Get Down with Down (skis)

^ if you're a 296 BSL (or within a mm or two and willing to risk prerelease/norelease) you're welcome to try my LD90s if you want, unfortunately I mounted Plum 150s directly on the ski without plates so there's no room for adjustment. They are a very fun and confidence-inspiring ski to go fast on imo, though even on your LD102s you're chargier than me so take that with a grain of salt.

edit:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boissal

If we're doing wishlists for the next generation of skis, I'd vote for going with plain black bases and make them thicker and harder. I don't care if I lose 5% glide over a race base, I'm usually not spending much time in a tuck trying to save 1/10th of a second and passing buddies in the flats. I walk across brush and rocks all the time and ski in sharklandia until mid season. I'll probably never wax the skis, let alone do any kind of structure work on the base to make it faster. I'll fix the major gouges a couple times a season and that's it.

---

100% the same... I'm on these skis exclusively in the bc, and I hit stuff. A lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boissal

Do you have some LD90s sitting around? I'm still a bit hesitant to charge on my LD102 as 179 feels super short, maybe a narrower ski in 177 will feel more balanced...
I'm pretty sure I could find a couple people in the Wasatch who'd jump on the CD114L too... Hell, I might get another pair as back up or to test a different mounting point.

---

i charge my ld102s. They are 186. Personally I can’t see skinnier being more chargey in the BC but who knows

I confess to only being on good snow with my CD114s, and am ashamed to say that I haven't beat on my bases ;-)

Having said that, I'd give up speed for a 4001 base as well next year - even if it's at an increased cost. I wonder if the implication (extra thickness in addition to toughness) is that there's an edge design change? I can see this as being slippery slope for a ski designer, but I thought I'd throw that out there.

I thought I was in the minority, in preferring plain, black bases. Even with Praxis custom orders, I've always gone plain black. All of this die cut silliness that adds cost with no performance benefit, while making you pick and choose p-tex colors when doing repairs (the assumption being that you care about cosmetics on the base). What's the point? I think I'm going to stick with black p-tex for all of my base repairs moving forward.

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

I confess to only being on good snow with my CD114s, and am ashamed to say that I haven't beat on my bases ;-)

Having said that, I'd give up speed for a 4001 base as well next year - even if it's at an increased cost. I wonder if the implication (extra thickness in addition to toughness) is that there's an edge design change? I can see this as being slippery slope for a ski designer, but I thought I'd throw that out there.

... Thom

---

I also would pay more. Here in UT anyway you can normally ski the bc from October/November to June, and many of us do... but you will hit stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by margotron

i charge my ld102s. They are 186. Personally I can’t see skinnier being more chargey in the BC but who knows

---

I went with the 179, first time in many many years I'm on skis shorter than 180. They're more centered than my usual mounts and I feel like I have no tip. It's really odd since the ski is basically a rail at speed but I can never relax completely on them, always feel like I'm closing my turns too much and getting bounced when I unload the ski before the next turn. The only time they really felt at home was on glacial corn last spring and I had to force myself to let them do their thing or they would buck me at every turn. I don't understand how a ski that stiff and straight can want to turn that much... Maybe it has to do with the fact that I ski long damp planks in soft snow most of the time and you can really lay into those without really getting into tight turns. The LDs only come out on hard snow and I don't adjust my skiing enough. I should do a groomer day on them to get a good feel.
I'd probably bitch and moan even more on the LD90 which would feel like a blend between a toothpick and snowblades. I'm so used to long wide floaty planks in soft snow that when you put me on small skis in the steeps my brain shuts down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mall walker

if you're a 296 BSL (or within a mm or two and willing to risk prerelease/norelease) you're welcome to try my LD90s if you want, unfortunately I mounted Plum 150s directly on the ski without plates so there's no room for adjustment. They are a very fun and confidence-inspiring ski to go fast on imo, though even on your LD102s you're chargier than me so take that with a grain of salt.

---

Thanks, I think I have ogre-foot syndrome and those wouldn't work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

Having said that, I'd give up speed for a 4001 base as well next year - even if it's at an increased cost. I wonder if the implication (extra thickness in addition to toughness) is that there's an edge design change? I can see this as being slippery slope for a ski designer, but I thought I'd throw that out there.

---

I think edges came in various thicknesses and you're right, thicker base probably means thicker edges and more weight...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

I thought I was in the minority, in preferring plain, black bases. Even with Praxis custom orders, I've always gone plain black. All of this die cut silliness that adds cost with no performance benefit, while making you pick and choose p-tex colors when doing repairs (the assumption being that you care about cosmetics on the base). What's the point? I think I'm going to stick with black p-tex for all of my base repairs moving forward.

