They work great. I know a lot of people the use them for their AT set up. They are actually pretty light and you definitely won't have any problems with the rockered tip while skinning.

yes, the 90mm brakes on these bindings will fit the twenty twelve. they will be tight be that is how they should be.

182 will be right for you.

the 7.9 is narrower underfoot and comes in shorter sizes. It will therefore be the easier of the two.

You know it, you want Salomon sth 12 driver or sth 14 driver if you want your skis perform. I will vouch for Looks as well.

These are good, lighter weight bindings that will fit:
http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-sth-12-driver-ski-binding
These might also fit... not 100% sure though:
http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-sth-12-ski-binding

I like the follow up! The flex and the last width are 2 of the main differences with the quest and ghost. The last is wider on all the quests, but the 14 fits narrower because of the liner. The flex feels softer in the quest compared to ghost of the same index number (comparing 120 ghost to 120 quest for example). Looks like the ghost 100 is only an oz heavier than the quest 12... I think you are right to look for a boot in the 100 flex range. hope that helps!

The Quest line is lighter and offers a walk mode and better soles for walking. Of the current Quest boots, I think the 14 has the most "Salomon like" fit. The 12 and pro fit wider. However, since you are getting them fitted, there is plenty that can be done to take up any extra volume. I tend to think you will be happiest in one of the quest boots. Personally I wear my Ghost 120s more often than my quest . They are stiffer, heavier and have standard alpine din sole, but they are super comfortable and fit like the falcon race. The grip on the midsole works wonders for hiking, and I prefer the 2 buckles. In short, both are great, the Quest will be a little better for hiking while the Ghost will fit a little more snug.

Walk soles with dynafit inserts are not available at this time. Standard walk soles are available (like the ones on the Quest Pro), unfortunately I'm not sure where they are sold individually.

Hi Lauren, you will want the 90mm. The 90/100mm refers to the width of the brakes on the bindings, so you want to match them to the width of the ski underfoot. The lady is around 85mm underfoot so that gives you a couple mm on either side of the ski, which is perfect.

I'd say true center is the progressive mount. Most people are saying to mount center, or 1 to 2 cm back of center, for progressive.

Hi Jay, the 'effective edge' you speak about only applies when skiing hard snow. In soft snow you are skiing the entire ski so the difference in the two lengths is very noticeable. Please provide more information on your ability, style, and the length ski you are currently using, as well as where you plan on doing most of your skiing. Thanks! Jamey

If you are happy with the length of your Czars you could go with the 184, it will be a little bigger but also more maneuverable. I think you could step up to the 192 if you wanted though. It is a very maneuverable ski but has the extra length to make it more stable at speed for those rowdy lines.

the 180 is 115mm underfoot and the 184 is 122mm underfoot. If you are leaning towards a more high performance pow ski go with the 184, if you prefer an easier skiing ski then go 180. You could really go either way.

The Sentinel will handle the ice better, it is narrower but burlier than the Shogun. However the Shogun is much more playful despite being a wider ski. If you are always looking to duck into the trees as soon as the groomers get icy I say stay with the Shogun, but if you really need a ski that can lay it down at speed on ice and can do everything else too then the Sentinel will be the best weapon.

they are very maneuverable, but true to size for a double rocker ski.

Having skied on these a number of times I can say they are extremely rigid torsionally. Their construction is also really burly so I can't imagine them ever getting "play out" over time. It is easy to see how other AT bindings would (and do) get flexier over time, but that mounting racket is so strong (and wide), I really think they'll last forever.

The brakes are included. You will need to select the correct brake width for your skis (see 'select options' above). Currently the options available are 90 & 115 If you have a skinny ski the 90mm might work, or if they are for powder skis the 115mm might fit. If the waist of your skis are +/- 3 mm of either of these 2 sizes you should be good to go.

The brake width you need to fit the shogun is out of stock in this particular model. These are available:

http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-sth-12-driver-ski-binding

When you 'select options', just choose the 100mm version. The sth 12 driver is a little more expensive, but it is a better, more durable binding, imo.

