Printable View
No experience with the pescado. I’ve had exceptionally awesome meadow skipping experiences in Sierra snow and mank with 192cm l138 and fully rockered protest (18x?). I also use 185(?) bibby’s a lot, and the l138 is much more fun for me on the low angle. Telemark, 155lbs.
Yes for 138s fucking slaying steep 50deg AK cream
Yes for 138skeeping speed up and not bogging down in the meadows and you can play and pop on them. Pow covered glacier flatter AK runouts to a PZ? Yessss
Yes for 138s in CO early season keeps you off the rocks and floats (and deflects well, as in up, instead of digging into a hazard or going under a log).
Yes for 138s floating sea of facets when you are CO meadow skipping.
138s for almost everything!
Don't know the Pescado, but I do remember really also liking Lotus 120s in the flats because the fat tip pintail worked really well for that, so a swallow would too.
ARGII felt awesome in the shop, but they are almost Spatula heavy. Fucking boat anchors! Might be fine for lift served days. UL version sounds nice.
Interesting that they said that. I emailed DPS and they’ve told me the rocker and shaping is identical to the Purple 138 Powderworks Alchemist SpoonQuote:
Originally Posted by old mexico
Looking at the photos there does seem to be a little different in the tip and tail taper but it’s hard to know if it’s just the photo playing tricks or what.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimty
Yes for this postQuote:
Originally Posted by Summit
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah If you really want a pair of 138s a guy in montrose Is selling a pair of powder works 182/ pure3 192 on Craigslist. Both brand new except the 192s have been mounted for wardens.
$1399 for any ski is not worth it. But it is the dentists powder ski after all so they’re ‘selling quick’
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I thought that too from the pics… Although the purples in the pics are in the shorter length, so maybe that’s itQuote:
Originally Posted by GoSlowGoFar
The Praxis Powderboards are also terrific at low angle pow skipping, as you would expect. Even better are the old Bluehouse Mavens, soft, 139 underfoot, reverse camber with just the tiniest bit of sidecut. I tele the 190 PB and the 190 Mavens at 165lb. The PBs are better at everything else other than low angle. The Mavens are now my very early season, very low snow, stay off the rocks on low angle terrain skis.Quote:
Originally Posted by hoarhey
So are Powderboards pretty much an across the board equivalent of an L138? I realize that they are both R/R, just want to know if there is any other practical differences besides brand.
Every iteration of the Maven was different flex wise(last version had updated rocker/camber profile, mainly how tips/rails rise). Gold version was/is not soft(my Proto mavens may be the stiffest ski I own).Quote:
Originally Posted by hopelesslyadolescent
I also have PB's and absolutely love them, but totally disagree with the PB's outperforming the Maven. The Maven is way more versatile.
Fuckin love my gold Mavens, seriously cold dead hands ski!
A stiffer maven would be alot of fun and hold up better at speed I'd imagine. There is one other area where even my soft mavens outperform the PB, and that's getting back to the lifts on groomers. That tiny bit of sidecut really makes a difference. But I usually only ski my PBs on storm days. The mavens were my first fat ski and first R/R and truly rocked my world.Quote:
Originally Posted by tuco
PB’s were intended to be a modernized-ish spatula with traditions torsion box design rather then stainless steel cap design. L138 usually have a hint of sidecut and are much lighter. The different versions of the l138 had different rocker profiles, tip and tail taper, and internal construction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Thomas
Apologies in advance if it’s been explained, couldn’t find any discussion on it.
Can someone elaborate to me if there’s a real difference between the older 138s with different flex. I’m a bigger guy and ski faster/ more aggressive than average. Would it be a problem to be on flex 2 vs 3. I found a 202cm length in flex 2 so I’m just curious since I’ve never been on the older dps skis
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Attachment 400624
Attachment 400625
Attachment 400626
20" in 24 hours
20 degrees to 33 degrees to 23 degrees during the event
40 MPH winds post storm
202 138s ate it up
(Except the bulletproof groomers at the very very bottom runout, we won't talk about that part, nor me nearly doing the splits on said bulletproof groomers.)
Worth the splits?
Oh yeah, had 3 hours of very magical turns on them, just got less greedy with taking the runs to the bottom vs just lapping the upper lift.
