# A new ski for me?



## Newpylong (Sep 21, 2008)

I am in the market for new skis this season. I currently ski a 178 Volkl Pro 724. I am 5'10" and weigh about 200 lbs. The ski is too long for me, but otherwise I think this is the type of ski I am looking for. I want to be able to ski bumps, carve, and ski crud. So I guess I am looking for an all mountain ski. What would a good size be?

I don't particularly feel like dropping that much money again since these are only a few years old. Does anyone have any good recommendations on last year's equipment for me? Will I be able to move the rail mounted Marker bindings that came on these to other skis? Or do most now come with bindings?

Thanks!


----------



## Philpug (Sep 21, 2008)

http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?t=72456

06/07 Nordica Nitrous 170 cm, with XBS Binding:
I got these in 07. As a part of my quiver, they didn't see much action. Last year my husband used them as his tree ski because it was shorter than most of what he has. Time to thin the quiver.
I haven't looked at them closely since putting them away for summer storage, but I recall some top sheet scratches, but good bases. May need a tune, can't remember.

$295 Shipped.


----------



## Greg (Sep 21, 2008)

Newpylong said:


> I want to be able to ski bumps, carve, and ski crud. So I guess I am looking for an all mountain ski.



Well, as you probably already guessed, it's hard to find a ski that does it all. I came off an AC3 which is the more forgiving version of the next generation up from your 724. I upgraded to a Dynastar Legend 8000 and have been very happy with it. Decent in bumps (I normally ski a bump ski so I'm particular there) and excellent in crud and powder. Not a great carver, especially on really icy hardpack, much manageable on groomed. I'd say a 178 cm would be good. Maybe a 172 cm if you want to go a bit shorter. Mount some Look PX12 or equivalent flat and you'll be good to go with a pretty light and nimble ski.

Edit: note - I'm talking about a 2007 model and prior. The 2008+ are a different ski.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 21, 2008)

Why do you think a 178 is too long?


----------



## lloyd braun (Sep 21, 2008)

Geoff said:


> Why do you think a 178 is too long?



that is exactly what I thought too.

Seems like it is the correct size or maybe even a bit short


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Sep 21, 2008)

lloyd braun said:


> that is exactly what I thought too.
> 
> Seems like it is the correct size or maybe even a bit short



I could see it being a ok length on the long side.  Unless it was to be a powder ski there is no way I would say it is short.


----------



## Trekchick (Sep 21, 2008)

I [Hart] Skiing said:


> http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?t=72456
> 
> 06/07 Nordica Nitrous 170 cm, with XBS Binding:
> I got these in 07. As a part of my quiver, they didn't see much action. Last year my husband used them as his tree ski because it was shorter than most of what he has. Time to thin the quiver.
> ...


Thanks I Hart. 
This is my listing on Epic, and its a very nice ski, but(if you haven't followed my household quiver issues) we have too many skis.
My husband has the 724 Pro in a 184, Loves it!  He likes this Nitrous as a compliment to the Pro, but I'm forcing him to thin the quiver.
I'm mean that way. 
If you're interest, let me know.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 22, 2008)

lloyd braun said:


> that is exactly what I thought too.
> 
> Seems like it is the correct size or maybe even a bit short



There seems to be a trend in the east to put people on dwarf skis.  On hardpack at recreational skiing speeds, that seems to work OK though it completely destroys moguls.  A 200 pound guy on a short all mountain ski isn't going to have a very good time in soft snow.  In my opinion, it makes no sense to optimize for the crappy days.  With a 1 ski quiver, I think you want gear that maximizes the good days and performs well enough on the crappy days to enjoy yourself.  I think an 85mm waist and around 177-180 cm length is the sweet spot for an eastern all mountain ski for a 200 pound guy.  I weigh somewhat more than that so I'm one size up from there.  Ski technology has improved to the point where an 85mm waist ski has the grip of a narrower ski of 7 or 8 years ago.  Everybody makes a ski like that and there are lots of really good options.


----------



## RootDKJ (Sep 22, 2008)

But isn't that same technology also allows for a better response, control, and float factors in a shorter ski?  I'd have to have to go back to anything longer than 180 (still have my 210 K2 TRC's in the attic just in case :wink


----------



## Trekchick (Sep 22, 2008)

After rereading this thread, I'm convinced that my nitrous is not ideal for this quiver.
My husband is on the 724 Volkl Pro, as stated above, in a 184.  He is 6'1" and 180 lbs.
IMO, shorter is not always better.
The Nitrous in a 170 would not be ideal for someone of your stature


----------



## prisnah (Sep 22, 2008)

short skis suck


That is all


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Sep 22, 2008)

prisnah said:


> short skis suck
> 
> 
> That is all



funny...there was a "short skis suck" bumper sticker that was popular in the '70s when the GLM method was around...when the Elan SCX came out and made its major debut at Sunday River the shop I worked for ressurected the old sticker with twist;  "short skis still suck" in the silhouete of the SCX shape.  Wish I still had some of them...I'd put them on my 192 fat skis.


----------



## prisnah (Sep 22, 2008)

I think it's high time we got some new "Short skis suck" stickers made up.


