Where does one post stupid Noob Jong questions asking why everyone trashes the PR?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Highway Star

Know how they're easy to turn? Yeah? That's because they're way too fucking short for you.

---

We all bow to your Powder Plus shredding, 18 din, super awesome race binder riding radness....

Do feel the need to prove how cool you are by posting shit like this, continually talking about your race binders and your super stiff fatties that you rip all over the EC? Everyone skis differently and not everyone is the uber ripper that you are. If you can't handle big skis, skiing on them is not all that much fun. If he likes to turn a lot, who gives a shit.

Just so you know, I'm 6'2", 180 and for a couple days, I skied some 178 Little Big Fats. Fuck, I'm a giant weeny.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crashnburn'd

:fmicon:

---

thats better.

I've always thought the Pockets were a "fun" ski, especially when new. Very light-feeling as well. I played with the demo tracks and preferred the 185 mounted -1.5 cm.

Pockets are relatively soft, have a deep sidecut (~17m @ 175cm), and moderate torsional stiffness. For a lot of people, especially those without a race background or don't ski that fast, its an excellent combination; the skier isn't required to "drive" the ski to get good performance. (in fact, doing so often overpowers the flex). Skiers with powerful technique will report this ski as feeling too soft.

As has been said, the foam core will break down and lose camber/responsiveness over time. However, if you're skiing 10-15 days a year, you probably have a good 3 seasons before they're beat. That's an acceptable life span for a lot of skiers.

I all boils down to feel. Ski what you like; the ski is still a tool and the skier still needs the technique.

I wasn't a big fan of the Metron - I thought it had a little too much shape, and the binding system felt heavy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Highway Star

Well sue me. I'm in a bad mood, and this guy was asking for it - it is a jong question. If he wanted his ego protected, he should have posted over at epicski and they would have told him that 175's are perfectly fine for a 200 lb guy. I'm sure he can take it.

As for me and my radness, well, fuck you. It took me a long time to figure out that race binding WORK. I'm trying to save people from having to figure it themselves - that race stock bindings are stiffer, have better retention, and last MUCH longer, regardless of your ability level. If you weigh over 150 lb, ski somewhat agressively, and can spend $200 on new bindings - **BUY RACE STOCK BINDINGS**.

Last time I checked, short skis suck.....has that changed? Skiing short floppy easy turning skis is a great way to limit your ablity and progression....are you advocating that?

---

hey bostonboy.......come on out west and ski 35-40,000vert a day with us on your super stiff stuff.......then go run your mouth! the correct equiptment makes skiing fun. You may look bad ass in the lift line, but it's no fun to struggle out there on the mountain. Bad mood or not, you should treat people with respect, especially when the man asked for YOUR advice, out of respect!

as for the question. StoneCold for where you live, if the PR is fun, you should by it. I too, would suggest stepping it up to 185cm

Thanks Lloyd, I live in NY, so you said it much better than me.

Mr. SuperStar - I'm not advocating anything other than having fun while you're skiing. Simply telling the guy to try some 185's or some other ski would have been enough. The shortest (non-park) ski I own is a 190 Gotama, numerically shortest is a 188 g41. Long vs. short... You decide what I prefer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KANUTTEN

Fact: Chris Davenport was on regular PR's for almost 50% of the days last year or year before that. That is according to my recollection of himself writing on some ski website a while ago (i.e not 100% certain fact, but close). To me that means that the ski should be enough for a lot of people a lot of the time. The biggest disadvantage is durability in terms of flex; they are good for a short season.

---

umm, sounds like salomon tells him to say that.
i see him rippin around and every time he's cut me off i've seen the ak rocket swallows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Highway Star

:rolleyes:

Any time, motherfucker.

---

you missed the point, it was about respect!

also, cold, what shop you work at? if you work for the aspen ski co, then don't just try skis at your shop, try at all the ski co shops, plenty of selection if you don't mind banged up top sheets and crappy bindings. i'd say you wouldn't even need your own skis for a while if thats the case.
i'd say the best all around ski is a quiver.

I'm 5'11", 180 and generally like soft skis. And short skis. And stiff skis. Buy what feels right for you, but don't be afraid to try everything. Also, foam cores break down faster, so keep that in mind for your purchase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Highway Star

Well then how am I dickswinging? I ski on a range from 175cm to 218cm...nowhere did I say he needed a pair of 201cm stocklis or (insert name of burliest ski you can think of)'s. I told him to grow a pair and buy some skis apropriate to his size....did you read my post?

---

I told you how you were dickswinging....did you not read my post or just not comprehend?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crashnburn'd

Do feel the need to prove how cool you are by posting shit like this, continually talking about your race binders and your super stiff fatties that you rip all over the EC?

