Recommended Skis & Bindings List

[marshalolson]

super generizations:

foam: lighter and more lively flex - but there are dense foam cores too (ala rossi squads)

wood: damper ride quality. generally more durable over long term use/abuse. though kingswood uses bamboo cores and they are failry lively. the width of the wooden slats controls torsional and over-all flex as well. lots of narrower stringers will create a stiffer & heavier ski than a few wide stringers.

--------
metal topsheet: heavier and more damp. skis can get bent. there are many compounds used, titanal being the most common these days.

fiberglass: lighter overall than metal. the core material and profile will dictate the flex moreso than a metal ski. camber settles out though use.

carbon: most torsionally stiff - lots of power transmission. can be super light in a glass/carbon hybrid, or if pure carbon, about the same weight as a glass ski.

---------
structural cap: metal topsheet is pressed all the way down the sidewall to the edge. tends to delam w/ edge hits. generally foam core. lots of shaping possiblities to effect flex points and torsional rigidity (most salomons, atomics)

cosmetic cap: topsheet material only extends along the top of the ski. the topsheet tends to be glass not metal (pontoon/fujativ/line)

sandwich: ABS sidewall, topsheet is only on top. most of the favorite skis on TGR are sandwich. the sidewall is more repairable than cap skis, and there are fewer (in general) incidents of delam, and in my opinion offer more energy transmission and control at speed

[couloirman]

when do we get to see a 179 bro super stiff? Isnt it wierd that the 188s get a super stiff but not 179's? Is it that a shorter ski doesnt have to be as stiff to be as relativley stiff as the larger one?

[Squatch]

when do we get to see a 179 bro super stiff? Isnt it wierd that the 188s get a super stiff but not 179's? Is it that a shorter ski doesnt have to be as stiff to be as relativley stiff as the larger one?

Depends on how you're phrasing the question. The same material, under the same force, will flex more in a longer length than a shorter one. If you're talking about flex angle or radius, well I'm not qualified to answer that question.

[couloirman]

what do you think skis longer, 189 AK enemy, or 188 super stiff bro? Just wondering if i can handle the super stiff bro cause my AK's are about as much as I can handle right now

[adam]

K2 makes there skis pretty long. I'm guessing the ak's.

[Squatch]

(heresay): I've heard the superstiffs ski really damn long, and are far stiffer than the AK enemies.

[couloirman]

(heresay): I've heard the superstiffs ski really damn long, and are far stiffer than the AK enemies.

i figured that, although the PM gear website says "This is achievable because of double layers of vibration-dampening rubber that make this 188 cm ski feel as stable as 223 cm downhill boards, yet as forgiving as a soft 170 length pair of skis."

So i decided to ask and see if anyones been on the super stiffs to judge themselves

[marshalolson]

the ak enemy's are prolly softer than the BRO stiffs. *about* the same length. even stiff bros will ski bigger than the ak's

[dorfke]

Marshal, or anyone else > could you elaborate on how the new big daddy skies? You say lighter and softer than the original big daddy, I presume you already skied it, or just saw it in a shop and flexed it? I also heard that it's "only" 190cm, correct?

Anyone else already skied the new 125mm big daddy?

[marshalolson]

there is a short review in this very thread (atomicguy?). i just posted his opinions.

and yes it is 190cm with a kicked tail.

[dorfke]

Eitehr I'm completely retarded or my eyes are in desperate need of some glasses but I' don't see the reveiew in this thread, even after reading it 3 times. Even tried to search with the google help in Teton domain but no luck.
Maybe this was in another thread?

[marshalolson]

Eitehr I'm completely retarded or my eyes are in desperate need of some glasses but I' don't see the reveiew in this thread, even after reading it 3 times. Even tried to search with the google help in Teton domain but no luck.
Maybe this was in another thread?

yeah, i guess it was another thread... actually, find Z's thread about THE SKI. maybe it was in that. infact, pretty sure it was.

