Moment Skis Discussion Thread

14587153:hot.pocket said:
Today we're gonna talk about how to talk about skis.

A new video series where we break down different aspects of ski design and how they affect performance.

Ski design information has been somewhat of a black box, especially compared to the in depth information and knowledge of similar industries like mountain bikes. We're working on opening some of this info up for the less informed so everyone can make better informed decisions when it comes to skis.

First up, camber and rocker.


**This post was edited on Feb 2nd 2024 at 3:52:09pm
Click to expand...

Love this.
 
Finally got a pair of Commander 98. Felt immediately locked in and confident. Any specific reason for the change? It's only 1 day skiing them but they felt about perfect for a daily all-mountain. And last years topsheet stands out on the snow.
 
14587539:officechair said:
Finally got a pair of Commander 98. Felt immediately locked in and confident. Any specific reason for the change? It's only 1 day skiing them but they felt about perfect for a daily all-mountain. And last years topsheet stands out on the snow.
Click to expand...

The reason for the update was to create less overlap between the new Countach 110 and the Commander 108.

With the Countach 110 taking the spot for a big mountain charging ski, we opted to slim down the Commander line from the 98 / 108 to the new 92 / 102, while giving it better groomer / low tide / hardpack performance.

We tackled this through a tighter sidecut, more radii for a variety of turn shapes, lower rocker lines and a heavier / stiffer build.

There wasn't anything inherently wrong with the 98, we simply wanted to move the Commander line more towards a traditional carving ski while maintaining some all mountain flair.
 
Just some idle thoughts, but man I really liked last seasons DW top sheet with the Reaper.

If anybody in Europe has a pair kicking around >=184 maybe lemme know. Any width, they were both awesome but fatter is better.
 
Anyone ridden the Countach 110? From speaking with the Moment folks it sounds like this is their soft snow freeride-y ski, which sounds right up my alley. I am looking to replace my Praxis MVP 108 (might have just obliterated bases being to greedy at Kirkwood on some cliffs and chutes) and am really intrigued by the balance of directional/charge and playfulness. Sounds like a lot of their athletes are opting for the Countach for soft snow over the Wildcat or Deathwish. Really looking for that ski I can daily drive for the most part up in Washington that allows me to feel confident at speed on a steep line, pivot nicely when things get tight, and stable in the air and landing. Anyone out here grabbing the Countach over the Wildcat or Deathwish? Or why are you going with the Wildcat or Deathwish over the Countach?
 
14589020:colerichardmyers said:
Anyone ridden the Countach 110? From speaking with the Moment folks it sounds like this is their soft snow freeride-y ski, which sounds right up my alley. I am looking to replace my Praxis MVP 108 (might have just obliterated bases being to greedy at Kirkwood on some cliffs and chutes) and am really intrigued by the balance of directional/charge and playfulness. Sounds like a lot of their athletes are opting for the Countach for soft snow over the Wildcat or Deathwish. Really looking for that ski I can daily drive for the most part up in Washington that allows me to feel confident at speed on a steep line, pivot nicely when things get tight, and stable in the air and landing. Anyone out here grabbing the Countach over the Wildcat or Deathwish? Or why are you going with the Wildcat or Deathwish over the Countach?
Click to expand...

I bought a set this year and also live in Washington. I absolutely love them. I bought them for deep snow and didn't pull them out until that big storm we had a few weeks back in January. They preformed fantastic in 12"+ powder. Really strong and stable, but could dump speed whenever you wanted. They also seem very nimble and light. What I rode before the Countach, and are now my rock skis, are a set of 2020 Jskis Hotshots which are around 2300 grams if I remember right. The Moments make me feel very in tune with what I'm skiing vs with the J's (which I do love) that just let me plow over anything no matter what the conditions. We lost 20 or so inches last week at Stevens pass and I still haven't put them away. Even at 110mm they're my go to skis. At least until I pick up some commanders for icy days. To answer your question though, I picked the Countach because it sounded like it would be a great soft snow ski while also being an all rounder. It very much is. On top of that in the marketing it stated it was a hard charging ski without metal which is what I had before. I was looking for something similar thile being a little lighter. Lol hope that made sense and I wasn't just rambling ?.

