Quiver of Two

I need skis in a bad way.  My RT-86s went bye-bye last year with the assistance of .... never mind.

My bread and butter ski is the K2 World Piste. They have little snap brand new, and mine have been pounded to a pulp over three seasons.  Still, I need a limp pair of skis to keep up with the Powderqueens and Pammy's of the world ...on those days in the trees when there is little or no new snow. Do I just replace the Worlds?

And then I need something fatter. The idea behind the RTs was that they'd be stiffer on the groomers and fatter in the pow.

But I took them in the trees, when conditions were less than fluffy, convinced that that is what a real man would do.  They were longer and wider than my Worlds - 184s I think - and I couldn't get them around.  Those who skied with me, were polite enough, but it was obvious I couldn't handle them in tight quarters.

So I need something wimpy, and short with some sidecut - like the Worlds.

And then something fatter that I really only use for the occasional pow day.

I was with James and Jason at Plattekill on 2/27, and it was CLEAR - we all needed something MUCH fatter.

Any ideas?

Oh yea ... this kind of analysis ... is beyond my current level of comprehension. Keep it basic? Just point and shoot.

I'm a little conflicted. Almost sounds like you are talking about 2 new skis. You want a wimpy ski for hardpack?

Harv, I'm not convinced you need two pairs of skis, though by all means get them if you can afford it. Nothing like a good quiver!

With a few exceptions (like the Atomic Blog and ON3P Billy Goat), most of the skis I highlighted on the RJPSP post are pretty much the same thing, made by different companies. I'm a huge fan of Line Skis, as you can probably tell. The Prophets seem to be ideally suited to my skiing style and where I ski. The "metal matix" gives it great torsional stiffness (meaning edge hold on ice) but the relatively flat camber, 100mm width underfoot and even long-ways flex give it float in soft snow. The sidecut makes them turn like they are rails.  FYI, the Prophet series (at least the 90 and 100) are the same skis as the classic Karhu Jak series. If you can find a pair of Jaks on sale somewhere, snap them up.

Not having seen you ski, I'm a bit hesitant to make a recommendation. I'm guessing that you are a fairly aggressive telemarker so the Line Prophet 90 could be a good choice for your day-to-day ski. Being a full twin-tip, they "ski short" so err on the long side. Having said all this, someone else might give you a totally different suggestion.

Ski number 2? Remember that float in powder comes more from the underfoot width than tip width. If your skiing style and boot/binding set-up can manage it, go for something in the 100 to 110 underfoot width, with tip rocker. The K2 Sidestash and Elan Olympus are good examples and both of these have factory-fitted skins (not sure if they come with the ski or are optional). Black Diamond makes some nice skis too, check out the Verdict and the Zealot. Another interesting choice in this category is the Icelantic Nomad.

Good luck!

I've tried to cultivate the quiver of 2 as well, but I don't really know if I got the widths right.

For Tele, I like to rock 96mm waisted Karhu Jaks on Powder Days and in the Spring time.  Only problem is that they are 190cm, tough to maneuver in tight trees and a little bit heavy for all day epics.  Love these skis for skiing open pow faces out west, though.  My other choice is an old pair of converted twin tips, 78mm waisted Dynastar Concepts.  I'm hoping to upgrade these to  RT 86s, and they'll probably become pretty much my go to Tele Ski.

For Alpine, I have 3 widths.  On Ice and hardpack, I use the 68mm width Volkl Racetiger SL - when I keep them sharp, they can cut through anything.  For the majority of my skiing, I use 78mm waist Apache Recons.  These and my Rock Skis/Twin Tips (also 78mm waist K2 Public Enemies) are what I choose for the majority of my days.  When we get a dumping, I turn to the 105mm waisted Volkl Gotama (the older one without the rocker).  I got these 2 years ago, and have used them about 5 times.  

I think the Ideal 2 ski setup for Gore would be one pair approximately 74-86mm in width that you are comfortable with wherever you take it (including hard hardpack), and one pair about 92-105 with either rocker or semi-rocker for sweet sweet powder days (I think the rocker would make it more nimble in trees and easily smearable if needed).  

For YOUR situation, though, I would just stick with the Worlds and maybe get a similar ski to ease in.  I like the idea of the K2 Blacklashes (little bit o rocker, nice 92mm width) in a 174.  I'd imagine that most of your time will be spent on the Worlds with very little time on the backlashes (mostly deep days), but that's cool because you don't want to wreck a nice new set of skis.  Then, when you decide the worlds have finally outlived their usefulness, you can grab a nice 76-84mm waisted ski and have an awesome 2 ski quiver.

Not hard to imagine that I confused skimore. Let me try again.

Most of the tree skiing we do at Gore is not on fresh snow. But it's not really hardpack. When there's enough snow to ski the trees at Gore (and let me tell you it doesn't take much) many times the best conditions are in the trees.

This was true all of last season up until the new year.  There wasn't much total snow, but because what falls in the trees STAYS in the trees (like Vegas!) and because what blows off the trails ends up in the trees, the best conditions can be in there. Skiable, reasonably soft snow ... often it's turnable, but VERY tracked.

