# Are you happy with your "specialty" ski purchase?



## Greg (Mar 18, 2008)

New powder boards, bump skis, racing sticks this season?

Are you happy with your specialized ski purchase this season? I picked up a pair of bump skis last fall and I love them. I truly think they helped me to become a better skier and my form has also improved on my mid fats as a result.

You?


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Mar 18, 2008)

I bought some powder boards this fall.  Sadly only got 1 powder day with them before hurting myself.  They performed real nice for me, even if it was just 1 day.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Mar 18, 2008)

Totally my 88mm waisted fat skis are great in the deep granuler sugar and crud along with fresh Poe...and they carve well as well..next season I want some Pontoons..


----------



## madskier6 (Mar 18, 2008)

I'm totally happy with my specialty powder skis, Volkl Gotamas, that I bought this year.  I've had a couple of great powder days on them at Magic plus they are great for Spring skiing on corn snow.  Had a great day skiing with them at Burke in Spring conditions.

Phat is where it's at!


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 18, 2008)

No specialty purchases this year.  I will say however that my Rossi Axiom powder boards I bought in 2000 that I still have were the BEST ski purchase I ever made.  I only have gotten to use them once this season and was pumped to have them in my quiver.

Next season, I'm looking to hopefully pick up a set of race sticks for days where it's hardpack and I can't find enjoyable bumps.

I don't ski a lot, but I like having a full quiver.  My goal is to have a mid-fat all mountain, race stock ski, bump ski and powder ski, then replace one each season.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Mar 18, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> My goal is to have a mid-fat all mountain, race stock ski, bump ski and powder ski, then replace one each season.





It's good to have goals in life..I remember when it was nice just having my own skis..period....But I want a steezier quiver as well..


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 18, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> It's good to have goals in life..I remember when it was nice just having my own skis..period....But I want a steezier quiver as well..




My girlfriend and I also have home ownership goals in the next year.  If I compromise our ability to do so due to my desire for a better ski quiver.......I'm effed, she'll kill me :lol:

balance


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 18, 2008)

Only got one real good powder day on my new boards. Definitely happy with the purchase at only $200 used. I don't know if I would be able to justify the cost of a brand new pair of boards at anything more than end of season prices for a "specialty" board though. These boards are only coming out on foot deep plus days which are probably only 10% of my total days per season (6 or 7). Hard to justify full price cost for that few days a season especially when the regular skis did okay. But the performance bump was definitely worth $200 for a few big days a year. The three ski quiver remains an ideal in my mind.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Mar 18, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> My girlfriend and I also have home ownership goals in the next year.  If I compromise our ability to do so due to my desire for a better ski quiver.......I'm effed, she'll kill me :lol:
> 
> balance





Well you're already taking out a big mortgage..what's a couple pairs of skis on the Visa card in addition..and a trip to Jackson Hole..lol..

It sounds like this girlfriend is marriage material..


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 18, 2008)

riverc0il said:


> The three ski quiver remains an ideal in my mind.



What do those 3 ski styles consist of for you?


I said 4 for me, but a set of bumpers is at the bottom of the priority chain.  My all mountain skis (B2's) work very well in the bumps, not quite as good as my old bandit X's though which are now my defacto bump ski.  My only gripe with them is length.  They're 184 and I'd rather have something around 178 for bumps.

I agree on cost to.  To be honest, I doubt I'd ever spend more than $250-$300 (flat) on a set of skis.  I'll take the last years model at a discount.


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 18, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> What do those 3 ski styles consist of for you?


Groomer, All Mountain, Powder. I guess a bump specific ski in place of a powder or groomer ski would be appropriate for those inclined to chase bumps the way I chase powder or others rip groomers. Just my take.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 18, 2008)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Well you're already taking out a big mortgage..what's a couple pairs of skis on the Visa card in addition..and a trip to Jackson Hole..lol..
> 
> It sounds like this girlfriend is marriage material..




yeah, she's definitely a keeper.  No trip out west next winter, but she's well aware that the following winter when I have earned another week of vaca.....I will be going to Utah.  Been too long, haven't been out west since 2001.


