Any more word on Blizzard Anomaly 102 (188, 21m) and 94 replacing bull series.
Printable View
Any more word on Blizzard Anomaly 102 (188, 21m) and 94 replacing bull series.
Thanks Greg!
I managed to get a few laps on the 102s in a 182. Really enjoyed them. Still very capable but a bit more forgiving and versatile than my Bonafides, especially in softer choppy snow. Will be a really nice Louise ski.Quote:
Originally Posted by robnow
It shouldn't matter but why did they have to make them purple? So far until now this year a good Louise ski is a CCM TackQuote:
Originally Posted by Spooky
Mounted og bodes. Looking forward to getting to know the legend
Best ski ever. Hope you enjoy em.Quote:
Originally Posted by byates1
Took out my reissue bodes yesterday. Glorious missiles. Hoping Blizzard re-reissue them at some point, because I need a backup pair.
https://www.instagram.com/p/C17WJIXojg-/
2nd half of today on the bodes. They do not fuck around. Semi hate fuck ski. Need more time on them.
Ppl wallowing around in the 20" that fell, nuclear all day. Me standing there blowing by everyone like a old Cadillac blasting down the road.
Mounted these a few weeks ago and still have yet to ski them. One of the last 183's from Corbett's Attachment 482671
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregL
this nails it. The rustler, unleashed, Atris, Corvus, revolt 114 and a bunch of others are much better travel ski options.
I have Atris already, and quite like it, but have 2 core shots. Probably gonna remount Duke PT with Strive for lower ramp and keep it for skiing with wife trips.
sounds like you already own a travel ski. My Atris and my older nocta are quiver killed for both the duke pt and jester for this exact reason.
It also seems like a waste to drill that many holes chasing 2mm of delta. Just swap out the pt for a Griffon or jester and you are able to reuse your heel holes and just drill new toe holes. If your core shots are properly repaired they shouldn’t matter at all.
I took my newly acquired R9s out for a few laps today after I had finished shredding pow on some pairs of simply fantastic RES skis. They are 180s and mounted at rec.
Attachment 484304
While I can appreciate why a lot of people would like them, the first impression is that they are not quite for me. I found them to a bit less turny - or rather less short turn specific - on hard snow than the outgoing R10s were. I do still find that they kinda prefer to do medium sized turns and that they want to turn, and it kinda felt like you have to fight the sidecut a bit if you want to do big arcs. To be fair, I have not done anything tune wise, so I am sure a bit of strategic work on the edges would quiet them down a bit on groomers - and yeah, their sidecut is what it is, so I am not going to pretend that I expect them to ski like a 25m radius ski. :)
I found them to be really good in soft snow / off piste. They ski deeper snow very well given their 96mm width, if perhaps not ON3P great. I never found the R10s to lack and soft snow prowess though, that is where I enjoyed them the most. They have some nice pop to them and are easy to pivot. The tips kinda plows a bit at slower speed in deep snow, but that would happen with most skis right.
I am happy that I finally got to try R9s after all the hype on here, yet chances are that they will not replace BlackOps 98s in this part of my quiver. I prefer how BO98s are a bit more quiet on edge, turning when you tell them to yet also less eager to drag you into a carve. Both are fine skis though.
And yeah, the build quality seems really good, the graphics pop nicely on snow and they feel very light and nimble. While they do not ski heavy - they are pretty light after all (and I had being skiing 2300-2400 ON3Ps all day today before getting on these, so I am a bit heavy ski biased when writing this) - their construction works really well imho. I can easily understand how a lot of folks would absolutely love these.
Personally, I like the fact that they (and the new R10) are not as "turny" as the old R10. All my Rustlers are detuned slightly to a 2 degree side edge bevel . . .Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-kapow
yeah, I def meant that to be a positive / welcome change. The previous R10s were way too keen to do quick short turns on hard snow for my liking.Quote:
Originally Posted by gregL
I would be interested in hearing more of your thoughts on the new R10. I think you mentioned further up thread that the new R10 addresses the shortcomings of the previous generation and that the new ski rips. Given how many of us seem to have been searching for the elusive R10.5 previously, I am surprised there hasn't been more chatter about the updated R10.Quote:
Originally Posted by gregL
I know, HL is deservedly receiving a ton of TGR love these days, but I'm not really seeing an analogue to this class of ski in their lineup. Yet...