----------



## Newpylong (Sep 22, 2008)

Thanks for the tips everyone...

I have nothing against long skis... I come from a racing background and have skied everything from 210 DH skies to 178 Slalom skis. Seeing what most people were skiing at the time, I did consider these to be a little long but I figured I wanted the added stability coming from a racing background. 

I'm not sure what's wrong with them... they are a very solid platform on the groomers and when carving, but when I slow it down its another story. They seem long and quite heavy. I have trouble turning getting them around, making bumps and trees quite miserable. I think they are wood core, is that the norm now? Would a foam core be lighter, and maybe cut down on the length slightly?

This was the last pair that I have bought since the early days of carvers when Volkl was giving me their skis, so I definitely am less than knowledgable when it comes to this stuff now... so thanks for your patience.

Any other ideas?

Thanks


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Sep 22, 2008)

Newpylong said:


> I'm not sure what's wrong with them... they are a very solid platform on the groomers and when carving, but when I slow it down its another story. They seem long and quite heavy. I have trouble turning getting them around, making bumps and trees quite miserable. I think they are wood core, is that the norm now? Would a foam core be lighter, and maybe cut down on the length slightly?
> 
> Any other ideas?
> 
> Thanks



They've got metal in them...like your old race skis, look for something without a metal laminate but with a sidewall...the metal laminate makes the ski smooth and stable at speed but unforgiving in bumps and trees and heavier.  A sidewall ski with a woodcore will still have solid edge grip but when you lose the metal you get a more forgiving and versatile ski.  Some skis to consider are the Fischer Watea 84 (84mm waist with two carbon fiber I-beams milled into the woodcore to make it torsionally stiff like a ski with metal so it holds on hard snow, but much lighter and more forgiving)  Nordica Afterburner, 84mm waist sidewalls, woodcore, but no metal (its the non-metal version of the Jet Fuel) or, if you're looking for something a little narrower check the Nordica Afterburner or Fischer Watea 78...both woodcore sidewall skis with no metal, both have 78mm waists and ~17m radius turns.  There are plenty of other good skis out there, but I've skied on all of these and think they're a great mix of edge hold and versatility...and you could probably find last year's version of them in a shop/online.  My $.02


----------



## skidmarks (Sep 24, 2008)

*Fore-Aft Balance could be what's wrong with them*

I agree that the trend is towards too short of a ski. Most of the time you can tell by the ski's turn radius whether it's meant to be skied short or long. Any ski with a turn radius of 16M+ should be skied a bit longer. 

I would check the "delta angle" of your binding and the "ramp angle" of your ski boot and the "dorsal flexion" of your ankle to see if you're stuck in the back seat. That would make the skis hard to turn at slow speeds.

PSIA had a great article on this subject a few years ago. A quick check would be if you drop a plumb line from your hips centerline while standing in your equipment (light pressure on boot tongue not flexed) the plumb line should fall through the midsole mark on your boot.

If you don't have great range of motion upward (gas pedal move) a heel lift might help.


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Sep 24, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> I agree that the trend is towards too short of a ski. Most of the time you can tell by the ski's turn radius whether it's meant to be skied short or long. Any ski with a turn radius of 16M+ should be skied a bit longer.
> 
> I would check the "delta angle" of your binding and the "ramp angle" of your ski boot and the "dorsal flexion" of your ankle to see if you're stuck in the back seat. That would make the skis hard to turn at slow speeds.
> 
> ...



this post should include a glossary of terms so most of the folks on here can understand what you're talking about.  I'm fine with the lingo...but not too many people know what "dorsal flexion" is let alone how to guage if they have enough.  Could you elaborate on your post so those folks who don't have a subscription to the Professional Skier can follow along?


----------



## Geoff (Sep 24, 2008)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> this post should include a glossary of terms so most of the folks on here can understand what you're talking about.  I'm fine with the lingo...but not too many people know what "dorsal flexion" is let alone how to guage if they have enough.  Could you elaborate on your post so those folks who don't have a subscription to the Professional Skier can follow along?



dorsal flexion....  It's technobabble for the 1950's "Bend zee knees.  Two dollars pleeze"


----------



## skidmarks (Sep 25, 2008)

*Dorsal Flexion*



eastcoastpowderhound said:


> this post should include a glossary of terms so most of the folks on here can understand what you're talking about.  I'm fine with the lingo...but not too many people know what "dorsal flexion" is let alone how to guage if they have enough.  Could you elaborate on your post so those folks who don't have a subscription to the Professional Skier can follow along?




*Dorsal Flexion. Flexion of the ankle resulting in the top of the foot moving toward the body*
Looked it up on Google cause I can't find my copy of Professional Skier.

This is relevant because; if he doesn't have a good range of motion he might not be able to flex in his boots, keeping him in the back seat and making it hard to turn at slow speeds. His fore-aft balance which is a product of boot ramp ange and binding delta angle can make this situation worse. I gave him a little test he could do.

_Originally Posted by Newpylong  
I'm not sure what's wrong with them... they are a very solid platform on the groomers and when carving, but when I slow it down its another story. They seem long and quite heavy. I have trouble turning getting them around, making bumps and trees quite miserable. I think they are wood core, is that the norm now? Would a foam core be lighter, and maybe cut down on the length slightly?

