Salomon QST Blank

[altacoup]

I just purchased a pair of these, 186. Took 2 test runs on a coworker’s pair mounted on the line. They felt fine. But curious if any of you have skied them mounted forward of the line and how you liked them? I vastly prefer my 106 mounted +1.5.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[Bandit Man]

I just purchased a pair of these, 186. Took 2 test runs on a coworker’s pair mounted on the line. They felt fine. But curious if any of you have skied them mounted forward of the line and how you liked them? I vastly prefer my 106 mounted +1.5.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Do you have the old or new 106? The 186 Blank skis so short that unless you want to ski/land switch, I don’t see why you’d want to move the binding forward, unless you want LESS float on deep days.

[altacoup]

I have the old 106 (green ones). I’ll probably mount my blanks on the line with a CAST set up. Seems like it’ll make for a very versatile travel ski.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[Dee Hubbs]

I had a few seasons on the the 106's (2018 Orange model), they were mounted at +1.
With my new 106's (2023 White model) I mounted them on the recommended line, and I feel like that is the correct spot, and wouldn't want to go any further forward.
The Salomon guys who ski both 106's and Blanks have mounted both pairs at the same point and have been happy.

[CMartin348]

Do you have the old or new 106? The 186 Blank skis so short that unless you want to ski/land switch, I don’t see why you’d want to move the binding forward, unless you want LESS float on deep days.

+1, the Blanks ski short. I have 194s and have them mounted -1 and find that to be excellent. Personal preference.

[kc_7777]

Mounted some 178 cm Blanks a bit forward (+1.5cm @ -6.5cm).

Great ski. But way too “short feeling” so sold. Wished it was a 183.

Though I could turn em like snow blades in the trees!

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[skibrd]

I'm 6'1 185 and I currently ride QST 106 188 and it feels good but wouldn't want longer. Do blanks just ride super short? Suggestions for 194 vs 186? 194 seems real long in trees.

It’s mounted fairly forward and with all the tail rocker it skis a lot shorter then the 194 length would suggest.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Reformed]

I got out on some 186 demos yesterday and had a great day mobbing around in shallow wind sift, soft bumps and soft groomers. I would echo all of the positive comments here - the Blank is easy to ski, can be pushed harder than its rocker profile and flex pattern might suggest and is more versatile than it looks. I enjoyed making different turn shapes on it in lots of different conditions and came away from the day more impressed than I thought I would. My experience REALLY makes me want to try the current QST 106, as that's the waist width/class of ski that I am currently looking for. I have deep days and shitfuck days covered. I'm looking for a fun and versatile ski to grab for everything in between. If the QST 106 doesn't give up too much of the easy/fun/capable combination of the Blank it would be a very strong contender in this spot for me. Anyone here able to compare the new QST 106 to the Blank or even provide experience with the 106 compared to other similar skis? The only other ski in this class that I have been on is the Enforcer 104 Free. I liked it, but felt like it was a touch too piste oriented for my tastes in this width. Part of that might have been the tune, so I could probably dial it in better with some detuning/edge work, but it's nice to not have to change the basic feel/nature of a ski. The Blank felt intuitive and easy from the second or third turn and allowed me to ski how I wanted to in every condition that I had it in. Is the current 106 really just a narrower Blank with a slightly longer turn radius?

[DigSki]

I got out on some 186 demos yesterday and had a great day mobbing around in shallow wind sift, soft bumps and soft groomers. I would echo all of the positive comments here - the Blank is easy to ski, can be pushed harder than its rocker profile and flex pattern might suggest and is more versatile than it looks. I enjoyed making different turn shapes on it in lots of different conditions and came away from the day more impressed than I thought I would. My experience REALLY makes me want to try the current QST 106, as that's the waist width/class of ski that I am currently looking for. I have deep days and shitfuck days covered. I'm looking for a fun and versatile ski to grab for everything in between. If the QST 106 doesn't give up too much of the easy/fun/capable combination of the Blank it would be a very strong contender in this spot for me. Anyone here able to compare the new QST 106 to the Blank or even provide experience with the 106 compared to other similar skis? The only other ski in this class that I have been on is the Enforcer 104 Free. I liked it, but felt like it was a touch too piste oriented for my tastes in this width. Part of that might have been the tune, so I could probably dial it in better with some detuning/edge work, but it's nice to not have to change the basic feel/nature of a ski. The Blank felt intuitive and easy from the second or third turn and allowed me to ski how I wanted to in every condition that I had it in. Is the current 106 really just a narrower Blank with a slightly longer turn radius?

