Printable View
If the best you have is a joke line out of a review I did, and where I did it(Sorry i don't schedule where demo's occur). Then you're going to have to try harder than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane1
But you on the other hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joo71...=share&index=6
If you don't pizza when you should have french fried, you're going to have a bad day.
Rad music bro.
Video removed by user?!? Fuckin A I was looking forward to watching Dane get rad.
Come to Crystal.
LOLOLOLOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by wildmanwillie
Ok guys, I come here to see if your wisdom can help me.
I'm demoing the 185 BD AMPerage. How would it compare to a 182 Med GPO? Can't demo them, but they are tempting me... :rolleyes2
That's not much of a question. GPO every time. Much more versatile. Turn? Check. Straight? Check. Slarve? Check. Carve? Check.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skaramanga
The Amperage is a good ski. They actually ski pretty similarly. GPO holds an edge better but gives up nothing in soft snow. But most importantly, the GPO is FAR more durable. Plus, the GPO is built in the US by skiers, instead of in China.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skaramanga
My buddy had the Amperage setup for tele. Skied them maybe 25 times. The camber in one ski was completely gone (flat) after that. I've been skiing my 187 GPOs on the backside of Disco all season, still no core shots, or edge damage. Enough said. The Amperage skis very similar to the JJs, I thought a bit softer. A fun ski but the GPO is much more versatile. Get a med + flex for a nice around ski. Med/stiff, or stiff for some real charging. Also I would really consider the 187. Super nimble ski. I'm looking for a pair of 192sQuote:
Originally Posted by Skaramanga
Thanks for the answers. I guess the 182 med+ flex would be good for me. I am a very lightweight skier, and by no means a charger.
I mounted my 182 UL setup on the dimple. Will let everyone know how it feels on the up and down next week...
Can anyone compare the GPO to the Bluehouse Precinct? They look real similar on paper. I'm sure the construction quality is probably superior on the GPO but I've been real happy with my current quiver of Bluehouse skis (Shoots, Maven, Maestro). I was considering picking up a pair of Precincts but it looks like the GPO can be had for just $100 more so seems like probably the way to go. Thoughts?
looking forward to hearing your impressions.Quote:
Originally Posted by syoung
Just got back from a yurt trip using my 177 protests at 8.8 lbs.
I've got my own wishes for a lightweight praxis UL core powslayer...
I haven't tried either ski but I will go on record that the build quality of Bluehouse is excellent.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldMil
I trashed my Maestros before they were stolen and they were holding up great with less damage that I would have expected.
Praxis are obviously awesome build as well.
Sent from my SGH-I717D using TGR Forums
I borrowed a pair of these guys with some demo bindings on them so I got to screw around with mount points just a tad. They were 187 medium-stiff carbon layups. These skis are pretty friggin dialed feeling. Sidecut/shape aside, the flex pattern is just fuggin DIALED. I haven't said that about a pair of skis since I got some of the old original surfboard dynastar legend LPs. Totally different ski obviously but in each of their elements, just really tuned feeling.
I got a day skiing off a snowmobile on some pillows and a few mellow tree runs in some dense 'fell wet' pow and then a day at a resort skiing some some total shit snow that had been beat by the sun and rain the day before.
Nothing new to add that hasn't been said but the versatility of these things is nuts. I'm used to getting skis from praxis and then moving the mount back (sorry phiberA: you're missing out if you just blindly trust all mount points with all binders with all boots in all regions of varying snow) so like always these seemed too far forward just looking at where my boot ended up. Mounted on the dot, I fought them a bit on the bouncy pillows in sticky snow and skied like a backseat tool but then just learned to trust they wouldn't auger the tips in. They didn't and felt really good on landings. Mounted on the dimple they pivoted like a champ trying to move quickly in tight trees. Really natural feeling, not unlike a full rocker straight ski.
I took them to the resort the next day, skied them on some heated, then refreezing crusty sticky bullshit snow and they worked as well as anything could (that's a good thing, not a 'meh' like it sounds). I moved the mount point back to roughly -1 just due to an overwhelming feeling that they'd be dragging the tips in blower. There hasn't been any blower in Tahoe in over a year but I just wanted to see how they'd handle everything else if one were to do such a thing. It definitely changed the way the ski rode (like all mount changes on every ski ever built). It certainly wanted more shin drive....not huge but very noticeable. It actually made me think I'd want to detune the tips a little more if I were to mount a pair here. They engage like captain piccard always envisioned engaging. They just lock.
If I had to own one pair of skis this one is near the top of the list. I'm not planning on doing that though (my protests, legend lps and wootest 2.0s won't be going anywhere). But these things can rail out of runouts surprisingly well for something with a turn radius in the mid-20s on shit snow. I tend to dig skis in the upper 20s-mid 30s but I was pleasantly surprised. I'll be getting a pair and putting some CAST plates on them when I do. They're not as loose feeling as the 'something-test' skis that praxis makes but they don't seem to suck anywhere. I'll still be waffling between mount points because I still have no idea how they'll drag or not drag in cold pow but I'll probably just mount on the dimple and then move them back if they annoy me. But whyturn and the colorful Italians' words seem to speak for me so far. I'm looking forward to standard layup/glass version in these for next season.
