Peter's/Experskier.com 2012 Reviews are now Up!!

[jbotti]

Enjoy!!

[Gary]

I've been checking everyday..thanks for the heads up JB!

[jim-ratliff]

I was just reading through Peter's reviews of various manufacturers, and was amazed at how well reviewed almost all of the Ski Logik skis were, and especially since they are only a two year old company. The other company with across the board great ratings was Kastle, a favorite of some of the members here (at least I think Gary still has multiple pair).

Note that if you are considering any Ski Logik skis, you can order any topsheet with any ski, and can even get some level of customization for $50 more.

[jbotti]

Reading the reviews several skis and thoughts stand out. First in general, I find that reviews f rockred skis are in general lacking. There is a fundamnetal difference between the way a tip and tail rockered ski ski versus a traditionallly cambered ski. I think Peter is missing an opportunity to distinguish his site by talking about the specific differences between rcokered skis and pointing out those that have eraly rise tip, early rise tip and tail, rockred tip, rockred tip and tail and agressively rockred tip and tip and tail. Obviously you can figure all of this out when you see the skis, but cleraly some good percenatge of the ski buying public is buying skis without demoing them. As well in the past Peter has done a great job with talking about what a specific technology does and what the benefits are and what the negative consequiences may be. Again he as an opportunity here.

When you look at the rave reviews on Epic and now the rave reviews from Peters testers on the new Blizzard freeride skis, it makes me ast least want to demo them. Unfortunatley for me, I have a bias against tip and tail rockerd skis and all new ones n the freeride line that people are raving about (the Bushwacker, the bodacious, the Cochise and I forgot the last one) have tip and tail rocker with a technology they are calling flip core. Everyone raves abouut it. I will put them on my demo list.

It appears that the new Kastle BMX line is a dud and that the LX line is only for light and or intermediate skiers.

In my quest for the perfect 85m wasited ski, a few entries stand out. As I have mentioned before the Head Peak 84 looks like a solid entry here and Harald has raved about this skis. I am anxious to see Peters review of the Movement Jam (85mm underfoot). Harald aslo raves about this ski, and I will end up owning one or the other.

Lastly, I am going to buy a Ski Logic Chariot in the 188 length. I love my Icelantic Shamans and much of the reason why is because of the large amount of sidecut and tight TR. When you use your edges to turn (instead of pushing on the tails to turn) sidecut really does make a huge difference. It is impossoble to find a ski that is 100m underfoot with a 15m TR.  Add to that the strong reviews and I can resist no longer.

[jim-ratliff]

Lastly, I am going to buy a Ski Logic Chariot in the 188 length.

I think I've heard something very similar to this before??   


And what is your choice in topsheet?

[Gary]

Hey JB....take a look at the Kastle FX84 too....aweseome turning radius, very versatile ski.
It would seem Kastle missed the mark on some of their skis.....look forward to hearing your comments on my favorite and only Kastle, the MX78.  I would like to demo the FX84 in the 168 length...has a 16m TR just like the MX78.

I too agree it would be nice if Peter could talk more about the tip/tail performance of rockered skis.

EX: my former JJ's tail..hated the tail.  My Rossi S3, loved the tail. Both skis had workable tips, the S3's were better.

It will be interesting to see where the DPS 112 fits in.

Our local ski shop is going to be carring some Ski Logic skis...woud love to demo Urlls Chariot....sure are the purttiest skis out there. AND all seem to really love them. G

[jbotti]

Gary, I owned the FX84 for about half a season. I never really loved the ski and I sold it. I bought it on Peter's review and I should have bought the MX 78 or MX 88. The ski is designed for the backcountry and because of that has less metal, is very light and they have a very different tip design which delays the hook up of the tips. Whereas this might be benefical off piste, it drove me crazy on groomed terrain when I wanted to lay them over and had to wait for the tips to hook up. In general I wouldn't say I overpowered the ski, but I was looking for something more damp, more powerful and with tips that would hook up right away. It is a nice ski for the right person, just not me.

I do have a pair of MX 78's that I bought used and I haven't had them on snow yet. Looking forward to it and I will write review when I get to ski them.

[jim-ratliff]

Gary:

Demo the Rave as well (92 mm waist).  The initial versions last year had too stiff a flex pattern so Ski Logik softened the flex to be more like the Ullr (101 waist). 

And 92 for New York is better than 101?

[LivingProof]

I was just reading through Peter's reviews of various manufacturers, and was amazed at how well reviewed almost all of the Ski Logik skis were, and especially since they are only a two year old company. The other company with across the board great ratings was Kastle, a favorite of some of the members here (at least I think Gary still has multiple pair).

Note that if you are considering any Ski Logik skis, you can order any topsheet with any ski, and can even get some level of customization for $50 more.

If anyone is interested, on the PMTS Gear forum, Skizoo is selling a pair of Chariots, 178 cm, for $575 shipped, with bindings. He states they are almost perfect, just a few runs, but, just not the right ski for him. Interesting and tempting, but, I really want to demo the soft ski I finally purchase. Any thoughts on the 178 length?

Could someone tell what is Peter's "Ski of the Year"?