The on-the-maps tree lines see a lot of traffic, and off the map lines are often times SINGULAR lines.  Those singular lines especially require very fast, precise turns. Pammy is one who can spank those kinds of lines. Matt is unreal.  I've never seen someone so TALL, blaze through those do or die lines with such confidence.  Anyway I digress.

I NEED something incredibly nimble, with a lot of sidecut to survive when skiing with those really good skiers. It has to be something like the Worlds. I'd stay with them if they weren't so BEAT. I may stay with them anyway, for budget reasons.

So question one is IF I replace the Worlds ... with what?

And the second question ... the second pair of skis ... the Worlds are just too narrow for any kinds of pow performance.  

I need something maybe 90mm in the waist that will be ok on the groomers. 

One thing Sick Bird Rider doesn't understand ... being a Jay Peak guy ... we get VERY few POW days over 12 inches. And the Worlds can actually handle 10 or 12 inches just fine.  This ski would be for the rare occasion when we get 18-24" - some thing that probably happens at Jay 5-10 per year.

SBR - I think a negative camber would be hard to handle at Gore on our trails, especially with our snowmaking issues.

I'm not sure if I'm aggressive. I really don't know. I do know I'm enthusiastic and insane. But that's different. I have a soft spot in my for anything Karhu. And my tele hero Zach is a total Jak believer.

My current boots are T2xs. My Worlds have G3 Targas on them. My dear departed RT86s had Rottefella R-8s. A hardwire style binding.

I'm just stuck. I'm not comfortable only having one pair of skis. When your a teleskier, on  a week's vacation and you have equipment failure, you've got to have backup.

Maybe it's Worlds or equivalent, and the 96mm Jaks.

What is equivalent to Worlds? Jeff just went from WPs to something K2 but I forget what. I'll take a look at the Backlashes. Sorry for this ramble.

Harv, repeat after me: Prophet 90, Prophet 90, Prophet 90....

I believe those skis would rock your world (or Worlds). I see lots of telemarkers on P100s but I think the 90s would suit your needs better. And you should also completely blow the budget and get Hammerhead bindings. I have R8s as well and they are OK but from what I hear about the Hammerhead, it is the way to go if you seek power and control.

Flat camber does not mean negative camber. There is some magic in the way skis are built these days that allows a ski with little camber to hold an edge.

Having said all this, if I was getting new tele skis for ME, I would probably go with the Line Chronic Cryptonite, with Hammerheads. While Line promotes it as a park ski, the CC gets rave reviews as a solid all-mountain ski.

Sorry to burst the bubble but Jay Peak has more "variable" days than powder days. Those legendary days do happen but I am usually somewhere else when there is powder.

I too was looking for a change in skis. My old Atomic TM-22's were getting long in the tooth and weren't as snappy as they could be. I, however was looking for a quiver of One, Yes, One Ski to Rule Them All

So they needed to be:
-Phat under Phoot for those all so seldom powder days and ever increasing days in the bc.
-Short - well shorter than my 180 TM-22's, so I could more easily get around those tight trees in the Grim Reaper and other such bark intimate locations. (One must understand that I started teleing on 215 Rossignol Chamois, double camber, back country skis and felt I had really hit the big time with 210 Karhu Supreme's, a true telemark ski, in 1988. From here I went to 207 Tua Razors before dropping all the way down to the 180 tm-22's, so downsizing has been a chartable progression for me.)
-Stiff to hold well on the hardpack (ice) that make up most of those days on the hill and so as not to get squirrelly at speed.

So I did my research and read ski reviews and on the Tele Demo day at Gore I was ready to take some runs and make a decision. As it turned out, I only demoed one pair and they seemed to do it all. They were Phat under Phoot (102); They positively railed on the hardpack, yet turned on a dime when pressured, were scary stable at speed even though they were 170's. Their sexy measurements were 132-102-118.

So I did some wheeling and dealing and ordered a pair, picked them up and mounted my bindings. I arrived at Gore the next day early enough so was able to park near the PLOTS (Parking Lot Of The Stars) I had 3 wonderful runs on them before getting a little tentative on the rock hard bumps on lower Rumor where I fell and blew out my knee. After I stopped seeing stars I was able to gingerly make my way down to the bottom of the mountain where I loaded the new skis back in my car and went home.

So this year I am really, really looking forward to skiing my new Black Diamond Verdicts and testing them out in the trees and crud and in all the other stuff I didn't get a chance to try last year.

These are the skis that I hope will be my quiver of one. After a total of 8 runs on them, they really seem to fit the bill with the only drawback being their weight. They are pretty heavy, but my hope is that since they are shorter I won't have to jump them as often to get them to come around those trees.

So there's my 2 cents.

