Review: Lotus 138

[bad_roo]

The sidecut of that thing (the 138) is so complex that those 'conventional' measuring points don't really do justice to its shape.

[lemon boy]

agreed! but it seems built with actual "sidecut" underfoot

[bad_roo]

true. let's just say it's weird.

[lemon boy]

you're queer? okay but I think the proper term is "gay"

[Arty50]

Thanks for the info Arty. Good to know there's someone around who knows WTF he's doing.

He used to be a tech for the US Ski Team.

[bad_roo]

He used to be a tech for the US Ski Team.

Who? Solzhenitsyn?

[skimasterflex]

um... 1mm? not THAT much thinner...

Well it's 1.5 mm thinner, and that bit is only generally used for mounting "Team" series skis. So unless they have some specific manufacturers recomendation to use it I don't see why you would risk pulling bindings out of such an expensive ski. The 9mm bit doesn't even come close to the base of most skis let alone burly handmade custom ones. If the Lotus requires the 7.5 it must be at least 20% thinner than most retail skis is my point. Either that or it must have better materials underfoot or a mounting plate that will hold the screws at that depth because most bindings we use won't hold at that depth typically.

[runethechamp]

Well it's 1.5 mm thinner, and that bit is only generally used for mounting "Team" series skis. So unless they have some specific manufacturers recomendation to use it I don't see why you would risk pulling bindings out of such an expensive ski. The 9mm bit doesn't even come close to the base of most skis let alone burly handmade custom ones. If the Lotus requires the 7.5 it must be at least 20% thinner than most retail skis is my point. Either that or it must have better materials underfoot or a mounting plate that will hold the screws at that depth because most bindings we use won't hold at that depth typically.

I'n no expert on mounting skis, but the ski is 1.5 mm thinner and the drill bit is 1.5 mm shorter.... Kind of makes sense to me.

[Arty50]

Who? Solzhenitsyn?

God bless you.

[marshalolson]

i have never seen a binding screw (that is the right length form the factory) that has more than 6.5-7mm of thread exposed.

ps: the louts is 1.5mm thinner underfoot than my igneous FAT and less than 1mm thinner than my powder plus.

[splat]

agreed! but it seems built with actual "sidecut" underfoot

There's 1mm of sidecut there, lb. Stephan said it would allow for an edgehold on the grooms and I think Ty's review confirms that. I'm stoked to see someone changing the way skis are made that allows them to be less powder specific and more all-around kickass, as it appears the Loti are.

Mad freakin genius, this Drake dood.

[SafteySquad]

So unless they have some specific manufacturers recomendation to use it I don't see why you would risk pulling bindings out of such an expensive ski.

I believe they come with said instructions.

[splat]

Brent at Tahoe Boot & Ski. He's on 50 just a couple of doors down from Tahoe Keys Blvd. In my humble opinion, he's the best tech in South Lake. I trust him 110% w/ my gear. The guy is a magician with skis. The fact that he noticed the lines weren't quite right speaks volumes. Most techs would just mount them up.

Agreed. Brent knows his shit. I took some Dynastart blems that the lines were all whacked out on the topsheet into him for mounting and he immediately noticed. That kind of shit throws some techs into a spin.

[soul_skier]

they sound pretty sweet, i might have to order a pair if i ever get the scratch

[teambigdave]

For the love of God please stop reviewing these things!!

I go sailing for a month, come back and find out I have to buy a new pair
Maybe I can sell Marshall his FFL's back (kidding)

Stupid dp
I hate you guys
It's March, there's been no snow in NE all winter, and now I'm going to buy skis to outdo my "dinky" Sanouks

[Steezy]

still no comparison between the Pontoons and the 138

anybody?

i'm guessin that the 138 wins hands down

bueller?

[frorider]

the dp lotus. so hot right now.

thanx for the review. i was leaning toward the lotus 120, but the more i think about it the more i'm thinking 138. i may wait for dp to do some more production cycles, so they can get the thickness/stiffness dialed in.

it's a fine decade to be a skier.

[funkendrenchman]

still no comparison between the Pontoons and the 138

anybody?

i'm guessin that the 138 wins hands down

bueller?

I'll send Tyrone my Toons and he can send me the 138s for a couple weeks for a head to head review. We have roughly the same boot size.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

I'll send Tyrone my Toons and he can send me the 138s for a couple weeks for a head to head review. We have roughly the same boot size.

How about you just send me your Toons and then I can test them both when I'm up in Alaska in a few weeks?

[skier666]

What about my Moments which will be in my hands tomorrow night.

160/136/150 in a 185 cm

[slim]

What about my Moments which will be in my hands tomorrow night.

160/136/150 in a 185 cm

Traditional sidecut with no rocker!?! You and Zippy are living in the past. This thread is about the future man!

[runethechamp]

rocker

I hate this word when used in skiing talk. It reminds me about tele nerds overanalyzing boot/binding interaction and rocker launch.

[frorider]

I hate this word when used in skiing talk. It reminds me about tele nerds overanalyzing boot/binding interaction and rocker launch.

yeah good point. mebbe we should stop using techy terms like reverse sidecut and pintail and rocker. plus why should we talk about ski construction in Tech Talk forum? instead let's just discuss beer and hucking.

[hop]

still no comparison between the Pontoons and the 138

anybody?

i'm guessin that the 138 wins hands down

bueller?

I dunno... I consistently go bigger on my pontoons than Glisseur goes on his L138's.

[leroy jenkins]

Since one that the Spats are known for is thier indestructability, I would really like to know how well the Lotus' handle abuse, once you beat them up a bit (knock on wood).