Please pardon the shameless plug, I'm selling a pair of 187s in Gear Swap.
That's not a shameless plug.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dromond
This is a shameless plug:
http://cdn.buzznet.com/assets/users1...7874303653.jpg
[and a nice picture of kidwoo as well, in his best vest]
Grabbed the last available pair of the new ultralight paulownia MAP core 187 w glass , according to Keith these are med/stiff but on the medium side of the range. Apparently ended up at 8 lbs 10oz for the pair. Should have them and get them mounted this weekend. Weight in glass layup is pretty impressive. I'm curious to see how these behave in chop as compared to the other lightweight similar dim skis I've tried this year (2014 super 7 air tip thingy) since the weights are similar but these should be considerable stiffer still than the Rossi. I wanted something a bit more soft biased than a true charger , aka an all mountain able powder ski, so I think the lightweight build will be pretty sweet.
Oh btw I talked to Keith about my size and style (6ft 1 207, no flippy spinny stuff. Currently have a gen 1 protest mounted at -8 from center) and he recommended mounting back 1cm.
Damn that's a nice weight. I'd like to hear how they ski compared to a reg cored glass gpo. Especially in funky conditions(crust, crud, chop, boiler plate). Curious to know how much the weight , or lack of, effects the dampness. Prob be my next touring ski regardless. Just which layup for use. Maybe just the glass paulownia MAP w some beasts for dbl duty.
Keith skied with a single carbon and a single glass with one another and barely felt any difference in all conditions.
I have a 192 carbon in hd if anyone is interested. The rocker and fwd mount make them ski short IMO
I've had the 187 in both the glass, and carbon layup. For touring I would go carbon all the way. Light, super fun ski in soft snow. Lots of pop. For area skiing glass layup. Damper. It's not that the carbons get deflected all over the place in funky conditions. (they do get deflected a little bit) With the carbons, when it firms up everything is transmitted from the skis into your boots to your legs. There's a post on this tread that speaks to that in some depth.Quote:
Originally Posted by grinch
I so know what you mean when you say everything is transmitted to your legs. I was skiing the 191 BG tour ysdy at Mammoth and I was loving them on soft snow and off piste, but every time I had to ski down the groomers to get to the lift i would start to feel what you are saying in my legs. Eventually my legs were in so much pain that I couldn't ski anymore by 2pm.. How is the medium + flex of the GPO ultralight compared to that of the 187 glass? Is it softer?.. The BG tour is def softer than the reg BG but it's still somewhat stableQuote:
Originally Posted by racesla
Sent from my SM-N900T using TGR Forums
According to Keith the flex ratings are the same between the lay-ups. As in; they flex the same, but will behave differently. I ended up going with a 187 med+ standard gpo, wanted it to be easy and fun in tight trees etc., but if I were to buy another pair I'd go med/stiff for sure. The GPO is very easy to ski as it is, skis pretty short, and the shovels on my med+ are a bit too soft for my liking. For touring this shouldn't matter though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dkla52
For reference, I'm 190cm/84kg, very average skier. Skis with power rather than finesse. Might be why I find the shovels a bit soft.
Oh, I almost forgot to add that I have a pair of 191 bg tours. I'd say they flex a tiny bit stiffer than my gpos, and that's even though the gpos are stiffened by the dukes.
The bgTs float better, the gpos ski groomers a million times better and are more forgiving overall. The gpos are more poppy as well. I like both for what I use them for.
Thanks. Yes, that's my feelings as well. Love my bc's in snow but took them to the hill on a refrozen day and noticed the deflection. My protests(glass) are super damp inspite of their lightish weight(relative to other skis this width). I know they're totally different skis but I suspected that was the case. I was actually wondering the differences in the new core(non carbon) in comparison to original current core(non carbon). If the new paulownia core still retains a lot of that dampness, with the substantial weight loss, I figured skip the carbon and put a beast setup on them and use for touring and on the hillQuote:
Originally Posted by racesla
Quote:
Originally Posted by grinch
Couldn't agree more on the carbon thing. I have a pair of medium/stiff GPOs in 182 with the carbon/glass layup. Last Sunday I was at JH for a day of skiing in 15" of fresh powder. The GPOs were just so much fun and so intuitive. I could ski slow and easy, hard and fast. Short turns and long turns. Even once the powder got all tracked up the GPOs were simply incredible. Probably one of the best days I have ever had out there.
The day after though was a different story. A bright sun and warm temps softened everything up early in the day and then very quickly the clouds rolled in and all that soft stuff started turning hard. Skiing the GPOs in those conditions was simply painful as the skis got tossed around and I seemed to feel every single vibration. After one or two runs I swapped the GPOs for my Kastle 98s which although there is no metal in them, they are very damp. The Kastles handled those conditions so much better. So I think if I had to buy the GPOs again, especialy for resort skiing I would probably go glass and no carbon. If I expected to tour on them a lot the carbon/glass setup would be the way to go.
All of this leads to a question too, these skis were originally designed and built for Tabke for the Freeride Tour and I would think he had to ski these in all kinds of snow conditions. Anyone know if he was on the glass only layup? It would seem to make sense to me.
I don't understand why people buy a carbon ski for resort skiing. Because it costs more and therefore must be better?