
Originally Posted by
obviouslynotagolfer
Update on the Mfree 192’s after 2 days: I prefer the 182’s.
Conditions for both days at W/B were similar: a few inches of fresh over April-appropriate refreeze/slush.
The 192’s (mounted on the line with Attack 14’s) felt a smidge too long; a bit more work than I wanted at sub-sonic speeds. I did enjoy the greater stability and longer radius in the open steeps, but I found those improvements marginal and overshadowed by the 192’s unwieldiness (if only compared to the 182’s, whose nimbleness as maybe spoiled me, ha)
That’s not to say 192 wouldn’t be the advisable size for my height/weight (6’2, 175 lbs.), and I may just be lazier and/or less aggressive than most. But as a more versatile tree ski, a billygoating-into-spicy-spots ski, and a fun-uber-alles ski, the 182’s work best for this old chunk of coal.
I know I could try a more forward mount, but I’ll more likely just put 192’s up for sale as is. If anyone in the Sea-To-Sky corridor is interested, feel free to PM me.
I came to same conclusion man Stability in runouts is 85-90% of the 192 Quickness is 40-50% better
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I need to go to Utah.
Utah?
Yeah, Utah. It's wedged in between Wyoming and Nevada. You've seen pictures of it, right?
So after 15 years we finally made it to Utah.....
Thanks BCSAR and POWMOW Ski Patrol for rescues
8, 17, 13, 18, 16, 18, 20, 19, 16, 24, 32, 35
2021/2022 (13/15)
Bookmarks