I did not ski the Argos (should have!). I bought it for powder skiing when traveling, crud and leftovers, more as my primary ski unless there's no new. As I am sure you feel the same, the 101 isn't that wide on soft snow, certainly not a carver, but plenty turny enough especially in soft snow. What I liked was:
Speaking with folks I know and trust, the blizzards seemed to be the right mix. Now that I have the ski, It has a great flex, it's softer than the Goat but stiill has a fair amount of stiffness. It has a nice progressive flex with a softish tail. It does have a Fischer feel.
I like the binding interface. it's an integrated rail, with holes for setting the binding in different positions. I went with the 5.14 which has the jester heel. The binding itself is very nice. Very solid and well-designed. Love the wide heel for better energy transmission. Their duke is a lower, more inegrated binding (still heavier and higher stand than the 5.14) but unless your hiking for turns, why get the extra weight and height? In speaking with Peter, his tester of the Argos really felt the ski was less responsive with the duke. According to Tim, the owner of Alpine high, he also prefered the 5.14 to the duke. Same feeling that there's no need for the extra weight and all.
The dimensions are just right, the 180 is a little different than published: 130-101-116. The 187 is a stiffer ski.
If I really like the Blizzards, I can use the same 5.14 and put it on another blizzard ski. You can also take the binding off, stack the 2 pair. It would cost less and be easier.
John, this settles it. We have to make sure we hook up for turns!
Home
Login
Register