Do I need to take off my petticoat and ski, or...

[uncle crud]

...did I get too big a Gotama?

I'm 5' 10" and 150-155 lbs. Decent skier, can make any sort of turn in most any condition. Ski moderately fast, in my group of ski buddies I'm about in the middle on speed & aggression. My usual ski is a 175 cm Head Monster 88.

Because a lot of threads said the Gotamas ski short for their measured size I got the 183 Gotama in the Sport-Conrad blowout.

I skied them yesterday for the first time. I found the sweet spot almost invisible, and it appeared only when I was going pretty fucking fast, faster than I usually go in the same conditions. They were sluggish and unresponsive if I wasn't maching or if I didn't airplane turn wherever possible (it's tough for a ski to feel unresponsive in the air).

Should I have got the 176? I didn't think Gotamas were this demanding.

[Phill]

Take off your petticoat and ski.

[pechelman]

5'10 155 = perfect for 05/06 183

give em a chance, they're a bit different than IM88's.

just curious, been on anything fatter than 88mm before?
you can ski them the same, but its easier if you dont try to.
ie less edge and angulation on firm.
but yea, give em a couple more days
skiing faster is fun too

[Shen]

UC,
If you hate 'em let me know...I am looking for a pair in that size.

[HitMe]

In what conditions did you ski them? The Gotamas really isn't a particularly responsive ski and particularly not on hardpack. Compared to your Monster 88, there is both less sidecut and less rebound. I don't really think that changes much with length.

That said, I wouldn't go so far as saying you bought the wrong ski (wrong model). A ski like the Gotama can be VERY useful, its just that one may have to get used to the feel of it before one appreciates it fully. It's not only a matter of speed, its also how you put it on edge and how you enter a turn. The softer it gets (to a limit) the more intuitive the ski gets, I would say.

[doublediamond223]

UC,
If you hate 'em let me know...I am looking for a pair in that size.

I wouldn't pass them up at a price in the range of Sport-Conrad's either...let me know.

[Magnoe]

Uncle Crud,

As you know I live in Missoula and would gladly trade you my 176's for the 183's if you wish... and give you whatever cash on top of that. I'm a smidge under 6 feet and range between 178 to 184 lbs and have found that the 176's are just not enough for me on the deep days like last week at discovery. Most of the time I love them at the Bowl because of the tight trees and big trenches.

Let me know. I'll hook you up with whatever you consider a fair swap.

P.S. I might be at the bowl this weekend and you would be welcome to take my 176's for a spin to know for sure if that's what you want. They have Freeride +'s on them.

[Danno]

hmmm, about 5'10 and 175, have the mantras in a 177 and the gots in 183. Right out of the gate I found the Gots to be pretty responsive for a ski that big and heavy. Turned easily at most speeds, even enjoyed them in the bumps. I think you may need some petticoat removal surgery.

[Below Zero]

I think you need a vaginal sand remover.

[irul&ublo]

What he ^^^ said.

But...I'm 210+ and ski the 183s; they are plenty of ski.

Where are they mounted? I have mine on the line and find that a slightly forward position, as opposed to really forward, is best, beacuse on hard snow the tails wash out. Mine are mounted w/ FRs.

[s.p.c]

183 gots= best ec bump ski ever (MRG/ bush/ stowe) etc.
completely bumped off the flame bigs. rule it in super tight trees. and can go pretty fast too (wish there was the Real estate to run em.....)

take off the petticoat you are good.

[nexus]

i normally ski a 180ish but after a few days on my 189 seths they have become my every day ski

[uncle crud]

Great responses, thanks to all y'all who bothered to bang a few keys for my curiosity.

Below Zero, I enjoy my pudendal sand, but I'll think about having it removed.

Ruler, they're boot-centered on the "FR" line, the rearmost line of the 2 factory lines.

Magnoe, thanks for that offer, I may take you up on the test run idea.

I'm going to take another day on the Gotamas and see what's what. Yesterday I was just charging and chasing faster, better skiers and didn't spend any time at all getting to know the skis.

[kidwoo]

I don't weigh too much more than you and skied the 183s last year. Given they were a tad softer but they were straighter too.

Just grit your teeth and ski like you mean it. Superstar punani is like 2 feet tall and 98lbs and he skis those things just fine.

It's all in the grimace......I'm telling you. And supu has mastered the snarl that the gotama requires.

[ShawnB]

This sorta came up recently in another thread; the problem is possibly not the ski nor the pilot but the mount. The kind of behavior you're experiencing sounds a lot like what I got when I mounted my Karmas bootctr on FR. Remote tips/unresponsive tail/unpredictable turns. Moved them forward and sweet spot popped into existence like Schroedinger's Cat.