Seems like the R9 and R11 over the past few years have gained fandom but the R10 has been either in between or just meh....always thought an R10 would be a great 1 ski quiver, low/mid 100's underfoot, can do a little bit of everything well enough,(albeit not a charger) perfect to throw in the truck when you're not sure what to expect on the hill, or travel with when conditions are unknown.
I value having that versatile ski in a quiver so would be interested in the R10. Prior generations never seemed to receive enough praise to justify making a buy, but would also be curious to hear more R10 thoughts, seems like this might be a better version?
I'm one of the few who has just loved the R10. Mine are the original release (they tweaked them in 2019-adding more weight, but mostly underfoot).Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishskisurf
It has just been a fantastic daily driver in whitefish and worked well as a 1-ski quiver--100% what I would grab for travel and while I never did the 50/50 thing, the 17 and 18 models were pretty light. *Maybe* I'd be worried about weight/dampness if I skied heavier PNW snow, but for CO/UT/MT/BC they were great.
The known shortcomings are present but they just didn't bother me:
-Some people thought they were "too turny" but I love that feel as it adds to the playfulness to me. The metal gives them a lot of snap out of the turns that reminded me of my old 2000s era tight radius slalom skis.
-They definitely had a speed limit but I was usually OK with it because A) if I'm going that fast, it means I wasn't turning enough, and B) I have a pretty high tolerance for chatter and tip deflection before getting too freaked out, and they were an easy ski to shut down.
-I only rarely experienced the hook-up/hinge point issue.
They were just so fun in the trees and noodling around making lots of turns. They clearly aren't big chargers, but I never felt like they limited the terrain I could ski, just the speed at which I could ski it...which is fine by me, more time spent skiing even if total vert is lower.
I really want to try the new R10, and was literally just fondling a pair in the shop an hour ago, but I'm a little sad to hear they've lost some of the super-turny feel. Given that, I'd probably step down from the 188 to the 186 rather than going to the 192.
It's good enough that you should buy a pair and ski them. I went from a 180 to 186 and mounted +5mm; detuned from 1 and 2.8 to 1 and 2. Have skied it 2/3 of my days this season.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reformed
^^Great deal for an awesome ski that's not coming back next year.
How would you contrast em with enforcer frees? I'm assuming a bit softer?Quote:
Originally Posted by gregL
+5mm? How did you land on that vs. recommended or +1cm?Quote:
Originally Posted by gregL
Spur of the moment judgement call as I was drilling them; I remember feeling like the tip was a bit heavy when I demoed them the year previous but not enough to warrant +1cm . . . but I wasn't wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by rainy512day
As a raving Cochise/Bodacious guy I'm really worried about this transition.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spooky
Mainly I'm worried that the Cochise is going to get "Russler-ized" and be much less of a charger than previously.
Anyone want to talk me down off the ledge, that's skied these? (Or do I need to hoard another pair of Cochise 108 or 106's - or why not both, eh?)
Get another Cochise 106/108. You’ll never see skis like that again in your lifetime from Blizzard.
X2 on getting another pair of Cochise in the variant you prefer. Odds of that ski coming back are low and you can likely get a pair on the cheap.
I’ve had a few days already on the new R10 in 192, mainly in soft snow conditions and I it’s exactly what I was hoping which is a narrower 192 R11 when it’s not deep enough : super strong au patin and still loose at both ends, and at last not too turny. Definitely worth the buy.
