Frank

Frank

    New Feature

    Browse Your Followers or See Who You're Following

  • #15111of 20025

Frank's Bio

Frank

Frank wrote a review of on April 1, 2013

5 5

I demoed these more out of curiosity about the triple camber. I was looking for a daily driver and figured that 112 underfoot was going to be too wide for everyday. I was wrong. I've been out on my new DWs about 5 days now. They're super fun everywhere. They rail like a race ski. Their 25m radius feels like 17 or 18. They are stable at speed,rock solid over drops, arc switch,and slice up the slush like nothing I've been on. I can't speak to the powder performance as we haven't had any good days since I bought them but I have to imagine that's their strength.

Some people have been asking about mounting point. It may be true (from an earlier post) that recommended is -5 from center, that would be tip/tail center. My rough observation is that recommended is only about -1 cm from running surface center (between front/back contact points). I wouldn't mess too much with recommended as the center camber area isn't that big and you want to be in that range for the hard snow railing capability.

Summary: if you can't buy these at least find a pair to try.

(0)

 

0 Comments

Frank

Frank wrote an answer about on December 4, 2011

Bents more playful, turny, better on the groomers (tighter radius). 183 BC probably too short. Bibby 190s stiffer, bomber ski, super stable on drops and at speed. Bomber vs. Playful, up to you. If you're skiing trees in Colorado, bents. Big lines in Jackson, Bibbys.

(0)

 

Frank

Frank wrote an answer about on December 4, 2011

I have 190 Bibbys and love them but would not get them as a one ski quiver. I don't think the radius is tight enough for ripping around the front side. I ski a lot of trees and sidecountry but also like going fast on the front side. I don't want anything but the Bibby in the pow but would go a different direction for the other spots. If I were you it'd be something like the Line Influence 105 or 115 for a one ski quiver. Or maybe the Atomic Blog or Access.

(0)

 

Frank

Frank wrote an answer about on December 4, 2011

I'm 215 and the 190s work great. They're a lot of ski so should probably be good. Rick is right that Moment makes different flex patterns in different lengths. I don't know what the 196 is like but make sure you check it out.

(0)

 

0 Comments

Frank

Frank wrote an answer about on December 4, 2011

I'm 215 so the 183s were too short. I think 183 would be the right length for 140 lbs. When I sold my bent chetlers I bought some 190 cm Bibby Pros. I like the Bibbys better but might just be because the length suits me better. They are quite a bit stiffer too so that worked for me. Be careful, I believe Bibbys have different flex patterns for different lengths. The one thing I liked more about the bents is the tighter radius. You can have fun in powder then rip around on the groomers.

(0)

 

Frank

Frank wrote an answer about on December 4, 2011

Remount them. I'm 215 and skied bents for a couple years. I really loved them. Back then they only had 183 and I think that's too short. Mounted standard I had a little problem with them "wheelying" but not diving. The most playful ski I've ever been on! Stick with them!

(0)

 

Frank

Frank wrote an answer about on September 24, 2010

Get them. I've skied bent chetlers for 1 1/2 yrs (got some early) mostly at winter park, also at the Beav, Vail, sidecountry, abay. They are soooo sweet for Colorado. Float, arc, short, long. I can ski the trees longer than before because the Chetlers are so responsive you can hit super tight lines. Although you don't want them for all mountain it's great to have a ski that's fun getting around the mountain to the good stuff.

(0)

 

Frank

Frank wrote an answer about on September 24, 2010

No ski can do it all but that said you need the bent chetlers. I got an early pair of chetlers and also have a pair of prophet 100s. Aside from a pair of slalom skis for early season hard on-piste all of my time is on the 100s and the chetlers. There's nothing better than the chetlers in the trees. Super quick. Great in the pow on the big lines too because you can switch between long and short turns super easily. They seem to be great on short to medium drops, keep you centered, land soft. The most surprising thing is they arc so well on the groomers. You really can fly and carve. Thanks to Atomic's race pedigree I guess. super fun in the park. Great switch. Such a playful ski. I never had so much fun skiing slush bumps as with the chetlers, slashing the slush piles.

So why do I ever put on the prophet 100s? I think those are also amazing, two best skis I've had. Going fast on groomers or hard snow 123 width just feels strange. A little slow to get between edges. The 100s bomb on the groomers and are still fantastic (though not as versatile) in the trees.

Bottomline: The Bent Chetlers are the perfect ski for the trees and a great ski for a lot of other conditions. There may not be a better ski on earth for just having fun no matter what day it is.

(0)

 

Frank

Frank wrote a review of on February 2, 2009

5 5

I own a pair of Chetlers. Got 'em at Jibij in Boulder, haven't seen em anywhere else. The prior review is right on; these are fantastic tree skis. Super quick, super precise. You can ski the trees longer 'cause you can get into smaller spaces and ski next to lines that have already been skied. Know those 4 ft wide swaths cut by snowboarders through the trees? The BCs just carve across and back into the pow. I've skied everything from 4 inches of carpet to 12 inches of mush, to 20 inches of perfect pow. They were fantastic in all.

The surprising thing is the performance on hardpack. I've skied hard snow pretty fast (40?) on them and they grip really well. The make long arcs, maybe like a 26 radius, and are surprisingly stable. Guess it's that Atomic racing pedigree. They were even fun in the bumps (rounded powder bumps so I suppose that's not much of a test). They'd probably be too nervous for long, fast, powder lines, e.g. AK but for tree skiing they can't be beat. For getting around the mountain to the trees they're surprisingly fun.

(0)

 

0 Comments