Any other ideas?
_

Skis seem to be the right length for someone his size. The Volkl 724 Pro isn't a bad ski is it?
Can we assume the skis bases are beveled (not railed) and otherwise tuned correctly?
I'd check out stance and want to hear more about his ski boots before spending $$ some new skis.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 25, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> Skis seem to be the right length for someone his size. The Volkl 724 Pro isn't a bad ski is it?
> Can we assume the skis bases are beveled (not railed) and otherwise tuned correctly?
> I'd check out stance and want to hear more about his ski boots before spending $$ some new skis.



I sort of agree with this.  The 724 Pro is a pretty beefy ski.  A 200 pound guy is probably going to be unhappy with a shorter or softer ski but you have to ski it centered.

A video clip in bumps and trees would be really useful.  It might be as simple as being in a stance where the ski doesn't allow him to skid at slow speeds.  If you drop a hand, rotate your shoulders out of the fall line, and get in the back seat, you'll get the results he's describing.  The edge locks and you can't unlock it to initiate your next turn.  We all fight it and do it to some degree. It's easy to lapse into it if you're slightly out of your comfort zone in bumps or trees.  You can detune the tail to compensate for some of it.  You can go softer or shorter to compensate for some of it.  ...or you can get some video of yourself in those situations and see if you're in the wrong body position.


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Sep 25, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> *Dorsal Flexion. Flexion of the ankle resulting in the top of the foot moving toward the body*
> Looked it up on Google cause I can't find my copy of Professional Skier.
> 
> This is relevant because; if he doesn't have a good range of motion he might not be able to flex in his boots, keeping him in the back seat and making it hard to turn at slow speeds. His fore-aft balance which is a product of boot ramp ange and binding delta angle can make this situation worse. I gave him a little test he could do.
> ...



I must confess to trying to bait you a little...and the fact that you had to google dorsal flexion supports my initial impression that you've got a ground level understanding of the terms you threw out but not a comprehensive knowledge of how they all work together.  Ramp angle, delta angle, forward lean have a circular affect on fore/aft balance...not linear...as in more and more ramp angle doesn't lead to getting your hips further and further forward, at some point you'll end up with too much (of any) and will end up breaking at the waist and dropping the hips back...and into the backseat.  You sound like you enjoy this kind of stuff, you probably teach, PSIA member, etc...I'd suggest you look into a MasterFit clinic and get a deeper understanding of how all this stuff fits together, how you can identify it by looking at a skier, etc...it'll make you a better instructor for sure.  I'm not trying to pick on you or anything, I've just seen what can happen when someone has read an article in The Professional Skier and starts playing around wth customers boots.  Fnd a really good bootfitter (you can start looking at America's Best Bootfitters...google it), buy him/her some beers and pick their brain.  
  To me it sounds like newpylong is on a ski that's a little too stiff for playing around at slower speeds, in the bumps, trees, etc...its got two sheets of titanal and a beefy woodcore....something without the metal in the same length is going to be more forgiving and user friendly at lower speeds, bumps, trees, etc.  Try and demo some of the skis I mentioned earlier...dont just rush out and by them, find the ski that's right for you...adn yeah, go find a good bootfitter and have them check out your fore aft balance too...regardless of the ski issue, being dialed in is key.


----------



## skidmarks (Sep 26, 2008)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> I must confess to trying to bait you a little...and the fact that you had to google dorsal flexion supports my initial impression that you've got a ground level understanding of the terms you threw out but not a comprehensive knowledge of how they all work together.  Ramp angle, delta angle, forward lean have a circular affect on fore/aft balance...not linear...as in more and more ramp angle doesn't lead to getting your hips further and further forward, at some point you'll end up with too much (of any) and will end up breaking at the waist and dropping the hips back...and into the backseat.



I was being sarcastic when I said I Googled it!!! My point was if someone didn't understand what "dorsal flexion" meant and didn't have a copy of Pro Skier they could Google it themselves. 

A big part of Master Fit is Fore/Aft Balance, unless they've changed their mind since 2005. Master Fit U's Master Course talks a lot about being over the sweet spot of the ski. They talk about how Boot Ramp Angle and forward Lean is key in being balanced. They didn't talk back then about the Delta angle created by the difference in height between the heel and toe piece of the binding combined with the length of the boot. In race gear it's pretty common stuff. They also talk about dorsal flexion and how a lack of it can make it hard to flex your ankles forward in a boot.

My first point was Poor Newpylong should get his kit checked out before he spends more money on new skis. He may be in the back seat and can check this out using the instuctions I gave. If you're too far forward your tails can wash out. Too far back it's hard to carve a turn. Right in zee Middle is cool!!!

Also we don't know if Newpylong is still skiing a pair of SX91 boots. (Pardon me if I missed talk about his boots). Boots are key, he bought new skis 2 years ago what kind of boots is he on? Are they too big??

Master Fit is great stuff just don't drink all of the Kool Aid. Their Insta Print presentation reminded me of a Time Share meeting I had to sit though to get a free lobster dinner. 

