4FRNT Renegade ~ Hand built in SLC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NWSkier

For those of you who ski this ski a lot what other skis do you use that you can transition to and from w/o too much trouble?
I know someone said somewhere that they own and don't recommend billy goats because it took a different style and they went over the handle bars the first time they go back to the Rens after skiing the BGs.

---

'Twas me who said that, and I stand by the comment. But there are a couple subtleties in that comment you missed:

It's not that I "don't recommend Billy Goats." In fact, I got rid of my Rens and kept the BGs when I moved to Baltimore. In particular, I was responding to a poster who wanted to ski the BG inbounds and the Ren for touring. You just don't get that many runs in the bc, and I personally wouldn't feel confident standing at the top of a big face with the Rens on my feet coming from many days on the BG inbounds. YMMV. I'd rather ski the Rens inbounds and tour on carbon Kusalas, if I were going that route. The Ren just requires you to be on the balls of your feet, while (my pair of) BGs require a forward, driving stance. IME, the two don't play well together. But there are times on the BGs that I wish I had the Rens, and vice versa and I could certainly see owning both if I was still skiing 60-80+ days a year.

One more thing: I just came to understand that my BGs flex ~20% stiffer than stock and are nontrivially more "planky" in feel, so maybe it won't be as big of an issue on the stock BG. The GPO is retardedly easy to ski by comparison—it's fine with a neutral stance. I'd guess transitioning between the Ren and GPO is fine (as was confirmed above).

What specifically do you want this other ski for? Narrower/more versatile? Lighter for touring?

I feel like I know my 196 crows now. Man, they redefine stability at speed for me. And they can eat up a big farkin mogul or two at speed without hurting too much. And then they magically have pretty damn good (and very consistent) edge hold on groomed. And yet somehow with heavy ass binders and the length, they are not unmanageable when you need to ski a mogul run in a usual everyday style (not zippering).

This is definitely the best ski I've ever had for Kicking Horse, where you need to do highly variable 4k runs at least every other run. Charge some sharky waters covered in just enough pow to glide in a straight line off the headwalls, eat some mogul where people traverse onto the fan from some easier run, shut er down for some long mogul pitches on the ski out (or don't), then GS the shit out of some groomers. Fun on everything.

Where can I get some info on taking care of the wood sidewalls? Snow's getting a touch wet, will have rain at base before long. A bit worried at the soak I see in them after a day.

^^Just be sure you dry them out at night. Maybe someone has more specific advice, but I skied mine in wet Cascadia snow for 2 seasons with no issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

^^Just be sure you dry them out at night. Maybe someone has more specific advice, but I skied mine in wet Cascadia snow for 2 seasons with no issues.

---

That's what I've been doing, but I'm pretty big on leaving the skis in the car at night. Is there any treatment I could use so they are less prone to soak?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

^^Just be sure you dry them out at night. Maybe someone has more specific advice, but I skied mine in wet Cascadia snow for 2 seasons with no issues.

---

This. I think 4frnt said somewhere (here or out on the interwebs?) just to make sure they have a chance to dry out overnight (i.e. don't leave them in the truck). Finishing up 4 seasons on an OG pair, more than one of those seasons with these as my only ski, and I've never done anything special with them, I just make sure they don't stay out in the car.

I've got to be closing in on 150+ days on these. I've never spent that kind of time on a single ski before. Time to retire them next year, I think - though not due to any durability issues. They still even look good....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by angrysasquatch

That's what I've been doing, but I'm pretty big on leaving the skis in the car at night. Is there any treatment I could use so they are less prone to soak?

---

The problem with treating them is that you run just as good a chance of locking moisture in as locking moisture out. Bring them in at night, you lazy sod.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

I just came to understand that my BGs flex ~20% stiffer than stock and are nontrivially more "planky" in feel, so maybe it won't be as big of an issue on the stock BG.

---

The stock BG is pretty damn easy to ski too. (Finally got on them today.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shroom

The stock BG is pretty damn easy to ski too. (Finally got on them today.)

---

Good to know. I'll have to hop on chick's pair next season and see how different they are.

I guess I should clarify my thoughts a bit though: it's not so much about "easier" or "harder" as it is about how much a ski requires you to adopt a particular stance, and how well those stances mesh. The Ren really does require a neutral stance—try to drive the tips hard, and they get pretty pissy. My pair of BGs requires a forward stance—try to drive them from neutral, and they'll be sluggish and annoyed. I didn't even really like my BGs all that much until I spent loads of time trying to get my hands up and really work on driving my tips. Anyway, I think this is maybe more of an issue with my particular pair so I'll shut up about it. Feel a little bit silly that I spent like 2 years spewing about that ski only to find that my pair is considerably stiffer than stock and that my comments didn't really apply.

My ren complement is named Cochise.

