What's Blizzard up to?

[skibrd]

Just posting here to say that my 187-cm 2019 Blizzard Brahma 88’s are amazing. Skied them at the Stevens Pass opener today...wow. So stable. So much fun. So much easier to ski than a 187 Bonafide (not that those are super challenging to ski). Haven’t had that much fun on a narrow waisted ski in years.

I’ve had mine out the past few days and they are a ton of fun. Totally worth the quiver spot for these early-season man-made snow days. I will say the rustler 10 and rustler 9 are just as much fun as the Brahmas but in a different way.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Beder]

Ripping groomers on my new Brahma 82's. Very fun ski and my old knees appreciate the narrower waist.

anti jinx--maybe a change in the weather about mid-month?

[Rossymcg]

how would the r10/r11 compare to say a volkl 90eight/100eight?

Sent from my SM-G973F using TGR Forums mobile app

[I've seen black diamonds!]

how would the r10/r11 compare to say a volkl 90eight/100eight?

Sent from my SM-G973F using TGR Forums mobile app

Haven't skied the Volkls but want to point out that the 2 Rustlers are not similar skis. The 11's are easy but very stable and happy to go straight unless you tell them otherwise. 10's want to turn, turn, turn.

[skibrd]

The R10 is very playful, but has that Blizzard stability.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Gentleman Skier]

I just got a pair of the new Blizzard Spurs in 189. It's my first pure powder ski and I plan to use it mostly for touring in the interior of BC (Kootenays) and very deep days at the resort (Red Mountain). I'm having some trouble deciding on what binding to get. I'm wondering if others have a similar setup and what they would suggest for a binding. I've had suggestions of everything from Cast to lightweight pin bindings and I'm curious if others have ideas. I'm 6 feet about 200lbs advanced skier. I already have some other setups for touring and the resort so this would be skied when its really deep only.
Thanks

[whyturn]

I just got a pair of the new Blizzard Spurs in 189. It's my first pure powder ski and I plan to use it mostly for touring in the interior of BC (Kootenays) and very deep days at the resort (Red Mountain). I'm having some trouble deciding on what binding to get. I'm wondering if others have a similar setup and what they would suggest for a binding. I've had suggestions of everything from Cast to lightweight pin bindings and I'm curious if others have ideas. I'm 6 feet about 200lbs advanced skier. I already have some other setups for touring and the resort so this would be skied when its really deep only.
Thanks

I think tecton or ATK is always solid. I’m not a shift fan but others are. I drive a 125 waist and 120 waist 193 touring skis with tecton at 190 lbs. that heel is solid for sure on tecton. Not bad on weight. SFB loves ATK and he drives 190 lotus 120 very hard


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[mr_pretzel]

I was just gonna say I got to checkout the new Spur a few days ago in a shop and holy heck is that tail stiff. Looks like an awesome deep day ski!

If you’re going to be pounding on them at the resort something like a shift or Cast makes sense in my book.

[PeachesNCream]

I think tecton or ATK is always solid. I’m not a shift fan but others are. I drive a 125 waist and 120 waist 193 touring skis with tecton at 190 lbs. that heel is solid for sure on tecton. Not bad on weight. SFB loves ATK and he drives 190 lotus 120 very hard


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

2nd the tecton or ATK. I think you can do better weight-wise than the shift if you're going to be using it for mostly touring.

I'd say something like:

90% touring, 10% resort: ATK
60% touring, 40% resort: Tecton
25% touring, 75% resort: Shift or CAST depending on if you want bomber or less fiddle factor

[HAB]

Like others have been saying, really depends how you're going to use them. My three pow skis have Shift, CAST, and Zeds on them. I look at Shift and CAST as really good options for mostly mechanized skiing that you can do a little skinning on. The Zeds make sense for a dedicated touring ski, but I'm not taking those inbounds.

[skibrd]

CAST


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Bandit Man]

I cannot remember who I bought them from here, but my 19-yo daughter loves her Black Pearl 98’s. Her skiing has improved and confidence has increased dramatically after her first two days on them. She loves skis with metal now. [emoji4]

[gregL]

I cannot remember who I bought them from here, but my 19-yo daughter loves her Black Pearl 98’s. Her skiing has improved and confidence has increased dramatically after her first two days on them. She loves skis with metal now. [emoji4]

Yeah, the Black Pearl 98 is a winner - many of our male testers thought it was the best ski they tried at WWSRA last spring.

[counterfeitfake]

My wife loved her older Black Pearls. I tried a pair back when it didn't have a number- I think it was 88 underfoot. Seemed good but at my height/weight they kind of folded up under me. Which is fine, if you're a 170 lb woman who skis hard you should go ahead and get a "man's" ski.

Has anybody used this year's Cochise? I'm really curious about the idea they might have tried to make it like the OG Cochise, but haven't heard any firsthand info.

[gregorys]

Has anybody used this year's Cochise? I'm really curious about the idea they might have tried to make it like the OG Cochise, but haven't heard any firsthand info.

Yes. +1000
(Personally, I think we have about the same chance of the Easter Bunny being real as Blizzard making the OG Cochise again. I'd love it, but I seriously doubt they're headed that way. OG Bodacious gone, lots of other skis getting more "playful" etc. That seems to be the exact opposite direction.)