IF that is the prob, they get good at high speed b/c you're no longer making subtle movements to activate different parts of the ski (which unfortunately happen to be misplaced and therefore don't have the desired result), but putting giant forces into the ski to which it can't help but yield--and to good effect... You could probably make this happen at regular speeds too, but you're too good of a skier to let yourself lean so far forward in your stance that you actually activate the tips, which a too-far-rearward mount requires. And then of course once the ski whipped around, you'd be over the bars anyway.

Oh shit: NERRRRD ALEERRRRRT!!!!!!!! NNNNNEEEEEERRRRD ALEERRRRRT!!!!!!!!

Fuck this Epic shit. Move 'em forward 1.5 cm. If no-go, swappy w/ Magnoe and everymag's smiles all around. Yes yes?

[jerr]

I can't comment on moving the mount forward. Mine are on the FR line and it's never occured to me to want to move them. But I have found that gots love to be 'driven'. Tell them where you want them to go and the gigs on baby!

[Arty50]

I don't think you need to screw with the mount, you just need to ski them more and figure them out. It's the same when you buy any new pair of skis that has a different shape, especially if said shape is much fatter or skinnier. I went from 188 G4s to 190 Gotamas a few years back and it took me a while to figure out the Gotamas. Now they're like extensions of my feet. Adding 13 mm (22 in my case) in the waist carries a lot of consequences. For instance, you have to lay them over a lot more to carve; and this feels really different at first. Just give 'em a few days. It'll click.

[HitMe]

I don't think the mount is likely the problem. I will not argue with Shawn about what it did to his Karmas, but the Gotama is a very, very differnt ski and I don't think you generally will see the same benefits of added quickness (as in better draw into the turn) on a Gotama.

So, I would again recomend to first try to get used to the ski some more and also try to put the ski a bit more on edge when carving (ie get the skis out from under you early in the turn to get the sidecut to work a bit more).

[Bandit Man]

You went with a ski that is:

(a) longer
(b) wider
(c) has less sidecut

Gotamas have a rep for being more manageable on the groomed than most skis of the same genre, but not compared to skis like the im88. IMO they pretty much do big round turns on groomers, due to the sidecut (or lack thereof) and really only come into being when the speed is turned up. Get them in a foot of fresh and you'll stop whining and what they don't do so well.

Also, nobody ever said that the Gotamas didn't require strength and skill (especially fat ski skills) to ski, just that in comparison to some other popular fat skis that appeal to the same segment, like Explosivs for example, they have a slightly softer flex and feel more managable. It's a statement that means more if you have spent time on a stiffer fatty.

Obviously if your buyer's remorse overwhelms you, you'll have no problem pawning these off to the minions here who will gladly lap up your sloppy seconds.

[seldon]

I'd say you have the right ski length. I'm 5'9", 155 and I started off demoing the 06/07 (white ones) Gots in a 190, found them to basically not hook up for me, be unresponsive, and not even be that fun, and then tried the 183s and fell in love. I'm sure if I was charging harder the 190s would be the right ski - so I think the issue is both the transition to fat skis (I was on LPs so it wasn't a big deal) and just getting used to a very different ski.

[Rontele]

Take off your petticoat and ski.

Getting ski advice from Phill is like getting black power advice from the Grand Dragon of the KKK. And yes Phill, you are still a homo.

[seldon]

Getting ski advice from Phill is like getting black power advice from the Grand Dragon of the KKK. And yes Phill, you are still a homo.

Ooohhhhh.

[uncle crud]

well damned if it didn't take another day to make me feel less clueless and less disconnected. Today I found them difficult at one point (where they were telling me to go scary-fast in very manky snow) but at all other points just focused on asking them what they wanted and then getting foward/aggressive enough to give them what they wanted. They like to be driven full-time, none of that "well if you give us generally good coordinates we'll get you there safely and happily" like the Monster 88 offers. Nope. You have to be on-point all the time, and then they reward you.

I'm still a bit intimidated by them but today made real progress. Before today, based only on last Thursday, my attitude was that they were pretty much intimidating. Today I sorta figured out how to tell them what I want so that they can give me something that, with a generous view, reasonably resembles my request.

[jrtoes]

the fr line is way too far back...if i were you id go my shop and get a remount most likely. if you have a good tech they should be able to monkey around and find the sweet spot for you.peace

[HitMe]

Interesting. I think the FS line is way to far forward. The discrepancy is interesting since it must be something in either our respective stances or in the preferences on ski feedback that differs.

Personally, in powder, I like to keep my skis as flat as possible to be able to acclerate and keep speed and at the same time I like to stand as neutral as possible on the ski to be able to react fast in tight situations and take hits without loosing my balance at speed. Usually, a kind of rearward mounting point gives me that. To much forward means I have to get a bit more in the backseat to balance the float and this for me means slower reaction in the trees and less balance at speed. So, the traditional thinking back for stability and forwards for quickness really does not apply for me on pow.

On hardpack I can more reasily work around a more forward mount by altering the stance without having too big of an effect on other aspects of the ride.