----------



## twinplanx (Mar 18, 2008)

Totally...I had just about forgotten what a good edge feels like.  I've wanted a pair of twin-tips since I first saw 2 pairs of ten-eighties since I saw 2 pairs strapped to the roof of a subby Impreza at Jay almost 10 yrs ago.  When my buddy out West was able to snag some used(not abused in the least) PE demos I just had to have them and was glad to fork over the 250$. The 8 days that I've been on these skis have some of my best ever.  ...Would I like to add to my quiver?


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 18, 2008)

riverc0il said:


> Groomer, All Mountain, Powder.



Those three would be my first choice as well.   I'm happy with the B2 as my all mountain, next I will look to add the groomer/race board as I don't have a ski that delivers the performance I want for those conditions currently.  After that it's a toss up between the Powder or Bump.  If I find myself in a position to chase more Powder then I'll upgrade the Axioms.  If I'm stuck looking for bumps more often, then I'll go that direction, not that that's a bad thing.  I love bumps almost as much as powder.


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 18, 2008)

No new skis this year, but I mostly love my new Nordica Hot Rod boots. Best fitting and performing boots I've ever had. Only prob is they let a lot of snow/moisture into the shell.

I just picked up a pair of used race stock Volkl Racetiger GS skis for next year. Can't wait to get out on those. Next purchase will be some semi-fat skis in the 80 mm range. Still love my Ripsticks as my frontside/crud/bump ski.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 18, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> I just picked up a pair of used race stock Volkl Racetiger GS skis for next year. Can't wait to get out on those.



If you don't mind me asking, how much did you pay?  What size and was it with bindings?


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 18, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> If you don't mind me asking, how much did you pay?  What size and was it with bindings?



Got em off ebay for approx $120 plus $25 shipping. No bindings and they are 185 cm. I'll be on the hunt this summer for some used race plates and bindings. I'm hoping to find something around $100.


----------



## snowmonster (Mar 18, 2008)

Very satisfied with the wide skis I got at the end of last season (94 underfoot). It's become my go to ski especially in the trees and on fresh snow. Very capable too on the groomers. I also got a race/carver ski and have used that thrice only (Mutix R11) and, as hawkshot once said, it makes me want to go fast and at irresponsible speeds. Happy with them both. A wider ski with Marker Dukes is in the works for next season.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Mar 18, 2008)

snowmonster said:


> I also got a race/carver ski and have used that thrice only (Mutix R11) and, as hawkshot once said, it makes me want to go fast and at irresponsible speeds.



But isnt it fun!:dunce:  I only used mine a few times for the same reason.  Even tore the ACL on them.


----------



## snowmonster (Mar 19, 2008)

Hawkshot99 said:


> But isnt it fun!:dunce:  I only used mine a few times for the same reason.  Even tore the ACL on them.



Agree. It's ridiculously fun! The ability to mix arms is great too but I prefer the long arms. The short arms are too snappy for my taste.


----------



## drjeff (Mar 19, 2008)

This will in all likelyhood get me flamed pretty badly, but what the heck.  Why not spend the $$ you'd spend on adding the to specialty side of your quiver and put it towards some lessons in your weak areas that you feel you need the specialty ski for??    

Personally  I'd much rather be darn comfortable in all conditions with 1 pair of skis, than getting the little mental second guessing going on when conditions change from what that specialty ski was designed for to something else.  Just my opinion,  now let my flaming begin  :flame: :uzi:


----------



## SkiingInABlueDream (Mar 19, 2008)

At the risk of being contrarian I still just dont get the need for a "quiver" of skis. For the last ~10 seasons Ive been skiing with an all mtn / mid-fat / do everything ski in everything from waist-deep fresh, chowder, crud, trees, glades, spring corn/slush, groomers, bumps, icebumps, 4" of fresh over icebumps, dust on crust, whatever.  My skis have been a Salomon Xscream, then K2 Axis X, and currently Dynastar Legend 4800 all of which are ~70 mm underfoot. (the 4800's really make me miss the Axes though).  But overall Ive never felt like I was unable to do whatever I wanted to due to my skis (with the possible exception of aggressive carving on iced groomers).  Maybe Im the proverbial neutered dog.

