What should I add to quiver between these two?

[Puck it]

In quiver all ready-

180cm 2003or4 Head Worldcup iRace with LD 12's(Rock skis)
177cm 2006 Head Worldcup iRace with FF17d's and plate (these fly)
174cm 2006 K2 Apache Recons with LD12's (no my favorite but works s with freshies, would like to replace and used out west)
160cm 2006 Head Supershape with FF14's and plate (these are a blast)

Now I am thinking of the Head Supershape Magnums with FF14's and plate in 170cm or Head im88 Monsters(06 model) in 175cm.

Which ones?

Do I get both and get rid of the K2's?

 

[eastcoastpowderhound]

iM88...you've got a skinny quiver there, needs some more girth.

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

I'd go with some snow-blades..they rock in tight trees..

 

[Trekchick]

im88 All the WAY!!!

 

[Puck it]

Railflex or Flat on the 88's

 

[Trekchick]

I'm not real brilliant on the Head Railflex, but I prefer flat for my midfats in general.
Maybe someone who has Railflex experience will weigh in differently.

 

[Puck it]

I was thinking flat also. I have a pair of LD 12's on railflex on my rock skis. I was thinking of using those in stead of buying new ones. I can get the 07 88's for 399 and MOJO 11's for 119.

 

[Trekchick]

If its a matter of getting a railflex to use your existing bindings, then I'd go with the railflex.
I've heard far more good about the im88 than the Mojo. Not sure I'd go for that even if its cheaper.

 

[Puck it]

The MOJO are flat bindings instead using my old railflex. Look PX12's Binding are an option also.

What about these?

Fischer 2008 Porohete (Prohete) Freeride Skis 170cm

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

I prefer flat for my midfats in general.
.

Just curious, how come?

 

[Greg]

Just curious, how come?

I've been on risers, plates, rail systems, etc. for a few years. I'm going flat this season. It's my understanding that unless you're carving up on edge, lifts do little for you. Anyone that has seen me ski knows I don't carve. Skidded turns baby!! Flat mounts also are supposed to lower your center of gravity a bit and there's probably a nominal weight savings there without the rails, plates and other junk. I'm interested to see if being closer to the snow feels any different this season.

 

[Trekchick]

Just curious, how come?

I've been on risers, plates, rail systems, etc. for a few years. I'm going flat this season. It's my understanding that unless you're carving up on edge, lifts do little for you. Anyone that has seen me ski knows I don't carve. Skidded turns baby!! Flat mounts also are supposed to lower your center of gravity a bit and there's probably a nominal weight savings there without the rails, plates and other junk. I'm interested to see if being closer to the snow feels any different this season.

Greg mostly answered this for me, but to add to it, a binding usually has an option for a slight lift if you want to use it. A slight lift is enough for the purposes that a mid fat will usually be used. I'm assuming that you'll use something skinnier for your "carvin' it up" times, THAT is when you want the plate or raised binding.
That is when I'll get on my FireFox or Race Tiger (70 and 67 respectively)

Put me on my mid fat(82-94) and let me schmeer some turns!

 

[Greg]

Put me on my mid fat(82-94) and let me schmeer some turns!

Are you sure you're from Epic? I get the impression most of those guys are carving purists/PSIA types, not some schmeerer like yourself. You'll fit in well here... :lol:

 

[Puck it]

What about the Fischers? Any cooments? Too wide?

 

[Trekchick]

Are you sure you're from Epic? I get the impression most of those guys are carving purists/PSIA types, not some schmeerer like yourself. You'll fit in well here... :lol:

Epic has far more Gear ho's that schmeer turns than tech junkies on skinny boards. Believe it or not, but Epic is known for the instruction and coaching, which is profound, and those guys are skinny ski, carving the perfect turn perfectionists.

I want to improve my skills but not to the point of perfection. Certainly not to the point of having a constipated look on my face. (not that they do, but I would if I thought about skiing technique that hard)
Some times ya just gotta schmeer and let that silly grin take over.

What about the Fischers? Any cooments? Too wide?

Oooof sorry kinda missed that.....

Fischer 2008 Porohete (Prohete) Freeride Skis 170cm

With a 106 waist, you're not going to have a lot of opportunity to use it on the EC, but you just never know. I recall the storm last year the second week of April, and the Heavenly powder where you'd have loved that ski. Just not a ski you'll use a lot.

If you got a great deal on it then I'd say go for it and use it when you can.

 

[Puck it]

The 88's and Fishcers are the same price. I was thinking that 88's would get more use also. And I think flat is the way to go with these. Save the rock skis also since I wouldn't be using their bindings. Should I keep the recon's?

 

[Trekchick]

The 88's and Fishcers are the same price. I was thinking that 88's would get more use also. And I think flat is the way to go with these. Save the rock skis also since I wouldn't be using their bindings. Should I keep the recon's?

The recons are great skis. If they are in good condition and you want to sell them, you should be able to get some good $$$ out of them.

If you really love them, then keep 'em.
If you decide to sell them, let me know, I think I have a friend who'll buy them.

 

[JimG.]

I want to improve my skills but not to the point of perfection. Certainly not to the point of having a constipated look on my face. (not that they do, but I would if I thought about skiing technique that hard)
Some times ya just gotta schmeer and let that silly grin take over.

Hey, I used to teach...come to think of it, the constipated set are kind of the reason I stopped teaching.

You just can't carve turns everywhere people go skiing now anyway; I don't feel comfortable carving turns in trees as an example. Pivoting and lots of rotary stuff works better there for me.

The rotary/skid model works better in bumps too. I always coached what seemed to work best for the majority. It's not always carving.

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

I've been on risers, plates, rail systems, etc. for a few years. I'm going flat this season. It's my understanding that unless you're carving up on edge, lifts do little for you. Anyone that has seen me ski knows I don't carve. Skidded turns baby!! Flat mounts also are supposed to lower your center of gravity a bit and there's probably a nominal weight savings there without the rails, plates and other junk. I'm interested to see if being closer to the snow feels any different this season.

You've lumped risers, plates and rail systems all in together. I'm no expert on all binding systems, but I know a little about the Marker XBS and XBI systems. Without getting too techy, they don't just bind your boot to the ski, they integerate the boot and ski together in a way that gives you more balance especially if you get too forward or back. All skis have a dead flex zone, these systems make that area smaller.

My Hellcats are 90mm underfoot and the XBI isn't mounted on the ski, but actually in it. there is a bored out section on top of the ski to accomadate the binding system.

This video kinda shows how it works if anyone is interested.

http://www.skinet.com/skinet/videos/article/0,26958,1567108,00.html

 

[Greg]

You've lumped risers, plates and rail systems all in together.

Didn't mean to generalize. I know these integrated systems each have specific functionality, but in my very limited equipment experience it seems the point is to aid in carving. My point was they all raise the boot higher off the ski and add some nominal weight. For my style of skiing, I'm trying to zero in on a set-up that will facilitate quick rotary powered turns, not high speed carves.