# Competition Mogul Skis



## Greg (Mar 27, 2007)

Any thoughts on the various comepetition level bump skis? I'm thinking about picking up a pair of these skis just for days I'm spending most of my time in the bumps. Any recommendations? I'm looking at the Dyna Twisters, Salomon 1080s, Rossi Scratch Moguls, K2 Cabrawlers, and the Volkl Dragonslayers. I know, the recommendation is going to be to demo, but I've never seen bumps skis offered to demo. These skis are hard enough to find much less demo so I'll just probably grab a deal online. I'm 6'1" and about 170 lbs. and would like the lightest and most responsive bump ski out there. My AC3s are a bit unwieldy in the bumps.


----------



## tjf67 (Mar 27, 2007)

If you want a pair of bump skiis just buy an old pair of straight skiis for bumps.  They have not changed.   If you have been skiing for more than ten years you probably have a pair in the basement.  BTW it you are having ahard time with the ac3 straight skiis are not going to make much of a difference.  Its how you ski them not what you ski them on.  I ski the bumps on AC4 and smash the crap out of them.  
You never got to whiteface.  What a sham you profit off a place that you never visited.  SHAM I TELL YOU!!!


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Mar 27, 2007)

Greg said:


> Any thoughts on the various comepetition level bump skis? I'm thinking about picking up a pair of these skis just for days I'm spending most of my time in the bumps. Any recommendations? I'm looking at the Dyna Twisters, Salomon 1080s, Rossi Scratch Moguls, K2 Cabrawlers, and the Volkl Dragonslayers. I know, the recommendation is going to be to demo, but I've never seen bumps skis offered to demo. These skis are hard enough to find much less demo so I'll just probably grab a deal online. I'm 6'1" and about 170 lbs. and would like the lightest and most responsive bump ski out there. My AC3s are a bit unwieldy in the bumps.




A friend of mine is a freestyle coach at WF. I'll see him this weekend and get his opinion for you.


----------



## skidon (Mar 30, 2007)

Volkl's current mogul ski is the Rebellion.  None of the Sallys are narrow enough to be considered true mogul skis, although many kids DO use them.  Of the 5 brands you mentioned, the K2 and Rossi are the dominant skis used at the Waterville Valley freestyle program, which has sent kids to the Olympics (for example, Hannah Kearney) and recently killed it at the Junior worlds.  I'd go with one of those 2 models...


----------



## Jean-Pierre Skier (Apr 5, 2007)

I think your Volkl AC3's are too heavy and stiff for bumps.  I'm not sure if you've set your heart on dedicated mogul skis, but any softer, lighter ski will work much, much better for you.  I love my K2 Public Enemies in the bumps, plus they perform all over the mountain and in any sort of conditions.  In my opinion, they are some of the best "do anything" skis I've ever had.  From Utah Powder to Mad River tree skiing.

Just a thought.


----------



## Greg (Apr 12, 2007)

Well, I'm waiting for a deal on either the 1080s, Scratch or Cabrawlers to come along. Already picked up a pair of non-lifted Look PX12 Pilot bindings just waiting for some nice matching boards. This will be my ultra-light bump set-up and the AC3s will remain my all-mountain, crud, powder, woods rig.


----------



## marcski (Apr 12, 2007)

slightly off topic...but 2 weeks ago, I saw a guy skiing on a pair of beautiful orange Olin Mark IV's. They weren't the comp's but still a nice bump ski back in the day!


----------



## skidon (Apr 14, 2007)

That Look binding is good, and along with its Rossi counterpart last year might even have been the best for bumps.  This year, though, Salomon came out with their Z Series bindings.  The Z12 Ti is much lighter, and its vertical coupling to the ski is tighter, which makes for more-precise egde control. Since you haven't mounted skis up yet, if you REALLY want ultra-light, think about those Sollymons.....  Also, what size skis are you going with?


----------



## Greg (Apr 14, 2007)

skidon said:


> That Look binding is good, and along with its Rossi counterpart last year might even have been the best for bumps.  This year, though, Salomon came out with their Z Series bindings.  The Z12 Ti is much lighter, and its vertical coupling to the ski is tighter, which makes for more-precise egde control. Since you haven't mounted skis up yet, if you REALLY want ultra-light, think about those Sollymons.....  Also, what size skis are you going with?



Well, I got the Looks for a hundred bucks so....

Ski length? Around 170 cm.


----------



## skidon (Apr 15, 2007)

OK, this year's Scratch Mogul came in 167 and 175.  Those are true sizes.  The 'Brawler was made in 169 and 179, but those are NOT true sizes.  The actual size of this year's and last year's Cabrawlers is 4-5 cm shorter than the size printed on the ski.  So, the real size of the 169 is around 164, and the real size of the 179 is 174.  Confused yet?  Heh.  The Salomon models that would be best for moguls would be the Teneighty Flyer and Teneighty Thruster.  The Thruster's probably better for you 'because it's a beefier construction.  They're both made in a 171, true size.  The Rossi and K2 are both 66mm wide at the waist, while the Salomons are both around 80, which is why the former 2 models are preferred over the Salomons for comp skiing - they're quicker edge-to-edge.


