Jp juliens in park?

i would alo consider the arv's ive never tried the jp's or lizzies but the arv's are sick in the park so soft and poppy but there width is really stable on landings
 
well im not actually worried about lizzies but i just havent heard much about the jps
 
The ski is great for jumps, and rails arent bad... If you are wondering about softness they are nothing compaired to the invaders. the invaders are almost too soft for big jumps i feel. the JPs always felt stable despite being a "soft" ski.
 
Hey hey hey, I actually have a real answer for you:

If you go to Armadaskis.com and click on "skis," in the lower right corner of the window it says "Which ski si right for me?" If you click on this, it takes you to a "condition matrix," a grid where they rate each ski in each condition on a scale of 1 to 10. They rate the JPvsJulien at a 4 in the park, which is the LOWEST score they give any of their products in any condition. To sum it up, it just wasn't designed for park use. The Elizabeth, on the other hand, was designed by Pollard as a really fat park ski. It is designed with all the features of a park ski (nearly symmetrical shape, nearly center mount, symmetrical flex, etc.). If you want a fat ski in the park, I'd say Elizabeth is a good choice (though there are many others), and JPvsJulien is a bad choice.
 
how bout the edge? i know they have a thinner edge to reduce weight, how does it hold up?
 
Fine, i have two pairs of JP's and my brother has a pair and they have held up great,,, mind you we arent hitting the rails all day everyday,,,we have park skis for that. But for the average use it should be OK.

Also i wouldnt go too much off that website thing mentioned above,,, itt is all marketing. the lizzies for example might be marketed as a park ski, but it really excels in pow. anythng with a waist like that is going to be great for pow.

I just wouldnt buy the JP thinking it is going to be mostly used in the park,,,,,unless mayby , mayby if you were considering the 178.
 
I personally didn't like my JJ's in park at all. They are not as soft as they used to be considered imo... Sure, tails are soft like i don't now what, but tips are not even close (yet not stiff by any means). So, what you get is like no support on backseat landings and not that butterable tips, i mean they are just not as fun for that shit as most of park skis out there. Also they were noticeably slower than my park skis (i wax them all like everyday i go skiing), i think it's due to the huge surface area. As a pipe ski they suck like nothing, consider supersoft tails and 38m turning radius (according to Endre's measurements).

So i'd say they are amazing "backcountry freestyle" kind of skis, i really enjoyed them for what they were designed for. But there're tons of better options for wider park skis imo.

47283590.jpg
 
they butter nice, but are too big for serious park riding, especially in the 188 size, they work alright off jumps as long as you're not spinning more than 5 or 7. bulky on rails due to the width. and the lack of sidecut is a down to for park. also the long size and width can be harder to hold an end on icy pipe walls. as for the edges, they're not the strongest, saying armada edges like to crack (they're average for cracking, but stay in the ski once cracked, not ripping out), a skinnier edge won't help your cause.
 
For park yes,,,, but if you ride at the Bird and are looking for a great all around ski the JPs would have to be the pick.

Like JP said, if he could only take one ski it would be the JPs.

They wil be fine in the park,,,especially the 178.
 
the ARV's and JJ's are almost identical, the tip/waist/tail are all like 3 or 5 mm's wider than the ARV....

i think JJ's would be fine in park especialy if you got the 178's, cuz they are so light.
 
never have rodden either but i know when i went to pick up the Jp vs jew I thought they would be heavy and put a littile bit of force into them and hit the ceiling of my local low roof shop...they are light but i dont know which is better thought i would just say this
 
The waist on the Jp is about 13 mm wider than the ARVs you have. The tip and tails on the Jp are about 10mm wider. As you can see, the Jp is much wider and has less sidecut by looking at this comparison. ARV's are a much much better park si. I love ARV's in the park. Jps are doable but it just isn't as easy, or fun.
 
you ride the bird what are you doing asking about park skis? only kidding.

if you already have a pair of charging skis, get lizzies, they are super fun and rock socks for jibbing.

if this is going to be your only ski and you ride the bird, don't get either. lizzies won't be able to handle the punishment of a badass mountain like that. jp's would be a little better on the mountain, but lizzies kill them for park, (unless you don't slide rails and only hit kickers larger than 60 ft.)

if it's your only ski for snowbird, arv would be much better suited.

of course if you're skiing the bird you should have burlier skis than any mentioned in this thread unless you're a tiny dude. there's so much better stuff to do at that mountain than ride park.

 
its not like im just getting this ski for only park. i just wanna make sure it skis it okay because i do ride park but only when everything else sucks.
 
my friend has seth's and he charges crud and still skis good in the park with them you should check some out get the 179 or some ak enemy's or w/e the k2's kill it everywhere
 
I aint sayin' nothing, I'm telling you that ARMADA says the ANT and the ARG are better in the park than the JJ's. I'd think they'd know best.
 
Upon closer inspection, for ANT in the park it actually says NA instead of a number score, and the ARG does not appear on the table. That said, 4/10 is the lowest score that they give to any of their products in any condition, so by Armada's own admission, it aint to good in the park.
 
i like my ants in the park. much more than jjs. args though, those are downright scary to ride on anything remotely groomed.
 
i think they turn better than the jj. i own ants and my good friend owns jjs so i've skied them both a lot and i just think the ants are more fun in the park than jjs. i like the extra stiffness too. it's great for big landings. they are a bit laborious for small rails and shit though. so when i say fun for park, i mainly mean jumping.
 
wait does that mean that the fujative and the tm are softer or that the jps are softer than those?
 
JJs have a 38 M radius, AKA they are straight. not designed for groomed shit, dont even bother. besides, the flex is not good for park. ARVs are much better for a dual purpose ski.
 
Yes, but he rides at the bird...I have ridden both skis and for the bird and its park and its oh so lovely powder the JPs i think are a much better choice....They are fine on groomers.
 
Second this. Yes they are soft, but by no means are they a soft that is good in the park. The flex is just wierd for park, It's probably just the length but I dunno.
 
ok so obviously there are people not listening...he skis the bird and wants something fatter tha 100 underfoot...

honestly i was in the exact same situation as you(minus skiing the bird) and i was considering the BC's too, and i ended up going with the BC's, and now i really wish i had gotten the Lizzies. If i had the money i would have lizzies and JP's just because the JP's are sooooo damn light and feel like you would have so much control over them that they would basically feel like part of you. If only armada could find a way to beef up the edges and stregthen the core a little w/o too much weight. All i have heard is how much fun the Lizzies are. They seem like a total hybrid ski...something completely new. The BC's are just a little too stiff, and diffinetely stiffer than the Lizzies and JJ's. if they were a little softer they would be soo much fun. I actually skied my BC's this year at the bird and they were superb. i dropped a few 5-10 ft cliffs with them and just bombed. They mashed the crud and floated pow excellently. I also had a day with 12-18 inches fresh with almost no visibility outside the trees, but it didnt matter because they floated so well and i was so cofident in their ability with crud that i didnt even worry. i would say get the lizzies. Im guessing its not like you plan to ride crud, because no one likes crud and everyone avoids it when possible. Your buying a ski that floats pow and its fun to mess around in the park with is what it sounds like. thats exactly what i was looking for and wish i had gotten the lizzies. Hopefully i wasnt too biased or anything...good luck.

p.s. i got the impression that you are a smaller guy so lizzies wouldnt be all that super soft. Also, ive heard and seen excellent things out of the seth, but it seems like you were looking for over 100 waist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top