Line Eric Pollard Pros?

Line's 'pro-models' are built with the same construction, they're just different sizes and widths. They'll ski pretty much the same as the skogan or mike nick with more millimeters underfoot.

ns ogre crew

ns gear geek
 
except theyre 10/15 cms longer, and probably a bit stiffer.

Thats like saying a 189 Pistol will ski like a 179 Fujative.

Anyways, ive heard theyre fun in soft stuff, probably a sick BC jib ski.

 
Except that the Fujative and the Pistol are built completely differently. The Line pro models all use the same core, the same fiberglass, and the same construction. Thus, they will ski very similarly. A longer ski is not always stiffer. It all depends on the construction.

ns ogre crew

ns gear geek
 
thats a lie, its true with all the companys, that they use the same cores, and toppings usually as other skis. that doesnt make it a pro model. the fact that makes it a pro model is that eric designed it. i garuntee it skis way differently than the skogen or 1260. just because they use the same stuff doesnt make it the same.

 
It's way different than a 1260 because a 1260 uses different glass and different construction.

The Seth Pistol and PE are not the same skis, either. They have different cores.

ns ogre crew

ns gear geek
 
according to the line website, each promodel features a 'rider specific flex pattern.'

------

i didn't come here with pants, and i'm not leaving with pants
 
Hey, go ski 'em all and tell me what you think. I have. I'm not here to argue about it. If you want to tell me that a ski with the certain materials put into it skis significantly better or worse than another ski with the exact same materials, I'm not gonna bother trying to convince you otherwise.

My *opinion* is that the Pollard skis like a Skogan that's a little longer and a little fatter. It is marginally slower edging and marginally more stable because it's longer and wider. By no means am I trying to argue that it's not a good ski, or that any Line pro-model isn't a good ski, because they're good skis, and there are plenty of people out there riding them who think they're good skis too. They're just all built the same. Which is not true with other companies. K2 has the Pistol, PE, and Fujative, all of which have different cores. Rossi has the Scratch and the Scratch FS, both of which have different cores and construction. Etc, on down the line.

ns ogre crew

ns gear geek
 
i saw them there fat as hell def just stick to pow with them they would be nuts

**************************************************

I have Armada AR5's and they are glorious
 
um...did we forget sidecut guys? ive ski'd and seen them all in various stages/cut in half/ ect

yes..the core is generally the same in all of lines skis...its a birch aspen macroblock core..heres the difference

diff cores...diff flexes...the same materials dont mean the same ski..the cores are thinner/thicker for pro specific flex..fiberglass also makes a ski softer or stiffer...more fiberflass means a stiffer flex

sidecut...all line skis have diff sidecuts, meaning they all ride differently

1260 has a carbonfiber stringer for pop....mothership has a titanium sheet for extra rigidity and edge hold

so no...line skis ARENT all the same....just by changing the thickness of some wood, a sidecut, or fiberglass

and whoever asked about the Eric Pollard pro 'fall line'

pretty stiff, rides really nice, excellent powder switch riding, just kinda iffy for east coast riding...i wouldnt use it as my ONLY ski, but i still love it

Line Skis

Siver Cartel

Orage

Powder

Armada

Dynastar
 
heh, exactly what I expected, a bunch of 'Ooh, what he said because I didn't have a clue what I was talking about' Props to h30 for actually knowing what he's talking about, rather than just spewing though...

The sidecut *would* be an issue, except for one thing: The sidecut radius on the 3 pro-models is 20.5, 20, and 19.5. Half a meter difference. Over the length of a 171, 176, or 186 cm ski. IMO, not much difference. If we were talking about like a 17.5 vs a 20.5, then there'd definitely be a difference.

I'll be honest, I've never been to the Line factory, but seeing how their cores are manufactured (with the multiple length-long blocks), it wouldn't make senese that they have different thicknesses of blocks, as that would be significantly less efficent (and much more expensive) than using the same 'blocks' to create different widths of skis. I haven't gotten out the caliper, but the skis *appear* to be the same profile height. As I said, though, I haven't measured them beyond eyesight, and I'd be more than willing to be proven wrong.

As I said before, it is my opinion that the Pollard skis like a slightly longer, wider Skogan. It's definitely a great soft-snow jib ski.

ns ogre crew

ns gear geek
 
my friend has had them since the begining of the season.....sry i cant tell you much about them he says there really nice though, and there really not that big in comparison to like the pistols....

 
well the pollards are wider underfoot than the skogen or the mike nicks and by that alone they're going to ride a little bit different

___________________________

''Shake it like a polaroid picture''

 
what up..... im an idiot. So someone clear this up for me.... im looking at getting a pair of these bad boys, im gonna be doing like 75% backcountry, 20% rails and 5% jumps..... am i stupid to buy pollard pros?

Bent Films

www.canonskiboards.com
 
^i'd go pollard as a minimum if you're going to be hitting 75% BC....pistol, msp, arv, moship maybe

-Strode

Abba Zabba, you my only friend
 
thats sick thanks..... why a minimum? do you think that arv/msp/moship/pistols, will out perform the erpollapros in the BC and as all around boards so i can still do handrails and take em into the park?

b

Bent Films

www.canonskiboards.com
 
hah nice, 5'12"

=======================

don't take me for a joke, i'm no comedian. too many mental problems got me snortin' coke and smokin' weed again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top