Max,
I agree that leaving a Head IM 78 for a Kastle MX 78 does not make a lot of sense, especially when you have the actual experience and high opinion of the Head. I've stated before that I really want to read JB's review of the Kastle 78 as he is another aficionado of the IM 78. As an easterner who lives at he lower edge of eastern skiing, if I had just one ski it would be a tough decision, but it would be a 78 waist.

[jim-ratliff]

LP:
I too am waiting for JBotti's review, but of the Ullr's Chariot.  He promised it to me last year     - and I am still waiting and interested to hear his thoughts.

I got the 178 Ullr's Chariot for me.  JBotti was considering the 188.  I think both of those are right decisions.  It's a twin tip with quite a bit of ski off the snow, and I'm 5'11" and 185 (I know both you and John are taller than me).

I would also check the binding mount and make sure it will adjust to your boot sole length rather than drilling more holes in that lovely wood.

[jbotti]

LP, when I checked the running length of the chariot with Dave at Ski Logik the numbers he gave me meant that the skis are short with regard to snow contact. This doesn't always mean that they ski short, but usually it does. The Scott P4 is a great example where the 181 length skis much more like a 165 or 170cm ski because the twin tips and tails are so large (and so much not in contact with the snow). Jim bought the skis to use as more of an all mountain ski and for this going a little shorter probably makes sense. I will most likely not break mine out in anything other than fresh snow, so I know I want to go long (for better float and better fore aft balance).

As an aside, I am going to attempt to demo some of the other Ski Logic skis when I am Colorado in December. The two that are on my list are the Rave TT (not with Rocker) and the Front Burner. Both seem to warrant a demo and I will hopefully take them both off piste. Even better, since Harald and I are the same BSL (which won't matter because they will have demo bindings) I will have Harald try both skis as well. We can see how he thinks the Rave and the Burner compare with the Movement Jam. We might even have a Jam on snow to compare side by side. Should be fun and I will post reviews of all three skis (assuming we get them to demo as last year I got shut out at Ski Logic).

[Gary]

Hey Jim,
92 or 101....not the everyday ski width for upstate NY.....I find for me at my body weight 78 underfoot covers a lot of snow conditions.

There are however days where my DPS 112's will get out here....a heavy wet snowfall of 3 inches and above would be perfect for slithering through the mash.

BTW, Peter reports the DPS 178 turning radius in the test as 18m...it's actually 16m...and not to sure who tested it but so many I know have been on that ski including Ron and loved it's versatility. Still, verdict is out for me until I ride it.

On thing I have noticed is that presumably, a powder ski performs better with a narrower tail than shovel. This I believe is so the tails can release in deeper snow much easier. I've seen what Icelantic has done and Skilogik just to name a few and I wonder what the thoughts are behind having a tail nearly as wide as the shovel.

Thoughts?

G

[jim-ratliff]

One thing I have noticed is that, presumably, a powder ski performs better with a narrower tail than shovel. This I believe is so the tails can release in deeper snow much easier. I've seen what Icelantic has done and Skilogik just to name a few and I wonder what the thoughts are behind having a tail nearly as wide as the shovel.
Thoughts?

Gary:  I find that my SuperShape Magnums are about all I need on the east coast. 72 under waist.

I'm not a good enough skier to assess your presumption about narrower tails, but lack of knowledge never stops me from posting an opinion.  Maybe the narrow tail concept is from a day of needing to keep the weight back to help keep the tips from diving and is really no longer needed with wider shovels and other powder assist technologies?

By the way, congratulations on your new skis. "No confusion on this one, a pure, superb powder ski."
The DPS Wailer (aka yellow banana) is, I believe,  141/112/128.  (tail 13 mm less than tip)

Ullr's Chariot: 145-101-131.  (tail 14 mm less than tip)  similar tip/tail, much narrower waist.
The Shaman:  160-110-130   (tail 30 mm less than tip)  similar waist and tail, much wider shovel than yours.
Blzd Bonafide: 135-98-118     (tail 17 mm less than tip)

My guess is that its a versatility trade-off. The Ullr's Chariot wider tail gives you shorter turn radius on the groomed, but maybe with some sacrifice as far as powder performance?

[jim-ratliff]

BTW, Peter reports the DPS 178 turning radius in the test as 18m...it's actually 16m...and not to sure who tested it but so many I know have been on that ski including Ron and loved it's versatility. Still, verdict is out for me until I ride it.
G

Interesting point. DPS' web page lists TR as 16 but doesn't specify which length, the brochure they provided Peter (posted on Peter's site) lists the turn radius as 18 but also no length. I see where Peter got his numbers, but have to assume that the current web site is more accurate or that the turn radius specified was for different length skis?

[Gary]

Jim, if you go to the DPSskis.com web page, click on skis then the 112rp, find and click on Specs and weights, it lists all the lengths and their related turning radius.  178 length, 16m TR.
 
The 18m radius is on the next size up ski.

It's interesting that Peter's test really didn't rate the ski as being very versatile. For me, I find that some of the ratings are right on....others like the JJ's, which they liked, were way off for my liking. The Kastle 78's and Head SS...right on for me.

Don't know if skiing styles and individuals physcial statistics carries more "decision" weight with fat skis...just not sure.

I find that guys I regularly ski with know how I ski, what I like to ski and what attributes I'm looking for is helpful....but nothing is better than demo....so I blindly go where I've been before.

I'm ready, willing and able to run the gauntlet...

Best, G