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...ad.php?t=56939

A few words on new Big Daddies and Thug - I have skied both 10 plus days ( all days around norther Utah ) - New BD - Unreal in deep snow - not as stiff as last years ski but not soft by any means. Thug softer than BD but has a different feel than BD due to construction. I see a lot of talk about too much tail on Thug - When you ski this ride it does not seem to have too much tail -Very even flex on both BD and Thug - 190 Big Daddy has a 41 radius and the 192 Thug has a 40 radius - The new BD is much easyer to ski than last years BD.Smaller guys in the 150lbs. to 180lbs. range should love the new BD.The new BD is not as great a straight line ski as older BD.A little side note the 193 sugar will be the stiffest ski Atomic will make in the FFg line 129 tip 99 waist 119 tail with a 30 radius. Construction of new FFg skis - All new FFg skis are a new type of cured Densolite ( yes still foam )but this new prosses is more like a surf board blank that has been milled to shape. Results are a litter ski with the same feel as older modles. Also Thug comes in a 182 length 140/120/133 w/33 raduis. Only 18 weeks till ski season-Peace

[dorfke]

thanks man

[ryanvdonk]

the JP vs. Julien should be in there for soft twins. also the prophet 130s should be in there for fatties

[stoicchris]

also the prophet 130s should be in there for fatties

I think the consensus is that while the 130s are a good ski there are better options available.

[pechelman]

TOURING BINDINGS:
naxo 13DIN - not as tall as the fritschi and stiffer. looks like the leader
fritschi Freeride - really tall stack. tele mode on soft skis. lots of heel settings. not torsionally stiff .
Fritschi FR plus - still really tall, but MUCH more torsionally stiff.

any add's? changes? deletions?

meh?
http://www.wildsnow.com/backcountry-...-017-flex.html

I thought the FR was stiffer than even the nx21 13din.
I also think saying the freeride isnt torsionally stiff is wrong. A lot depends on if your mount puts the rubber tripod dealy flush to the ski surface.
Ive had them in some stupid icy bumps on a 99mm ski and they felt pretty good imo (my tripod is flush).

I also dont know how much the new rear design improves torsional stiffness. I thought the real improvement there was the spring loaded heel catch to help mitigate insta-tele. I know the heel peice was also extended which allows for a flush tripod mount, but the reviews and comments Ive read I dont seem to remember them mentioning anything about stiffness, perhaps they can comment or Im mistaken.

edit: maybe nevermind on the frplus comment. I forgot the tripod was foregone for the inset track dealy. Although is bossas' review it sounded like there was a difference, but "not mindblowing"

[FiveLarge]

meh?
http://www.wildsnow.com/backcountry-...-017-flex.html

I thought the FR was stiffer than even the nx21 13din.
I also think saying the freeride isnt torsionally stiff is wrong. A lot depends on if your mount puts the rubber tripod dealy flush to the ski surface.
Ive had them in some stupid icy bumps on a 99mm ski and they felt pretty good imo (my tripod is flush).

I also dont know how much the new rear design improves torsional stiffness. I thought the real improvement there was the spring loaded heel catch to help mitigate insta-tele. I know the heel peice was also extended which allows for a flush tripod mount, but the reviews and comments Ive read I dont seem to remember them mentioning anything about stiffness, perhaps they can comment or Im mistaken.

edit: maybe nevermind on the frplus comment. I forgot the tripod was foregone for the inset track dealy. Although is bossas' review it sounded like there was a difference, but "not mindblowing"

Dawson states "Due to inherent error in any mechanical testing system, I'm confident in saying the Marker alpine, Freeride and Naxo Nx21 bindings are all essentially equal in lateral twisting stiffness..." So, the freeride and nx21 should probably be considered the same in terms of stiffness... He even notes that the naxo binding torque plate mod "is a modification that makes makes the 04/05 model Naxo NX01 equal to the Freeride" in terms of stiffness.
All that being said, not sure if his test is a truly accurate measure of stiffness. I've heard several people say they thought the nx21 FELT stiffer than the freeride...but, that's obviously subjective...

WRT to the plus, and the new rear design piece...my GUESS would be the greatest value may come later in its life. It's typical for play to develop in the freeride over time...this may help to stabilize it after much use... Purely a guess, so don't bash me on that...