That said, Im still curious about this "flotation" thing ppl talk about  when they talk about fat skis and I made a whim purchase yesterday of a pair of Fischer Watea 94's.  (read good reviews, found a decent deal and I guess money burns a hole in my pocket.  Oh yeah, and I needed to do something with a pair of leftover bindings).  

Maybe when I try them out on the next fresh-snow day next season (or this season??) I'll have an epiphany and revive this thread saying 'ok I get it now'.

[edit: I guess a sub-point would be, does one really _need _a quiver skis, or do we just like our toys.  yeah, I thought so   ]


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Mar 19, 2008)

drjeff said:


> This will in all likelyhood get me flamed pretty badly, but what the heck.  Why not spend the $$ you'd spend on adding the to specialty side of your quiver and put it towards some lessons in your week areas that you feel you need the specialty ski for??
> 
> Personally  I'd much rather be darn comfortable in all conditions with 1 pair of skis, than getting the little mental second guessing going on when conditions change from what that specialty ski was designed for to something else.  Just my opinion,  no let my flaming begin  :flame: :uzi:



My race skis are great in powder and crud...but my fat skis are better..My fat skis are good on eastern hardpack..but my race skis are better..:-?


----------



## Greg (Mar 19, 2008)

skifastr said:


> At the risk of being contrarian I still just dont get the need for a "quiver" of skis.
> 
> For the last ~10 seasons Ive been skiing with an all mtn / mid-fat / do everything ski in everything...



Your second sentence explains the opinion you have in your first.


----------



## 2knees (Mar 19, 2008)

very happy with my bump skis.  Head Mad Trix.  Great in bumps.  I have no quiver.  its my only ski so i have to make them work everywhere.


----------



## Rushski (Mar 19, 2008)

Haven't had full use out of my midfats (last year's Blizzard Titan Eight).  But they ski so well they can go out at any time and not just for light pow/crud.  The usage I have had with them have made them worth it and will prolong the life of the rest of my (small) quiver.

Though my RX8s still are my best bet for groomers.


----------



## snowmonster (Mar 19, 2008)

skifastr said:


> [edit: I guess a sub-point would be, does one really _need _a quiver skis, or do we just like our toys.  yeah, I thought so   ]



...it all started when I was a young boy and we didn't have the money to buy me a wagon named Rosebud...

Yeah, these are our toys. We don't need them but it surely makes going to the office bearable.


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 19, 2008)

drjeff said:


> This will in all likelyhood get me flamed pretty badly, but what the heck.  Why not spend the $$ you'd spend on adding the to specialty side of your quiver and put it towards some lessons in your weak areas that you feel you need the specialty ski for??
> 
> Personally  I'd much rather be darn comfortable in all conditions with 1 pair of skis, than getting the little mental second guessing going on when conditions change from what that specialty ski was designed for to something else.  Just my opinion,  now let my flaming begin  :flame: :uzi:


No flaming here, that is a good point... most skiers really only need a one ski do it all quiver.


----------



## madskier6 (Mar 19, 2008)

riverc0il said:


> No flaming here, that is a good point... most skiers really only need a one ski do it all quiver.



Agreed.  But if an expert skier really likes to ski powder, there's nothing quite like a true fatty for those conditions.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 19, 2008)

riverc0il said:


> No flaming here, that is a good point... most skiers really only need a one ski do it all quiver.



Absolutely true statement.  I definitely only 'need' one pair of skis.  

That said, I love having the option.  While I can ski powder alright on my all mountain B2's, the difference is night and day when I get on the Axioms.  The extra float allows me to not only ski though deep powder faster, but it also reduces the amount of energy needed, so I can ski longer and harder without getting fatigued.  The latter part of that statement is what makes them worth it to have.

I'm hoping for the same in getting a ripper for groomers.  The B2's pretty much suck on ice / skied off conditions.