----------



## Greg (Aug 28, 2007)

*Cabrawlers, Baby!*

Well, this morning I finally pulled the trigger on a pair of 2007 K2 Cabrawlers (179 cm)






http://www.untracked.com/p1318-07_k2_cabrawler_expert_mogul_skis.html

I'll be mounting a pair of 2006 Look PX12 (flat, no lifters) that I got on eBay for $100:






I had three gift certificates for Untracked.com so I got the whole ski and binding combo for about $250. I'm ready to rock those piles now!


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Aug 28, 2007)

Greg said:


> Well, this morning I finally pulled the trigger on a pair of 2007 K2 Cabrawlers (179 cm)
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Nice Greg, I hope you like them alot.


----------



## Grassi21 (Aug 28, 2007)

Greg said:


> Well, this morning I finally pulled the trigger on a pair of 2007 K2 Cabrawlers (179 cm)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Now we will never see you on a groomer.   ;-)


----------



## Greg (Aug 28, 2007)

Grassi21 said:


> Now we will never see you on a groomer.   ;-)



Well, I did go with the longer one so it still should be usable on the groomers. As you know, I'm far from a carver and I should be able to chop down the flats on these. It's a not a primary ski; just for when I expect to be on the bumps at least half the time.


----------



## Grassi21 (Aug 28, 2007)

Greg said:


> Well, I did go with the longer one so it still should be usable on the groomers. As you know, I'm far from a carver and I should be able to chop down the flats on these. It's a not a primary ski; just for when I expect to be on the bumps at least half the time.



I know.  Just bustin' stones.  They look sweet.  I've always liked K2s top-sheets.  I'm really interested to hear you thoughts on them as the season progresses.


----------



## Greg (Aug 28, 2007)

Grassi21 said:


> I know.  Just bustin' stones.  They look sweet.  I've always liked K2s top-sheets.  I'm really interested to hear you thoughts on them as the season progresses.



My 4 year old is excited I'm getting skis with the Statue of Liberty on them. :lol: She has some sort of fascination with the statue lately. I'll be sure to share my thoughts as you can imagine. I'm going to weigh them to compare them to my AC3s.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Aug 28, 2007)

Greg, what dimensions are your new bump skis??


----------



## Greg (Aug 28, 2007)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Greg, what dimensions are your new bump skis??



92-66-82

Sweet, eh? :lol:


----------



## ALLSKIING (Aug 28, 2007)

Nice Greg....I am waiting for my B-day and X-mas to pass.


----------



## mtl1076 (Aug 28, 2007)

I might be late to this game, but if anyone is looking for a 170 Dragonslayer, used but in great shape shoot me a pm.


----------



## Greg (Aug 29, 2007)

*They're here!!! *

Word! Big props to Untracked.com. I ordered these suckers yesterday morning and was surprised and elated to see them leaning on my front steps when I got home from work today this afternoon!







As far as length goes, they're pretty similar to my AC3 which are 170cm:






As mentioned earlier in this thread, the Cabrawler runs much shorter than its printed length. I would guess the 179cm Cabrawler is indeed around 173cm. I'm very glad I opted for this length over the 169 (163) especially given how skinny these are overall. I plan to use these skis on the bumps and groomers (not a carver skier) and save the AC3s for natural snow/powder/trees.

Another goal was a lighter ski. Based on my completely unscientific measurements using a bathroom scale, the AC3s weigh 13.6 pounds while the Cabrawlers + the PX12s weigh 10.8 lbs. for a savings of almost 3 lbs. I expected a bit more, but hey, I'll take what I can get.

Anyway, not much more can get you psyched for ski season this time of year than a ski delivery! 8) I'm slowly turning into a gear whore. Can't wait to see how the skinny skis help in the bumps! Come on winter!!!


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Aug 30, 2007)

Greg said:


> As mentioned earlier in this thread, the Cabrawler runs much shorter than its printed length. I would guess the 179cm Cabrawler is indeed around 173cm. I'm very glad I opted for this length over the 169 (163)



My enemys are the same way.I am guess ing they measure the top sheet length when it is flat, but then there is the turned up tail.  Re those skis flat on the back, or turned up.


----------



## Greg (Aug 30, 2007)

Hawkshot99 said:


> My enemys are the same way.I am guess ing they measure the top sheet length when it is flat, but then there is the turned up tail.  Re those skis flat on the back, or turned up.



There's a slight turn up on the tail. I think the issue is K2 measures the running length (along the edge) of the ski, not tip to tail.


----------



## jack97 (Aug 30, 2007)

Greg said:


> Another goal was a lighter ski. Based on my completely unscientific measurements using a bathroom scale, the AC3s weigh 13.6 pounds while the Cabrawlers + the PX12s weigh 10.8 lbs. for a savings of almost 3 lbs. I expected a bit more, but hey, I'll take what I can get.



Nice..... I was tempted to pull the trigger at 169. Got the twister instead. I noticed the skis seems light but the PX12 added the extra weight. 