+1 for Ren/Cochise

Ren/Zealot/Vicik/RC112/RPC112/Automatic

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

'Twas me who said that, and I stand by the comment. But there are a couple subtleties in that comment you missed:

It's not that I "don't recommend Billy Goats." In fact, I got rid of my Rens and kept the BGs when I moved to Baltimore. In particular, I was responding to a poster who wanted to ski the BG inbounds and the Ren for touring. You just don't get that many runs in the bc, and I personally wouldn't feel confident standing at the top of a big face with the Rens on my feet coming from many days on the BG inbounds. YMMV. I'd rather ski the Rens inbounds and tour on carbon Kusalas, if I were going that route. The Ren just requires you to be on the balls of your feet, while (my pair of) BGs require a forward, driving stance. IME, the two don't play well together. But there are times on the BGs that I wish I had the Rens, and vice versa and I could certainly see owning both if I was still skiing 60-80+ days a year.

One more thing: I just came to understand that my BGs flex ~20% stiffer than stock and are nontrivially more "planky" in feel, so maybe it won't be as big of an issue on the stock BG. The GPO is retardedly easy to ski by comparison—it's fine with a neutral stance. I'd guess transitioning between the Ren and GPO is fine (as was confirmed above).

What specifically do you want this other ski for? Narrower/more versatile? Lighter for touring?

---

I know what you meant by not recommending both at the same time. Thanks for the input. I'd like a "point and plow" type ski for really heavy chopped up snow in the PNW the Rens are the most stable ski that is also fun and in powder that starts to get chopped up they're good but when the sun beats down on the snow and it gets heavy and chopped I want something w/ camber under foot and it the tail

Do you find the GPOs are better skied centered like the Rens or driving the tips?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judo Chop!

+1 for Ren/Cochise

---

+2

345678

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldSchool1080s

Ren/Zealot/Vicik/RC112/RPC112/Automatic

---

H8u and your retardedly hudge quiver :the_finge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NWSkier

Do you find the GPOs are better skied centered like the Rens or driving the tips?

---

The GPO def skis with a more centered stance unlike the Billy, which you drive the shit out of... The Billy is easy to ski, but the GPO is stupid easy...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheFugitive

H8u and your retardedly hudge quiver :the_finge

---

His 842 other skis are on teh KSLs:fmicon:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheFugitive

H8u and your retardedly hudge quiver :the_finge

---

Haha, I still don't know how I ended unloading those BGs to you. Loved those damn things. Plus you get to ski the whole damn quiver since you have a 315mm sole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldSchool1080s

Haha, I still don't know how I ended unloading those BGs to you. Loved those damn things. Plus you get to ski the whole damn quiver since you have a 315mm sole.

---

Its cause I'm a skilled buyer and talked you into the sale. Plus I think quiver overlap is an understatement when it comes to your ski problem errrrr I mean addiction ahhhhh I mean collection. Really though its most likely your just super rad and the stoke you have provided me will come back to you 10x.

/end thread drift\ rens are rad and all that. If os1080s let's me hop one of his sets of rens I am sure I will not be able to live without them. Which is why I must resist!!!!

Sent from my MB886 using TGR Forums

whos got a pair local to SLC that they'd let me spin around a few days on? I need to experience the "hype" of this ski....

BSL is 332MM....28.5 cochise.

Hit me up with a PM if ya got's something you wouldnt mind letting me test out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skidog

whos got a pair local to SLC that they'd let me spin around a few days on? I need to experience the "hype" of this ski....

BSL is 332MM....28.5 cochise.

Hit me up with a PM if ya got's something you wouldnt mind letting me test out.

---

Just drop by the 4FRNT office, we have demo pairs mounted with Adrenaline's. 25 bucks a day and that goes towards purchase.

2900 S West temple. Here 9-5ish.

PSA-

360$ for 186s at backc0untry.com

http://www.backcountry.com/4frnt-ski...NDYXQ1MTAwMDA0

Question re: mount position... I picked up some 196's in gear swap. Mounted once at 317 at the mid recommended (92 from tail?).

My bsl is 295, so I figure I'll go forward or back 1cm. I'm 5'9", 165 or so. Which way do I go? My 186 are 87,5-ish, and I like them there.... I figured forward made sense, but then I read something about going forwards if you're big, which might imply backwards if you aren't.

Thoughts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mustonen

... then I read something about going forwards if you're big, which might imply backwards if you aren't.

---

Moving a mount fore or aft because of your size doesn't really make sense to me. imo, it's all about maneuverability (fore) vs. stability (aft).

Since you ride the 186s already, and like your mount, I'd trust your own instincts on this one and not listen to anyone else who doesn't have extensive experience on both lengths. (so take my comment with a grain of salt, too.)

I love my 186 mount and if I got a 196, for more stability and bigger lines, I'd either mount center or back to put/keep me on my shins. Forward seems like it would just overlap the quiver too much and be too pivoty for a ski whose role is stability contrasting your 186's maneuverability.

Fair comment.

As much as anything, I've been wondering how the 196 would ski ever since it was announced. The 186 is almost too pivoty, and tends to buck a bit at speed in heavy crud. I'll have to measure when I get them and see where those rear holes would actually put me.