Also I'm 6'2, 200lbs on a 188cm. I could have sized up, but I like my 188s
 
14589090:JerryAllDay said:
I bought a set this year and also live in Washington. I absolutely love them. I bought them for deep snow and didn't pull them out until that big storm we had a few weeks back in January. They preformed fantastic in 12"+ powder. Really strong and stable, but could dump speed whenever you wanted. They also seem very nimble and light. What I rode before the Countach, and are now my rock skis, are a set of 2020 Jskis Hotshots which are around 2300 grams if I remember right. The Moments make me feel very in tune with what I'm skiing vs with the J's (which I do love) that just let me plow over anything no matter what the conditions. We lost 20 or so inches last week at Stevens pass and I still haven't put them away. Even at 110mm they're my go to skis. At least until I pick up some commanders for icy days. To answer your question though, I picked the Countach because it sounded like it would be a great soft snow ski while also being an all rounder. It very much is. On top of that in the marketing it stated it was a hard charging ski without metal which is what I had before. I was looking for something similar thile being a little lighter. Lol hope that made sense and I wasn't just rambling ?.

Also I'm 6'2, 200lbs on a 188cm. I could have sized up, but I like my 188s
Click to expand...

Yeah I’m thinking it would be a great daily driver for the most part and I’d probably get the WC 101 or DW 104 when spring sales come up end of season. Appreciate the feedback.
 
14589020:colerichardmyers said:
Anyone ridden the Countach 110? From speaking with the Moment folks it sounds like this is their soft snow freeride-y ski, which sounds right up my alley. I am looking to replace my Praxis MVP 108 (might have just obliterated bases being to greedy at Kirkwood on some cliffs and chutes) and am really intrigued by the balance of directional/charge and playfulness. Sounds like a lot of their athletes are opting for the Countach for soft snow over the Wildcat or Deathwish. Really looking for that ski I can daily drive for the most part up in Washington that allows me to feel confident at speed on a steep line, pivot nicely when things get tight, and stable in the air and landing. Anyone out here grabbing the Countach over the Wildcat or Deathwish? Or why are you going with the Wildcat or Deathwish over the Countach?
Click to expand...

I’ll give you the other end of the question. The WC/DW over the countach.

let’s get the easy one out of the way. The only reason to choose the WC over the CT would be you prefer a more progressive forward mounted ski. The WC mounts -6 and the CT mounts -8. Not a world apart but forsure changes the dynamics of the ski. If you prefer a more progressive free ride ski you’ll be happier on a WC. If you prefer a more directional charger you’d prefer the CT.

for all intensive purposes the CT front half is a WC 116 with 1mm narrower tips and 1mm narrower tails that are more flat but not commander flat. It’s 140/130 which is part of the reason for the amazing float. That’s also the reason with the flatter tail on the CT it requires a bit more work and better technique to really push through the shovels being further back but also allows the ski to charge really well. The radius is also smaller on the CT so it’s faster edge to edge when comparing it to the 116 WC. Smaller radius than the 108 as well.

the core is poplar and beech, Which gives it the higher stability at speed and more charging characteristics over the WC which is poplar and ash. I personally prefer a more progressive ski and mount. I have commander 98‘s and they’re my least favorite moment ski because of the mount and heavy directional feel. But I wanted something for icy days that had metal.

now onto the DW. for comparisons sake I’ll describe mainly the 104 over the 112 since you mentioned you’re considering that as well.

the DW 104 is going to be playful and pivoty but still has no issues charging down the mountain and holds good stability for a ski with its waist size. It’s going to be faster edge to edge than any of the others mentioned due to its waist and radius. While it’s still higher than the CT the lower waist makes up for the difference.

its shares a similar core to the CT in that it’s poplar and beech as well. So the stiffness and stability is much higher compared to the WC and DW 112 which are both poplar and ash. The 104 is essentially the same weight as the 112 with both being 8lbs in a 184. The 104 core is a more stout wood combo like the CT so it gains more weight. The CT is 9lbs in a 182. The 104 punches above its weight for high speed stability and usually surprises people for how composed it is at speed, especially if they’ve been on the 112 as the 104 is more chargy than the 112.

you will obviously lose float with the 104 compared to the CT. That being said it holds its own fairly well in soft snow and really doesn’t have issues until you’re getting into the deep deep. The tips are 132 so not some narrow sticks.