I could talk about this stuff all day.
Thanks


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Sep 26, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> I was being sarcastic when I said I Googled it!!! My point was if someone didn't understand what "dorsal flexion" meant and didn't have a copy of Pro Skier they could Google it themselves.
> 
> A big part of Master Fit is Fore/Aft Balance, unless they've changed their mind since 2005. Master Fit U's Master Course talks a lot about being over the sweet spot of the ski. They talk about how Boot Ramp Angle and forward Lean is key in being balanced. They didn't talk back then about the Delta angle created by the difference in height between the heel and toe piece of the binding combined with the length of the boot. In race gear it's pretty common stuff. They also talk about dorsal flexion and how a lack of it can make it hard to flex your ankles forward in a boot.
> 
> ...



I missed the sarcasm...sometimes the :blink: helps me spot it!  Okay, you've got more depth and background in this area than I initially expected.  The first post just seemed heavy on the jargon and light on the meat...a little knowledge is a dangerous thing type deal.  
I agree with you on the instaprint...I'm an HD vac guy myself...semi weighted mold, fully weighted cast (I've got one in my basement)...the instaprint misses too much of the lateral arch, met arch, etc  As for delta angle, I've always had to ski on too many different skis every season (tough job, but someone has to do it) to really be concerned with it in my personal set ups but it is key for the serious gate chaser.  As long as I'm dialed in my boot I'm happy.  I could talk about this stuff all day too...glad to have another junkie in the gear forum, it can get slow in here.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 27, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> My first point was Poor Newpylong should get his kit checked out before he spends more money on new skis. He may be in the back seat and can check this out using the instuctions I gave. If you're too far forward your tails can wash out. Too far back it's hard to carve a turn. Right in zee Middle is cool!!!



For most people, an investment in some competent instruction is how you get out of the back seat.  Technobabble about dorsal flexion, boot ramp ange, and binding delta angle is a bunch of crap for a low time recreational skier.  If you have the wrong body position and don't bend your f'ing knees, you'll end up in the back seat.


----------



## riverc0il (Sep 27, 2008)

Newpylong said:


> I'm not sure what's wrong with them... they are a very solid platform on the groomers and when carving, but when I slow it down its another story. They seem long and quite heavy. I have trouble turning getting them around, making bumps and trees quite miserable. I think they are wood core, is that the norm now? Would a foam core be lighter, and maybe cut down on the length slightly?


I skied the 724 Pro in a 128 the first year that version of the ski came out. Respectable carver. Not good in the bumps nor is it a good tree ski, IMO. Never skied it in powder. My opinion was it was too much of a power ski that preferred hard pack snow. An ultimate "all mountain ski"... good at everything but great at nothing.

Go wood or foam based on your preference for the ski's performance not based on weight on length. There are plenty of light weight wood core skis that ski at various lengths. Most Volkls are super heavy because they load the ski up with sheets of metal. Same with many other manufacturers. It is no longer just the standard wood versus foam debate.

If you want to ski well in the bumps and trees but also rail on the groomers you are going to have to find your balance point on a very tippy scale. I would recommend demoing a lot of skis. The better a ski performs on the groomers... usually is an indication that bump performance and tree performance will suffer (from my experience).


----------



## riverc0il (Sep 27, 2008)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> Some skis to consider are the Fischer Watea 84 (84mm waist with two carbon fiber I-beams milled into the woodcore to make it torsionally stiff like a ski with metal so it holds on hard snow, but much lighter and more forgiving)  Nordica Afterburner, 84mm waist sidewalls, woodcore, but no metal (its the non-metal version of the Jet Fuel) or, if you're looking for something a little narrower check the Nordica Afterburner or Fischer Watea 78...both woodcore sidewall skis with no metal, both have 78mm waists and ~17m radius turns.  There are plenty of other good skis out there, but I've skied on all of these and think they're a great mix of edge hold and versatility...and you could probably find last year's version of them in a shop/online.  My $.02


I was withholding specific recommendations pending more input, but the Fischer Watea 78 came immediately to mind (or perhaps the 84 if there is a preference for powder performance). I only have experience with the 94, but the 78 or 84 really seem like they would fit the bill here. No experience with the Nordica (HPD is going to have my head one of these days, I swear :lol: ).


----------



## skidmarks (Sep 27, 2008)

Geoff said:


> For most people, an investment in some competent instruction is how you get out of the back seat.  Technobabble about dorsal flexion, boot ramp ange, and binding delta angle is a bunch of crap for a low time recreational skier.  If you have the wrong body position and don't bend your f'ing knees, you'll end up in the back seat.



You are missing the point. These things we've mentioned can prevent you from bending the knees. You can be bent to the end of your range of motion just standing in the lift line.


----------



## Geoff (Sep 27, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> You are missing the point. These things we've mentioned can prevent you from bending the knees. You can be bent to the end of your range of motion just standing in the lift line.



And you're missing my point.  Instead of lapsing into technobabble, you might ask if the original poster has a range of motion issue in their ankles.