---

I'm done now. Have a good winter.

If you listen to anybodies advise listen to this guy over all others 10 to 1.
The only thing I can add is my wife likes her 175 PRs, 5-8" ~ 145lbs on powder days / soft snow days but puts on her Head Super cross Ti on anything hard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mechmaster

I've always thought the Pockets were a "fun" ski, especially when new. Very light-feeling as well. I played with the demo tracks and preferred the 185 mounted -1.5 cm.

Pockets are relatively soft, have a deep sidecut (~17m @ 175cm), and moderate torsional stiffness. For a lot of people, especially those without a race background or don't ski that fast, its an excellent combination; the skier isn't required to "drive" the ski to get good performance. (in fact, doing so often overpowers the flex). Skiers with powerful technique will report this ski as feeling too soft.

As has been said, the foam core will break down and lose camber/responsiveness over time. However, if you're skiing 10-15 days a year, you probably have a good 3 seasons before they're beat. That's an acceptable life span for a lot of skiers.

I all boils down to feel. Ski what you like; the ski is still a tool and the skier still needs the technique.

I wasn't a big fan of the Metron - I thought it had a little too much shape, and the binding system felt heavy.

---

Bottom line is PR's/Guns are fun ass skis. Not tooting my own horn, but I do remember Tyrone and Arty being amazed that I skied the way I do on them. The PRs' bad rep on this board precedes the actual sickness that is that ski. They are my everyday ski: park, pipe, moguls, slush, crud, groomers, pow, they're the only skis I've ever skied on that truly didn't excel in any one thing but skied everything amazingly.
Put it this way, S. Gaffney ain't sponsored, and I see him on PR's more than any other ski in his quiver.

opening day maddness thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoelaces

heh, I got a dose of that followin Alka around Squaw last last Spring....just when I thought I was really movin, I see this black dot hundreds of yards below me moving at the speed of light. Still can't believe you ski PR's like that, 'cause they're all like soft and stuff and aren't suppossed to go that fast

---

Note: I'm not defending soley because I ride for them, I defend them cause they're sick skis and it seems like on this board that jumping on the bandwagon of "PR's are lame" is the thing to do.

Alkasquawlik,

Just curious, how many days do you expect to get out of a pair of PRs?

With my xscream series (straight prolinks) and yellow AK Rocket, both skis seem to really soften up with a relatively low day count. ~60 on xscream series and about ~25 on the AK Rockets.

I demoed the PR and liked them, but wonder how the foam core would hold up.

"Originally Posted by Highway Star
Know how they're easy to turn? Yeah? That's because they're way too fucking short for you.


We all bow to your Powder Plus shredding, 18 din, super awesome race binder riding radness....

Just so you know, I'm 6'2", 180 and for a couple days, I skied some 178 Little Big Fats. Fuck, I'm a giant weeny."

Have to say, I agree with Hwy* here. A 175 PR is very small for a 200lb guy!!!! Seriously. I agree it would severley limit progression and he would probably find himself buying a new pair mid season. Also 200lbs will PUNISH the PRs. I give them 10 days until the camber is gone and he has some mini spatulas. The Little Big Fats you're talking about hold their shape a LOT longer so there's a big difference there, and an extra 20lbs. The massive TT on the PR will make a 175 feel about 170 too. I think it's crazy that Stonecold likes them at this size, but if he does that's fine. i do agree with you there Crash, who gives a shit indeed. I'm just shocked. Whether Hwy* said it well or not is beside the point, his suggestions where pretty viable. A 184 777 and a 186iM88 are also pretty small for 20lbs, but OK. Both are soft and fun, nothing like a Powder PLus. I'd actually recommend a 192 777. I rode it a long time at 175lbs and it felt short to me (largely because I'm extra super gnar). I admitted before that the PR is the worst ski I've been on, but it works for some so I don't care and don't "diss" them. I'd advise against them from a quality standpoint though as they are made in a cut rate manner. Better getting some slightly more durable scratches (they have some wood, a pre built camber and stronger sidewall) at almost the same shape. I find them an extremely fun (if non durable) ski. Hope that helped, I'm just someone that had a lot of friends sell there PRs in frustration, and saw other friends stagnate (I know Micky D, et al aren't stagnant....).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Highway Star

:rolleyes:

Any time, motherfucker.

---

No worries guys, empty barrels make the loudest noises when disturbed.

Give good advice, respectfully...

Look at MD9 too, he is a PR man and I have seen some cool shit from him and those skis.


Aqua, did not know you were a PR guy too. That is two guys that rip shit up on these sticks.

QUOTE=col_surfer]No worries guys, empty barrels make the loudest noises when disturbed.