I got my bindings mounted 1 cm forward, it turns out with my set up that its balanced from tip to tail at the mid line of my boot (which turns out to be where my BOF point). Just made a knife hand and found the point where it's balanced on my index finger. If I do the same experiment with my k2 axis and volkl g3, the bindings are mounted no where near the balance point. Not sure if I like it but I am excited about giving it a try in both the flats and bumps.


----------



## Greg (Aug 30, 2007)

jack97 said:


> Nice..... I was tempted to pull the trigger at 169. Got the twister instead. I noticed the skis seems light but the PX12 added the extra weight.
> 
> I got my bindings mounted 1 cm forward, it turns out with my set up that its balanced from tip to tail at the mid line of my boot (which turns out to be where my BOF point). Just made a knife hand and found the point where it's balanced on my index finger. If I do the same experiment with my k2 axis and volkl g3, the bindings are mounted no where near the balance point. Not sure if I like it but I am excited about giving it a try in both the flats and bumps.



When I get the bindings mounted, I'm just going to tell them to mount 1 cm forward. There's a "mid-sole" marking on the ski which I assume is the correct mounting point for a centered position. I figure going only 1 cm forward is a safe enough deviation from what the manufacturer recommends.


----------



## jack97 (Aug 30, 2007)

Greg said:


> When I get the bindings mounted, I'm just going to tell them to mount 1 cm forward. There's a "mid-sole" marking on the ski which I assume is the correct mounting point for a centered position. I figure going only 1 cm forward is a safe enough deviation from what the manufacturer recommends.



Same here..... but you know with me, along with the feel, I have have to understand why when it comes to techniques and equipment.

BTW, I got my twister over at forerunner, Phil (the tech) said that the place recommends 1cm forward on all bump skis. As for props, he mounted bindings that I got else where for for a cheap price, overall a nice deal.


----------



## Greg (Nov 6, 2007)

jack97 said:


> I got my bindings mounted 1 cm forward, it turns out with my set up that its balanced from tip to tail at the mid line of my boot (which turns out to be where my BOF point). Just made a knife hand and found the point where it's balanced on my index finger. If I do the same experiment with my k2 axis and volkl g3, the bindings are mounted no where near the balance point. Not sure if I like it but I am excited about giving it a try in both the flats and bumps.





Greg said:


> When I get the bindings mounted, I'm just going to tell them to mount 1 cm forward. There's a "mid-sole" marking on the ski which I assume is the correct mounting point for a centered position. I figure going only 1 cm forward is a safe enough deviation from what the manufacturer recommends.



Well, this was an interesting experience. I went to pick up my Cabrawlers a few weeks ago and they were totally screwed up! I noticed the toe binding partially covering the graphic at the tip. It turns out they mounted the bindings 1 cm forward from *center mount*, i.e. the center of the ski! Apparently a lot of park skis are mounted this way so anyone going +1cm, be sure to clarify when you say 1 cm forward, it's from the *standard* mounting point...

The kid was like, "no problem, we'll have him remount and they'll be ready for tomorrow." I said, "no.....you're going to contact your K2 rep and get me new skis." He seemed to want to do the right thing and ultimately they did by getting me replacement boards. So, as it stands, all is right with the world:






I would have been really pissed if it was mid-season and had to wait an extra two weeks. It turns out this shop didn't follow powhunter's request to have his PX12 Lifters mounted without the lifters too. They were also supposed to set aside a pair of 1080 Moguls for me really cheap ($75) and when I asked, I was told they got "sold". Not sure I believe that one. I'm done with that shop.

Anyway, I hope to break out those bitches on Monday at Snow.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 6, 2007)

Greg said:


> Well, this was an interesting experience. I went to pick up my Cabrawlers a few weeks ago and they were totally screwed up! I noticed the toe binding partially covering the graphic at the tip. It turns out they mounted the bindings 1 cm forward from *center mount*, i.e. the center of the ski! Apparently a lot of park skis are mounted this way so anyone going +1cm, be sure to clarify when you say 1 cm forward, it's from the *standard* mounting point...
> 
> The kid was like, "no problem, we'll have him remount and they'll be ready for tomorrow." I said, "no.....you're going to contact your K2 rep and get me new skis." He seemed to want to do the right thing and ultimately they did by getting me replacement boards. So, as it stands, all is right with the world:
> 
> ...



Kind of interesting on 1 cm mount on the cabrawlers, did you try the balancing experiment to find the mid point in terms of weight? The weight of my twister is distributed differently along the length and the weight of each piece of the bindings is different, this placed the balance point at a different spot than the (running surface) length midpoint.


----------



## Greg (Nov 6, 2007)

jack97 said:


> Kind of interesting on 1 cm mount on the cabrawlers, did you try the balancing experiment to find the mid point in terms of weight? The weight of my twister is distributed differently along the length and the weight of each piece of the bindings is different, this placed the balance point at a different spot than the (running surface) length midpoint.



I did using your unscientific hand method. It's still a bit forward from the modified mid-sole location, sort of right at the BOF.


----------



## jack97 (Nov 7, 2007)

Greg said:


> I did using your unscientific hand method. It's still a bit forward from the modified mid-sole location, sort of right at the BOF.



That's where my twister ended up; the balance point (in terms of weight) is close to the bof.


----------