----------



## skidmarks (Sep 28, 2008)

Geoff said:


> And you're missing my point.  Instead of lapsing into technobabble, you might ask if the original poster has a range of motion issue in their ankles.



I think we covered that. I even asked what kind of boots he was on. And he was given a test that he could do at home to see if his equipment put him in the back seat.

Once we know it's not an equipment problem some lessons might be the ticket.

And Geoff looking at your Avatar I would suggest you moving your feet apart.


----------



## skidmarks (Sep 28, 2008)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> I agree with you on the instaprint...I'm an HD vac guy myself...semi weighted mold, fully weighted cast (I've got one in my basement)...the instaprint misses too much of the lateral arch, met arch, etc



Wow, I have one too. HD vacs Rule. The Shop I manage has a SuperFeet Kork set up. I bought into the Aline system too. We carry several brands of trim to fits also. Some systems work better with certain feet than others.

I do boot sole planning/canting for the racers. A good fitting boot is key to skiing well. One of my favorite  is the Krypton. It did really well for us. I figured the next step would be to bring in Full Tilt because it's the original. These boots really freeride well.



Looking forward to talking some more tech with you in the future.


----------



## Edd (Sep 28, 2008)

Back on topic here...

I started skiing on K2 Public Enemies last year and find it to be a fun, very capable advanced eastern ski that you can take out west if you make a trip.  It's got a wood core and an 85 waist.

They changed the name this year to Extreme but you can easily find an unused pair a year or two old cheap.  That is, if you don't mind ugly skis.  The Extreme looks much better, but that'll cost you.

Good luck with your search.


----------



## bigbog (Sep 29, 2008)

*....one or the other..*

Moment _*Comi*_...(160-136-145, only comes @186)
...or probably more preferable,
Liberty _*Helix*_......(135-105-122, *176!)

*EDIT:.....don't take all this "there are _more_ skis!" seriously....too much coffee yesterday..


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Sep 30, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> Wow, I have one too. HD vacs Rule. The Shop I manage has a SuperFeet Kork set up. I bought into the Aline system too. We carry several brands of trim to fits also. Some systems work better with certain feet than others.
> 
> I do boot sole planning/canting for the racers. A good fitting boot is key to skiing well. One of my favorite  is the Krypton. It did really well for us. I figured the next step would be to bring in Full Tilt because it's the original. These boots really freeride well.
> 
> ...



funny...I've been pretty impressed with Aline as well...have them in my boots currently.  Its the only other footbed out there that could ever get me off the beds I made on the HD vac.   Alines are the best bang for the buck out there and so quick and easy to dial in...had Gordo and the crew brought those out while I was still on the shop floor it would have saved me hours at the round wheel grinder. 
   I've got a roundwheel grinder at home too...no point having the HDvac without it!  Managed to find an old scott boot press...just need a foredom with a 1" carbide ball and I'll have a pretty full home kit.  
     Flexons have never worked well for me...tried them "back in the day" and I've tried the Kryptons too...but find I'm happier in a more traditional overlap with a little tweaking.


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Sep 30, 2008)

Geoff said:


> For most people, an investment in some competent instruction is how you get out of the back seat.  Technobabble about dorsal flexion, boot ramp ange, and binding delta angle is a bunch of crap for a low time recreational skier.  If you have the wrong body position and don't bend your f'ing knees, you'll end up in the back seat.



while you're right, I was giving newpy the benefit of the doubt based on the fact that he used to race.  Though I've seen a few former high school heros who were parked in the trunk.  Zee hands, zee hands...iz all about zee hands!  
   Still, after all that's been thrown out here I'm sticking with the skis...the 724 Pro was pretty stiff and burly...like riding a buckin' bronc in the bumps...very diff ski from the 724 EXP.  I'm dialed in my boots, the backseat is not my home, and I know I wouldn't have much fun in the bumps on a 724 Pro.


----------



## WJenness (Sep 30, 2008)

I too am a big fan of the Alines, I have them in my boots as I have pretty flat feet and a lot of boots I was trying on last year were killing the insides of my ankles, the Alines really helped with that.

-w


----------



## Newpylong (Oct 13, 2008)

Hi Everyone. Thank you for all the great suggestions. I ended up picking up a pair of last year's Trouble Maker's (175cm) for a great price at Jackson's (Norwood, MA). I decided I had to sacrifice something to get the versatility I wanted in the bumps, crud, etc. Gonna hold onto the 724's for the hard pack.


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 13, 2008)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> funny...I've been pretty impressed with Aline as well...have them in my boots currently.    I've got a roundwheel grinder at home too...no point having the HDvac without it!  Managed to find an old scott boot press...just need a foredom with a 1" carbide ball and I'll have a pretty full home kit.
> Flexons have never worked well for me...tried them "back in the day" and I've tried the Kryptons too...but find I'm happier in a more traditional overlap with a little tweaking.



I want a Scott Press TOO!!!!

The new A-Lines are real nice. Your foot will now slide over the top surface and they use a tab instead of the buttons for adjustment. When you have a chance stick your foot in a Full Tilt. I could never get my foot anywhere near a Flexon but the FTs kind of fit me.


