Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth

    New Feature

    Browse Your Followers or See Who You're Following

  • No Ranking

Jonathan's Passions

Sport Climbing

Jonathan's Bio

Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth wrote a review of on December 19, 2009

5 5

These are tough fixed length poles with a nice swing weight, though, surprisingly, I find the swing weight on my adjustable BD carbon fiber poles - with powder baskets - to be just a bit better. Go figure. (Perhaps the added weight of the Kevlar the bottom of the fixed length's shafts?)

I love BD adjustable poles, and these fixed length are a very good option for resort days. Oh, and they look sweet, too.

Nice work BD.

(0)

 

0 Comments

Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth wrote an answer about on November 24, 2009

Tabrys is right: go 186. I'm your size, bought the 179s, and absolutely wish I'd picked up the 186s. The 179s are a lot of fun, but you will almost certainly want more ski. Excellent in tight trees, certainly soft enough for bumps, but are you really going to be skiing a lot of bumps anyway on this ski, with the 134mm shovels?

(0)

 

Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth wrote a question about on November 17, 2009

Seems like I could go either way WRT size: s/m or m/l. Anybody out there actually had a chance to try both on? I'm 5'10, 180#, currently wear a dakine heli pro pack, though I NEVER pack the thing full, and I am just wondering whether the m/l will be necessary. Another factor is that I will be frequently carrying a BD shovel & avy gear with this pack when touring, and if it's a pain to cram the shovel + avy gear in the s/m, I'd just go with the m/l....Lastly, if I am wearing this pack & hiking in bounds, I'll be carrying Armada JJs or Dynastar Huge Troubles on the pack. I assume the pack can handle skis this size, but will that factor into the s/m vs. m/l question? Thanks for the thoughts.

(0)

 

Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth wrote a question about on August 25, 2009

Hey Ty (or anybody out there in the know) - in all of Patagonias Capilene shirts (in Cap 1, 3, 4) I am a solid size Large, and moving down to mediums would be too tight. (I'm 5'11", 185 lbs.) But I'm not sure whether to get the Nano in a medium or Large -- worried that the Large is going to be too roomy if it is designed to accomodate underlayers.

(0)

 

Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth wrote an answer about on August 25, 2009

I agree with Shane that you'll be better off with the 179s. I'm 5'11", 185, ski the 179s and I would go up in size before I ever considered dropping down in size with these skis. They are light, soft, and the turn radius is tiny for a ski this size, so don't downsize.

(0)

 

Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth wrote an answer about on August 25, 2009

I love the 100s, but if you are not going to be using this ski specifically for powder, I would get the Prophet 90. The 100s are an outstanding but soft powder ski. If you are mostly going to be ripping hard pack groomers, it's too soft. Now, if you've got another pair of skis for those hard pack days, pick up the 100s and you'll love them in the fluff. Also, they turn unbelievably well, and they ski short, so I would pick up the 172s if I were you.

(0)

 

Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth wrote an answer about on August 25, 2009

Well, I've got Marker Griffons mounted on both Prophet 100s and Prophet 90s, and have been very happy with them. Admittedly, I've only run them for one season, so I can't speak to long term durability. I'm 5'11", 185, advanced/expert. I ski trees, bumps, steeps, but am rarely hitting drops bigger than 15-20 feet. I hike a lot at Taos, Alta, Snowbird, so I like the light set up of the Griffons. Your experience may vary, but this has been a good set up for me. If you plan on hitting big drops or features, I suppose you might want to think hard about the Jester or the Salomon Sth 14 or 16.

(0)

 

Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth wrote a review of on July 3, 2009

5 5

My street shoe is a 10.5, occasionally 10. After climbing in Katanas (41.5) for the past six months (loved the fit, hated the lack of durability on the rand), I tried out 5.10 Galileos (9.5), 5.10 Anasazi Verdes (9.5), Evolv Pontas (9.5), and Evolv Optimus Prime (10). As has been noted by others, the Primes are very tight. I literally can not get my foot inside a (9.5), and the (10s) are still incredibly snug, but, i think, due to the symmetrical toe, not incredibly painful. I am only using the Primes inside, and I've kept the Anasazi Verdes for outside, since I would give that shoe the nod for edging ability (asymmetric toe and all). But the Primes stick to everything I've wanted them to inside and somehow manage to be extraordinarily snug while reasonably comfortable. So far, no signs of trouble with durability -- we'll see. So check these out - just don't kid yourself into thinking that you'll down size these much, if at all. And if the Primes aren't a good match for you, might want to check out those Verdes....

(1)

 

Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth wrote a review of on January 7, 2009

2 5

I love Black Diamond, but i feel like this is the first product of theirs that i've used that hasn't delivered. Bottom line: a glove this big needs to be really warm, and it isn't. If it was lower profile, with great dexterity, then sacrificing a little warmth would probably be worth it. I exchanged these for the Hestra Heli gloves, and those are probably the best combination of warmth / dexterity i've ever found in a gauntlet glove.

(0)

 

0 Comments

Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth wrote a question about on January 5, 2009

Just picked up the Prophet 100s from Backcountry. I've had very good luck with look PX 12 bindings on other skis I own (and i weigh 185 lbs.), and would be inclined to just mount another pair of them on the Prophets . Will be skiing trees and steeps, but not doing huge drops. Is there really any strong reason to mount instead a "fat" binding on the Prophets?

(0)

 

Jonathan Ellsworth

Jonathan Ellsworth wrote a review of on January 5, 2009

5 5

First of all, this ski is simply called the "Trouble." Don't know why backcountry has the name wrong. This ski is the same as the Dynastar 06-07 Trouble Maker, just different graphics. In short, I use the ski for bumps (it's my favorite all time bump ski) and jibbing, though I love the ski in the trees and tight chutes on packed powder days. I'm 5'11" 185 lbs., and I ski the 175 cm. If you just want to rip groomers, keep looking (it can get chattery at speed), but it's a great choice for bumps, park, jibbing.

(0)

 

0 Comments