----------



## severine (Mar 19, 2008)

I like my specialty skis even though I don't use them for their intended purpose.  My Dynastar Marie Martinod Pro TTs rock, even if they're a park and pipe ski (for which I have never used them).  Great confidence building, awesome getting through crud and fresh manmade (never got to try them in powder, though).  I took a chance in trying them as an "all-mountain" and the gamble paid off.  The only thing I've found they don't do as well on is hardpack/ice (which is why I just added the Roxy Joyrider to my now 2-ski quiver).  Yeah, I've skied them on hardpack anyway and lived to tell the tale.  But it's not as fun as it could be with a better gripping ski.

Nobody "needs" even one pair of skis, if you want to get technical.    Variety is the spice of life though, n'est-ce pas?


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 19, 2008)

Let me clarify my statement as "most skiers really only need a one ski do it all quiver" was painting the brush too broadly and too factual when taken literally (I would much rather offer my opinion than try to speak factually on this matter!!). I think the point drjeff was trying to make (correct me if I am wrong) and that I was echoing is that most skiers really are not going to notice or take advantage of the performance difference and would be better off one a one ski quiver with 10 more lessons during a season than spending the money on a new set of skis. Even some skiers that could tell the difference in performance may not get their monies worth. That said, there most definitely is a point at which specialized skis for certain conditions improve performance and enjoyment in those conditions and at that point, it becomes a financial issue of whether the specialization for a limited number of days is worth while. Someone only skiing powder once or twice a year may not see the financial value in a big powder board over a 80ish mid-fat. The financial point of worth whileness will be different for every skier depending on their desires, performance needs, and finances.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Mar 19, 2008)

Powder skis are awesome in crud and deep sugar granuler chop as well..they're not just effective in deep powder.*


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Mar 19, 2008)

skifastr said:


> At the risk of being contrarian I still just dont get the need for a "quiver" of skis.
> ................
> [edit: I guess a sub-point would be, does one really _need _a quiver skis, or do we just like our toys.  yeah, I thought so   ]



Do I *NEED* them?  No, I could be happy on a rental ski, just getting out there.  But I love haveing my quiver.  There is more to it than just having lots of skis.  They each do something for me that I really enjoy.  Whether it be floating down a powder trail on the wide skis, or tearing up a high speed groomer on the race skis, or throwing mad steezy airs on my twin tips.

It is like why do some guys collect cars?  They can only drive one, and there is usully always overlap in their "car quiver".


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 19, 2008)

I can definitely see how joe average skier might not think it makes financial sense in buying new skis.  I guess with me, the quiver is something I've built over time.  I got new skis (all mountain) this winter for the first time since 2003.   In doing so, my old all mountain are now defacto bump skis, they've softened too much for skiing crud and carving at higher speeds, but still are fantastic in bumps.  My powder boards were purchased in 2000 and despite having 150 days on them, still ski great - easily the most durable skis I've ever owned.

Next season, I'll get a set of groomer/race skis as nothing I have right now really nails those conditions like I'd like.  That said, the skis I purchase will probably be a new 05-06 or 06-07 model that I find for cheap.

The average joe probably doesn't think its worth the money to have multiple styles of skis.  That said, the same person often spends $800+ on their skis.  I'd rather search for deals and get two sets for that amount if not for cheaper.  An example would be this weekend at Saddleback I saw the exact same ski/binding set up I've got on 'sale' for $740.  I paid $325.

As with everything though, different strokes for different folks.  To each their own.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Mar 19, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> An example would be this weekend at Saddleback I saw the exact same ski/binding set up I've got on 'sale' for $740.  I paid $325.



Don't you have B2's?  I don't care what binding you have, there should be no way that they are that expensive "on sale"


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 19, 2008)

Hawkshot99 said:


> Don't you have B2's?  I don't care what binding you have, there should be no way that they are that expensive "on sale"



Indeed I do.  Granted this was in the shop in the lodge, but yeah they had the same Axial bindings as mine.  List price for the skis $720, bindings $220.   Package sale for it was either $720 or $740.  Last years model just like mine.