The big factor that tips the scale in my opinion for the 104 is the triple camber. That allows the dw’s and specifically the 104 to handle such a wider range of conditions that the CT just can’t match. When things get firmed up, icy, crusted over or just really shitty the DW comes alive. The triple camber will bite into essentially any surface and gives you grip where there just typically isn’t in a normal rocker profile. As great as the CT is, and it is that Great it just has a narrower window that it performs well in and a longer list of conditions it’s not ideal in. Where as the DW is the opposite. There really are no conditions it isn’t great in until you get into super deep days. While you could absolutely ski the CT from the start of the season to the end and it would work, You’re going to have a better time on a DW 104 in that same time frame.

you made it sound like you’re going to be using essentially one ski for the time being and hopefully getting something else down the road. For me personally in that situation I want the ski with the widest range of performance that’s going to give me the maximum amount of good days in most conditions. Which is going to be the DW 104. If I had to get only one right now. I’d choose that personally. Then add the CT as a second ski down the road for deeper days.

with all that being said unless something wild drops in the reserve line that I need to have I’ll be adding a Countach as my next ski to the quiver. So I’m a lover of the ski. I just already have a DW 104 and 112 currently in the quiver.

you can’t go wrong with either one. Just for me personally triple camber is real and it greatly improves your skiing experience across a much wider range of days. It’s the reason the ghost train has become my favorite ski period. A ski that big especially in my 194 shouldn’t be able to do what it does, but that’s triple camber.
 
14589127:PartyBullshiit said:
I’ll give you the other end of the question. The WC/DW over the countach.

let’s get the easy one out of the way. The only reason to choose the WC over the CT would be you prefer a more progressive forward mounted ski. The WC mounts -6 and the CT mounts -8. Not a world apart but forsure changes the dynamics of the ski. If you prefer a more progressive free ride ski you’ll be happier on a WC. If you prefer a more directional charger you’d prefer the CT.

for all intensive purposes the CT front half is a WC 116 with 1mm narrower tips and 1mm narrower tails that are more flat but not commander flat. It’s 140/130 which is part of the reason for the amazing float. That’s also the reason with the flatter tail on the CT it requires a bit more work and better technique to really push through the shovels being further back but also allows the ski to charge really well. The radius is also smaller on the CT so it’s faster edge to edge when comparing it to the 116 WC. Smaller radius than the 108 as well.

the core is poplar and beech, Which gives it the higher stability at speed and more charging characteristics over the WC which is poplar and ash. I personally prefer a more progressive ski and mount. I have commander 98‘s and they’re my least favorite moment ski because of the mount and heavy directional feel. But I wanted something for icy days that had metal.

now onto the DW. for comparisons sake I’ll describe mainly the 104 over the 112 since you mentioned you’re considering that as well.

the DW 104 is going to be playful and pivoty but still has no issues charging down the mountain and holds good stability for a ski with its waist size. It’s going to be faster edge to edge than any of the others mentioned due to its waist and radius. While it’s still higher than the CT the lower waist makes up for the difference.

its shares a similar core to the CT in that it’s poplar and beech as well. So the stiffness and stability is much higher compared to the WC and DW 112 which are both poplar and ash. The 104 is essentially the same weight as the 112 with both being 8lbs in a 184. The 104 core is a more stout wood combo like the CT so it gains more weight. The CT is 9lbs in a 182. The 104 punches above its weight for high speed stability and usually surprises people for how composed it is at speed, especially if they’ve been on the 112 as the 104 is more chargy than the 112.

you will obviously lose float with the 104 compared to the CT. That being said it holds its own fairly well in soft snow and really doesn’t have issues until you’re getting into the deep deep. The tips are 132 so not some narrow sticks.