Give good advice, respectfully...[/QUOTE]


I wouldn't ski with Highway Star if he paid me! I think I've seen him before at about 4pm at the bar, ski boots on, tellin lies!

I'll be he can't find binders for these Nordicas :rollin
http://www.freshathighlandfarms.com/...age_cheese.gif[

glad to see a good amount of debate on the PRs. my original question as to why everyone trashes the PR has certainly been answered. i see lots of good feedback, so thanks to everyone who posted. it has been an interesting read to say the least. i'm glad some of the PR supporters came out of the closet. and i'm glad the PR haters explained why they hated them. VERY informative.

Quote:

---

Are you only skiing Highlands or will you be skiing Aspen Mtn. too?

Do you tune for D&E?

---

I will mainly be skiing Highlands and Snowmass. I didn't actually tune for D&E, but I transfered the equipment from the tune shop to various locations.

Quote:

---

also, cold, what shop you work at? if you work for the aspen ski co, then don't just try skis at your shop, try at all the ski co shops, plenty of selection if you don't mind banged up top sheets and crappy bindings. i'd say you wouldn't even need your own skis for a while if thats the case.
i'd say the best all around ski is a quiver.

---

Certainly did work for ASC, and noticed they don't have a huge choice of different brands. Met a guy from Incline and he gave me his card and said come out and try some stuff. So that's what I'll do.

As it is now, I will try to demo as many different skis as possible. If I can finagle having a huge quiver via demoing all season, I will. If I find a ski that I can't live without, I'll pull the trigger and make a purchase.

Thanks again fellas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StoneCold

I will mainly be skiing Highlands and Snowmass. I didn't actually tune for D&E, but I transfered the equipment from the tune shop to various locations.

---

If you're mainly skiing Highlands you could probably get away with PR's as your only ski. The low skier density means that the front doesn't get hard as fast as Aspen Mountain and when it does, you can just hike the bowl and its always soft somewhere back there. The lite weight will be nice for the hike.

If you were working the shop in town, you will eventually end up skiing Aspen frequently. It's just so easy to jump on the Gondi and you get more vert in an hour than you would hiking the bowl all day. But Aspen can get hard and the PR's aren't so good for that. AX4, 8800 or IM88 would be much better choices for railing on Aspen Mountain and would get the job done at Highlands as well.

If you can get away with demoing all year, go for it!

I use PRs as my AT rig, and love 'em. They are light weight for skinning/touring, and w/me being only 5'8 and 160lbs, they ski great in the back country w/fritchis and deanlis driving them. I wouldn't ski them as my alpine rig, but for BC, they are a super sweet set-up (for me).

I'm a fat bastard 230 5'11" and love PRs. Prolly too much of a puzzy for anything tougher than the noodles.

But, like others have said, if you enjoy them go out and get them. They make me a better skier and I enjoy myself when on them (except trying to keep up with Endless on poorly groomed icy runs on one of his speed gun days) in almost all conditions.

If you like the PR feel but want something a bit stiffer, try the Nordica Beast 92TT/12TT (same ski). It's cheap on ebay. It has almost exactly the same dimensions and a similar feel, but they're somewhat stiffer and with a wood core, so they'll last longer.

They are vulnerable to edge compressions, though, so be careful in rock season.

AN UPDATE: People recommended I try as many different skis as possible.

1. First few days of the year skied Salomon Scream 10 Xtra Hots and enjoyed them. They held up well to the crud, but I felt like I wanted something fatter. Used 3 days.

2. Then used a pair of '06 Salomon 1080 Guns and enjoyed them, as I thought I would, because I liked the Blue Noodle, which is why this post first got started. Easy to turn, blah blah blah. Used 6 days.

3. '06 K2 Apache Outlaw. This ski was the tits. I had skied an older apache last year (chief?) and was expecting the Outlaw to be just as heavy. But it wasn't. It ripped. It turned fast. Solid at my top speed, yet turned fast on the steeps. Used 3 days.

4. '02? Atomic Beta ride 10EX with old Diamir bindings. "test drove" this set up as I was going to buy it from someone. Actually really enjoyed the skis. Floated through the powder. Easy to turn. Didn't really have any complaints.

I will try to demo some more things, but find myself going back to the K2s whenever possible. Awesome ski.

Have not had a chance to try any Volkls yet. Although I've heard good things about the Unlimited.

i only have three days on my atomic 185 EX's. one day was on hard pack and the other two was at jay in 18-20 inda glades. im about 180 and 6'. the skis skied really well in both conditions. i had no problems in tight trees or hard snow. they turn incredibly easy...of course i am old schooler skiing the new turn...shit, everything easier from that perspective!

also, being an old salomon binder fan...the new (to me) atomic binders hold incredibly well. no pre-release out of the heel so far.