Printable View
I did not mean to imply that the micro camber on my Meridian Tours is as exaggerated as the crazy profile I just posted. Sorry about that. I also don't think the micro camber on the Meridian is intentional. I can post rocker profile photos of 187 Meridans and 181 Meridian Tours later this evening. No micro camber evident in the Meridians, if memory serves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melee
No point posting Meridian profile photos, since they look exactly like what Melee posted above. Below are some Meridian Tour profile photos. You might have to zoom in to see the white wall between the silver edges.
1. Skis touching just under the binding toepieces, as well as near the tips
Attachment 356896
2. Skis touching just under the binding heels, as well as near the tails
Attachment 356897
Again, I don't notice this skiing. There's maybe 1mm between the bases in the first photo at most.
I know Melee says the line is solid at -10 for the C98 (great blister podcast episode) but I can't help but feel like -8 or 9 might be the go to if I enjoy my WC, DW and Kartels. Never skied anything mounted so far back before. But he obviously knows what he's talking about. I went long for my height, so I'm wondering if I'll have an easier time with more ski behind me in bumps/trees.
I mounted my 194 CM108 on the line, they engage turns and pivot just fine. Don't feel like there is a need to go forward. Per Melee's description of the design on the podcast, you can tell by the increased width of the tip (and presumably the front radius too) that their intention was to make the ski engage turns well despite being a -10cm mount point.Quote:
Originally Posted by AZskibum
These things rip groomers so hard. Exactly what I was looking for, and very happy with them so far.
As stated above, is it true the Deathwish has a less deep rocker line than the Bibby/Wildcat mold? How does the splay compare?
I've only skied the older version (the year they went a bit lighter, thought they got pushed around too much for my taste compared to the Bibby) before they stiffened them up and change the layup. Intrigued to try them out again.
The old CMD was -8 and the tail kicked up quite a bit sooner. New 98 is -10 & the tail is near flat.... I have mine at -10 for 2021 & they are dialed their.Quote:
Originally Posted by AZskibum
I need more time on my frankenskis. But I learned that I have no idea how to ski them in cut up pow. Had a great time landing switch off some old man rails. Feels like I have to ski groomers kind of delicately. Just not used to a true center mount yet. I do love the dirty stashe with the flat spot underfoot. I get why they did that with the park ski.
I have no idea how to butter so those soft tips and tails are cool, but lost on me...For now.
Kind of want a deathcat 101 with a slightly more traditional mount.
Every time I try and Butter I get off the ground for a second then slap snow and my toes hate me.Quote:
Originally Posted by SupreChicken
Hi there,
I'm a 5'6", 121 pound male and I was wondering if the 174 Moment Wildcat 108 would be too long for me. I live, work, and ski in Aspen. Usually ski an all mountain ski at 164, but it doesnt have tail rocker. Really enjoy steep, tight trees and steep bumps, so I don't want to buy something that I have trouble pivoting on a dime because of length. Anyone small have experience on the 174 Wildcat 108? TIA
welcome to tgr! 174 is wayyy too long you are going to die
He is correct, you are going to die...Quote:
Originally Posted by sruffian
Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk
In all seriousness the 174 will not be too much ski for you. If you have concerns give the guys at the moment factory a call. They will be happy to chat with you.
I was so stoked on my DWT that I ordered a pair of DW on backorder back in late December. Got a ship notification today that they shipped out 10 days ahead of schedule. So stoked to ski them!
You MFers are SO melodramatic...he will not DIE (most likely), he will probably just maim himself... with years of painful rehab...he will live to suffer moreQuote:
Originally Posted by scmartin69
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Anyone know of anywhere I could get last years Wildcat 116? Sickest graphic out there
haha yeah its funny I keep going back and forth. People think it isn't too long, but also I don't think people have a real strong understanding of what its like to be 120 pounds on skis meant for people who weigh 140+. My friend who is 5 inches taller than me and 20 pounds heavier skis a 174. Seems crazy that we would be on the same ski.
Our 11 yo granddaughter has been demoing the Bella in a 162 and absolutely loves them. She is 5'3" / 115 lbs and is a good U-12 racer. She spent Monday ripping around Alta on her 160 Fischer GS race boards. Yesterday put the Bella's on and it took her half a run to figure our balance, stance etc. I think she was skiing the Bella's just as fast as the GS skis. Long turns or short turns it made no difference. Not much to ski off trail but we did get into Ballroom and some other areas with bumps and she bounced her way through them no problem. Not going to be an opportunity to ski powder but at 108 underfoot I would not anticipate a problem. The worst (or maybe best) part is Grandma and Grandpa will need to get her a pair and Moment is out of stock until Mid February. Hopefully I can find a pair from a retailer. She was skiing Carson's and Zephyr's but has outgrown them so she was only using her race skis.
What size are you looking for?Quote:
Originally Posted by jashpash
Interesting data point. I think though that 162 is too small for me considering the twin tip. I'm a pretty athletic 32 year old male, so I hope I've got more muscle mass than an 11 year old girl, but who knows... So hard to pull the trigger on a pair when I'm not convinced. Then again, the guys at moment told me the 174 Wildcat 108 and 172 Bella are the same ski but the Bella has a cm cut off each tip. So the 162 is probably closer to a 164... decisions decisions. Thanks for your input, very helpful
Im the same height as you but weigh slightly more, I’d consider myself an expert skier. My touring ski is a 184 wildcat 108 tour, and the shortest ski I daily drive is a 181 meridian. I’d personally only consider the 174 if I was skiing extremely tight trees that my home mountain is known for, but now that I live out west I wouldn’t ski anything that short.
You will have plenty of strength to drive the 174, 164 would be far to small.
Has anyone skied the voyager binding? I'm curious how this compares to the tecton , shift, and radical 2.0s on the down.
Preferably the 190 but considering the 184. Both have their strengthsQuote:
Originally Posted by K1mJ0ngTr1ll
I've got ~10 days on mine now, mostly backcountry, with a handful of lift served runs on firm snow as well. They're paired with 184cm ON3P Billy Goat 116 Tours and Dalbello Lupo Pro HDs, which are both pretty stout pieces of gear themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by thurmondmb
I'd describe the ride, with the freeride spacer in place, to be incredibly solid and robust feeling. Excellent power transmission through the whole binding, no sensation of a floating heel, and a really solid feel when stomping landings. I've hit a few decent sized cliffs and booters, some to flatter than desirable landings, have generally been skiing them as hard as I can, and I'm very impressed so far. You can feel the lack of toe elasticity on really firm conditions vs Tectons or Shifts, but not so much so that I mind skiing them inbounds after a sidecountry lap. I'm not a total ramp angle nerd, but my ski/boot/binding combo definitely has me feeling like I'm in the sweet spot most of the time.
Touring wise, they're as light as I want a binding to be, are super easy to step into, are efficient to transition, the flippers are great, and the bindings are generally just enjoyable to use. My only gripe is having too remember to deploy the brakes at the top of the hill(which I've totally spaced), but that's just going to take some getting used to.
TLDR: They're sick, get em.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thurmondmb
I have been on it a bunch recently. I'm sure a better review will come out somewhere, but so far: It feels more "locked in" than any of those. I notice the lack of elasticity, and personally I really like it. But I also do my best not to ski my touring setup inbounds, and it's on a nice light ski (DWT). If you are used to a Pivot, or even a Shift that lets your ski float a little more independently of your ski, it might feel harsh.
It doesn't have the heel float I'd notice in an Ion, Radical, or Vipec, the heel feels solid and locked down like a Kingpin heel. I can't imagine having "power transfer" problems with it, but again, I do my best not to ski my touring setup inbounds on variable terrain.
I'd describe it as feeling like my ski is directly bolted to my boot. It feels very precise. It's exactly what I personally want my pin bindings to feel like on the down, but I understand that a lot of folks prefer a more "alpine" elastic feel. Personally, I skied it for three days and realized I never wanted to tour on my Vipecs again, so I bought another pair.
It's basically an ATK FR14 with a taller toe shim. You can probably find more discussion in the ATK threadQuote:
Originally Posted by thurmondmb