I think the new 106 is similar to the blank in terms of versatility but quite a bit more lively and fun than the blank. It's also quite a bit more lively than the old 106 (I have the maroon). By lively I mean more energy out of turns - you can use the ski's rebound to get into your next turn a lot more than the blank.

For reference, I skied those 3 skis in back to back to back runs last season skiing fairly steep chopped up snow as well as groomers, and the new 106 was hands down my favorite (as well as one of my buddy's). We generally ski pretty fast and aggressively, although we both do more quick turns than barreling through chop.

Also, I've been skiing Solitude every day since Dec 29 and I think there's only been two days when I didn't ski the 106; I have yet to find a weak point. I probably should have been on protests another day - I didn't know the 10" report was going to ski like 30" - but I did not feel held back by the 106 at all. They were quite predictable trenching on the bottom, and face shots every turn is pretty fun.

[I Skied Bandini Mountain]

Couldn't pass up ptex1's closeout and joined the club. It looks like there's going to be a few inches of fresh to try out tomorrow.

[altacoup]

I ended up mounting mine +1 and cast set up. Really an ideal go anywhere do anything set up. Skis great in pow and is surprisingly good on firm snow.

[zion zig zag]

Would these be a good pow day option if I have a QST 106, or too much overlap? The 106 is a 181 and they have felt a little under gunned on some recent pow days, as in I can’t drive them like I would like to. I’d go 186 in the Blank. Pretty happy with the 106’s otherwise.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[Bandit Man]

Couldn't pass up ptex1's closeout and joined the club. It looks like there's going to be a few inches of fresh to try out tomorrow.

Are those the 194’s? They look big. Looking forward to hearing about their maiden voyage.

[Beder]

Would these be a good pow day option if I have a QST 106, or too much overlap? The 106 is a 181 and they have felt a little under gunned on some recent pow days, as in I can’t drive them like I would like to. I’d go 186 in the Blank. Pretty happy with the 106’s otherwise.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Hell yes. Blanks for the pow day, 106 for the days after.

Camber, rocker, and taper are all different. It's the QST 98 that is actually a baby Blank.

[zion zig zag]

$479 at The House right now using code: SAVINGS


hmmmmmmmm...............

[sierraskier]

Are those the 194’s? They look big. Looking forward to hearing about their maiden voyage.

Lot's of tip/tail rocker so they ski short and are easy to turn. Yet they are pretty heavy / damp so they are actually pretty good at crud blasting. The 186's just looked way too short and turny to me

[CptnCrunch]

Lot's of tip/tail rocker so they ski short and are easy to turn. Yet they are pretty heavy / damp so they are actually pretty good at crud blasting. The 186's just looked way too short and turny to me

I’ll second this. I’m 5’ 10”, 150 lbs and the 186 ski short. The Blanks are surprisingly damp and handle cut up 3D snow well at speed. They are fun on storm days. I don’t think they are that great in 2D snow but they will get you back to the lift just fine.

[I Skied Bandini Mountain]

Are those the 194’s? They look big. Looking forward to hearing about their maiden voyage.

Finally got them out this morning. About 15 degrees (F) with 4-5" of 5% fluff on top of groomed and 12" cut up heavy crud from yesterday. First chair up and conditions were tracked out pretty quick with spring break crowds.

These skis are a cheat code. Love them. Handled everything very nicely - new pow, bumped up stuff, scratchy hardpack, day old crud. Solid skis.

[Huskier]

I just spent a day on the 194. 6-9" @JHMR Good gravy, what a ski. All the superlatives already mentioned here but what impressed me the most was how well it navigated the interface between fresh and the crust beneath: damp, stable crushing with zero drama. Definitely not a ski for tight spaces, but give them a steep open fall line and watch them just shrink the mountain.