But would love to see someone's honest take that's been on the OG Cochise, Carbon Cochise (last 5 years?) and the new 20-21 Cochise. I'm not rushing out to buy one, either way - but still would love to hear.

[Gentleman Skier]

I'm leaning towards the tecton or kingpin option since I plan to ski them at the resort now and then.

[skibrd]

I'm leaning towards the tecton or kingpin option since I plan to ski them at the resort now and then.

I’ve beat on kingpins hard inbounds. Go with them. They are great.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[kid-kapow]

I’ve beat on kingpins hard inbounds. Go with them. They are great.

The front elasticity of Tectons should make them the better choice for inbounds skiing. Hell, Vipecs could be a good option too.

Then again - I would either go lighter - something like a 300gr tech binding - or heavier - Cast.

Argument for lighter: these will primarily see soft snow use. As such, the weight and shape of the skis vs the snow it will see is what makes the larger impact, not the bindings. So you might as well optimize an already heavy setup a bit for the up. Sure, Tectons could be a way of optimizing for the up, but investing for the down, but are the conditions going to be that demanding? If not, go light - ATK FR14 / Moment Voyager or some such. Yeah, your knees will not be super happy during skiing in variable, but that is not what you bought these skis for right?

Argument for Cast: The weight difference between a Kingpins and Cast is pretty marginal - like 220grs. So where the Cast will suck more - going uphill, they will suck less relatively speaking, than hammering through variable where the front elasticity is going to make a huge difference. So if you want to do Kingpins you might as well go Cast imho. That way you can go throttle on the downs, but yeah - they will be a bit on the heavy side walking to the top.

so kingpins are in a no mans land inbetween imho. I do not get why people buy it anymore. Weight focus: Tecton. Full on alpine: Cast or Shift. Heavy, non-elastic tech toe binding - Kingpin.

edit: my bad - the correct weights of Kingpins are 690 for the 13 version and 630 for the m works version. So the differences are bit larger than stated above ie more favorable for the Kingpins. I still would not buy either version though (or I would pick Kingpins over Dynafit's offerings). ATKs, MTNs or Vipec/Tectons are just better options imho. I run Vipecs, Shifts and Casts for my >110mm powder skis that will see occasional touring (so yeah, no overlap in my quiver at all ) The lighter weight skis - BMT122s - have Vipecs, where the Cast/Shift is mounted on standard layup resort skis from ON3P.

[stuntmanbo]

so kingpins are in a no mans land inbetween imho. I do not get why people buy it anymore.

This exactly 100%.

I don’t really like Tecton/Vipec but I get why people buy them.

For me it’s either ATK R12/FR14 either the Shift.

ST Rotation, Ion, Guide, etc are basically worse (more fiddly, worse climbing aids) than a R12 and weight almost twice as much.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

I own Tecton, Kingpins and Shifts. Haven't skied the new version of the Kingpins, but the old version is my least favorite of the three.

[XavierD]

Kingpins are the only one of those three which use the same crampons as all my other backcountry bindings.

[HAB]

Kingpins are the only one of those three which use the same crampons as all my other backcountry bindings.

While it's nice that they use a more common crampon, that doesn't feel like a great reason to buy them. Especially when we're talking about a 12x underfoot pow ski.

[XavierD]

While it's nice that they use a more common crampon, that doesn't feel like a great reason to buy them. Especially when we're talking about a 12x underfoot pow ski.

Sometimes you need to cross the constantly windbuffed to a hard shine aspect ha going over some rectum puckering exposure to get first tracks down that very deep very fun well protected couloir.

Kingpins ski fine and I doubt most folks can tell the difference between them and Tectons or even shifts on 120mm skis in most conditions where you are skiing 120mm skis. They are also pretty consistently available for cheaper than Tectons.

Tectons are easy to use for sure, and honestly a phenomenal touring binding but using standard crampons has got to be the easiest ask out there. Many of this community of mediocre fucks want hole patterns standardized so they can go to the pain of installing inserts.

[Eluder]

Has anybody used this year's Cochise? I'm really curious about the idea they might have tried to make it like the OG Cochise, but haven't heard any firsthand info.

I am about to drill my pair. I have some 2015's these are replacing, (OG shape with a little bit of camber instead of flat). I put some days on the 20/21 ski at Big Sky last January. The models in-between were fine skis but I always liked my older pair better so I never moved on. These definitely inspired me to get a new pair, they still charge and are stable but perform a better in the fresh snow. I was stoked to find that you can still lock in and do huge arcing turns even though the radius came down a touch, its not dumbed down that's for sure. Thankfully Blizzard didn't do anything stupid and try to rewrite the script here, this ski was best in class at its roots IMO and I feel they have improved it with this iteration. If you like skis like this these are certainly worth a go.

[Adrgha]

I just got a pair of the new Blizzard Spurs in 189. It's my first pure powder ski and I plan to use it mostly for touring in the interior of BC (Kootenays) and very deep days at the resort (Red Mountain). I'm having some trouble deciding on what binding to get. I'm wondering if others have a similar setup and what they would suggest for a binding. I've had suggestions of everything from Cast to lightweight pin bindings and I'm curious if others have ideas. I'm 6 feet about 200lbs advanced skier. I already have some other setups for touring and the resort so this would be skied when its really deep only.
Thanks

What do these things weight? They look really interesting.