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 13, 2008)

Newpylong said:


> Hi Everyone. Thank you for all the great suggestions. I ended up picking up a pair of last year's Trouble Maker's (175cm) for a great price at Jackson's (Norwood, MA). I decided I had to sacrifice something to get the versatility I wanted in the bumps, crud, etc. Gonna hold onto the 724's for the hard pack.



Great pick, it's a fun ski for sure. What boot did you own anyway?


----------



## Philpug (Oct 14, 2008)

riverc0il said:


> I skied the 724 Pro in a 128 the first year that version of the ski came out. Respectable carver. Not good in the bumps nor is it a good tree ski, IMO. Never skied it in powder. My opinion was it was too much of a power ski that preferred hard pack snow. An ultimate "all mountain ski"... good at everything but great at nothing.


After skiing an AC4 (and liking them), I picked up a pair of 724 Pros at a swap, but I was truly unimpressed with the ski, felt like a dead fish on my feet, I can see how he feels it is too big. Personally, before going shorter, I would suggest demoing different skis. He is my size and I also think that a 170 would be too short in this type of ski, it is a matter of him finding the right ski in that 175-180 range. 



skidmarks said:


> I figured the next step would be to bring in Full Tilt because it's the original. These boots really freeride well.
> .


Don't bother with the Full Tilt. Go back in Epic's archives where compare the Flexon (FullTilt) to the Krypton. In the past 25 years of skiing, I have been in 2 boots, a Flexon for 20 and a Krypton for the past 5. The Krypton is a Flexon/FT on steroids, a much more powerful and responsive boot.


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 14, 2008)

I [Hart] Skiing said:


> Don't bother with the Full Tilt. Go back in Epic's archives where compare the Flexon (FullTilt) to the Krypton. In the past 25 years of skiing, I have been in 2 boots, a Flexon for 20 and a Krypton for the past 5. The Krypton is a Flexon/FT on steroids, a much more powerful and responsive boot.



Kryptons are a great boot! At www.suburbansport.com You'll see that we carry the Krypton Pro ID,
Krypton Cross ID, Krypton Il Moro ID, Krypton Rampage, Krypton Jakk for the kids, Krypton Kryzma ID, and Krypton Lotus ID for Women. I may have missed a few.



> Originally Posted by skidmarks
> I figured the next step would be to bring in Full Tilt because it's the original. These boots really freeride well.


 So I figured why not bring in the FULL TILTS too and cary both. Makes sense?

PS: Contact me if you want a special AZ price!


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 14, 2008)

*PS: Krypton VS FT*

I do ski in a Krypton Cross myself and think it's the best boot I've ever been in. Got one of the first pairs and upgraded to the ID liner a few season's ago. They work real well with A-Line foot beds.


----------



## bvibert (Oct 14, 2008)

How wide is the forefoot area of the Kryptons and of the Full Tilts?


----------



## Philpug (Oct 14, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> PS: Contact me if you want a special AZ price!


Thank you for the offer, but I am pretty well set up with my connection 



bvibert said:


> How wide is the forefoot area of the Kryptons and of the Full Tilts?


I have the dims somewhere on Epic. The Kryp is 98mm in width, the FT is w/i mm'ers. Of you were to fill both shells with sand, the Kryp is slightly lower. Note the middle buckle position and the hinge point as a comparison, lower and better positioned on the Krypton.


----------



## Philpug (Oct 14, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> I do ski in a Krypton Cross myself and think it's the best boot I've ever been in. *Got one of the first pairs and upgraded to the ID liner a few season's ago.* They work real well with A-Line foot beds.



The pair posted in the previous thread were the FIRST pair to a person who's checks were not signed by Dalbello. I got them before there were even liners in the country, shells only because I was going to use a Thermo liner.


----------



## o3jeff (Oct 14, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> PS: Contact me if you want a special AZ price!



Hopefully I got the special AZ price on mine;-)


----------



## bvibert (Oct 14, 2008)

Philpug said:


> I have the dims somewhere on Epic. The Kryp is 98mm in width, the FT is w/i mm'ers. Of you were to fill both shells with sand, the Kryp is slightly lower. Note the middle buckle position and the hinge point as a comparison, lower and better positioned on the Krypton.



Damn, sounds a little too narrow for my monstrously wide feet...


----------



## o3jeff (Oct 14, 2008)

bvibert said:


> Damn, sounds a little too narrow for my monstrously wide feet...



Try them out before you rule it out. Mine feel awesome, but haven't skied them yet.


----------



## bvibert (Oct 14, 2008)

o3jeff said:


> Try them out before you rule it out. Mine feel awesome, but haven't skied them yet.



My boot fitter thought he could work with boots with a 106mm last, but would prefer even wider...


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 14, 2008)

bvibert said:


> How wide is the forefoot area of the Kryptons and of the Full Tilts?



Kryptons are 98 but with the Custom ID Liner and some boot work my wide EE foot fits.  
The Intution liners "Custom ID" have evolved a lot since the Thermoflex liners too.

It seems like the FT may be a slight bit narrower but they are not talking about it. I've put my foot into the Bumble Bee Pro and it seems okay.

How wide is your foot? Is it just plain wide or wide or wide across the ball of the foot?