[marshalolson]

well, my take is that even with the tripod flush (which is also an issue with naxo's), there is a level of side to side movement in the toe piece of the FR not seen in the naxo. i think it is to do with the relatively small clamp area on the boot, compared the the relatively larger clamp are on the naxo.

just look at the little movie on the wildsnow page of the FR. good alpine bindings do not do that (916, p18), and the naxo does is to a much lower degree.

all of that being said, as spthomson says above, naxos feel stiffer side to side on snow...

[The Dark Side]

Where would kneissl tanker's (180s) fit on the stiffness scale?

[marshalolson]

tanker would be about a 7... and one of the best skis ever made.

[The Dark Side]

Agreed & Thanks.

[Tri-Ungulate]

So this quote is from another thread, as is my response, but I thought it was more appropriate in this thread:

reviews of the fr10 seem to be mostly on the negative side although I have heard a couple good ones.

Trackhead didn't like them, even though his initial impression of them was favorable. He felt he couldn't edge too well, and preferred a wider ski, so is now happy on his BroModels. However, gramps, who often as not skis the same lines at the same time as TH, loves his FR10.0s. TH had 187s and gramps is on 178s; TH outweighs gramps by a bit, and gramps has a slightly more aggressive style.

All the other negative reviews I've seen or heard have been from people who felt the FR10.0s were "too stiff". This isn't usually a common complaint on TGR – on epic, perhaps, but not here. They seem to be approximately a dp#2 in stiffness, guessing about 240 or so on the Iggy scale. Flex is pretty consistent throughout, so as far as soft tip for easy initiation, not a lot of love from the FR10.0, but for a good power/weight ratio, they're spot-on. Outside of those who don't like stiff skis, all the outside reviews and people I've talked to (who I trust) have given the FR10.0 a thumbs-up. I think in part due to the stiff flex and light weight, the ski seems to have a fairly narrow sweet spot, so 1) it's not terribly forgiving technique-wise, and 2) binding placement is super important, and can screw you if off by some margin. Also, because of the light weight of the ski, it doesn't handle chop/crud as well as a heavier ski, but considering its lightness, it does a far better job than say, the Voilé Carbon Surf.

I think that the ski generally favors a lighter-weight skier who likes to climb high and charge hard. Since they're generally targeted for BC use, that narrows the market a bit, but overall they're great skis. I have a pair (mostly as a spring quiver ski) and like them a lot so far; I have the 178 and weigh even less than gramps, though.

I'm actually a bit surprised marshal doesn't have them on this canonical "TGR Recommended Ski List", as the FR10.0 has the dimensions of the Carbon Surf, the snappiness of the Trab Freerando and the light weight of either – and both of those skis are listed under the Touring category. I'm guessing TH's negative assessment is one of the reasons for the omission.

This year's FR10.0s have been softened a bit, and I think are a touch heavier, and subsequently more durable.

I don't work for Dynafit, nor do I have any connection to them other than skiing on them.

[marshalolson]

I'm actually a bit surprised marshal doesn't have them on this canonical "TGR Recommended Ski List", as the FR10.0 has the dimensions of the Carbon Surf, the snappiness of the Trab Freerando and the light weight of either – and both of those skis are listed under the Touring category. I'm guessing TH's negative assessment is one of the reasons for the omission.

added. thanks. and yes, the ommission was based mostly on TH's assesment.

[joschost]

Any idea where the Dynastar Legend 8000 fits on the scale?

[MTT]

Bobo's has a Legend Pro XXL in the shop so that people can see and touch the ski. So i got to touch and bend the XXL. First this is the only LP ski that is produced out of the Dynastar race room this year.

The flex, this is not a stiff ski, it has a very even tip to tail bend to it. They flex alomst exactly like my well skied soft 188 Bro's.

The XXL has a thinner side profile than my 194 LP's The XXL seem to weigh less than my 194 LP's

So fatter than 194 LP's
Lighter thsn 194 LP's
Softer flexing than 194 LP's

Torsional stiffnes is the same ??
So it should be a very managable Fattie.