RMU Apostle vs. Fat-ypus L-toro vs. ON3P Jeronimo

easy.steezy

easy.steezy

Active member
I'm looking for a 100ish waisted ski that performs well all over the mountain but can still kill it in the park for a wider ski. I've heard nothing but good things about all of these skis, but I'm just looking for some more input from more people! I'm 5'10" 160 lbs, and I'll be riding Whiteface, NY next year.

While I've heard plenty about the Jeronimo in these forums, I'm looking for me info on the Apostles and L-toros! How well do they ride on icy hardpack? Are they light, heavy, inbetween?

Since the Apostle only comes in 175 and 185, I would probably get the 185 since 175 is too short. Should I worry about the extra length even though it's a rockered ski?

Any and all help with get some karma, much appreciated guys!
 
I ride on a pair of RMU Wisco's, essentially a symmetrical apostle. These things fucking rip, best all mountain ski I have ever owned, they slay everything from rails to ice to cliffs and pow. If you can get your hands on a pair of these you should get them ASAP, and if not, you should still go with the Apostle's. RMU is a solid company that makes solid skis.
 
Sounds great! How is the durability? I've heard very good things concerning durability on the other two skis, so it'd be great if I didn't even have to think about that with my decision1
 
these are ll good skis made by good dudes. im sure you wont be disappointed with whatever you choose. ive personally never ridden rmu but fatypus and on3p make some great skis. i love my jmos
 
L-toros are sick, pretty soft though so if you dont like that dont get l-toros. nothing but good things to say about them though.
 
Bumping this thread. Deciding between these three for an everyday ski. Be used 85% allmountain/powder and 15% rails. I prefer my skis softer and to be real playful. What you guys think? I'm more leaning towards the l-toro or apostle.
 
RMU skis are sooo underrated but fatypus makes some killer gear. I would say RMU is more fun simplyu from the design of the ski. think of it is as a fat Halo and the the fatypus reminds me of a line ski. couldnt tell u which one tho. probably the abang playfullness with way more backbone and better tho.
 
care to explain a little more? hows the flex? flat underfoot? width? length? how much rocker and how early does it start? the website doesnt say much.
 
170 length, moderately stiff, cambered underfoot, rocker in tip and tail, not sure of the exact profile. Dimensions are 114-121-102-121-114
 
They destroyed whatever shitty snow was left at A basin in June so I'd say they charge through crud. I haven't really hit anything bigger than 20 ft on them yet seeing as I got them late season but my overall impression is that they are a very fun, playful, soft/buttery yet stable ski. Just my $.02 but I would totally recommend them.
 
Rode the apostles

all last year.

The RMUs were a very playful ski that handles its own in the woods and park. The

flex underfoot feels fairly stiff but tips seem a bit softer but I never really

felt the ski was a noodle. They do seem to like to be on edge and they get a

tad squirrely when going real fast straight. They excel in tight spaces in soft snow. Durability

seems extremely solid but I did need some work done when I first got them cause

the base was concave (and still isn’t quite flat). Really don't think you could go wrong with either

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top