*o3jeff got the AZ+ price because he's a repeat offender...............*


Enjoying Kryptons since '04


----------



## Greg (Oct 14, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> Kryptons are 98 but with the Custom ID Liner and some boot work my wide EE foot fits.
> The Intution liners "Custom ID" have evolved a lot since the Thermoflex liners too.
> 
> It seems like the FT may be a slight bit narrower but they are not talking about it. I've put my foot into the Bumble Bee Pro and it seems okay.
> ...



skidmarks - I have a ridiculously narrow and flat low volume foot. Also a very skinny ankle, heel and lower leg. Can the Kryptons be made to work for me? I'm not normally on the groomed if I can help it so I would like something that allows for a fair amount of forward flex and constant tongue pressure. The Kryptons seem to be the boot of choice for bump skiers lately.


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 14, 2008)

bvibert said:


> My boot fitter thought he could work with boots with a 106mm last, but would prefer even wider...



Wow sorry to hear that! Is your foot that wide everywhere? What size is it anyway?

Send me a picture of your foot if you can!!

What boot do you ski in now?


----------



## bvibert (Oct 14, 2008)

My foot is wide across the ball, but otherwise I don't think it's excessively wide.  I've never really studied other people's feet so I don't have much basis for comparison.

I wear a size 12 street shoe and am going to be in a pair of size 28 boots of some sort this winter.  I was in a pair of 29.5 Beasts from a few years back up until now (one of the stiffer versions from when they have a few different ones in the beast line).


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 14, 2008)

I can see you in a Beast but the Beast is boxy and big all over.

To fit my wide foot I had to grind the shell in a few places and push out the shell too. That ID liner helps a lot too. Of course a foot bed is a must but can be as simple as an A-Line. I'd need to see your foot in the boot shell to tell for sure.


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Oct 14, 2008)

bvibert said:


> My boot fitter thought he could work with boots with a 106mm last, but would prefer even wider...



106 last is like rental boot territory...might as well put your foot in a waste paper basket if you want anything wider...or its time to pick up snowboarding!  Unless you've got a EEEE width and a foot that looks like a bear paw I think you need to find a better bootfitter not a wider boot.


----------



## bvibert (Oct 14, 2008)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> 106 last is like rental boot territory...might as well put your foot in a waste paper basket if you want anything wider...or its time to pick up snowboarding!  Unless you've got a EEEE width and a foot that looks like a bear paw I think you need to find a better bootfitter not a wider boot.



Apparently there's a few performance orientated boots with wider lasts, but yes he indicated that my selections would be slim.  Thanks for the input though.

Sorry for the hijack.


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 14, 2008)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> 106 last is like rental boot territory...might as well put your foot in a waste paper basket if you want anything wider...or its time to pick up snowboarding!  Unless you've got a EEEE width and a foot that looks like a bear paw I think you need to find a better bootfitter not a wider boot.



Oh that's cold but mostly true. With the trend towards wider boots that aren't just big buckets you should be able to find a good fit.


----------



## Philpug (Oct 14, 2008)

Can we get this Krypton talk into a separate thread?


----------



## o3jeff (Oct 14, 2008)

Philpug said:


> Can we get this Krypton talk into a separate thread?



We already have 2 or 3 threads that have already been hijacked to Krypton talk already:lol:


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 14, 2008)

*Perhaps the Pros*



Greg said:


> skidmarks - I have a ridiculously narrow and flat low volume foot. Also a very skinny ankle, heel and lower leg. Can the Kryptons be made to work for me? I'm not normally on the groomed if I can help it so I would like something that allows for a fair amount of forward flex and constant tongue pressure. The Kryptons seem to be the boot of choice for bump skiers lately.



They have a firmer liner "gold" Get the whole size vs the .5 size and the liner will be thicker too.

If that doesn't work we have the Rossi/Lange PLUG boot soft that is a narrow 95 last


----------



## Philpug (Oct 14, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> They have a firmer liner "gold" Get the whole size vs the .5 size and the liner will be thicker too.
> 
> If that doesn't work we have the Rossi/Lange PLUG boot soft that is a narrow 95 last



I have the IL Moro, Silver and Gold Liners and the cold is damn low volume.


----------



## bvibert (Oct 14, 2008)

Philpug said:


> Can we get this Krypton talk into a separate thread?



I was thinking the same thing, but am too tired right now.  I'll try to remember to do a little creative spliting in the morning....


----------



## Newpylong (Oct 15, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> Great pick, it's a fun ski for sure. What boot did you own anyway?



Nordica Speedmachine...


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 15, 2008)

Newpylong said:


> Nordica Speedmachine...



Speedmachine is a fine boot. I would just be aware of the forward stance that your boot is set in.
Like we were talking about, lots of boots have more forward lean than is needed. A few quick fixes can get you balanced if you're not. 

Those twins you got will be big fun in the trees and bumps.


----------



## Newpylong (Oct 16, 2008)

I hope so.. was a little weary of the twins but since reading some reviews and talking to a few people they seem like a real nice ski.