You could try to tighten the strap more.

I think you'll be just fine on the Sth14 Driver.

Salomon uses a combination of Beech, Poplar, & Ash in their cores.

for a ski this wide it works surprisingly well. It will not compete with a narrow race style ski but I found it held really good on the man made ice that can be encountered at times here in UT.

You should get the 125x179-186.

The s7 is a very well liked ski, I think because it turns by its self. I found it to be very hooky. I prefer the Rocker2 because it is lighter and easy to ski without the hookiness. If you are looking at the 180 or 170 Rocker2, they are 115 under foot and have a shorter turn radius so they are even easier to ski.

I would recommend the 182. They initiate the turn very easily because of the slight tip rocker.

I think the Shogun in a 182 would be a good ski for you. I know they are great all over the mountain and because they are pretty forgiving, they should be pretty good in the bumps as well.

I doubt your glasses will fit under.

Salomon makes the best bindings on the market in my opinion. I've tested some others but was really disappointed in their performance on firm snow. Depending on your weight and aggressiveness, these are the links for my picks:

http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-sth-12-driver-ski-binding
http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-sth-14-driver-ski-binding
http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-sth-16-driver-ski-binding

Choose the 130mm brakes. Have a good one!

Salomon Sth12 driver, Sth14 driver, or Sth16 driver, depending on the your weight, style, and ability. Salomon shogun or ghost for boots. Check those out I think they will make your season better than ever!

184 my friend.

yep I think the 192 will treat you right!

Chris, I'm thinking the 182 might in fact be a better choice. Nothing worse than having skis you can't turn! I think you've probably got 1 or 2 more seasons on something in the low 180s and then you'll probably want to go longer. Hope that helps! -Jamey

I think you'll be stoked on the 191s. They have a good turn radius and with the slight tip rocker they initiate really easily too. For your size, level, and style, 191s are the way to go.

the 192 is awesome!!

Sounds like the Sentinel will be ideal for you. It absolutely rips the groomers and will be much better in pow than your last skis. I would stay with the 177.

I think it will be a little short, but because it is standard camber underfoot with traditional tail it will be pretty stable just a little short in the tip. If you can find a 190 I think it would be perfect. The czar is very solid ski... wood core, a great big mountain ski,

Salomon Sth16 driver or Sth16 Steel would be the way to go imo.

Hey Mike,
Here ya go, weights are per ski.
170 – 2100g (per ½ pair)
180 – 2250g (per ½ pair)
184 – 2420g (per ½ pair)
192 – 2525g (per ½ pair)
-Jamey

I think the 182 will feel small to you, but it will be quicker easier if the trees at your mountain are really tight. While there is not a ton of tip rocker there is definitely a noticeable amount that really helps initiating the turn... If your a good advanced/expert skier and your trees are not 'east coast' tight, then I say go with 191.

If you really ski fast and aggressively, need a longer ski for stomping airs, and it is really deep where you ski, then go with the 192. Otherwise go 184, at your size you should be just fine with the 184.

I think you'll find the Rocker2 is more fun overall. The Czar is a great ski, but the Rocker2 takes it to a new level. Remember the 180 is 115 under foot and is easier than the 184, so it might be a good choice.

2 questions: What do you estimate as your skiing level going into this season? Have you ever skis on rockered skis?

Guessing 192 will be best fit. Skied a couple days at Big White back in the mid 90s, great snow!

nope, same ski.

I agree with Sandy here, I went with a 130 skin. With rockered skis the widest part of the will typically not even touch the snow when skinning.

When I skied the 180 this past winter and I said to myself, "self, these are some smooth, predictable, effortless skis. people are gonna love these". I think you'll love 180, 115 is still quite wide so it will be able to hang on the deep days too. The main difference is that the 180 is just an even easier ski.

I find that these and the cliff blocks kick in within about 2 minutes personally

I had the 184s mounted 2.25" (58mm) back of true center. I liked this spot as did most people that tried them. My 192s were mounted true center and I did like how they skied, but if you plan on touring a lot the center mount becomes very difficult because when you kick turn you really have to reach far with the new ski to clear the tail.