Will too buy some Cochise 106 just in case. Not too sure abt the longest length tho
Envoyé de mon iPhone en utilisant Tapatalk
Don’t really get this nostalgia for old school chargers. The current crop of modern chargy skis like M-Free 108, Sender Free 110, Blade Optic 104/114 and Unleashed 108/114 are much more fun and won’t for sure hold you back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roQer
I guess we all define chargers differently.
If you define a charger as a ski which actually people are charging on then you won’t see any Cochises or Bodacious. I mean really charging in real terrain not just skiing fast some black runs.
While I agree, there's something to be said for a true (e.g. Not playful) charger. I love the MFree and am getting along with the Hotshot. But I still reach for my Moment Commanders most of the time. There's a place for both in most quivers.Quote:
Originally Posted by roQer
bodacious is one of the most versatile skis ever made. Same with a cochise. Ski companies are trying to make skis more accessible for more people to drive higher ski sales. The only charger you listed is the m-free. Otherwise you listed three noodles that get tossed in crud and crap snow.Quote:
Originally Posted by roQer
I guess Arne didn’t charge in your view apparently.
At this point I had to laugh. Did you ski any of the „noodles“?Quote:
Originally Posted by SoVT Joey
Arne did of course charge at his time but this can’t be compared to charging today. Just watch today‘s FWT comp in Verbier. Different world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roQer
yes. I’ve skied all four of them. They are soft and underwhelming. FWT is great, athletes are choosing skis based on the performance need for big mountain and airs. They definitely charge, but I’m not going to sit here and tell you that a black crows anima is a charger.
Kind of funny opinion but whatever. Great we have choices.
hm, I guess that is one way to skin the cat. Blister and a fair few strong skiers on here are of a differeing opinion, which is fine, we do not need to agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by SoVT Joey
It also seems that a clarification of what constitutes "a charger" is in order. Long radius wants to go straight - sure. The other skis have the ability to go fast, but also fits more while also requiring more skier finesse to haul, while being able to do a whole lot more for most strong skiers than the traditional "lets see how few turns we can make" type skis. So perhaps the term needs some evolution as well.
Oh well - good thing we have Heritage Labs. I can't recall the last time I saw anybody on either Bonafides or Cochises around here or on sale for less than say 30-40% off, so I can't really fault a major brand from trying to make something most skiers in a given segment want and need, without catering to the most niche of niches - discerning chargers on TGR. And huzzah, we know have a brand that caters to just that niche - so winning all around no?
Bingo. Get a couple backup pairs and you are set. Lucky for me I am partial to the OG cochise. Always plenty of used ones around when I need to re-stock. Probably less so the newer ones (which I never liked as much).Attachment 484597Quote:
Originally Posted by XavierD
I personally agree, but know some people want to keep skiing the long radius, low rocker flat tail skis -Quote:
Originally Posted by roQer
Even if the modern generation of fast skiing pro skiers are still going absolutely nuts on the “soft playful accessible” skis.
I’d much rather ski any of the ones you mentioned over a Cochise.
I’m with you in terms of really enjoying the current offerings. I’m also realizing that my skiing has likely changed as skis have changed. Last time I got on my OG Cochise 108, I recall thinking “Why did I ever think these were so great?” Then I swap back to my M102 and I’m back in my happy place. [emoji16]Quote:
Originally Posted by roQer
All that being said, I recall those days when I felt like my Cochise were “cold dead hands” kind of skis. At that point in ski evolution, they likely were. As you said, lots of powerful but fun designs out these days.
I’m catching up and it’s interesting you didn’t like the R9s for the exact same reasons I loved it. I would add in that if I drove the tips hard and got really far forward on them I could get them to carve little tight turns, but that has never really been my style. I’m more of a middle to long turn skier.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
What I did love is how they felt with trees, bumps, and chopped up groomers at the end of the day. I didn’t have to think about the R9 because they felt like an extension of my legs. Even took them OB a few times in various density pow up to 6-8in and didn’t really have issues, where if I had a flat tailed similar width more carving centric ski I would have been scared.
For tune I made the edges round on the rocker section and taper the edges to 3-6in in front and behind of my feet.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums