FATYPUS vs. ARG

[ptavv]

Buy Spatulas. Take the extra money you would have spent on ARGs and buy booze. By the time you sober up, ski season will be over, and you'll have had a much better time.

[TheDon]

Ah ha that was good-funny and good advise...I can get a pretty good deal on some ARG's and I found a pair of the Spats for $375. But the fatypus I'd be paying the full 8 which sucks!

I hate decisions like this. The prophet was fun but so heavy that is why I was leaning toward the fatypus, its a touch shorter and lighter.

My bro has been into this forum for a while and put me on to it about two months ago, and after reading for a while it seems all the maggots are so into the SPATULA it is unreal...it is CULT LIKE!

[The Dad]

Look, the Fatypus is disparaged around here. I haven't ridden them, but consensus seems to be that at least when you get above Sumo dimensions, normal sidecut is a waste.

Personally, if I could rationalize another $400 on pow skis this year, I'd buy the Praxis. If I could rationalize twice that, I'd buy those and a pair of nice bump skis. But if the Praxis were gone, I'd probably rank the options Lotus 138, then ARG. I wouldn't bother with the Fatypus, just based on the reviews here. YMMV.

[leroy jenkins]

My first post in this thread was basically just shooting down one of your options. I figured I'd give you a few more to think about.

4frnt ehp 193
Praxis
Sumos
Drake Powderworks Lotus 138

Of course, you can always just try and find some spats, theres still some pairs floating around if you're willing to spend enough time waiting and looking.

Also, theres a thread about some super secret salomon fatties that are supposed to come out sometime thats pretty intruiging thats on the front page of tech talk now.

Out of all these, I want the ehp 193s, the Lotus' and maybe the Sollies.

Out of those, the 4frnts are the only ones that are currently available (well kinda) that I can afford.

[leroy jenkins]

Look, the Fatypus is disparaged around here. I haven't ridden them, but consensus seems to be that at least when you get above Sumo dimensions, normal sidecut is a waste.

I would also say that, unless it is a weird rockered ski, (which supposedly makes length less of an objective measurement) I'd say a ski that fat is useless under 190cm.

[Damian Sanders]

P+, shred the knar......

[skimasterflex]

If you're going to get rediculously fat skis that aren't reverse sidecut/camber my money is on the KW Megafat over the Fatpussies. They are also only 10 lbs. I have red ones coming myself. Full width bamboo core instead of the abs sidewalls they usually use on their skis, makes it about the same weight as the Fat at 116mm waist but the Mega is 146mm.

Someting tells me your measurements are off on the 130 though. I skied a pair with Reactors for a while and that was without an ACL in my right knee. There is no way I was hiking 2 years ago all spring with a 30lbs setup.

[TheDon]

[QUOTE=Damian Sanders;979533]


Three Words

SICK

SICK

SICK!!!

[TheDon]

You quote me at 30lbs

Someting tells me your measurements are off on the 130 though. I skied a pair with Reactors for a while and that was without an ACL in my right knee. There is no way I was hiking 2 years ago all spring with a 30lbs setup.

I actually said roughly 16lbs for the pair.

I had the Prophet 130 last year and loved’em but they were just so damn heavy (roughly 16Lbs a pair).

BTW I'm not saying it is a 100% acurate estimate on weight, all I know is that MoFo was Heavy. I am putting the z12 ti on what ever fatty I get cuz it weighs in at 3lbs, which is SWEEEET!

Double BTW I read your ideas on the KinsWood with thread...I have to say I agree with a lot of what you're saying after riding the 130 almost all season last year. It is crazy how an inch can feel bottomless.

[ill-advised strategy]

well, I bought Alottas...I'll review 'em when I ski 'em.

I guess we'll see. I figured there's no replacement for displacement. I wish they were available longer, but I'm thinking the short length might work well in the trees and whatnot.

[leroy jenkins]

P+, shred the knar......

So, what, are the skins to protect your bases on those gnarly descents?

[TheDon]

Yetiman--

So why did you decide to score the faty's?

I pretty much have a pair ordered them and then I started reading everbody's thoughts on this sight and now I'm not so sure.

But it seems like all on this forum think if your riding something with a waist bigger that 120 your nuts unless its spat shaped...ya know?

It is so cool to hear everybody's opinions.