The big factor that tips the scale in my opinion for the 104 is the triple camber. That allows the dw’s and specifically the 104 to handle such a wider range of conditions that the CT just can’t match. When things get firmed up, icy, crusted over or just really shitty the DW comes alive. The triple camber will bite into essentially any surface and gives you grip where there just typically isn’t in a normal rocker profile. As great as the CT is, and it is that Great it just has a narrower window that it performs well in and a longer list of conditions it’s not ideal in. Where as the DW is the opposite. There really are no conditions it isn’t great in until you get into super deep days. While you could absolutely ski the CT from the start of the season to the end and it would work, You’re going to have a better time on a DW 104 in that same time frame.

you made it sound like you’re going to be using essentially one ski for the time being and hopefully getting something else down the road. For me personally in that situation I want the ski with the widest range of performance that’s going to give me the maximum amount of good days in most conditions. Which is going to be the DW 104. If I had to get only one right now. I’d choose that personally. Then add the CT as a second ski down the road for deeper days.

with all that being said unless something wild drops in the reserve line that I need to have I’ll be adding a Countach as my next ski to the quiver. So I’m a lover of the ski. I just already have a DW 104 and 112 currently in the quiver.

you can’t go wrong with either one. Just for me personally triple camber is real and it greatly improves your skiing experience across a much wider range of days. It’s the reason the ghost train has become my favorite ski period. A ski that big especially in my 194 shouldn’t be able to do what it does, but that’s triple camber.
Click to expand...

CT is short for Candide Thovex not CounTach just for clarity.
 
14589131:PartyBullshiit said:
I just used that so I didn’t have to type out the full names every time for my comparison
Click to expand...

Thanks for the detailed response. I honestly might just be tempted by the Countach due to the top sheet (I think it is the best looking one right now) and the fact that they have the 182 and 188 in stock. I am actually in Reno so wanted to snag something while I am down here. How tall are you? I could snag the WC 108 right now or wait on the DW 112 since they don't have the 184 shipping yet. However, I was surprised when I went in the store by how the floor model 190 length..I honestly didn't seem that long. Lifting it up, flexing it, etc. I am sure it actually measures like 187 or 188 too. For me being 5'9" 175lbs advanced the 190 might be a fun option with it being mounted -5 it'll maintain the pivotability and playfulness, but gain even more stability. As I told you in a separate message, I picked up some ON3P Jeffrey 100s in 181 and, due to them being mounted -4 at 181 length, they feel incredibly short, too pivot-y, and sacrifice a bit too much stability for play. I've been skiing Kirkwood (and home mountain is Stevens Pass) and find myself being a bit more cautious and going more slowly with those dropping in off the cornices or going into some chutes..they did shine on the tight steep trees Kirkwood has and off smaller drops and bumps..I am comparing this to my Praxis MVP 108 in 184 that made me feel really confident dropping off the ridge anywhere and going fast through untracked powder, chop, hitting icy patches, etc. yet is still playful enough to cut speed fast and shoot over to a nice drop and run out the landing at speed, pop off side hits at the bottom going back to the chairlift.

I was probably misleading myself thinking I preference playfulness of stability/charge-y-ness in a ski when I bought the Jeff 100. Also, I am looking for something in the 108-112 range i.e. the Countach, DW, WC 108 and in the 100-104 range i.e. the DW 104, WC 101 to replace my Jeff 100 and my MVP 108 (it is going to be relegated to rock ski soon, as I have been slowly destroying it this season and it hasn't held up as well as I thought it would).
 
14589164:colerichardmyers said:
Thanks for the detailed response. I honestly might just be tempted by the Countach due to the top sheet (I think it is the best looking one right now) and the fact that they have the 182 and 188 in stock. I am actually in Reno so wanted to snag something while I am down here. How tall are you? I could snag the WC 108 right now or wait on the DW 112 since they don't have the 184 shipping yet. However, I was surprised when I went in the store by how the floor model 190 length..I honestly didn't seem that long. Lifting it up, flexing it, etc. I am sure it actually measures like 187 or 188 too. For me being 5'9" 175lbs advanced the 190 might be a fun option with it being mounted -5 it'll maintain the pivotability and playfulness, but gain even more stability. As I told you in a separate message, I picked up some ON3P Jeffrey 100s in 181 and, due to them being mounted -4 at 181 length, they feel incredibly short, too pivot-y, and sacrifice a bit too much stability for play. I've been skiing Kirkwood (and home mountain is Stevens Pass) and find myself being a bit more cautious and going more slowly with those dropping in off the cornices or going into some chutes..they did shine on the tight steep trees Kirkwood has and off smaller drops and bumps..I am comparing this to my Praxis MVP 108 in 184 that made me feel really confident dropping off the ridge anywhere and going fast through untracked powder, chop, hitting icy patches, etc. yet is still playful enough to cut speed fast and shoot over to a nice drop and run out the landing at speed, pop off side hits at the bottom going back to the chairlift.