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Oct 17, 2008)

bvibert said:


> Apparently there's a few performance orientated boots with wider lasts, but yes he indicated that my selections would be slim.  Thanks for the input though.
> 
> Sorry for the hijack.



Tecnica Mega is 105, Vento HVL is 106, Head has a mid entry that's 106...the iType and their new Peak...a three buckle boot.  All of them are pretty roomy everywhere, not just across the ball of the foot and their a few models down the line in performance.  So, what I'm saying is rather than find a boot wide enough to fit your forefoot right off the shelf, find a boot that fits everywhere else and then stretch/grind for the room you need at the widest part of your foot.  Either way, off the shelf you're going to have to sacrifice something initially...comfort or performance...but its 10x easier for a good bootfitter to modify the boot for the comfort you need than it is to increase the performance level....we can't change the composition of the plastics, but we can make it roomier.  Skidmarks sounds like he knows his stuff and he's in CT...so go spend some time with him and see what he can do for you...it'll be worth your trip.  I have no doubt that I'd be able to make your foot happy in a performance boot and from what I've read from Skid, I'm sure he could too.


----------



## bvibert (Oct 17, 2008)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> Tecnica Mega is 105, Vento HVL is 106, Head has a mid entry that's 106...the iType and their new Peak...a three buckle boot.  All of them are pretty roomy everywhere, not just across the ball of the foot and their a few models down the line in performance.  So, what I'm saying is rather than find a boot wide enough to fit your forefoot right off the shelf, find a boot that fits everywhere else and then stretch/grind for the room you need at the widest part of your foot.  Either way, off the shelf you're going to have to sacrifice something initially...comfort or performance...but its 10x easier for a good bootfitter to modify the boot for the comfort you need than it is to increase the performance level....we can't change the composition of the plastics, but we can make it roomier.  Skidmarks sounds like he knows his stuff and he's in CT...so go spend some time with him and see what he can do for you...it'll be worth your trip.  I have no doubt that I'd be able to make your foot happy in a performance boot and from what I've read from Skid, I'm sure he could too.



The bootfitter I've spoken to come highly recommended and I trust his opinion based on those recommendations and watching him work with my wife.  The Vento HVL is one of the boots he mentioned (and carries), even at 106 he figured he'd have some stretching and/or grinding to do to fit my foot.

Thanks for all your help and recommendations.


----------



## eastcoastpowderhound (Oct 17, 2008)

bvibert said:


> even at 106 he figured he'd have some stretching and/or grinding to do to fit my foot..



:-o  sounds more like a flipper than a foot!  :razz:  I've fit a bunch of HVLs in the past...handy boot to have in stock and the 95 will ski well.


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 20, 2008)

*One picture says it all.....*



eastcoastpowderhound said:


> :-o  sounds more like a flipper than a foot!  :razz:  I've fit a bunch of HVLs in the past...handy boot to have in stock and the 95 will ski well.



Can we see a picture of this foot? Please!


----------



## o3jeff (Oct 20, 2008)

skidmarks said:


> Can we see a picture of this foot? Please!



I think you just might see it first hand, see the new gear thread.


----------



## bvibert (Oct 20, 2008)

eastcoastpowderhound said:


> :-o  sounds more like a flipper than a foot!  :razz:  I've fit a bunch of HVLs in the past...handy boot to have in stock and the 95 will ski well.





skidmarks said:


> Can we see a picture of this foot? Please!



It's really not _that_ freakish, just really wide across the ball area.  The HVLs have a bit too much volume over-all.  I tried on a pair of Lange Fluid 100s that actually fit pretty well, except for being tight up front.  I tried on a few other different boots, one Nordica seemed to fit ok, but felt like it might be too flexy under my weight (80-90 on their scale, my current boot is a Nordica Beast with like 100-110 flex or something).  The boots with stiffer flex in that line were narrower and I could barely get my foot in it.  I understand that having some flex is good, especially if you're doing bumps like I aspire to do, but the boot was like deforming under my weight.

Skimarks, I'll be coming into the shop at some point to see what you have to offer.


----------



## ERJ-145CA (Oct 21, 2008)

I just copied this from a previous post that I made on a different thread:

_I bought Fischer Watea 78's last year.  I think they are great all mountain skis, easy to ski from hardpack to crud and they're fast too.  I think last year was the first year they were made but maybe there may be some of last years version around for cheaper.  They changed the graphics for this year.  I ordered them last summer from ski-depot.com and had no problems, I received them promptly.  This link is for last years model:

http://www.ski-depot.com/miva/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=SDO&Product_Code=722987FWATEA7808_


----------



## skidmarks (Oct 21, 2008)

ERJ-145CA said:


> I just copied this from a previous post that I made on a different thread:
> 
> _I bought Fischer Watea 78's last year.  I think they are great all mountain skis, easy to ski from hardpack to crud and they're fast too.  I think last year was the first year they were made but maybe there may be some of last years version around for cheaper.  They changed the graphics for this year.  I ordered them last summer from ski-depot.com and had no problems, I received them promptly.  This link is for last years model:
> 
> http://www.ski-depot.com/miva/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=SDO&Product_Code=722987FWATEA7808_



You can get a pair of this year's with railflex binding for $699.00


----------