Maybe the BD Havoc
Could maybe hook you up. I have connection for BD stuff

review
Backcountry Magazine:
"BD bills this new twin tip as stiff and tight carving. The Havoc saw few Western testers, so widespread panic was minimal. 'Once in the turn, SOLID,' said an editorial veteran. 'Holds an edge very well [and] turny, for such a wide ski.' In the East, the Havoc was among the best of BD's new skis, consistent in most turn shapes and conditions. 'Felt very stable at speed and very good edge hold on the hard stuff. When it was on edge it was responsive and grippy,' said on tester. 'Easy to ski. A bit jumpy but easy to initiate all size turns,' said another. A third called it a 'daily driver.' 'Great fee, great ski. No shortcomings. A medium-flexing ski that rolls naturally through a variety of turn shapes. It skis in and over all snow surfaces and degrees of pitch.'"

I still have a pair of TM-22s.  I've never skied a snappier ski. And while I've never been on something wider than 90mm underfoot, I find it hard to believe that  significantly fatter skis can out perform those on firm corduroy. BUT... I digress. I never use the TMs because I'm not after firm cord.

My thinking last year, in search of a Quiver of One was the same as Keith's. Stiff, fatter and with sidecut. But my definition of fatter wasn't nearly as fat (RT86) and I WAY over estimated how much stiffness I could handle in the trees. ALL of this is why I was giving up on the Quiver of One concept.

This is what I found based on the above input. Images added just for fun:

Black Diamond Verdicts
132-102-118.




Line Prophet 90s
125-90-113




Black Diamond Havocs
121-88-113



What I've read about BD's in general is that they are very stiff.  It does seem like the folks who rave about them tend to be excellent, aggressive skiers like Matt.  Based on what I know now I'd probably try the P90s ... or ideally Gore would have a tele demo that wasn't on a Tuesday, and I'd try them all.

I've never done a demo... do they have a variety of models? How much time is spent with (tele) binding changes?  Sounds like I need to end up at MRG on a tele demo day, but odds of that seem slim.

You want a fun a turny ski, checkout the Icelantics. I have Nomads in a 181 and they  rock on pow days. Don't know how  they perform on hardpack, but its one of the most quick turning skis I've ever been on

Harvey44 wrote

Sounds like I need to end up at MRG on a tele demo day, but odds of that seem slim.

The MRG festival is in March, too late for this season's ski testing. You should consider a road trip to the Vermont Tele Fest in December. Who knows, there might be some Canucks in attendance.

"You want a fun a turny ski, checkout the Icelantics. I have Nomads in a 181 and they  rock on pow days. Don't know how  they perform on hardpack, but its one of the most quick turning skis I've ever been on"



Yes, but, smaller Icelantics, and, of course, the Phantom Crystal Ship. For the trees. Anytime.

skimore wrote

You want a fun a turny ski, checkout the Icelantics. I have Nomads in a 181 and they rock on pow days. Don't know how  they perform on hardpack, but its one of the most quick turning skis I've ever been on

I'd thought Icelantics were all twin-tips.  I still don't understand the advantage of a TT for a straight ahead skier. Is there one?  It seems like extra weight on a shorter ski, and for a clutz like me ... something to get my tails hung up.  What's the attraction?

I was in Gear Source yesterday talking to Jeff Palka. He wants to focus on American made brands, and is going to start carrying Icelantics.  He told me that his new stock was coming in within the next few weeks, I should see if I can test drive a pair.

Look for big changes coming to Gear Source in the next month or so.

Check out the 168 Nomads. The TT helps you get out of jams in tight trees (sometimes you can only go backwards), which is what this ski is great for. Not for the groomers, though. If you want to try a more all around Icelantic, the Shaman may be more to your liking, but, personally, I don't think an all around ski exists for icy Eastern mountains that get dumped on every now and then. Too much compromise. Two pairs at least, the other a nice stiff ice groomer tool, and keep one locked up down by the gondola.

I wouldn't get bent on the twin tipp thing too much. Most of BD skis have some kind of turned up tail. The TT's tend to be more manuverable and ski shorter. So I wouldn't be so inclined to go short. I have a pair of Killowatts in a 185 and find them more than manuverable in the trees. They do like to go and seem to have a stiffer tail. If you get back on them they will rocket you out of a turn. Check out my 2nd turn in this clip where I got back a bit and they send me across the fall line.

Killowatts

Skimore's video embedded for convenience:

I'll see you and raise you one. Phantom Crystal Ships at Killington. Never mind the damn snowboarder.

eh, embedding doesn't work. Here's the link:

http://www.vimeo.com/3523691

This site has Icelantics for about 1/2 price

icelantics

Hey Harv:

There is something cool sounding about those shamans

Harv, the problem is you have not gotten the addiction yet....You can never have too many skis.  Addicts need a quiver...you will always need rockers, so keep what you have for the early season days, when the snow is thin.  The K2 backlash (replacement for the Work Stinx) is an awsome all around ski.  92 mm underfoot, but still carves a mean turn on hard pack.  K2's run long, so a 167 would be plenty.  Add a pair of the Icelantics for POW days and you should be rocking.....just my recommendation.
But....Line Prophet 90's ski real nice too.