---

No way, black bases are the only way to go. It's like red boots/skis/cars: they're obviously faster.
Unless you're photoslutting for a brand and getting upside down a lot I don't see the point of rad designs on bases, you never see them. At most get the logo or the name of the brand at the tip where you don't have to worry about repairs...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiSt

If you're ever passing through Hamar, I have a pair you can borrow.

Incidentally, it's the the stiffest and probably best of the protos. It's not really fully rockered, more like the profile of a lotus 138, flat underfoot for about 55cm and massively rockered in both tip and tail, 120mm at the narrowest and about 43-45m radius, 193cm measured along the base and sub 2kg.

I have no ETA for this model making it into production, if ever, though.

Sent fra min SM-G950F via Tapatalk

---

Wow, thanks. I´m afraid Hamar is a bit too far south. 1300km is long trip to demo skis no matter how great skis sound. Would love to see that kind of ski in production, you would sell a ton of them. Maybe even 10 pairs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JanIdar

you would sell a ton of them. Maybe even 10 pairs

---

Yup.

Sent fra min SM-G950F via Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phatty

Still looking for a 187cm SD105 review. Those are high on my list, but I don't want to be the guinea pig.

---

What do you wanna know exactly? They RIP! But def. no Powder Ski!

Base repair check-in & vote for beefier base: a year ago when I got my cd114’s, I managed to hit a shark 2nd day on them and scarred right thru to the core

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiSt

If you're ever passing through Hamar, I have a pair you can borrow.

Incidentally, it's the the stiffest and probably best of the protos. It's not really fully rockered, more like the profile of a lotus 138, flat underfoot for about 55cm and massively rockered in both tip and tail, 120mm at the narrowest and about 43-45m radius, 193cm measured along the base and sub 2kg.

I have no ETA for this model making it into production, if ever, though.

Sent fra min SM-G950F via Tapatalk

---

Sounds like a fun ski! Color me interested. Any pairs in CH? I’ll be moving to Zurich this summer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lindahl

Sounds like a fun ski! Color me interested. Any pairs in CH? I’ll be moving to Zurich this summer.

---

Should be one or two at Gregor's and some pairs in Innsbruck I believe.

They're definitely fun in the right conditions.

Sent fra min SM-G950F via Tapatalk

Countdown 104L Ongoing impressions

Skied a few hours of hard pack off lifts today. Trying to make sure I'm not going to regret taking only one setup to Euro land. 181s, Hawx XTD boots, Vipecs.

Felt pretty good overall. Definately not as much ski as I'm used to when skiing hard. A bit nervous that I over de-tuned the tails as they did not have the grip I was hoping on firm groomers to really push through the end of turn. Maybe I'm just used to a bit longer ski, who knows.

You can tell they are 1600g. My typical setup for a day with conditions like today (Western "firm") is a 187 Atomic Alibi (metal spine), with PX15 Racing clamps -- in short heavy.

Impressed with how much better Vipecs feel than Speed Rads. I wasn't raging bumps, but skied them with some gusto and never felt.

The recent Western "firm" has been ... er ... challenging for several of my skis - this, from someone who grew up skiing in Vermont.

TL;DR: I'm looking at shimming my Vipec toes. On bulletproof snow, I'm wondering if skiing with stiffer boots (XT 130 Freetours vs. Mango Maestrales) overdrives the 104s. I might need to subtly adjust the tune.

I usually avoid firm conditions like this (don't like to rattle my old bones), but it got me to thinking about an SD95 type of ski. That would just encourage me to put "unnecessary" wear on a finite resource, however (my knees). I should be on the skin track on days like that.

Last week I escaped for a tune testing day at Eldora in those conditions.

My 14/15 Billygoats really had my "attention". My CD 114s were considerably more confidence inspiring, but I still had to dial it back a notch. Neither of these skis are GS skis - doh!

My 104s (not Ls) were pretty squirrely on this hard snow (they're totally predictable in manky snow). On hard snow, I was overdriving them and re-stabilizing required my attention. This surprised me considering how intuitive they are in garbage snow. My experience with my 104s might be instructive. IIRC I'd previously only been out on them with my Mango Maestrales. Last week and today, I was wearing my XT130 Freetours and I think the extra power contributed.

Today, I took out both the 114s and 104s. Again, I felt as if I was overdriving my tips on the 104s when I hit firmer conditions.

