I basically had my mind made up; I was going to buy a pair of the Fatypus alotta’s.
I had the Prophet 130 last year and loved’em but they were just so damn heavy (roughly 16Lbs a pair).
So this morning I got an e-mail from Tyson Hall, Tanner’s bro at Armada, he said the ARG pair weighs in at 9.5Lbs.The Fatypus is 10Lbs.Aaaaa!!!!
Help me out what do you guys think?
Results 1 to 25 of 71
Thread: FATYPUS vs. ARG
-
11-07-2006, 03:23 PM #1
Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- utar
- Posts
- 2,741
FATYPUS vs. ARG
-
11-07-2006, 03:33 PM #2
Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Posts
- 2,931
Those are really completely different skis. Fatypus is just a ridiculously fat board, while the ARGs are multi-sidecut Spat disciples.
-
11-07-2006, 03:36 PM #3
Merkin Merchant
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- sandy, sl,ut
- Posts
- 9,968
Everything I've heard about the fattypusses (besides the marketing hype, and you don't trust that do you?) rated them as meh or worse. True, I haven't heard a whole lot, but I also think that if they were a great ski, I would have heard more about them.
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ________________
"We don't need predator control, we need whiner control. Anyone who complains that "the gummint oughta do sumpin" about the wolves and coyotes should be darted, caged, and released in a more suitable habitat for them, like the middle of Manhattan." - Spats
"I'm constantly doing things I can't do. Thats how I get to do them." - Pablo Picasso
Cisco and his wife are fragile idiots who breed morons.
-
11-07-2006, 03:43 PM #4
Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- S.L.C.
- Posts
- 769
Big E beat me to it. But I will second him so as to pat my post count. They are going to be very different. If you liked the Prophets why don't you get Thugs or Sumo's? They are the same thing, but I think lighter.
Thanks Shane
-
11-07-2006, 03:47 PM #5
Stoner Witch
- Join Date
- Dec 2003
- Location
- Sea Level
- Posts
- 3,711
Based on the banged-up barmaid in their ad, I wouldn’t get the Fattywhatevers. The ARG looks rad.
The trumpet scatters its awful sound Over the graves of all lands Summoning all before the throne
Death and mankind shall be stunned When Nature arises To give account before the Judge
-
11-07-2006, 03:55 PM #6BLOOD SWEAT STEEL Guest
Nice name drop there.
-
11-07-2006, 03:59 PM #7
Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- Aspen
- Posts
- 9,565
Tanner Hall told me you should get ARGs.
-
11-07-2006, 04:05 PM #8
Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- utar
- Posts
- 2,741
Still a valid comparision both geared to ski the Pow!
Originally Posted by Big E
-
11-07-2006, 04:08 PM #9
Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- utar
- Posts
- 2,741
Great point man, mos def can't follow hype... does that mean you are throwing out Freeskier Mag's review of the ski? Originally Posted by leroy jenkins
-
11-07-2006, 04:09 PM #10
________________
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Boulder
- Posts
- 6,196
I'd throw out any mag's review. Originally Posted by TheDon
Search for Jonski's review on here. That'll give you the lowdown
-
11-07-2006, 04:11 PM #11
David Beckham's Evil Twin
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
- Radville
- Posts
- 3,328
Being suited for skiing pow is about all they have in common. Originally Posted by TheDon
Shapes, flex, camber/rocker are all completely different.
The Fatty, due to it's shape, will still be skiable all over the mtn.
The ARG, due to shape, rocker, etc, can be skied anywhere, but I wouldn't buy a pair if you plan to use them anytime other than 12"+ storms.I've got more suits than Liberace, but less than Eastvailhucker.
-
11-07-2006, 04:29 PM #12
Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- utar
- Posts
- 2,741
You really think so? Man you see guys on their fatty-bo-batty's with you know? 4" storms... all on their prophets and the spats. Well and that could be because alta is full of guys like that... Originally Posted by Vicious
But it is an interesting shape to say the least...probably no so hot on anything but pow...I don't know your thoughts?