I was probably misleading myself thinking I preference playfulness of stability/charge-y-ness in a ski when I bought the Jeff 100. Also, I am looking for something in the 108-112 range i.e. the Countach, DW, WC 108 and in the 100-104 range i.e. the DW 104, WC 101 to replace my Jeff 100 and my MVP 108 (it is going to be relegated to rock ski soon, as I have been slowly destroying it this season and it hasn't held up as well as I thought it would).
Click to expand...

I vote the 188 Countach and 184 WC101. I have commander 108s and Wc101s and they complement each other nicely for my inbounds quiver, would have probably gone Countach over the C108s if it was available when I bought for a bit more looseness/freestyle ability, but still love the C108s for fast big mtn lines and crud trucking, you just gotta be an aggressive skier on top of your game otherwise they can take you for a ride.
 
14589164:colerichardmyers said:
Thanks for the detailed response. I honestly might just be tempted by the Countach due to the top sheet (I think it is the best looking one right now) and the fact that they have the 182 and 188 in stock. I am actually in Reno so wanted to snag something while I am down here. How tall are you? I could snag the WC 108 right now or wait on the DW 112 since they don't have the 184 shipping yet. However, I was surprised when I went in the store by how the floor model 190 length..I honestly didn't seem that long. Lifting it up, flexing it, etc. I am sure it actually measures like 187 or 188 too. For me being 5'9" 175lbs advanced the 190 might be a fun option with it being mounted -5 it'll maintain the pivotability and playfulness, but gain even more stability. As I told you in a separate message, I picked up some ON3P Jeffrey 100s in 181 and, due to them being mounted -4 at 181 length, they feel incredibly short, too pivot-y, and sacrifice a bit too much stability for play. I've been skiing Kirkwood (and home mountain is Stevens Pass) and find myself being a bit more cautious and going more slowly with those dropping in off the cornices or going into some chutes..they did shine on the tight steep trees Kirkwood has and off smaller drops and bumps..I am comparing this to my Praxis MVP 108 in 184 that made me feel really confident dropping off the ridge anywhere and going fast through untracked powder, chop, hitting icy patches, etc. yet is still playful enough to cut speed fast and shoot over to a nice drop and run out the landing at speed, pop off side hits at the bottom going back to the chairlift.

I was probably misleading myself thinking I preference playfulness of stability/charge-y-ness in a ski when I bought the Jeff 100. Also, I am looking for something in the 108-112 range i.e. the Countach, DW, WC 108 and in the 100-104 range i.e. the DW 104, WC 101 to replace my Jeff 100 and my MVP 108 (it is going to be relegated to rock ski soon, as I have been slowly destroying it this season and it hasn't held up as well as I thought it would).
Click to expand...

I’m 6’0 183lbs. But I went 184 with both my 104 and 112. I wanted nimbleness over charge. With the 190 you lose a bit in tight spaces and I do a lot of trees. I’ve never regretted going 184 on those. The 190 would work for you no problem since you seem to prioritize stability.

the WC 108 is also a great option. I just got back from beaver creek skiing mine. We had a decent amount of fresh new snow and the WC 108 performed great. But again for me on that ski I prioritized nimbleness and went 179. I could have sized up to 184 but I’ve been very happy with the 179 for what I use it for. The full size cat 118 I went 190.
 