One other thing ... Pivots on the 114s and Vipecs on the 104s. I've been on the Pivots quite a bit this year and I'm getting used to and liking the flatter stance.

I need to shove a 3-5 mm shim under the Vipec toes to make sense of this. There was a time when a vintage Dynafiddle ramp angle didn't bother me. Times change ...

The tune/predictability on both the 104 & 114 is great in all other conditions (including wind-fucked snow), irrespective of boot stiffness. Both skis are detuned to the sidecut. Today got me to thinking about extending it on the 104s an inch at a time at the tip (starting by feathering) - predictability over absolute edge hold.

I'm gonna return to my softer Maestrales with the 104s (what I normally tour with) to make sure I'm not nuts, and I need to pick up some UHMW to chop up into toe shims.

I'm excited for you about your trip. My take is that you'll be longing for the ski that's sitting at home maybe 70% of the time. I feel your pain. I'm working on getting that demon out of my head (not always successfully).

... Thom

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

Are you guys seeing a possibility of a CD 114L in 182 size next year? 189 is a wee bit long for a touring ski for me. I'm guessing this width touring ski doesn't sell much in Euro-land, so demand in general is low for this ski.

3500 or so gms./pair of CD 114 touring goodness has me lusting.

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

Are you guys seeing a possibility of a CD 114L in 182 size next year? 189 is a wee bit long for a touring ski for me. I'm guessing this width touring ski doesn't sell much in Euro-land, so demand in general is low for this ski.

3500 or so gms./pair of CD 114 touring goodness has me lusting.

... Thom

---

It's on the table. L-series is doing decently well, and we already have everything we need, so... [emoji846]

Sent fra min SM-G950F via Tapatalk

You made my day ;-)

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

Does anyone have experience using Down Skis with tele gear? I just started skiing and was thinking the TD 105s might be a good ski to save up for next season. Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pythmere

Does anyone have experience using Down Skis with tele gear? I just started skiing and was thinking the TD 105s might be a good ski to save up for next season. Thanks!

---

@dschane to the white courtesy phone.

He runs Tele gear on multiple Down skis. NTN, I believe.

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pythmere

Does anyone have experience using Down Skis with tele gear? I just started skiing and was thinking the TD 105s might be a good ski to save up for next season. Thanks!

---

Yes, they work very well, though generally, I see no reason to distinguish between alpine and tele skis. IMHO, it's better to distinguish among skiing styles for selecting skis.

My experience is on the Countdown and Showdown series. I have very little experience on center mount style skis like the Throwdowns but it's on my list for next season. I'm sure they'll be great if I can mentally adjust to more ski behind me and less in front.

But, if you just started tele skiing, . . . that's another conversation.

Attachment 274192

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by margotron

i charge my ld102s. They are 186. Personally I can’t see skinnier being more chargey in the BC but who knows

---

Bump for additional feedback on this. I've been skiing my LD102 179cm a bunch lately for bigger days. I finally got some real speed on them and, predictably enough, they are a lot harder to handle than their big brothers (CD114L 189cm). I'd feel a lot better on the longer version, any time I wasn't fully centered on the ski things got a bit touchy. It's especially noticeable in the back seat, the tail is relatively short but ultra stiff so the tips pop straight out and I feel like I'm on Rax skis... In variable snow it got a bit spooky, I alternated between surfing on the tails and getting way too close to burying a tip...
I might need to hop on the CD104L which seems like it would be slightly less stiff and more stable at speed with the bigger shovel. The weight difference is negligible and the LD might just be too stiff for me, it's really a handful if you're not constantly driving the ski hard in bad snow and letting it do its thing while remaining super centered in soft/variable snow. That tail is absolutely unforgiving and the lack of a tail rise has been killing me when exiting drainages in refrozen or wet shit.

Anyone skiing on this year's iteration of the CD104? If so, what is your opinion on it in the resort?

OMG did any of you guys see Bimboes' run at Verbier?

Tell me about the CD114. Any comprissons to other skis?

Go watch Bimboes run of free ride world tour at Verbier.

Super heroes can ski on anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

Super heroes can ski on anything.

---

Agreed. One thing I've found however, is you can get a good idea of how the ski likes to be skied.

While I can barely dream of skiing like these guys, I stand on a ski very much like he does, and this translates to how I bond with the ski as opposed to how Tabke stands (and how Qs weren't my cup of tea).

... Thom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

Tell me about the CD114. Any comprissons to other skis?

