East coast allmtn/bump ski?

T

thesoloist

Member
Tried other places without a solid answer, guess I'll try here. and please, any "full tilts" will get -k.

5'11-170lb, new england only. 7/10 skier. Have 178 chronics, great ski but can't do nothing in soft bumps(think the day after storm, all trails at killington are bump trails). Got destroyed on panic button and a little better on bittersweet. tails keep hitting uphill bumps throwing me all over the place lol.

what I'm looking for: around 85mm(+-5?), 170 length, soft so I don't get bounced around, good groomer/bump performance, doesn't have to be twins(won't hit park on these), can work around in allmtn/eastern tree conditions, don't care about powder since we don't get much if any.

Did went to local shop and guy there suggested Nordica steadfast(not sure I like the underfoot metal) and icelantic pilgrim(SO light and DAT CAMBER), I was thinking along the line of atomic panic(?)/blackeye ti(not sure about metal)/volkl rtm80(same metal)/rossi e83?

any help appreciated
 
Steadfest would be a good option, don't worry about the metal underfoot, it's just a binding reinforcement. I would be a little worried about the durability of the I-Core. Also check out the Blizzard Bushwacker, one of the best east coast tree and bump skis. Volkl Kendo's, yeah they got metal but they are a fantastic ski.
 
Oh no, i'm so scared.

Full tilts.

Also, if you can't ski bumps on the chronics, the problem is probably your technique, not the ski.

And also, is english your first language?
 
Why do you want such a skinny ski? I wouldn't recommend you get a ski thinner than 100 underfoot and ideally >110 is the best match. I changed my Mad River daily driver to 181 ON3P Caylor an I don't see myself going to a much skinnier ski in the future.
 
Maybe look for some of last seasons atomic punx. They feel just like a mogul ski. They are super fast edge to edge and the tip and tail and pretty soft. They are reasonable stiff underfoot though so you can carve them hard still.
 
This a ton. I rode on ice coast bumps/trees(on resort tree skiing is basically bump runs with tight trees) with 175 armada arvs which is a similar ski to the chronic but softer in the nose and didn't have any issues at all. In fact I have a ton of fun on a 90 waist ski in the bumps.

Don't ride the trough, cut into the ending of the bump and getting on the balls of your feet are the gas peddles so to speak.
 
Uhh, no. The wider a ski is, the harder it becomes to ski bumps. If op can't ski bumps on a 90 mm waisted ski, there's no way he can do it on 100+ waisted ski.

You ski a 120 waisted ski on a near daily basis on the east coast? Interesting choice
 
1) you get what you wish for.2) this is probably true.

3) what do you think? My guess is that you know you're thinking the correct answer.
 
1. oh, the horror! However will I live with myself knowing you -k'd me!?

2. then maybe just practice skiing bumps instead of wasting hundreds of dollars on a new ski that won't fix the problem?

3. either english isn't your first language, you're no older than 10, or you're just really stupid. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume english isn't your first language
 
Because if the OP actually wants to ski bumps well and enjoy doing it, you wouldn't want something over 90 underfoot.
 
I have to disagree. OP said he didn't want to get 'bounced around' on bump runs. To me that means he wants a stiffer, longer, wider ski. It means more stability in moguls and especially moguls covered in fresh snow, at least in my experience. Fatter skis are more fun in an all mountain context. I'm aware that goes against most of what OP said he was looking for in a ski, but I always try to recommend skis to people (whether they are friends looking for advice or in a context like this) that are a little longer/wider/more rockered than what they might otherwise choose. I think it helps with skill progression more than picking a more traditional ski.

I use Jeffreys/Dynafit for touring and Caylors/FKS as a daily driver. I can also move the Dynafit binders to the Caylors if I want to tour on them though.
 
Kestle FX 84 / 94 depending on what want, the early rise in the tip on the latest one makes it cracking all rounder. Ive just picked up a set of 94's in 186 and they are bang true to length. I got them as I wanted something a little bigger than my old Fischer Wateas for similar conditions, they just used to love smashing soft bumps and moguls. Going on fat skis through tight bumps and moguls is doable but just silly if you live where its not deep most of the time.
 
I'll have to disagree back. If he is getting bounced around on a soft ski it is due more to his technique than the ski. The longer a ski is the harder it is to turn quickly, making moguls more difficult, and the stiffer it is the less flex you get when hitting a bump, and the harder the ski will snap back from that flexed position, which is much more likely to throw you off balance than a softer ski with a more forgiving flex.

Unless op is a good enough skiier to go mach speed through moguls and just absorb them, he won't find more stability and control in moguls on a longer, wider, stiffer ski.

There's a reason competition mogul skis are short and skinny.
 
Finally, a competent and serious answer.

Why is everyone else big dicking each other? Just answer OP's question with a factual backed-answer. That simple.
 
Because we're not as soft as you, you fucking pussy.

and "factual backed-answer?" Nice english, numbnuts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top