14589164:colerichardmyers said:
Thanks for the detailed response. I honestly might just be tempted by the Countach due to the top sheet (I think it is the best looking one right now) and the fact that they have the 182 and 188 in stock. I am actually in Reno so wanted to snag something while I am down here. How tall are you? I could snag the WC 108 right now or wait on the DW 112 since they don't have the 184 shipping yet. However, I was surprised when I went in the store by how the floor model 190 length..I honestly didn't seem that long. Lifting it up, flexing it, etc. I am sure it actually measures like 187 or 188 too. For me being 5'9" 175lbs advanced the 190 might be a fun option with it being mounted -5 it'll maintain the pivotability and playfulness, but gain even more stability. As I told you in a separate message, I picked up some ON3P Jeffrey 100s in 181 and, due to them being mounted -4 at 181 length, they feel incredibly short, too pivot-y, and sacrifice a bit too much stability for play. I've been skiing Kirkwood (and home mountain is Stevens Pass) and find myself being a bit more cautious and going more slowly with those dropping in off the cornices or going into some chutes..they did shine on the tight steep trees Kirkwood has and off smaller drops and bumps..I am comparing this to my Praxis MVP 108 in 184 that made me feel really confident dropping off the ridge anywhere and going fast through untracked powder, chop, hitting icy patches, etc. yet is still playful enough to cut speed fast and shoot over to a nice drop and run out the landing at speed, pop off side hits at the bottom going back to the chairlift.

I was probably misleading myself thinking I preference playfulness of stability/charge-y-ness in a ski when I bought the Jeff 100. Also, I am looking for something in the 108-112 range i.e. the Countach, DW, WC 108 and in the 100-104 range i.e. the DW 104, WC 101 to replace my Jeff 100 and my MVP 108 (it is going to be relegated to rock ski soon, as I have been slowly destroying it this season and it hasn't held up as well as I thought it would).
Click to expand...

Dw 190 ships March 1 if you can wait that long.

if your priorities are at speed stability I’m going to push you to the Countach over the DW112. Remember as I mentioned the DW is poplar and ash. Just like the cats. They are less stiff and stable at speed vs the 104 and Countach which are poplar and beech.

so if the 104 is too narrow for you as a main ski the Countach would be the way. If you don’t mind sacrificing some stability for more playfulness and to gain a wider window of use based off conditions then the dw112 would be a great option.

I don’t really hear a reason for you to go WC over countach unless you want that progressive ride of -6.
 
14589200:PartyBullshiit said:
Dw 190 ships March 1 if you can wait that long.

if your priorities are at speed stability I’m going to push you to the Countach over the DW112. Remember as I mentioned the DW is poplar and ash. Just like the cats. They are less stiff and stable at speed vs the 104 and Countach which are poplar and beech.

so if the 104 is too narrow for you as a main ski the Countach would be the way. If you don’t mind sacrificing some stability for more playfulness and to gain a wider window of use based off conditions then the dw112 would be a great option.

I don’t really hear a reason for you to go WC over countach unless you want that progressive ride of -6.
Click to expand...

Yeah from what I can find as well the Praxis MVP 108 is definitely stiffer throughout than the DW and WC so I imagine that being similar to the Countach. I am thinking I might like grabbing the Countach and the DW 104 in the 184 length once it is back in stock. I think that would be a good balance of charge and play with the DW 104 being more play when I want and the Countach being more charge when I want.
 
14589204:colerichardmyers said:
Yeah from what I can find as well the Praxis MVP 108 is definitely stiffer throughout than the DW and WC so I imagine that being similar to the Countach. I am thinking I might like grabbing the Countach and the DW 104 in the 184 length once it is back in stock. I think that would be a good balance of charge and play with the DW 104 being more play when I want and the Countach being more charge when I want.
Click to expand...

Solid combo. As long as you know you won’t be encountering any firm or icy then I’d go countach first. If you’re likely to have variable conditions I’d go DW 104 first. Its still stiff and stable just won’t have as many down days due to conditions.
 
14589239:PartyBullshiit said:
Well since the cat seems to be out of the bag at summit might as well drop the news here. Countach 104 coming in July.
Click to expand...

Si9V.gif
 
Anybody in Portland or near Hood that wants to sell me some clapped wildcats? 180-190 cm

I'm looking for some toasted wildcats to use as spring season freeride beaters.

Disclaimer:

I'm trying to get a flat pair for as cheap as possible, meaning I don't want to pay more than $80 for a beat up ski that will most likely get destroyed after a season or two.(fine with edge cracks and core shots, as long as they still have a good bit of life on em after a few repairs) I'm not about to go ski down a rock face and smash rails on my fresh 0nepp$. Thanks!!
 