---

I've been on the 196 all season.
Took a minute to get used to since they ski very light and will deflect if you're not paying attention in hard chop. I was used to heavier metal skis with a more aggressive stance that would just plow. These definitely ski more neutral upright and feel like they have a lot of tail when carving hard on groomed.
When you get used to driving them hard while remaining neutral they're amazing skis. Ive been daily riding them on everything from ice to deep blower and they seem to be good at everything. On deep days I didn't think at all about tip dive and just went. The tails are there when you need em if you end up backseat. Im a big dude and I love the overall stability they have given me. I don't plan on getting rid of em unless it's for another pair next season. Can't think of any skis that are similar that I've been on unfortunately but I absolutely love them.

Pyro, good to hear you're enjoying them!

Not too many reviews out there, but there are a few you may find useful here: http://www.skipass.com/tests/ski/down/?sort=dd

Either brush up on your french, or enjoy google translate trying to make sense of their freeride ski lingo...

Sent fra min SM-G950F via Tapatalk

SiSt, Geo, or anybody else: super keen to hear more about the SD 105 187. Weight, radius, reviews maybe too?

And congratulations on Mickael B’s outrageous Bec run.

Over in Europe, I was reminiscing about the OG Volkl Gotama. The one from 2005 / 2006 with the solid black top sheets, minimal sidecut, and perfect flex. Minus the massive rooster tail throwing twin, those skis were perfect.

Looking at specs, it looks like the CD105 is a damn close modern replacement. Can anyone with experience on either of those confirm that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GBB

Over in Europe, I was reminiscing about the OG Volkl Gotama. The one from 2005 / 2006 with the solid black top sheets, minimal sidecut, and perfect flex. Minus the massive rooster tail throwing twin, those skis were perfect.

Looking at specs, it looks like the CD105 is a damn close modern replacement. Can anyone with experience on either of those confirm that?

---

Wanna buy my OG '04 Gotamas? Kidding. I love them, too. I'd like to remount with a modern binding but that just seems stupid. There has to be a number of skis that are better by this point. Amazing that I still ski them, though. And as such, I'd like to find the modern version of that shape that has become a classic that just doesn't die. Looks a lot like the CD104.

As a few have been asking here is a short review of both CD104L and SD105

Skier is 6’4” and #185 nekked.

SD 105 mounted on the line with pivots. I bought these as a gift for my brother and skied them a couple days in various conditions. Heavy skis incredibly damp incredibly straight. The relatively narrow tips make them a bit funky in deeper snow- of course when you go fast enough you get can get on top but don’t expect to stay on top if you are slashing turns. They really shine skiing fast and with confidence through tracked out snow and I found them great in shallow virgin snow- dust on crust, corn, etc. The rocker lets you make modern turn shapes when you want but otherwise you need to do some work to move them edge to edge- the 45m radius makes them essentially straight.

CD105L with dynafit FT. I’ve only had these out in spring touring conditions. There they are a light and maneuverable ski which can arc and slip turns. Feel very stable skiing steep corn. They chatter a lot on more firm snow- but what ski in this class wouldn’t? Reminds me a lot of the bamboo sidewall era dps 105s I had once upon a time.

What size SD105?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_pretzel

What size SD105?

---

45m radius makes me think the 202s?

Sorry they were the shorties... 187

Looking on the site I'm not sure of the radius of the 87. Anyway it's quite long

Sent from my FRD-L09 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charlie Don't Surf

Sorry they were the shorties... 187

Looking on the site I'm not sure of the radius of the 87. Anyway it's quite long

Sent from my FRD-L09 using Tapatalk

---

The 202s ski very similar to what was said above as well. Faster you go more control they have.
I've skied moguls on them but holy shit is it a lot of work. They'll flex but you have to monster drive them. I'm 6'6" 250lbs and they're A LOT of ski.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pythmere

Does anyone have experience using Down Skis with tele gear? I just started skiing and was thinking the TD 105s might be a good ski to save up for next season. Thanks!

---

To all the down guys on this thread - I'm sorry. This noob can't receive a PM, otherwise I would never clutter this thread with the following -

@pythmere - I'm selling lightly used pair of TD 105 in a 182 length. If you're interested, PM me. If you can't do that and you're still interested, email me. guitarorchestra10 AT yahoo DOT com

Just noticed there's a 40% off sale today at www.downskis.com

Those CD114 Special Editions are some of the sexiest skis I've seen. Too much overlap with my QLabs and BGs, but the sale price is really tempting. How do these prices compare to the pre-sale prices?