Proud new member of the Spatula club!
Had a $105 eBucks stash from Christmas shopping, and just couldn’t resist this time.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...9ed36d8ee3.jpg
Welcome brother!Quote:
Originally Posted by lucknau
Didn’t see this cross posted yet, Marshal is working to remake the original-ish versions of the lotus 138
Bringing Back The Best: Lotii And Other Assorted Love Songs
https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...d.php?t=345312
https://heritagelabskis.com/products/c138
Anybody know the recommended edge angles on r1 lotus 138 192cm? I saw that marshal is setting his upcoming c138 at 1:2 (base:side). I’ve been slacking
The conditions you're going to use that ski in = edge angles won't matter at all. More important will be your ability to stay centered or slightly backseat while skiing a groomer runout back to the lift.
Ha! True, but three times I’ve (accidentally) toured on hard pack with my l138. 1500’ single pitch descent (it’s a great pow run). Beware the first cold and windy storm after the January thaw.
How’s that saying go? Fool me once shame on you….
This is such an informative thread, that is all.
Brings the lawls too — beetlejuice, hope all is well in your life if you’re lurking these days.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I picked up a pair of 192 L138 Spoons in the Pure 3 construction. Purple ones. Wondering about mount point on them - I generally ski relatively centered. Go with recommended or move the mount forward?
PSA / heads up....
not sure if you'd consider this a good price, but they look pretty clean. comments say $650.
https://www.geartrade.com/item/75853...RoCgDcQAvD_BwE
I've skied them both on the line and at +1.5 and like them significantly better forward. FWIW I'm a directional skier but not an ex racer or "must mash my shins through my boots at all times" type guy and my whole quiver is in the -6 to -12 rangeQuote:
Originally Posted by Pinned
Welcome indeed - need to break mine out of semi-retirement soon!
Two questions:
1. Which would be more fun skiing telemark? Lotus 138 or Lotus 148 Spoon?
2. Can you tour on Lotus 148 Spoon or is it too wide to be efficient in on the uptrack?
Hold your feet a bit further apart? I toured on 128mm wide Protests and it wasn’t too bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by wantriot
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
The wider skis often don't fit in established skin tracks. My usual pow tourer is a Lotus 120 - which is often wider than the skin track before me.
That's really about the only drawback.
Yeah, I've toured a bunch on L138s and Protests and have found the same. Super fattys are great if you're breaking trail in deep snow, but you're often half-way breaking trail in an existing skin track, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Chupacabra
My bad knee doesn't like sidehill skinning on firmer snow with a ski that wide, either.
I tour on l138 on tele. I think they are a load of fun, but not all tele skiers like a lot of tail rocker.
I’m usually breaking trail, with a crew that’s breaking trail, or the skin track is soft, so I’ve never had a problem with the width in a skin track. Traversing on the up on hard snow is tricky because of the width.
Just picked up a pair of 182 L138 spoon Pure3's, the purple ones for the wife, and need to install clamps (Vipec). Is the consensus on the +1 line? More forwarder or more backwarder? She tends to like pretty traditional mounts FWIW. Evidently Christmas never stops for her!
I've skied the 192 length of that generation both on the line and at +1.5 and like them way better forward.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Thomas
I've never skied the 182.
On all the 192s except the R0, I like them on the line. I think my R1s are actually slightly rearward, maybe - 1. No way would I go ahead of the line, but YMMV.
Don't think I've ever seen a mounted thrice ski go for $1,300. ugh.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/16573498913...Bk9SR4bjy8z_YA
Hahah that’s wild!! 3 sets of holes in carbon. Someone is feeling confident.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
WTF?
$1300?
3 mounts, but only 2 days on them?
He moved the third mount to +3.5?!?
Controversial opinion I know , but the purple spooned version isn’t R/R. It’s basically a fat 5 point ski like the JJ. I bet This guy was moving the mount point around because they ski funky and tip hook and he couldn’t figure them out.Quote:
Originally Posted by pfluffenmeister
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Quote:
Originally Posted by HAB
I have dynafits on 148 spoons. Yes, they are usually wider than existing skin tracks which is a little annoying, but any day that makes those skis viable you should not be worried about a firm skintrack.Quote:
Originally Posted by wantriot