-
11-07-2006, 04:34 PM #13
Mutt Wrangler
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
- Location
- Missoula, MT
- Posts
- 23,030
i just like how info@armadaskis.com seems to be tanner hall's bro. but Hall's not a common last name or anything.
No longer stuck.
Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn
-
11-07-2006, 04:40 PM #14
Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- utar
- Posts
- 2,741
Right...Elitist
-
11-07-2006, 04:42 PM #15
Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- utar
- Posts
- 2,741
XPick-
Jonski's review is it of the ARG or the Fatypus?
-
11-07-2006, 04:55 PM #16
________________
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Boulder
- Posts
- 6,196
Faty
I think that bossas and midget both have ARG's but I don't think anyone has skied them yet
-
11-07-2006, 05:01 PM #17
Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- utar
- Posts
- 2,741
Mother Shitter Son of Ass...I searched for it but am not finding it!
I will hit up bossass and midget to see what they think and when they get out on them
-
11-07-2006, 05:03 PM #18
Registered User
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Location
- Aspen
- Posts
- 9,565
http://tetongravity.com/forums/showt...hlight=fatypus Originally Posted by TheDon
Try harder next time, JONG!
-
11-07-2006, 05:06 PM #19
Banned
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 6,041
NO WAY!!!! Originally Posted by TheDon
I basically had my mind made up; I was going to buy a pair of the Fatypus alotta’s.
I had the Prophet 130 last year and loved’em but they were just so damn heavy (roughly 16Lbs a pair).
So this morning I got an e-mail from Tyson Hall, Tanner’s bro at Armada, he said the ARG pair weighs in at 9.5Lbs.The Fatypus is 10Lbs. Aaaaa!!!! Now I don’t know what to get!
Help me out what do you guys think?
There is no way in hell the P130 weighs 16lb for the skis alone. NO WAY!
16 lb with bindings.....or roughly 10-11 lb would be more realistic. I've fondled them, and they should weigh in that range.
FYI, the '07 Big Daddy is 10 lb flat on my scale.
-
11-07-2006, 05:09 PM #20
Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- utar
- Posts
- 2,741
Thanks...uh duh...
-
11-07-2006, 05:16 PM #21
defines PSIA level 11
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Location
- Redwood City and Alpine Meadows, CA
- Posts
- 8,276
Isn't the whole point of these megafat rockered reverse sidecut skis that they make even shallower snow ski bottomless? Or am I missing something? Originally Posted by Vicious
-
11-07-2006, 05:19 PM #22
Banned
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 6,041
Ok...
I don't think weight will be much of a factor then.
Try a lighter binding, perhaps.
-
11-07-2006, 05:20 PM #23
Banned
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 6,041
Originally Posted by alpinedad
Nope. Super fats are great in a light 6-12" of snow.
-
11-07-2006, 05:23 PM #24
Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Posts
- 2,931
I think most would say that the Spats kill it in just about any soft snow, the less ideal the conditions, the better they seem to get. The ARGs, with more normal sidecut (at least, not reverse) underfoot would seem to address the Spats biggest negative, their somewhat diabolical nature on hardpack. Originally Posted by alpinedad
In the interest of full disclosure, I'm a Spatulator, but only have about 4 days on mine thus far
-
11-07-2006, 05:27 PM #25
Registered User
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Location
- Wilson, Wyo.
- Posts
- 4,837
alpinedad--sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. Originally Posted by alpinedad
it depends on the specific ski you're talking about (spats have a tendency to do that). one simple reason is that they float more than other skis due to surface area...but the sidecut and camber profiles have a significant effect.
i won't comment on the ARGs or other skis that i haven't ridden. suffice to say that while all "huge" skis will tend to do pretty well in deep pow, not all will do as well in 2-6"...and even fewer will do well on the beaten path.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks