• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

'Out For Delivery'

koreshot

New member
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Messages
1,057
Points
0
Location
NJ
Geez. Interesting that your skinniest skis are waisted at 79mm. No wonder your eyes almost fell out of your head when you saw my Cabrawlers...

Also explains why I have no bump skills :) - the atomic pow+ with 2 metal sheets and 115mm under foot doesn't like to turn quickly. That coupled with no skill results in disastrous bump expeditions.

I bought the Legends thinking they would make a decent bump ski cause I really need to learn. Skiing bumps helps improve ones skiing everywhere else. Its funny to read you post "the legends will sorta work in the bumps". I guess you can say that when you have an actual bump ski.
 

wa-loaf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
15,109
Points
48
Location
Mordor
It always seems to take forever to go from "out for delivery" to "delivered." :D

My only cool thing on the way were my skis that were delivered yesterday. Darn things sat on a truck in CT from Friday afternoon until yesterday around noon, too.

:lol: We're about a mile from the local UPS distribution center, but seem to be at the end of the route. So i see things go out for delivery at 5 am and they don't show up at the house until sometimes as late as 5 or 6. It's complete torture, I'm better off not looking at the tracking.
 

tcharron

New member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
2,222
Points
0
Location
Derry, NH
I love reading those three words when you track a package. My Dyna Legend 8000s with Rossi 120 Pro TIs are "out for delivery". Woohoo!

Anyone else have any cool stuff on the way?

I ordered a crapton of Natural Snow for Southern VT and NH, but the GD UPS web site keeps saying the package doesn't exist. Doesn't give me much hope. :-D
 

tcharron

New member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
2,222
Points
0
Location
Derry, NH
:lol: We're about a mile from the local UPS distribution center, but seem to be at the end of the route. So i see things go out for delivery at 5 am and they don't show up at the house until sometimes as late as 5 or 6. It's complete torture, I'm better off not looking at the tracking.

Air packages nearly always get delivered first on a given route. It may have been put on a truck, but unless the driver already has a air package, he'll drive right on by and come back later to deliver it.
 

Greg

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 1, 2001
Messages
31,154
Points
0
So having read his review of the ski, I think he would have recommended a +1.5cm mounting position for the 06/07 legend.

It appears that way.

They're here and man are they sexy! Turns out they were mounted slightly (probably inadvertently) forward by about 0.5 cm. I'll probably be fine with that. I'll post pics later.
 

koreshot

New member
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Messages
1,057
Points
0
Location
NJ
It appears that way.

They're here and man are they sexy! Turns out they were mounted slightly (probably inadvertently) forward by about 0.5 cm. I'll probably be fine with that. I'll post pics later.

Looking at some picture of my quiver lined up by boot midsole, and it does seem that when mounted on the line, the Legends are very back ... lots of tip and little tail. I assume that isn't good for bumps??? They seem as far back as the pow+, a powder specific ski. Interesting.

Here is the picture to demonstrate (Marc, please refrain from commenting on my underwear):
DSCN1110.JPG
 

tcharron

New member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
2,222
Points
0
Location
Derry, NH
Looking at some picture of my quiver lined up by boot midsole, and it does seem that when mounted on the line, the Legends are very back ... lots of tip and little tail. I assume that isn't good for bumps??? They seem as far back as the pow+, a powder specific ski. Interesting.

Here is the picture to demonstrate (Marc, please refrain from commenting on my underwear):
DSCN1110.JPG

QQ

I think you got a little TOO excited about them skis.. :-D
 

Greg

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 1, 2001
Messages
31,154
Points
0
Absolutely beautiful:
IMG_4227.jpg


2007-08 Quiver Shot:
IMG_4225.jpg

L to R: 2007 K2 Cabrawlers (179 cm), 2007 Dynastar Legend 8000 (172 cm), 2005 Volkl Unlimited AC3 (170 cm).

The poor Volkls will be relegated to rock ski status, or more likely sold to a fellow AZer. An interesting observation on weight based on my unscientific bathroom scale method. The Volkls top the list at 13.6 lbs., the Dynas are a pound lighter, and the Cabs, not surprisingly win the weight contest at an even 11 lbs!

Legend binding mounting point
IMG_4229.jpg


As you can see, they ended up slightly forward, probably by about a half cm or so (good thing). As compared to the Cabs which are exactly 1 cm forward:

IMG_4235b.jpg


Almost indistinguishable. I think I'll be fine with that. The goal of the Legends is a new primary ski when not mostly skiing bumps. I wanted one that dealt well with the groomers, but was manageable in the bumps, trees, and deeper snow. Can't wait to ride them.

I'm a happy gear whore tonight! :)
 

riverc0il

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2001
Messages
13,039
Points
0
Location
Ashland, NH
Website
www.thesnowway.com
172 cm. It will be the primary non-bump or natural snow ski, but I expect them to behave in the bumps if need be. I had them standard mounted as I believe I read Dynastar already moved the mid-sole mounting point more forward on newer Legends. I think riverc0il mentioned that.

Didn't demo, but I've never read a bad review of a Legend 8000. Aside from the waist (79mm), the dimensions are the same as my current AC3s, and I'm expecting them to be lighter so I should be able to adapt pretty easily.
Is that last year's 8000? They changed the dimensions on this year's model. I prefer the original mounting point but your mileage may vary. It was less than 1.5cms so not a huge difference. I have a big foot print so getting my heal slightly forward was more important for my style of skiing. BTW, you may be bringing your 8000s out more than your crabralers unless you are skiing bumps all day, they are going to rip bumps way better than your AC3s, might be surprised. Though I can see grabbing the 'brawlers if you are bumping all day.

Edit: Just scrolled down and saw the pics for last year's model.
 

riverc0il

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2001
Messages
13,039
Points
0
Location
Ashland, NH
Website
www.thesnowway.com
I think that more forward mount went back to the older Legends. Like around 2005. Hopefully, riverc0il will comment.
Here is the deal on the mount point. The first year 8000s had a more forward mount point, just under 1.5cms or so. Second and third year moved the mounting point backward. Actually, I think the change happened on a second run during the first year as I had two pairs from the first year and they were different. Not sure what the current year's 8000 looks like as far as this is concerned. I noticed this after snapping a pair of the original mount and then mounting up a replacement pair on the line and noticed a difference in performance. Personally, I enjoy the original mounting position better and have mounted subsequent year's skis at 1.5cm forward. I am not going to pretend to know what the physics and technique issues are that cause my preference but I doubt it will be the same for everyone.
 

riverc0il

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2001
Messages
13,039
Points
0
Location
Ashland, NH
Website
www.thesnowway.com
Found this on Steve's site:

http://www.thesnowway.com/2005/07/15/a-ski-of-legendary-proportions

That refers to the 2005 Legend though. I think the 2007s are basically the same board though.
Link fixed in the quote to go directly to the top instead of the cut. I think the 05, 06, and 07 models were completely unchanged except for top sheet. 08 grows a little all around and has more sidecut. Dynastar made some great changes to both the 8000 and 8800 this year. I need to edit my site above as the difference is actually a little less than 1.5cm. More like 1.25+ish or so. I should have rounded down instead of up.

Interesting comparison koreshot, especially next to the rossi. Really all depends on personal preference, physical body specs, turn style, technique, and type of terrain skied. There really is no rule of thumb for all skiers and I really should just nix the recommendation from my site and just keep it to the facts.
 

Greg

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 1, 2001
Messages
31,154
Points
0
Is that last year's 8000? They changed the dimensions on this year's model. I prefer the original mounting point but your mileage may vary. It was less than 1.5cms so not a huge difference. I have a big foot print so getting my heal slightly forward was more important for my style of skiing. BTW, you may be bringing your 8000s out more than your crabralers unless you are skiing bumps all day, they are going to rip bumps way better than your AC3s, might be surprised. Though I can see grabbing the 'brawlers if you are bumping all day.

Edit: Just scrolled down and saw the pics for last year's model.

Thanks Steve. I was thinking about the fact that you have a long BSL and that might add to why you like to be +1.5 cm. As you can see in the pic, they did end up a tad forward so I think I'll be okay.

Looking forward to riding the Legends, especially in more variable snow. I'll probably use the Cabs mostly for the night bumpin' sessions at Sundown, but I suspect the Legends will see equal if not more use. I never got a chance to demo them, but went for them based on predominantly positive reviews, including yours. I've actually been eyeing them for years and only went for the AC3 a few years ago after demoing the 724 EXP (its predecessor) which I liked. Probably negligible, but I'm also glad to be shaving a pound off the weight of the midfat. I wonder how the 2008s differ as far as how they ski. I know the shovel's a bit fatter.
 

severine

New member
Joined
Feb 7, 2004
Messages
12,367
Points
0
Location
CT
Website
poetinthepantry.com
Sexy skis... gear whores... I thought this was a family forum? ;)

Those are beautiful skis! :D Nice choice! Can't wait to hear about them after you've tried them out.
 

Greg

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 1, 2001
Messages
31,154
Points
0
Those are beautiful skis! :D Nice choice!

Well, I didn't get them because of their looks, but I kinda lucked out that they are so handsome......sorta like my wife.... ;)
 

koreshot

New member
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Messages
1,057
Points
0
Location
NJ
QQ

I think you got a little TOO excited about them skis.. :-D

That's nothing! You should see me when I'm really excited. Or maybe not.

Greg,

Clearly beauty is subjective, the 06/07s topsheet looks fine, but I actually prefer the older, simpler style better.

Even with a slight forward mount, the bump skis definitely have more tail. Are bump skis in general more center mounted? Is having more tail a good thing?

River,
Now that you explained your preferences, I keep thinking I should have mounted more forward. I am 6.2 and 225 and size 28 boot so my BSL is pretty large too. Should be interesting. Worst case, I can just have them remounted.
 

Greg

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 1, 2001
Messages
31,154
Points
0
Greg,

Clearly beauty is subjective, the 06/07s topsheet looks fine, but I actually prefer the older, simpler style better.

Even with a slight forward mount, the bump skis definitely have more tail. Are bump skis in general more center mounted? Is having more tail a good thing?

River,
Now that you explained your preferences, I keep thinking I should have mounted more forward. I am 6.2 and 225 and size 28 boot so my BSL is pretty large too. Should be interesting. Worst case, I can just have them remounted.

Well bump ski tails are softer so you can get away with more tail than on a rigid ski. Having a little bit of extra tail can help you recover from those trips to the backseat too, I guess. Anything to help you get those tips to dive is good which is why the standard rule of thumb on bump skis is +1 cm.

My shell size is 28 too (BSL of 325 mm) so I'm somewhere in the upper/middle as far as boot size goes too, I guess. I think Steve's like a street shoe size 14 though so he's probably up in the 30+ shell size area...
 

Beetlenut

New member
Joined
Dec 28, 2004
Messages
1,945
Points
0
Location
Wakefield, RI
New pair of Atomic NEOX 412's on the way, and an extra set of 88mm wide brakes, to put on my new Snoop Daddys!
 

riverc0il

New member
Joined
Jul 10, 2001
Messages
13,039
Points
0
Location
Ashland, NH
Website
www.thesnowway.com
River,
Now that you explained your preferences, I keep thinking I should have mounted more forward. I am 6.2 and 225 and size 28 boot so my BSL is pretty large too. Should be interesting. Worst case, I can just have them remounted.
28 mondo is not that big. I put my foot into 30.5 boots. I can't remember the BSL but I think they are around 345ish or so. Consider them about 2cms longer than yours or so though mondo does not equal BSL, there is definitely a relationship. Honestly, I haven't talked with any one else that has skied both points so I can only explain my preference. I down play the preference more now than ever as the more gear issues I read about from varying perspectives, the more I have come to understand there really is no universal preference for most skis... so much depends upon the variables.
 
Top