Oddly, I still come across some B2's for $300+ flat on ebay, which even at that I think is kind of a rip off

http://cgi.ebay.com/Rossignol-Bandi...ryZ16062QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem


----------



## tekweezle (Mar 20, 2008)

as you get more "into" skiing, you want to have the "right tool for the job" atleast for that particular day.  you could use a hammer to try and fix everything but would you?

i do agree with the statement that improving skills could help you tackle any condition on the mountain.  But sometimes, you don;t want to work so hard.  having a better tool for the job increases the fun factor on the mountain.  

in spring conditions, everyone ought to have a pair of rock skis.

so for me, i got a pair of shortish, narrowish eastern ice skis and a pair of wider at the waist crud busting skis for out west.  i could ski my east coast skis out west and west coast skis out east and actually, i have but results would be mixed.


----------



## Greg (Mar 20, 2008)

tekweezle said:


> as you get more "into" skiing, you want to have the "right tool for the job" atleast for that particular day.  you could use a hammer to try and fix everything but would you?
> 
> i do agree with the statement that improving skills could help you tackle any condition on the mountain.  But sometimes, you don;t want to work so hard.  having a better tool for the job increases the fun factor on the mountain.
> 
> in spring conditions, everyone ought to have a pair of rock skis.



I agree with all of this except your last sentence. All skis are rock skis. :razz:


----------



## severine (Mar 20, 2008)

Greg said:


> I agree with all of this except your last sentence. All skis are rock skis. :razz:


Or at least, rock skis in training until they officially become rock skis.


----------



## tekweezle (Mar 20, 2008)

the way i have beat up my skis, they are well on their way to being relegated to rock skis status!


----------



## mondeo (Mar 20, 2008)

2knees said:


> very happy with my bump skis.  Head Mad Trix.  Great in bumps.  I have no quiver.  its my only ski so i have to make them work everywhere.



Same here (K2 Cabrawlers.) They take a little effort in crud or deep powder, but 90% of the time they work fine. That being said, once I get past the financial hurdle of buying a house, the quiver will start.


----------



## riverc0il (Mar 20, 2008)

tekweezle said:


> i do agree with the statement that improving skills could help you tackle any condition on the mountain.  But sometimes, you don;t want to work so hard.  having a better tool for the job increases the fun factor on the mountain.


That is extremely ironic because becoming a better skier with more proficient technique and prowess makes it so you don't work so hard and have a higher fun factor on the mountain. I am not suggesting having two or three skis is not preferable (as cited by my previous posts regarding thinking a three ski quiver is ideal... I currently have five :-o ). But rather I was suggesting the inverse of a point of diminishing returns and that is a point of not getting much out of a specialty ski without having the technique to utilize it and also suggesting that the money factor could be an issue, what is worth more.... substantially increased technique that will last until your body starts to deteriorate or a one trick pony pair of boards.

I think the ski industry is really loving this quiver idea. It is great for some skiers but I don't think it is good for most people. The industry certainly does not cater to the quiver crowd despite encouraging it because so many companies try to release the quiver of one do it all ski. Specialty skis are often hard to locate (who has seen a bump ski in a local shop or a light weight fat powder ski? most shops in New England don't carry that stuff). Interesting dynamic as far as industry drive, consumer demand, and what types of skis are actually created. Personally, I think there is a disconnect that the industry does not want to identify because they are quite alright with everyone chasing after a truly specialized ski that does not yet exist because ski manufacturers need to produce in high quantities to make it worth while.

I guess that is where the boutique or so called "exotic" brands come in to play.


----------



## skibum9995 (Mar 21, 2008)

Very happy. I picked up some 181 Nordica Dobermann GSRs at the beginning of the season and have had the chance to ski them in all conditions from bulletproof to a 14" powder day. It took a couple days to get used to the two sheets of metal instead of the single sheet I was used to in my Volkls. Super stable at speed and hold like ice skates on the hardpack. They are also the best powder skis I have ever skied being 67 underfoot and they power through crud with ease. Perfect one ski quiver.


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 21, 2008)

skibum9995 said:


> They are also the best powder skis I have ever skied being 67 underfoot



:lol: That's very funny considering the conversations people have around here of needing 101 under foot. My skis are currently 66 and have been great in everything, although I am tempted to pick up something like an Apache recon with 78+. 101? Only if I lived in Utah. . .


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 21, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> 101? Only if I lived in Utah. . .




You say that.....but knock something that wide until you try em'.  My Powder skis are 110 underfoot.  I bought them as did half the town of Stowe in the winter of 00-01.  A Rossi Rep had a bunch of these skis, I think they might have been a 97 model, very old first gen powder board, pre - fat craze, and he was selling them for $100.  

Best skis I've ever owned.  Anything powder days with over 8" and I'm on em'.  Getting on something that wide in deeper snow is some major fun.


----------



## kingslug (Mar 21, 2008)

Well, I now have a somewhat strange quiver. K2 Strykers, 180 and 74 underfoot, Volkyl AC40 Carbons 170, 84 underfoot. I'm still waiting to bring them both somewhere and test them against each other. The Volkyl's are kind of short for me but really hold onto ice. Stiff in the bumps though but the shortness helps a little. The strykers might actualy be a better ski in all conditions as they are very damp and forgiving. The Volkyl's need to be managed, the Strykers could care less. Next up...powder skis.


----------



## skibum9995 (Mar 21, 2008)

wa-loaf said:


> :lol: That's very funny considering the conversations people have around here of needing 101 under foot. My skis are currently 66 and have been great in everything, although I am tempted to pick up something like an Apache recon with 78+. 101? Only if I lived in Utah. . .


All skis over 70 should be burned.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Mar 21, 2008)

skibum9995 said:


> All skis over 70 should be burned.



Well then all Spyder jackets and tight pants should be burned as well..lol


----------



## twinplanx (Mar 21, 2008)

*That 70's sjow*



GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Well then all Spyder jackets and tight pants should be burned as well..lol



good burn:beer: Steeze


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 25, 2008)

I know this is about skis, but I got a pair of Full Tilt boots a couple of weeks ago and my skiing technique improved dramatically. I'm ripping through stuff like never before.My friends noticed it immediately! No shin bang in the bumps. It feels like I'm controlling the boot and not the other way around. They are based on the old Raichle Flexon design, with improvements. Same molds and were sponsored by K2.  Check out Fulltiltboot.com. Ed.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 25, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> I know this is about skis, but I got a pair of Full Tilt boots a couple of weeks ago and my skiing technique improved dramatically. I'm ripping through stuff like never before.My friends noticed it immediately! No shin bang in the bumps. It feels like I'm controlling the boot and not the other way around. They are based on the old Raichle Flexon design, with improvements. Same molds and were sponsored by K2.  Check out Fulltiltboot.com. Ed.




This looks interesting, I may be getting new boots next season, but will probably hold off for one more.  I'll have to check these out for sure.  I hadn't heard of them, but I remember people loving the Raichle Flexon's back in th day.


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 25, 2008)

ed-drum said:


> I know this is about skis, but I got a pair of Full Tilt boots a couple of weeks ago and my skiing technique improved dramatically. I'm ripping through stuff like never before.My friends noticed it immediately! No shin bang in the bumps. It feels like I'm controlling the boot and not the other way around. They are based on the old Raichle Flexon design, with improvements. Same molds and were sponsored by K2.  Check out Fulltiltboot.com. Ed.



I used to love my old Flexon Comps. Dalbello bought the patents and has their own adapted versions with tweaks designed by Glen Plake. I've tried on Dalbellos and they just didn't fit right. Fulltilt bought the actual molds, so their boots are identical to the old Raichles only with modern liners. These are something I'd really like to try out and they will be on the top of my list when I replace my current boots.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 25, 2008)

My concern with them is that they appear to be geared toward a narrow foot.  I have rather wide and flat feet, so they might not be a good option for me.


