I don’t think they will but I really hope they come out with longer options in the Masterblaster next year. A 191 would be perfect.
The “secret stash” goes fast, I regret not buying the 189 Hotshot with the grizzly topsheet.
Printable View
I don’t think they will but I really hope they come out with longer options in the Masterblaster next year. A 191 would be perfect.
The “secret stash” goes fast, I regret not buying the 189 Hotshot with the grizzly topsheet.
I'd be curious to try them behind the line, but I really think I like that -8 zone on a twin. I have skied -10-11 on a few skis, but they were more directional skis with flatter tails. My issue with going back that far on a rockered twin is that I don't feel like you get much support from the tails mounted that far back. I think the conversation regarding mount point should include whether or not we're talking about a twin and also what the rocker lines look like. IMHO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muggydude
I just had two more great days on the Hotshot. One cream cheese pow day with associated end of day chop and one icy park day where we found really good blown in powder/chalk in the chutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishskisurf
I need a crazy versatile ski. I don't want to think about my skis when jumping from the park and onto the steep stuff. Hotshot fills that role better than any ski I've tried.
That's how I'm gonna describe them now. I went from doing the shortest slalom wiggle turns (following my 6 year old snowplowing) I've done in decades - never had such short turn radius skis since I skied moguls - to big fast turns skimming choppy soft moguls (OK they wobbled up/down doing that but they tracked fine) to arcing big GS groomer turns to charging fresh powder to skiing steep chalk and it's all fine. Deep days I'll go for the Rustler 11s to surf around, but the Hotshots would do in a pinch on deep days.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnowMachine
I wouldn’t hesitate to go back -.5 or -1, but wouldn’t go further than that. after my first day on the MB where I felt like maybe I’d like it a cm back from rec, I’ve really enjoyed the 187 MB on the line. The mount is about .5 to 1 cm closer to the tip of the ski than the rec mount point on hotshot and friend but I think that’s due to the HS/friend being two cm’s longer in actual length and the mount point only being 1 cm further from the tail on those skis. So the MB makes up for it by taking 1 cm of length off the front half. seems counterintuitive but it does work well. plus the HS and friend have much more rocker in the front of the ski. I have the M6 and m102 and love both of those skis on their recommended line as well. On the line the 187 MB will just take a run or two of getting used to, but it skis great and personally at this point i wouldn’t go back. I don’t need that much tail behind me on that ski, but after a day don’t notice it anymore and just really like the ski on the line.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnowMachine
I used to always mess with mount points (mounted my e104 1.5 or 2 cm’s back to make them more like the m102) but after a while I always start questioning my decision and regret it. now it would take a lot to get me to move from recommended. nice to know it’s set up the “right way” enjoy the ski as intended and not think about it. part of the reason to have different skis.
I'm J skis curious. Reading this thread, I'm left with the impression their 'charge' series skis similar to my beloved MSP99s. Anyone have time on hotshot and MSP? Thinking a hotshot may be a great complement to my MSP99s here in PNW for low fresh/skied out conditions. Or I could just consider the MSP108, but that's kind of boring haha.
Another point - When pro skiers are designing the skis like at J, and designing them very well, and are engineers too not just pro skiers, the designated the mount point is spot on.Quote:
Originally Posted by MD12
I don't know who designs every ski there but I can say the above is true for the Hotshots, I talked to the guy for a bit last year about it.
So I’ve got two days on the 187 Masterblasters now. Mounted -1cm from the line.
First day I really had a rough time liking them. I did some light detuning tips and tails at the contact points. They felt clunky, unpredictable, and would hook up at odd times. I did notice they also were just generally slow. Beat up my legs and really felt like they were a lot of work. Not intuitive and really had to manhandle them.
Checked base flatness, nothing really to report. Maybe ever so slightly edge high, but pretty acceptable generally speaking. Decided to wax them, and took a gummy stone to the whole edge.
Second day on snow was MUCH better. Way more predictable, carve well, pivot and slash with ease. Definitely manageable in steeps and bumps. I think the factory wax job was the main culprit of the first day woes. Gummy helped too I think. Kind of disappointing they were that slow out of the plastic, but not a huge deal.
The suspension on them was great in the chop and refrozen Tahoe crud. Very stable and mellow out the imperfections, pretty happy making quick slashy turns on groomers, and just sending it. Didn’t get close to any kind of speed limit. They could carve well, but on less than steep groomers, they definitely don’t pull you into a carve, and require some energy to get on edge.
Need to get these on some steeper groomers to really open them up and see how they do. I got them into speed a couple times, and it does seem like they really come alive with speed. And/or I need to really drive the shovels with some weight behind them to get some energy back out of the ski.
Front of the ski was stiffer than I expected. Kind of rethinking the mount point, I probably should have gone on the line considering I’m inbetween sizes for the 181 and 187. If I was purely doing steep carving and high speed stuff, I’d think the rearword mount is ideal, but considering I invariably end up in a lot of bumps and steeps the recommended line may have been better. At least for the 187s. The 181s going -1 may have made more sense x although it’s possible I could still overpower the shorter length. Hard to say until I get more time on them.
Overall, these seem easier to pivot and more forgiving of a centered stance than the mantra 102s. Better in moguls for sure- but also less precise and don’t give you back as much energy as those skis do when you Push them and load the shovels. The comparison is further complicated by the fact I was in great skiing shape with 40 days in last year when I skied the mantras, vs 3 days on snow this year and not in skiing shape at all. I’d love to A-B the skis back to back.
Will continue to ski them and see how it goes. They certainly still are a lot of fun where they are and aren’t difficult to ski. I May consider remounting to the recommended line, tbd. They still feel balanced and a good combo of easy to pivot but also stable and can push them as hard as I want. I used inserts for the first mount, so I may just put in another set of inserts and then be able to move the toes rearward for real hardpack days and forward to the line for softer moguls and tree type days.
I wonder if I maybe would be happier with a two ski hardpack quiver of 181 Master Blasters for bumps, steeps, and trees- and 184 M102s for real hardpack and carving days. Hmmm
If anyone has some 181 Masterblasters, or some Mantra M6 or 102s and lives in Tahoe, and wants to swap skis for a few runs, hit me up.
Muggy, just curious, what size are you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Muggydude
I've come to the conclusion, after skiing a bunch of bigger skis this year, that I'm sticking with 183 on the Hotshot. Mounted at rec. I know that there would be places I'd appreciate the 189, but for the type of tight tree/rock garden skiing I end up in, the benefit of the smaller ski outweighs the benefit of the larger ski in open terrain.
This weekend was perfect for the Hotshot in Tahoe. Cream cheese pow, choppy consolidated snow, refreeze and some really nice blown around soft snow. I'd imagine the MB works well in those conditions, too.
As for construction, the J's are just bomber. I've abused the hell out of mine this year and they look great.
I and others had the same experience with the Hotshot, taking even a couple days for them to click. Description of issues very similar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Muggydude
Interesting to me that the Masterblaster had a learning curve as well.
May be some learning curve, but truly I think most of the issues were the slow bases/wax from the factory making the skis sticky. I’ve had this issue before with other skis, although those were after many days and the skies had dried out. Slow bases and no wax/bad wax can ruin a ski’s behavior and make them very sluggish and hooky (doesn’t just affect straight line). Last year my Praxis Quixotes were like that and I have always loved those skis, realized they needed wax and they went back to being a breeze to ski.
I’m 5’10 215lbs (athletic) roughly. I do have very small boots (25.5) so sometimes I think that hurts my ability to leverage the tips
Fwiw my Jskis were used when I got on them first, and didn’t do any tuning or wax.
Bandit,Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
You have my blessing to buy more skis.
I still regret selling my Metals and have often looked at the Hotshot. Per Blister the 183 Hotshot measures a bit short.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
It's a universal truth. I dunno if it was Aristoteles or Pythagoras who put it in writing, but never mind...Quote:
Originally Posted by kc_7777
n=n+1
muggy, I also didn’t like the factory wax on my MBs and thought they were a little sticky in fresh snow. I’m glad you mentioned that - haven’t skied my friends yet but I’ll make sure to put the right wax on before I go cat skiing with them next week.
They do. I can't count the number of times that I've wished they were 185-6. Just a tiny bit more ski. I bet I'd like the 189, but it's pushing it for length/weight for the type of skiing I want to do with these.Quote:
Originally Posted by kc_7777
I know that the 183 Friend was too short for me. I appreciated how nimble they were in the trees, but I constantly felt like I was going to go out the front skiing fast in chop. I sold them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnowMachine
realize you’re lighter than me, but you and I were in the same boat with the 183. When I got the 183 I was 180 lbs. The 189 is 186 and is easier and the swing weight feels lighter than even the enforcer 104 186. The feeling I had of the 183 feeling short was in the back of my mind even in tight spots. The 189 is easier in tight spots to me than the 183. It’s about support and the right sized platform to have a bigger sweet spot. On a stiffer ski like the e104 additional length can hurt, but because the flex pattern is more forgiving on the hotshot so I don’t notice any downside and just think it’s better. If you get the chance to try the 189 I think there’s a 90% chance you’ll like it more.
Well hell..... Maybe I need to try it. I really do like the ski. I had a pretty high speed crash last weekend in the cream cheese schmoo and resulting chop. I'm about 90% sure it wouldn't have happened on a longer ski. On the bigger drops into soft snow it would be nice to have a bit more ski out there, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by MD12
FWIW, I thought the length of the 185 E110 was right on for a daily driver, I just thought that ski felt like a completely dead version of the Hotshot.
On 189 hotshots again today on east coast. Slightly soft groomers that turned into heavy ass corn, rock hard trees and bumps, no visibility. Thought they were the wrong skis for today and knew I should have taken out my m102s but wanted more time on them and wanted to see how they’d do. Really thought I’d switch skis after a few runs but kept them all day. had a total blast. anything short of ice or super firm, these are my skis.
Spent an afternoon on the 189 J Skis friend in jackson. I had been skiing the 189 hotshot the past few days and wanted to bring the friends out for a few hours.
In short, this is a stupid easy ski. Jackson has a lot of pushed around soft snow and there are still pockets of untracked powder of varying density. trees, bowls, couldn’t have been easier. swing-weight is noticeably lighter than the hotshots. anything with fresh snow was a blast and felt like i was on cheater skis that read my mind. trees with fresh snow was just so stupidly easy and fun. they’re significantly looser than the hotshots and easier in most conditions that they’re meant for - at one point i was doing helicopters down a groomer with my kids without even thinking about it. also a softer flex throughout the ski (including underfoot) than the hotshots.
In the powder ski category, I’d say these lean significantly to the powder-specific side but have enough all-mountain capability to ski confidently on groomers and still have fun. I could get decent speed and some edge hold on softish groomers that were pretty edgeable. compared to the hotshots, they have horrible edge hold and a much lower speed limit on groomers (not sure I’ve found the speed limit of the 189 hotshots yet), but they’re way better resort powder ski than a ski 100% designed for untracked powder. nice compliment to the hotshots.
on sizing, I’m 6’2 and 200 lbs. If anything I’d go longer. I think anyone about 150/160+ that’s an advanced+ skier will find these very easy and shouldn’t consider sizing down.
and yeah i dug up the j skis thread for kc so he can have his line thread back.
hey sameQuote:
Originally Posted by DoubleBogey
im on the 189 grizlys with gold pivots - its slick.
on the MB, I think they should tweak the ski to move the effective edge and mount back a cm or so from the tip - maybe add a tiny bit of low slung rocker to the tip. then again, maybe i’m just trying to find a 99 underfoot hotshot, and these guys know way more than i do. MB skis great as is and is my current DD.
Anyone have time on the Fastforward?
I plan on using this as my low tide ski, so primarily skiing groomers and bump runs (more early season or late season) with perhaps a bit of trees if the coverage is decent (mid season when there hasn't been snow for a while). Other skis I have and like are a 190cm Moment Wildcat 118 and 185cm Line Blade Optic 104. I looked into both those companies for a narrow option, but the Commander 92 is much more directional and the Blade Optic 92 is way softer and lighter than the 104.
Also debating between the 181 cm and 187 cm. Since it's more for bumps and groomers I'm thinking the 181 cm could work, I just don't want it to be too short.
I haven’t, but it sounds like a good ski for your use case based on the reviews ive read and my time on masterblasters and hot shots. Or you can buy my cheap 181 masterblasters in Gear Swap…
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is tempting, as my understanding is that the Fastforward was based on the old, narrower Masterblaster.Quote:
Originally Posted by waxloaf