, 11:39 PM

Those Goliaths sound nasty. wish I could get them or stiffbros on proform. Anybody know how/if LP flex differs from that of XXL ?

**SiSt** · 10-11-2007, 01:09 AM

Originally Posted by Nick Pappagiorgio

The LP is not a powder ski (unless you're super light).

3rded...

They are my everyday ski, and I love them very much, but they don´t excel in half a meter of fresh, unless it´s quite steep. If you want float at low speed, you need something wider and softer (maiden´s, gots, or maybe even hellbents/katanas/sumos (haven´t skied those though, but you get the idea.)) to round out your quiver.

The LP is definitely a great all round ski though. Good in chopped and variable, holds an edge on ice, real fun on groomers to if you go really fast. Lapping gapers with "extreme" carving skis on something they would define as a powder ski is seriously fun.

(Or you could just remove the first two skis from my quiver and keep the last two, it´s 177cm original 1080s (rocks, small mountains, dicking around), 191cm rossi gs skis, 186cm LP´s and 185 praxis)

jk · 10-11-2007, 02:12 AM

My two ski quivers:
Tele: LP 186 and Praxis 185 (Not so happy with Praxis on tele though, so I will get LP XXL in stead and put a set of alpine binders on the Praxis)
Alpine: LP 186 and Spats (Spats to be sold and replaced with the Praxis)

Praxis/Spats for almost anything soft enought to sink the entire lenght of the edge into. LP for firm to hard snow contditions, or on days/descents with variable snow/icepatches and comps. Used to think the LPs were good in powder, not so much anymore after skiing a lot of more soft snow specific skis. Of course, they will manage but they will not excell.

**Fritz** · 10-11-2007, 11:41 AM

I'm going to second (or third) the 138 / LP combo. Seems like these would cover almost everything.

Originally Posted by gamma

190 dp lotus 120
192 dp lotus 138

ive got some 9thward 1st bloods that i am prolly gonna mount up soon for ec and less than lovely pow days.. (truth is , I usually just go when its snowing).

I will probably part with one pair of skis in the future.. not sure which yet.

^^I like your style. For me it's 192 138s, 200 120s (and a couple others but these will get the most attention).

**ChowdahRidah** · 10-11-2007, 12:09 PM

The Explosivs are similar to the LPs in that they are great all around skis but they certainly do not excel in powder. I would say they are best at skiing chopper powder and windblown.

Do LPs ski better on groomers than Explosivs???

**pechelman** · 10-11-2007, 12:14 PM

In my experience, I enjoyed the explosivs a tad more on groomers despite the fact that the LPs have more sidecut. I think i liked the explosivs more because they were lighter and more lively, a bit shorter, and were a lot easier to slide the tails around in tight spots where I wanted to scrub speed or change dir quicker than the sidecut allows.

If i try any quick-hard-steep angle changes on my edges with the LPs, the bigger sidecut tries to hookup and I make them chatter.

On both reccomended mounting points, the 180 explosiv is more stable than the 186 LP in running straight on hardpack.

A 180 explosiv, in my size, sucks in powder\crud in comparison to the 186 LP. (partially b\c a 180 explosiv is really a 177)

I guess it really just boils down to peoples skiing style and boots and stuff, but I absolutely love how the LPs do in pure powder. Ski them centered and with a little speed and stay balanced and youll/ I have a blast.

edit, 5'10, 170, ski in "stiff" AT boots that I can flex with my ankles w\o using any body weight

**shasti** · 10-11-2007, 12:49 PM

You dont need the LP to ski powder that well anyways. Unless 97 is the widest wiast in your quiver, the job of the LP is "everything else" not pow

**descender** · 10-11-2007, 12:54 PM

I thought the Karma at 87mm would be my non-pow ski but I never, ever ride it. It's too narrow on anything but a groomer, at least compared to what my lazy ass has become used to. I think 95-100 is a good all mountain non pow size, then 110+.