I haven't riden the spats and now I am left wondering

[summit]

i agree that traditional sidecut camber seem a waste at the fattypus dimensions

OTOH all three persons i've spoken to/read reveiws from who have fattypus alottas... they seem to really like them

[pechelman]

i agree that traditional sidecut camber seem a waste at the fattypus dimensions

OTOH all three persons i've spoken to/read reveiws from who have fattypus alottas... they seem to really like them

you including jonski in that list?
i thought his review was somewhat negative especially with regard to their powder performance

[skimasterflex]

You quote me at 30lbs



I actually said roughly 16lbs for the pair.



BTW I'm not saying it is a 100% acurate estimate on weight, all I know is that MoFo was Heavy. I am putting the z12 ti on what ever fatty I get cuz it weighs in at 3lbs, which is SWEEEET!

Double BTW I read your ideas on the KinsWood with thread...I have to say I agree with a lot of what you're saying after riding the 130 almost all season last year. It is crazy how an inch can feel bottomless.

What I meant was that I was skiing the 130 with 8lbs Reactor 12s for a while. And while it was pretty effing heavy I just don't know if I could have been toting around That muh weight. Can the 130 really be 16lbs? That is all I am wondering. I would think it was more like 13lbs maybe. I'll weigh them if Line ever ships a ski again.

[arem86]

Hey, I've got a pair of last years Prophet 130's, so I figured I'd try'n weigh them, however we have some weird ass electronic scale, and they didn't weigh enough to even set the thing working by themselves, so I weighed myself, then stepped off and then stepped back on holding the skis, after doing this several times, I've come to believe they weigh somewhere in the 10-11 pound range. That is, of course without bindings. Hope this helps.

[Damian Sanders]

So, what, are the skins to protect your bases on those gnarly descents?

Yeah, didn't ski that one....I'm standing on a 15 foot drop/cliff, to 4 inches snow on liftline knar....

[ggski]

Have Alotta's. One day on them so far...15 inches of fresh, then crud and a few groomers. They killed it all. To soon to do a full blown review but, so far so good.

[TheDon]

I've come to believe they weigh somewhere in the 10-11 pound range.

Thanks, CRAZY, that means the fatypus the ARG and the KW Mega are all relatively the same weight.

Its funny how other companies will talk about how light their shi saying things like 'the lightest super fat ski on the market'. When they're all about the same.

A86-
I feel ya on Line's delivery date...What's the deal?

[TheDon]

Have Alotta's. One day on them so far...15 inches of fresh, then crud and a few groomers. They killed it all. To soon to do a full blown review but, so far so good.

Let me pick your brain...

Did you get the yellow guy, 06-07 model? At what price?
Have you ever rode a spat type pontoon rocker ski? if so, How do they compare?
How did you decide on the Alotta?

[bagtagley]

well, I bought Alottas...I'll review 'em when I ski 'em.

I guess we'll see. I figured there's no replacement for displacement. I wish they were available longer, but I'm thinking the short length might work well in the trees and whatnot.

Gotta be a step up from the 176 PRs you were on.

[Krash]

jonski's review last year was a good take on the ski, but it was a proto-demo that was mounted a little too far foward and thus not the ski anyone who buys a Fat-ypus would get. It took the boys a while to nail a good mount point down, but better late than never. The new skis '06-'07 have a new lay up and perform much better. Thus the rave Freeskier reviews, when Freeskier goes out and test, they just go out and rip it up no hype there.

I don't think sidecut is a waste over 120 in the waist, it is just hard to construct a ski to perform with those dimensions. But when done right, M1111, Sumo, Fat-ypus, Kingswood, Wally etc. the results are awesome.

I don't own a pair of Fat-ypus's but I think they rip, and ask anyone in Summit County, I bet they know someone who has the Fat-ypus and loves them! jonski's review was one of the only negative reviews I have seen, and I believe the issues he pointed out have been addressed

So I say go for it!

[fat yeti]

Weighed my prophets with solly 9-16 they weighed 16.5 pounds so with now bindings they should be around 10 lbs.

[Damian Sanders]

Its funny how other companies will talk about how light their shi saying things like 'the lightest super fat ski on the market'. When they're all about the same.

Wood/Foam/Fiberglass weigh pretty much the same no matter who the company is....if they're building skis of similar size, they are going to weigh similarly.....fact of life. Marketing is Marketing.

You may want look into the DP skis, I though I saw some weights posted in the 8.5-9 lb range......they were using an extra thin profile, and use more carbon instaid of fiberglass, so that explains why they were lighter....

End of the day though, get some bindings that weigh less........if you want a light ski, don't use S916's.

[TheDon]

End of the day though, get some bindings that weigh less........if you want a light ski, don't use S916's.

For real! Those are some Heavy Bitches!