Get Down with Down (skis)

I had a little problem with the 114L to begin with until i broke the edges in. Since then i love them. Took them as a one ski quiver to japan this year. Still loved them even in a low snow year. Held up really well on the soft snow pistes as well. Only slight issue was the length in 189, low snow = lots of shrubs = tight trees could be a bit challenging. Had them out on a couple of pow days here in austria before the lockdown and they`ve become my go to pow skis now. The CD1s are just too heavy compared to the 114Ls and these perform just as well despite being 2 cm narrower.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

but dropping 5 cm in length for kick turns is only 2.5cm on each end.

---

only on a center mounted ski...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mall walker

only on a center mounted ski...

---

So, more like 2.1cm for the tail "half", but who's counting ;-)

Any idea if Down is actually shipping to the US? It’s an option on their website, which is new...


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

^ I emailed them, they are. I was quoted 50euro shipping, which isn’t nothing but when added to the price of the skis, still a killer deal.

That's a smokin' deal on shipping!

Anyone got time on the 102 carbon? Late winter to spring touring and ski mountaineering ski? I tend to like width for our snow conditions in NW Montana hence my looking at that one or the 104L over the 90

@mall walker has been on pretty much everything. My experience runs to a limited trial of the LD102s and a couple generations of the CD104s (not Ls, but read on).

I I wrote about the LD102 earlier in this thread [edit]in post #433, above[/edit], but here's a quick background/recap ...

I was looking for a Spring ski in this general width - a category which for me has been elusive, given the varied the conditions one encounters in the Spring. I doubt this Goldilocks Spring ski exists, but the CD104 profile is much closer to what I'm after than the LD102. The 104 is close enough for me that I took a chance at the 104L.

I had a short term, inbounds trial of the LD102. When possible, I like to suss out a ski inbounds, to quickly get some mileage on them. I also tend to choose a ski for what it does worst and not what it does best. On the first day, I found what was for me a show-stopper and because of this, I didn't pursue this further to see what the ski did well.

The reason I've become so quick to judge was because of my experiences with some Praxis Quixotes. While I learned a lot about my preferences with this ski, I spent way too much time in getting to the point where I decided they weren't for me. These days, I don't ski enough to spend 7-10 days getting used to a ski and so out they went.

The LD 102 along with the Praxis Quixote have been the two weirdest skis I've ever been on and both because of what I'd call a quirky fore/aft balance point. Two days of whiteout (dust over crust conditions) and I was done with the Qs. BTW, the Qs were great in soft snow, but their quirky balance point on anything hard was enough for me to move on. Parenthetically, it was the CD 114s that kicked the Qs out of my quiver. The CD114s were great on those two whiteout days and to date, I haven't found conditions where I miss the Qs (although the Qs may initiate a bit quicker in tight trees ... just a bit).

So, my experience with the LD102s in re-frozen Spring snow was the key reason for moving on from them.

I couldn't fully embrace the 40m turn radius of the LD102 but not for reasons you'd expect. I could easily make quick turns with them. The problem for me was the stance on long radius turns.

With the LD102s, I found that medium/long radius turn initiation on hard snow required a centered balance point. Mid turn, I had to quickly transition to driving them hard with my shins. It was a transition that didn't appeal to me, and it was the fact that I never was able to adjust to the weird (for me) weight transitions the Q required of me that informed my perhaps hasty decision with the LD102s.

I can get used to one stance or another on a ski, but this mid-turn transition really bugged me and at that point, I was more or less done with the skis. On steeper, tight terrain (also hard snow) they were fine. I think they'd do really well in a narrow couloir as long as there weren't runnels to deal with (admittedly challenging for any ski).

In comparison, the CD 104s are very nicely balanced. They like to be turned from a mid-forward stance but are quite forgiving and have a wide sweet spot. They're a mellower version of the CD114. If I were to improve anything on the CD104s, it would be to have a bit better grip in the tip on harder snow, but I suspect that too much would be sacrificed in their 3D snow performance to do so. I'm good with the compromise as they handle Spring slush, refrozen chicken heads and other challenging snow remarkably well.

Enter the CD 104L. A pair came my way about a week after the COVID-19 shutdown. I stare at them longingly and won't be able to get on them until next year, but I have enough confidence in them to have sold my CD104s (to @mall walker). Time will tell if this was impulsive. Interestingly, the 104Ls feel remarkably damp in the shop. When I pull back on the tip and let go (tail anchored to the floor), the tip flutter settles down remarkably quickly - much faster (for example) than my 2014 Billy Goats.

Will this shop test matter on snow? Beats the hell out of me, but I'm pretty confident in my decision to swap out the CD104s for the 104Ls. Time will tell how much of a fool I was (and still might be :D).

One last thing ... I inspect/tune every ski I take out to 1/1, and have a pretty good handle on de-tuning the tip and tail.

... Thom

I’ve been on the CD102L, the predecessor to the LD102. Boissal’s been on the more recent LD102. For my money I loved the 102, it definitely had a weird balance point and took some getting used to, but I found it incredibly versatile. I also loved the LD90, fwiw. I put a lot of mileage on my LD90s, which one to go with depends IMO on how much boot you’re gonna bring. With something like a TLT7 / Travers, the 90 is rad. With more boot, more ski.

I’ve now got Thom’s 104 heavies, which are a lot of fun. They LOOK a lot wider than either of the other two, but they ski great. They are much less weird to adjust to than my old 102s, super intuitive. Boissal loves the 104Ls I know, and he skis hard.

I have struggled between buying a 104L and a LD102 for next season, vs maybe just putting ultralight bindings on my 104 heavies. I dunno. The 104 shape is much friendlier for sure. None of them you can go wrong with imo, but the 102 definitely has to be skied differently than most skis, I felt. I happened to like that specific way it skied, and it felt a lot narrower in steep terrain than the 104, which is nice in certain terrain.

Now having yet another ski at that 100mm spot (Black Crows Solis) it’s hard to justify adding something else, but a ~1500g Down ski would round out my quiver nicely.

Sorry for the ramblings, in the car waiting for my takeout to be ready. If you want to be safe and get a ripping ski you’ll definitely like, get the 104L, imo.

Buddy of mine just scooped the last pair of 2019 CD104L in 187cm right from under my nose while I was waffling and emailing Geo about things. Serves me right...

Re: LD102 vs CD104L, as MW say I'd pick the CD104L 95% of the time. It would take very specific conditions to get me back on the LD102 after having skied the CD104L, it's much more versatile and works well in all conditions. Perfect daily driver compared to the LD102 which takes some time to figure out and will slap you in the dick hard if you don't handle it right.

Perfect Down quiver for me would be LD90 for the steeps in hard snow (I don't ski those), CD104L most of the time (including huge days, no-fall zone gnar, and average pow day), and CD114L when things are really deep or really funky.

Wait, that's exactly the Down quiver I have! This year I skied 1 day on the LD90, 35-ish days on the CD104L, and 15-ish days on the CD114L.
When I had the LD102 and the CD114L as my 2 ski quiver I skied the big guys about 55 days and the small one 5 days, all in the spring. It was a really fat year though but the fact that I gravitated to a 190cm 115 underfoot ski for pretty much the entire season (again, including huge days, steep days, tight couloir days) is, to me, indicative of the fact that the LD102 is a specialty ski that gets squeezed out of the lineup in the Wasatch.

Buddy of mine just scooped the last pair of 2019 CD104L in 187cm right from under my nose while I was waffling and emailing Geo about things. Serves me right...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kevino

Anyone got time on the 102 carbon? Late winter to spring touring and ski mountaineering ski? I tend to like width for our snow conditions in NW Montana hence my looking at that one or the 104L over the 90

---

Re: LD102 vs CD104L, I'd pick the CD104L 95% of the time. It would take very specific conditions to get me back on the LD102 after having skied the CD104L, it's much more versatile and works well for pretty much everything. Perfect daily driver compared to the LD102 which takes some time to figure out and will slap you in the dick hard if you don't handle it right. I loved the super long radius of the LD102 for holding an edge at speed and making much bigger turns than the length of the ski should allow (179cm it too small IMO, 185ish would be better) but the crazy stiffness is tough to manage. The tails are short and really snappy and the shovel is a bit short and low which makes for an unforgiving ride, if you're not super balanced you get tossed around (backseat mostly) and there's no recovery when there are no tails to push back against. The CD104L skis like a toned down version of the LD102 with a more modern shape. It's easygoing and playful if you want to ski that way but it can also be pushed as much as your thighs and self-confidence will allow and as far as I can tell it has no speed limit. I works beautifully in the steeps too, I skied a few lines this season that I would consider my most hairball to date and never once did I worry about the skis even when the snow turned bulletproof and the exposure was making me rethink most of my priorities.

Ideal Down quiver for me would be LD90 for the steeps in hard snow (we don't have those in the Wasatch), CD104L most of the time (including huge days, no-fall zone gnar, and most pow days), and CD114L when things are deep or really funky (wind hammered mostly).
Wait, that's exactly the Down quiver I have! And this year I skied 1 day on the LD90, 35-ish days on the CD104L, and 15-ish days on the CD114L. If I could keep only 1 ski it would be the CD104L. Then I'd probably make a deal with the devil to somehow get a 2nd pair of ski and that would be an old Lotus120 in 190cm (Pure3 from BITD when DPS made skis, not identity statements).

When I had LD102 and CD114L as my 2-ski quiver I was on the big guys about 55 days and the small ones 5 days, all in the spring. It was a really fat year though but the fact that I gravitated to a 190cm 115 underfoot ski for pretty much the entire season (again, including big days, steep days, tight couloir days) is, to me, indicative of the fact that the LD102 is a specialty ski that tends to get squeezed out of the lineup in the Wasatch. Not sure how that translates to what you deal with in NW MT though...

Soooo. A few pairs of the SD105, 187 left. I ordered myself a backup pair, at €320 including shipping, how could I not? A few LD102 in the 179@ €289,plus ship, CD104 in 181, as well. My down quiver is getting pretty loaded. More 202s,please,Geo and SiSt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boissal

Wait, that's exactly the Down quiver I have!

---

:fmicon:

welp. i wasn't planning on buying a pair of cd104L's today, but $360 shipped is too good a deal to pass up. now i gotta go ask for forgiveness from the wife...

Somebody please grab the remaining 189 CD114L. The temptation is getting mighty hard to resist... Just got Shifts installed on the 187 CD104 i picked up a few weeks ago. Waiting for some inserts so I can shim the toes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SoooL

Somebody please grab the remaining 189 CD114L. The temptation is getting mighty hard to resist... Just got Shifts installed on the 187 CD104 i picked up a few weeks ago. Waiting for some inserts so I can shim the toes.

---

I almost bought a pair last week but I needed to make it a two-fer with the 187 CD104L and the last pair sold from right under my hesitating nose. Guess I'll have to wait for the fall group buy.

Non L cd114 are unreal fun skis with any sort of fresh. I'd imagine the 114L are pretty damn great too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arild

Soooo. A few pairs of the SD105, 187 left. I ordered myself a backup pair, at €320 including shipping, how could I not? A few LD102 in the 179@ €289,plus ship, CD104 in 181, as well. My down quiver is getting pretty loaded. More 202s,please,Geo and SiSt.

---

Hehe sorry about the 202s.

I really want the SD115 to come back, or something similar in that width. Wish more people were interested in this ski. Would also take a SD105 in a 193 or something like that

I also have a pair of sd105 202s I may be willing to part with if anyone is interested. Time to thin all the shit in my garage down.

Id be super interested in a sd115 around 196-198cm

I agree with pyromaniac. Pretzeldude, you'll have the 115m in a 197 and like it, damn you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pyromaniacman129

Non L cd114 are unreal fun skis with any sort of fresh. I'd imagine the 114L are pretty damn great too.

---

My CD 114s kicked my Praxis Qs to the curb ... more of an equal but better for me sort of thing. They're nearly as predictable as my 2014 Billy Goats in 3D chop.

I'd love to see a 114L come out in a 182, but I think I'm dreaming.

... Thom

Lots of activity on Down skis. I have been eyeing the LD90 for a few months and with stock down to two pairs, I pulled the trigger.

Damn those CD104Ls are tempting. Need new spring sticks to replace my 177 MTN Explore 95s which are a tad short for me. I ended up on some 187 QST 106s for most spring outings this season - fun for blasting down faces but a bit overkill for corn skiing and in tight spots. I'e been eying Ravens, Bcrows Camox FBs and Solis, but the Ravens are all gone and BCrows seem to be made of gold.

If I didn't have PTSD from my experience with the LD102L (same vintage Thom has described) I'd have pulled the trigger already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by North

Damn those CD104Ls are tempting. Need new spring sticks to replace my 177 MTN Explore 95s which are a tad short for me. I ended up on some 187 QST 106s for most spring outings this season - fun for blasting down faces but a bit overkill for corn skiing and in tight spots. I'e been eying Ravens, Bcrows Camox FBs and Solis, but the Ravens are all gone and BCrows seem to be made of gold.

If I didn't have PTSD from my experience with the LD102L (same vintage Thom has described) I'd have pulled the trigger already.

---

I wish circumstances allowed me to get on my 104Ls this Spring, but I'd trust Boissal and mall walker more than me (due to # of miles traveled on Downs) ... that the 104 series is totally different. I certainly found this to be the case with the 104s.

... Thom

Pulled the trigger on 104Ls - too good of a deal to pass up, Boissal's feedback and mall walker's comparison of the regular 104 with the Solis were compelling enough. Hoping I can take them out for long days and couloir skiing (QSTs too heavy/long for this) but still have a backbone for reasonably aggressive skiing (Explore 95s too short for this).

No Down this year :(

From their Instagram
"Down?? Yes we are alive!!!!!

After a very challenging last winter for all of us it has been decided DOWN will not launch a full lineup this season.

The pandemic has hit DOWN financially hard like many others in the ski industry. From small ski shops to local ski areas to guides to...the list is long....2020 is one to forget (from a business perspective). So after 10 plus years working night and day to keep this small independent ski company alive it is time for a pause to focus on family, health, and hopefully a lot more skiing! We will also use this extra time to revitalize, refocus, and rethink DOWN and ensure we are continuing to deliver on our mission.

I know this will come as a disappointment to our very loyal DOWN supporters but after a TON of thought it is the right thing to do this winter.

So are you going out of business? No!!! We are actually working on some limited edition releases for this winter...but at our pace not the normal industry cycle :) Please stay tuned here and sign up for our newsletter.

Where have you been? Sorry. Our response time to emails and social has been a little off over the past weeks as this difficult decision weighed hard but we are back so give us a few days to get up to speed.

How can you help? We will be relaunching our soft goods site soon so buy a few Ts...or buy skis???? We have a few left overs from last year at great deals. Grab them fast or tell a friend!! If you don’t see what you want drop us a mail and we will see what we can do :)

So this is not a goodbye but we really want to thank all the people that have and continue to support DOWN. Much love and here’s to a great winter!!!! #getdown #thankyouforthesupport #winter2021"

Bummer, and thanks for posting.

Hopefully, this will be a positive break for the guys. The good news being that they're smart about their infrastructure investment - outsourcing manufacturing and keeping the variable costs low.

... Thom

I too cross my fingers for Down's return.

In the mean time, I finished the 187 CD104 adventure setup. I snagged a pair of sub $300 Shifts from Snowinn in May, stock was limited so I had to settle for 110 mm brakes. A tad wide but they'll do for now. Toes installed with inserts and shimmed 6 mm. Shim material is a bit on the soft side (3x2 mm plastic/nylon cutting board) and the nubbin had a tendency to sink into it. So I enlarged all the mounting holes in the shims to 10 mm and used stacks of flat M5 washers as spacers. Mount feels rock solid.

Attachment 342121

I have a brand new pair of lowdown 90 19/20 year skis for sale. https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...is-26-0-liners

Are there plans for another group buy this spring/off-season?

I was literally just wondering about these guys. Hope all is good and they are able to continue producing skis.

Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk

Same. Need to replace my 3 season old cd114s. Top sheets are starting to delam


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hope so -- it's usually in July or so. I think it's a matter of whether materials/supplies become more readily available as the vaccine shitshow rollout proceeds.

Finally mounting my CD104Ls. Instructions couldn't be clearer on where to mount. What I don't understand is why they've included a crisp transverse line on the topsheet that doesn't seem to correspond to any useful measurement. Doesn't match stated mount point, doesn't match true center. Do I need remedial tape measure training, or can I continue to ignore this line completely?

https://drive.google.com/uc?export=d...PYyPKB12c9etIw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by North

Finally mounting my CD104Ls. Instructions couldn't be clearer on where to mount. What I don't understand is why they've included a crisp transverse line on the topsheet that doesn't seem to correspond to any useful measurement. Doesn't match stated mount point, doesn't match true center. Do I need remedial tape measure training, or can I continue to ignore this line completely?

https://drive.google.com/uc?export=d...PYyPKB12c9etIw

---

Ha, I had the same problem and confusion. Ended up mounting where the arrow points towards more or less (effectively at a -11cm I believe?) Lame topsheet instructions.

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk

Ignore the line and the arrow. I think the drawing is an attempt to clarify the text and shows you that you drill forward (direction of the arrow) of the true center (horizontal line). It's a visual aid that doesn't correspond to anything which makes it a bit weird.
Regardless, I prefer to have instructions printed on the top sheet and measuring myself rather than relying on a centerline that may or may not be accurate (as was the case with some of their previous skis). The instructions could use some improvement (namely removal of the arrow and line, the text is all that's needed).

That being said, both of you definitely fucked up your mount beyond hope. I'll be over soon to collect the skis for disposal, they're unusable.

Scroll up to post #149 in this thread for mount points, or click this link:

https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/...88#post5490388

... Thom

Figure best to tag this onto this thread...
Background... So for late spring/early summer climb-ski missions, I've been using blizzard zero g 85s, and they have been surprisingly good - obviously very light, jump turn great, ski hard snow and corn great... but inevitably you can't time consistent snow on a 3k+ descent and you have some funky heavy snow that they struggle in. So this has me thinking on adding to (or replacing the zero g) with a down ski that's pretty short and light but be more conditions versatile. (One more piece of context - my winter BC ski is a 190 4frnt raven which I like alot, although very different.)
So this got me looking at the Down options, since these appear to be addressed at my kinda unique niche...
- First, I'm intrigued by a short (177) Lowdown 102 since I really dig long radius skis (4frnt's) and think this could be a light couloir ski that I can determine the turn radius on, and not get hooked up. But... reading the reviews, it sounds like the tail is super flat and firm and maybe this thing is a wolf in sheeps clothes (in the tail in particular)
- So then the Lowdown 90 gets much better reviews here, but would it be a more conditions versatile Zero G (ie, light and quick but much less hooky and more rocker to allow to throw around more)? How different is it really from the 102 version?
- And last, there's the Countdown 104L which people really really love. It's getting heavier and seems more daily driver-like, but could I get it short (181) and use it as a couloir ski? Is it stiff enough?
- And then last-last, the Down rec mount points seem pretty traditional (10-11) and I generally prefer forward. I'll search around more here, but have people been ok going say 2-3 forward on these?
In a nutshell, I guess I'm considering adding/replacing with a new ski that = pretty light for skinning and on pack, therefore will be on short end vs my normal skis, strong enough and with some camber and sidecut for steep and hard conditions, but with some more width and rocker to be more versatile in heavier/deeper/crustier snow (less locked in or hooky). I feel these Downs are kind of unique in these attributes. But still not sure which of the 3 best fits the bill.
Thx for any insights!

the 102 comes in a 179 iirc and it’s definitely something you have to handle, not easy going. an acquired taste, but it would be great for what you’re talking about. the 90 is awesome too, much more manageable, and is probably more of a reasonable step from your 0Gs in the direction you’re looking. the 104 is goldilocks, but more soft snow biased.

if I were buying again today for this spot I’d take the 102 but it’s not a shape or radius that vibes with everyone. the 90 is the conservative choice (and it skis great for a ski that size), the 104 is heavier and wider and accordingly it skis better.

they’re all plenty stiff and plenty capable in nasty snow IME. you can’t go wrong with any of these shapes or layups really, and a 181 104L would be a decision you could have zero doubts about.

I definitely preferred being a little forward of the line on all of mine