Nobody wants to hear your negativity about BGs not being good for rails anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by iggyskier
Printable View
Nobody wants to hear your negativity about BGs not being good for rails anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by iggyskier
Quote:
Originally Posted by Backward_Banana
I'm....gonna need a waiver signed if you move forward as is.Quote:
Originally Posted by thefortrees
Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
Quote:
Originally Posted by iggyskier
Just drive from the heels, right?
Rax skis 2.116
man that's too bad. BGs are sooooo good and that guy must have been like "WTF these are terrible! whats all the hype about?"
Nice score Backward_Banana.
So what's with the scribed line on the topsheet? I get that you should use the sidewall mark but I thought there weren't any markings on the topsheet? My Kartel 108s didn't have a topsheet line, maybe whoever mounted the bindings scribed that line?
And yeah, it must have been interesting skiing them at that mount point.
Either the customer or shop added the line.Quote:
Originally Posted by 3PinGrin
Well that's unfortunate for the former owner for sure. Derp!!Quote:
Originally Posted by iggyskier
I rode a BG as far forward as the demo track would allow. Went from the top of the chair straight to the demo bench and screwdriver. Nope nope nope
Had accidental shop mount at -1. They were squishy on groomers and they got me new billy goats. The line is it!
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
BG at +3 from center = progressive future skiers
My 184s are mounted 2cm behind the line due to hole conflict and I love em, granted I've never skied BGs on the line. I have wheelied out on deep landings off bigger cliffs but not a problem if I stay forward.
This is coming from a guy who typically mounts forward of recommended but I do have a lot of tolerance for mount location generally.
Pretty excited about my Woodsman's that just came in (with the Canada skin):
Attachment 295783
Some absolutely gorgeous new wood veneers available on the site. Wish I had the cash to spare...
Saw those, soooooo tempting but I promised no new skis this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by waxloaf
arrange 1jan shippingQuote:
Originally Posted by DumbIdeasOnly
My favorite:
Attachment 296984
As for unique skis - someone emailed about doing essentially a SuperGoat rocker/length Cease & Desist (so like...193cm SuperGoat 124 or something). Could be done, but we would need to get ideally about 15-20 pairs sold to make it work.
I don't remember having been asked for that ski before so could be no interest - but if there is some in a 125mm-ish SuperGoat variant, let me know.
Fuck, I'd more than likely be in for that.....125mm-ish is speaking my language yoQuote:
Originally Posted by iggyskier
So 2
Or would you still want a 192cm Woodsman 124? Haha just to complicate this.Quote:
Originally Posted by tuco
I think the intent here was the keep the tour flex so it remains powder focused, but could always be build as a true 193cm SuperGoat 124 too which would be sort of fucked up.
Fucked up in a good way...Quote:
Originally Posted by iggyskier
MegaPlank
So basically the old cease and desist?
No? because the old C & D had way longer rocker.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier
Would it not just be a Supergoat 124 vs 118?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leavenworth Skier
Sort of like the 2013 CD. But that ski had gen 1 RES and a lot more tail rocker than this, so not fully apples to apples. We went super rockered in 2014, then obviously back for 2019. So, that 2013 CD would be the closest thing to a 193cm SuperGoat 124 out there, but a lot of changes since then.Quote:
Originally Posted by robnow
And again - I think on the interest end, this was brought up as more of a longer, maybe wider, more stable CD. But I mean...a SuperGoat flex could be done.
Well, yeah, I would be. DD material there, especially if the tr could be kicked into 32m-ish. Be like flashing a lollipop to a baby!Quote:
Originally Posted by iggyskier
But there are similar skis out there.
SG, MegaGoat in class by themselves.