Branden this message is for you!

[Gary]

Branden...I tried to return your PM with the following response but it didn't find you as a recipient so thought I'd post it here hoping you'd see it.

Hey Branden...that trip to Europe sounds fantastic....it's on my list of things to do. Glad to hear the snow is falling....enjoy... still hoping you can meet up with our gang sometime here in the future.

Great on the SS....let me know.? I actually had the same experience going from the 170 to the 165 and I'm 5'9 and 70K...very similar for sure.
Glad the Watea's hit a home run for ya. A good friend and instructor who teaches at Aspen told me he prefers the performance of the 78 over the 82's. I had a pair of 82's and didn't think they were as versatile as they should have been.
As far as my change...when my 1 year old SS lost the camber, I sent them back and had to wait for a factory response on warranty. At which point I purchase the Fischer Progressor 8's in a 160 length. Awesome ski,? (if i were to do again would get the 165). Turns like the SS but better in soft snow and bumps cause it's 72 underfoot. Still a great hardpack carver as well.

My other ski is a Icelantic Pilgrim...it's the one ski I can take anywhere in the world and ski. It carves, floats, cruds it's ridiculous how good it is. It's 90 under foot and I ski it in a 169 length. The turning radius is 17m. Ron has a pair he's looking to sell. This ski rocks, GS turns, bumps, carving. You can take the same skiing style you have on the SS and apply to this ski.

I'm just thinking getting the Pilgrim with 90 underfoot gives you a lot of flexibility when traveling and dealing with a variety of snow conditions. Still, the 78 rocks even in snow up to shin high and also is a great turner.

Choices are tough today with so many awesome skis out there. Let me know what you decide.
Best to ya,
Gary

[Brens]

Gary,

awesome - really appreciate the reply.  I have real troube with the forum I have to register every time I use it - just doesn't recognise me.  hOw would you rate the icelantic pilgrim against fisher watea 94?

I will be away for a week so may not have an opportunity to reply.

All the best and thanks again, you are as always incredibly helpful - we may get together yet in the good ol USA.  RE Europe - put Zeramtt on your list - longest runs I have ever seen especially going down to Italy.

Brendan

[Gary]

Brendan....good to hear from you.

Ok...here's the biggest difference. Both skis ski flat and soft edge changes in powder and crud very well. However, because I like to get my skis up on high edge angle when turning, I found the Watea 94 had a mind of its own. It was hard for me to keep the skis directed.

The Pilgrims which actually measured at 92 underfoot felt like a high performance carving ski. I had to keep looking down to see I really was on twin tips. Part of the reason for the performance may have been the 17m turning radius of the Pilgrim.? If my memory serves me, (never usually does) the 94 radius was 21 in the 176 length.
The Pilgrim is much more compliant, more fun, and more versatile by my standards. THe cherry on the ice cream sundae was the Iclelantic absolutley rule by comparison in the bumps....without a doubt. Much easier and tons more forgiving...big plus here!

Zermatt goes into my bucket list...but still hoping you can join us in Steamboat, Dec, Aspen, Jan, Jackson, Jan maybe Alta or Powder Mountain in March.
Heading to Portillo Ski Resort in Chile" for a Sept clinic with John Cllendenin....there's room for one more!? ? ?Sept 4-14th.

Best to you Brendan....hoping your enjoying the skiing there!

G

[Ron]

To clarify, the 94 @ 186 has a 22m TR, the 176 is closer to 19. It's a much stiffer ski than the Pilgrim (although the Pilgrim is very torsionally stiff), manueverability-wise, the pilgrim Gary is on is a 169 TT, the 94 was a 176 raised tail. so being stiffer and considerably longer (given actual running length) the 94 is a bit more underfoot, so it's going to depend on your size. Overall, I still much preferred the Pilgrim.  I think the pilgrim is also pretty true @ 90 underfoot.? I just replaced my 169's with 179's and will be on them next month. To me, the Pilgrim is the best soft-snow "all mountain" ski out there. My favorite ski along with the Nomad; which I am getting in the new soft (SFT) model. Iclelantic's are light ski's: I mounted with Griffons which are a very light weight bindings. It's a great pairing.? If you are interested and need locate, let me know and I can put you in contact with someone from icelantic to help.

Link to Icelantics....  http://www.icelanticboards.com/#/skis/detail/pilgrim

[Ron]

Brandon, I just put a call in for you to icelantic for shops over there for you. Where do you live?

[Brens]

Hi Ron and Gary,

Many thanks again - have only just returned form a week away so hence the late response.  Ron the closest city to me is Brisbane, next is Sydney.  Planning a trip away to our local ski fields in the next 2 weeks - skiing with a friend who is one of Harald Harb's instructors so really loking forward to it.

Thanks for the tips - you really got me buzzing on this new ski - I ski a lot in Colorado (especially Crested Butte) so something  that works better in the bumps than the watea has me excited.
Gary - I am booked for September but have a graeat time cant wait to hear the reports fro Chile.

[Gary]

You'll have to let us know how your skiing is and some photo's if you can.

I'm hoping you can get your hands on a pair of Pilgrims to try....wonderful ski. What are your plans and dates for your Colorado skiing trips?

Keep us posted,

G

[Ron]

bran' getting a pair in USA to try will be easy.  i am also heading to Chile in August on new '09/10 icelantics!

[Brens]

Thanks Ron - appreciate it, I am looking forward to try those babies.  Should be in Colorado in January.  Enjoy Chile

[Ron]

Brendan, I spoke to Annelise at Icelantic. She will be happy to get you in touch with someone in Australia or here when you get to Colorado. if you fly into denver, you will drive by their HQ!  They are located right off 25.

her e-mail is annelise@icelanticboards.com  tell her Ron sent ya' (Maybe it's a bad idea... )

[Brens]

Ron - I am flying in to Denver - sounds like a plan.  Thanks for doing this.