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 25, 2008)

I was turned on to the defunct Raichle Flexon concept by my Russian ski champ  friend Vitale Samsonov. He bought the Dalbellos and can't stand them. He put the old liners in from his Flexons and said they are now tolerable. He is going to get a pair of Full Tilts. Got my pair from Hunter. The liners are phenomenal! There is no tongue, it's a wrap around. NO SHIN BANG! I was giving "flying lessons" on K27 at Hunter a while back, and after I regained my senses after crashing, my shins were killing me. (The whole mountain was talking about THAT spectacular crash).  I have a wide foot myself and was told they are narrow, but when I put my foot in them, I couldn't believe they are the first boot that I didn't have to get blown out. My old Dalbellos always were cranky and ached. Both pairs fell apart prematurely.The buckles on the Tilts are super easy to adjust too. I got the Kamo model and people say they look cool too! Ed.


----------



## jack97 (Mar 25, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> My concern with them is that they appear to be geared toward a narrow foot.  I have rather wide and flat feet, so they might not be a good option for me.



FWIW, previous boot fitters have told me I have a slightly wide feet and tapers to average heel. The boot fitter where I was trying the dabello krypton told me that it should be fine given its a larger volume boot. 

As mentioned flexon and the krypton has the same design approach (the cabrio design), the difference are just minor tweaks. At face value, Krypton advocates would say they have more adjustment features and the middle buckle is optimally placed to lock down the heel.   

What I would really like to know is flex range and stiffness. The problem is getting a full tilt  around my area is hard, closet place is at sb about 3-4 hrs away, kind of asking alot to just try a boot, let alone ski on them. Anyhow, I love the fit of the Krypton and how it feels on the snow. The amount of front pressure you can put on them is amazing and with no shin bang.


----------



## deadheadskier (Mar 25, 2008)

What is the flex rating like on Full Tilts stiffest boot? 120?


----------



## jack97 (Mar 25, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> What is the flex rating like on Full Tilts stiffest boot? 120?



Can't answer that directly, what I do know is that mogul skiers Jen Heil and Kriste Richards skis the full tilt bumble bee and Dale Begg Smith skis the old flexon comp. Generally bumpers don't use the stiffest boots. I think the Cameo and the bumble bee pro are the stiffest in their line up. 

Not that I am hawking Kryptons, but the pro version comes with two tongues for stiffness, part of their bag of adjustments.


----------



## wa-loaf (Mar 25, 2008)

deadheadskier said:


> What is the flex rating like on Full Tilts stiffest boot? 120?



You can't make comparisons since all boots rate differently. The full-on comps were pretty popular on the WC back in the early 90s so they are certainly stiff enough, but it's a very different flex because of the one piece tongue. They do "feel" less stiff, but the construction makes them very responsive. I have a narrow heel and med-wide foot and felt they were a good fit. Easy to get in and out of too . . .


----------



## ed-drum (Mar 25, 2008)

My Kamos are pretty stiff. They were stiffer than the Bumble Bee that I tried. The Full Tilt web site has a dealer locater. Hunter had them in stock, so it was a matter of just picking out the model. No heel lift in them at all either. Now it's time for a new pair of boards. Got new Swans goggles last week, awesome lens. My wife is going to throw me out of the house. "How much stuff do you need?"  Ed.


----------



## SKIQUATTRO (Apr 4, 2008)

very happy with my Atomic Sugar Daddies....and the wife loves her Line Celebrities


----------



## Trekchick (Apr 4, 2008)

Two new specialty skis in my quiver this year adding to the bump ski I bought a couple years ago.
This year
Blizzard Mag SL 155.  This ski is smooth, and OMG quick!!!
The tighter you carve the faster it goes.  Did I say smooooth!?

Bro 174 Soft Standard, big mountain ski!
This ski inspired me to do jump cornices and rip lines that I had only imagined.
With a 32 m TR, its not a great ski in Michigan, but out west it was my ski of choice and inspired confidence!!!


----------



## eatskisleep (Apr 4, 2008)

My powder skis are amazing in powder... they just float... It's amazing.


----------



## andyzee (Apr 5, 2008)

Yes


----------