[joesnow_]

Quick question guys - had mine remounted with shifts after swapping the sths these came mounted with over to a pair of m102s. When they were remounted the shop mentioned they had to go “about 1cm back” due to interference with the original mount. I had grabbed these second hand so the original mount wasn’t centred to my boots - I could just squeeze in with the heel all the way back on the track.

Skiing them at -1 has not been great - when finishing turns the tails just want to wash out constantly. Feels like they’ve lost the bite they had before - can’t get the tails to lock in at all, took them in for a tune but still no Bueno.

I’m on the 194s so I’m not short on length…am I going mad or can that -1 make such a difference?

Major bummer!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Huskier]

Paging Bandit, DC, or anyone else who spends time skiing a maritime snowpack and whose quiver has contained Goats and Mfrees: About to pull the trigger on 194's: Too much overlap? 6'2 205#. Goats definitely have more smash-y vibes, Mfrees pivot and slash better. Super impressed with Blank's performance in nice light-to-medium density pow but it's a rarity that I'm skiing snow that good.

Over 12: 187 Protest
Over 6: 189 Assym Goats
Under 6 or soft leftovers: 192 Mfrees
??? - 194 Blank

[noslow]

Quick question guys - had mine remounted with shifts after swapping the sths these came mounted with over to a pair of m102s. When they were remounted the shop mentioned they had to go “about 1cm back” due to interference with the original mount. I had grabbed these second hand so the original mount wasn’t centred to my boots - I could just squeeze in with the heel all the way back on the track.

Skiing them at -1 has not been great - when finishing turns the tails just want to wash out constantly. Feels like they’ve lost the bite they had before - can’t get the tails to lock in at all, took them in for a tune but still no Bueno.

I’m on the 194s so I’m not short on length…am I going mad or can that -1 make such a difference?

Major bummer!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wondering if the difference in binding delta(heel to toe height) is actually causing the issue more than the mount change?
So you had the STH on before and got along with the Blanks fine and then swapped to the Shifts with the mount moved back a bit and now have the issues?

STH have a higher positive delta than most regular alpine bindings out there and if you got along fine with them, the Shift may be different enough that it puts you slightly off your “happy place” when it comes to stance and balance.

I’m not sure the actual delta of a typical AFD adjusted Shift binding is though so maybe measure the heights of the toe AFD and heel on both bindings to see if the delta is wildly different.

[altacoup]

I can see how mounting these back would lead to tails washing out. See if you can remount forward of the line. I’m skiing mine at +1.5 and know a lot of people are at +2 especially on the 194.

[Bandit Man]

Paging Bandit, DC, or anyone else who spends time skiing a maritime snowpack and whose quiver has contained Goats and Mfrees: About to pull the trigger on 194's: Too much overlap? 6'2 205#. Goats definitely have more smash-y vibes, Mfrees pivot and slash better. Super impressed with Blank's performance in nice light-to-medium density pow but it's a rarity that I'm skiing snow that good.

Over 12: 187 Protest
Over 6: 189 Assym Goats
Under 6 or soft leftovers: 192 Mfrees
??? - 194 Blank

I don’t ski the 194’s (I keep thinking I should try the adult size) but I think they fit right between the MFree and BG. However, the question becomes “When will you choose the Blank over the others?” I feel like the Blank is a great resort powder ski, especially when you have a lot of groomers to get back to the lift. That being said, I only skied mine once this season and opted for the MFree instead. As TAFKALS told me way back when…”the MFree is the closest thing to a skinny BG as you are going to find.” And is there anything more tantalizing on those PNW in between days?

[DigSki]

Wondering if the difference in binding delta(heel to toe height) is actually causing the issue more than the mount change?
So you had the STH on before and got along with the Blanks fine and then swapped to the Shifts with the mount moved back a bit and now have the issues?

STH have a higher positive delta than most regular alpine bindings out there and if you got along fine with them, the Shift may be different enough that it puts you slightly off your “happy place” when it comes to stance and balance.

I’m not sure the actual delta of a typical AFD adjusted Shift binding is though so maybe measure the heights of the toe AFD and heel on both bindings to see if the delta is wildly different.

To add to your theory - wouldn't moving back cause the tail to be more engaged, not less? I find moving mounts forward makes skis easier to pivot / slide, so I'd assume moving back has the opposite impact.