These may or may not replace my 186 for everything but early/sketch season and/or trees, so I do want the mount to be versatile... Might just have to bite the bullet and get it as close to the middle reco as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OldSchool1080s

Ren/Zealot/Vicik/RC112/RPC112/Automatic

---

186Ren/196Ren/Bibby/Wrenegade/XXL/Vicik/Tahoes

:D

I can play!

Spatulas/Kusalas/Billygoats/Wrenegades/PowPlus/Head103/Down4/skinnyshit

Just skied my new 186's for the first time past weekend, they're FRIGGIN' AWESOME. I demoed them last year and wasn't too impressed, but i think the mount was too much rearward. Pulled the trigger on a good deal and mounted them at 87cm from the tail: they feel like my 186 ehp's turned up to 11! Moreover, they are ridicilously predictable in all conditions thanks to the full-rocker/minimal sidecut/stiffness combo.

Just to clarify you demoed, didn't like and then bought anyway?

Either way your going to love them especially once you really get used to them.

I demoed them, thought they were too much work, but did appreciate their stability and stiffness. Instead I bought a pair of (non TBT) Elan Boomerangs to replace my aging EHPs. I overall like the boomerangs, but they just feel a bit to soft in comparison to my EHPs, so when I saw a good deal on the Rens I jumped on it to also have a more stable ski.
However, after skiing them with my own mount i just love them overall and they feel way more nimble than when I demoed while still providing excellent stability (I'm guessing the boomerangs will not be seeing to much action anymore...).

So stoked to ski them again next season!!!

Just reread the entire thread.

I'll mount them at 87.256764577753359095423684289427cm straight pull from the tail.

;)

^^I actually read your full post, but didn't have time to respond. Go 87 from the tail.

...then buy some 191 Billy Goats. :wink:

I'm bummed I got rid of my Rens, but not quite enough to justify buying them again for how much I ski these days...even for the $285 that bc.com is blowing them out. BGs still rocking my world. Only time I really miss the Rens is treed rolling terrain. So fun and quick side-to-side!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

^^I actually read your full post, but didn't have time to respond. Go 87 from the tail.

...then buy some 191 Billy Goats. :wink:

I'm bummed I got rid of my Rens, but not quite enough to justify buying them again for how much I ski these days...even for the $285 that bc.com is blowing them out. BGs still rocking my world. Only time I really miss the Rens is treed rolling terrain. So fun and quick side-to-side!

---

The easiest solution to that is just to ski more.

Thanks avugeek.

It was good rereading this thread...All stoked for winter.

I have the 196 Rens with STH 16s, great ski for Jackson Hole Mountain Resort & the surrounding slackcountry.

If you want touring, I would go with the 187. Kind of hard to kick turn on a 196. However, I do like the 196 Renegade for charging around Teton Village & hiking the Teton Pass Mt. Glory bootpack.

I tour with some 188 CRJs, but if I were ever to get another Dynafit touring, I would go with a 187 Ren or Hoji if the right deal presented itself. Right now, the six or seven skis I have is enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by auvgeek

^^I actually read your full post, but didn't have time to respond. Go 87 from the tail.

...then buy some 191 Billy Goats. :wink:

I'm bummed I got rid of my Rens, but not quite enough to justify buying them again for how much I ski these days...even for the $285 that bc.com is blowing them out. BGs still rocking my world. Only time I really miss the Rens is treed rolling terrain. So fun and quick side-to-side!

---

Is that 87 straight pull or along the base of the ski?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shafty85

Is that 87 straight pull or along the base of the ski?

---

The ski is flat in the rear; 87 is 87 no matter how you slice it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Altaholic

I have the 196 Rens with STH 16s, great ski for Jackson Hole Mountain Resort & the surrounding slackcountry.

If you want touring, I would go with the 187. Kind of hard to kick turn on a 196. However, I do like the 196 Renegade for charging around Teton Village & hiking the Teton Pass Mt. Glory bootpack.

I tour with some 188 CRJs, but if I were ever to get another Dynafit touring, I would go with a 187 Ren or Hoji if the right deal presented itself. Right now, the six or seven skis I have is enough.

---

Why not go with PM Gear Kusalas? Touring version of the Renegade... (and skis even better in the stiff flex).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobcat Sig

The ski is flat in the rear; 87 is 87 no matter how you slice it.

---

Doesn't the ski have continuous rocker? This would seem to indicate the tail isn't flat, to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shafty85

Doesn't the ski have continuous rocker? This would seem to indicate the tail isn't flat, to me.

---

Yes. When you get your pair; you'll know I mean. The tails are flat. And you don't need to worry about measuring from the bottom. A mm in difference will not matter.

87 - measure it, mark it, drill it, mount it.

Edit: Here's a shot of a pair I ended up buying. The rocker is so subtle that it might as well be flat.

http://i.imgur.com/k44Td.png