East Coast Moment Demo Day this Sunday 2/18 at Tenney Mt. Lots of curiosity regarding Moment Skis in New England. We will have Commander 92,96, Deathwish 104 and Wildcat 101 mounted up. Come try and pair and see what's up!

1087194.png
 
I'm throwing pivots on some chipotle blades - I'm assuming true center is the way to go? I feel like that's standard for blades
 
Just got on my DW 104 for the first time over the past few days. It took only a few turns to absolutely love triple camber and the ski as a whole. I’ve never been on a Moment ski before and was honestly a bit skeptical that a ski could be so good. I’m now kind of upset that I spent a few weeks trying to get along with the Jeff 100 I bought when I could have been on the DW 104. All in all, I’ve never been on a ski that feels so intuitive and allows you to handle such variety of terrain.

At least my life has been simplified. I only need to look to Moment for skis.
 
14594951:colerichardmyers said:
Just got on my DW 104 for the first time over the past few days. It took only a few turns to absolutely love triple camber and the ski as a whole. I’ve never been on a Moment ski before and was honestly a bit skeptical that a ski could be so good. I’m now kind of upset that I spent a few weeks trying to get along with the Jeff 100 I bought when I could have been on the DW 104. All in all, I’ve never been on a ski that feels so intuitive and allows you to handle such variety of terrain.

At least my life has been simplified. I only need to look to Moment for skis.
Click to expand...

Triple camber is real. Moment ftw
 
14595044:PartyBullshiit said:
Triple camber is real. Moment ftw
Click to expand...

Yeah you were right. Not at all invalidating others experiences with it, but it just worked for me. It wasn't something I had to get used to at all. The DW 104 is going to be super nice for early and late season and overall low tide. Really assures me in wanting the DWT for my daily touring now as well (or possibly throw a pair of shifts I have on the standard DW).
 
My 190 DWTs during the last huge storm cycle in Tahoe. If you're wondering whether you can ski four feet of pow on them... the answer is yes.

1089686.jpeg
 
14601390:thatsG said:
What are best flex comps for a wildcat 101?
Click to expand...

Hmm they're definitely stiff for that class of freestyle ski, the rocker and low swing weight keeps em playful though and you can get a ton of pop/energy out of them. They feel kinda like a damper Prodigy 2.0 but didn't lose their flex nearly as quickly (and way more durable), similar dampness to the CT2.0 but not as easy to flex to get on tip/tail. Haven't used the Jeffrey, but from what I've heard I think the WC101 is slightly stiffer but not as damp for charging through crud.
 
14601390:thatsG said:
What are best flex comps for a wildcat 101?
Click to expand...

The Elan Playmaker feels like Josh Bibby just asked Elan to remake the Bibby (but with a longer effective edge), which is now the wildcat

But agreed that it flexes similarly to the Prodigy 2.0. Kinda flexes similarly to the Black Crows Camox too, but very different shape.
 
14604936:hot.pocket said:
They sold out 2 hours before this post.

There are no more available for this year.
Click to expand...

Ya sorry about that. Found out after that my phone blocked your sms stuff. So never received the usual text. Just saw them suddenly on the site.
 
14607554:lusch0 said:
Just saw that Cody LaPlante now skis for Armada, which is a bummer, I thought he was great under Moment.
Click to expand...

moment has always seemed to lack a little bit on the park rider representation to me. especially riding my franks in the midwest, kids are always asking me about them and not many recognize the brand. trying to do my part to show were not all just big mtn resort riders out west lol
 
14607554:lusch0 said:
Just saw that Cody LaPlante now skis for Armada, which is a bummer, I thought he was great under Moment.
Click to expand...

imo he looks like he's skiing a lot better on the armada too.
 
14607758:lusch0 said:
It's been like 3 days g he couldn't have magically gotten that much better
Click to expand...

You can see it in the swing weight of the ski, that ARV94 is a feather and has better camber for how Cody ski's. Lot less work for him to do what he does.

Not like the Frankenski is bad, just not meant for elite park skiers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top