The Rocker2 is 122 under foot so even in the 184 you are getting a lot of ski, a lot of floatation. You are right that you could go with either size, but if your not skiing that aggressively I think you'll be better off with the 184.

I think you will feel a slightly more responsive ski but it is almost the exact same ski.

The Sentinel better at speed, but the Shogun is more versatile and more fun. You get a wider lighter ski with the Shogun and heavier more stable ski with the Sentinel. I prefer the Shogun myself if I had to pick one.

Ok, tough call for sure. I'm inclined to recommend the 190 czar as it is a little narrower underfoot and would be maybe a little better all mountain and in the bumps, plus it is a good size for you. The Rocker2 is so much fun, but it is wider so it will be worse in the bumps, and be more of a powder ski. If you were a smaller skier I would really say 180 Rocker2 (because its 115 underfoot and turns so easily), but for you its really between the 190 Czar and 192 Rocker2 and I think the Czar will be a little better... or maybe the 191 Shogun?

HI Brandon, I think you could go with sth14 no problem and I doubt you'll need to set you din higher than 12 on them... maybe 13 on comp day. I will vouch for the total security you get from the Salomon driver series bindings. I've been using the sth16 since they first came out, so I've been thrashing on them for the last 6+ years, and I've NEVER had a pre release I wasn't happy about. You step into the 14 or 16 driver and you know your locked in good. I also find them pretty easy to put on on the steeps after hiking or whatever. If you look from the top down you'll notice that the driver toe piece wraps around the boot pretty far with the "wings", this makes it easier to hook your boot toe into the binding, level the ski, and and step down. On hard snow your performance wont suffer like a Marker either, the side to side transmission loses nothing. Hope that helps!

This one has the toe height adjustment so you can raise and lower it depending on how worn out your boot soles are. as well as adjustable toe wings to make the perfect fit to your boot. It is a wee bit heavier: 2120 grams vs. 2050 grams.

The lens is virtual impossible to rip from the frames without doing several deliberate actions. I've been using the ios for the last 3 yrs and have never had an issue with that and I've done my fair share of high speed cartwheels!

I think the BBR will be way more fun than the swallows and they'll rip way harder on the firm. Since the swallows are 195 and the longest BBR is 186, they may not have the same top end speed when pointing it in pow, but that's the only case I can think of. These skis do it all, I've been on them a handful of times and always loved them.

The Rocker 2 is so maneuverable that even the 192 can be considered playful. I'm about the same size as you and skied the 192 for the majority of last season. The rockered tip and tail will make this ski feel even shorter than your motherships. The other thing to remember is that this ski is quite light in weight, especially in the tip and tail, which makes it sooo much easier to throw around. I think you could go either way but because of your fast aggressive style I would suggest the 192. You will have the upper hand with these skis!

I think the 184 will be good for you.

2 layers of titanium and abs sidewall makes the sentinel solid and damp... Salomon built this ski to compete against the mantra so it is very similar. It really has nothing in common with the pocket rocket.

Yes, they would fit perfectly.

not really no. you really only need the sth16 if you're gonna try to stomp cliffs higher than 25'... or weigh 200+. I run both but the 14 would work for me probably 90% of the time... I would go with the 14s.

turns and maneuvers extremely easily due to tip and tail rocker. this effectively shortens the contact points of the ski considerably. however, as an intermediate, I don't see why you would go longer than 171, unless you are already skiing a ski in the 175 range in which case do not hesitate sizing up to the 179.

you get 2 poles for the listed price.

These are not reverse camber...traditional camber means that the ski has full edge contact on firm snow all the time. I think that is what you are asking...? please let me know.

Yes, Salomon makes outstanding bindings. If you need a 14 din this is your best bet:
http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-sth-14-driver-ski-binding
otherwise the sth 12 is the way to go:
http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-sth-12-ski-binding

I found this version to be just slightly wider than previous ones. I have a narrowish foot and they are still fine for me, so probably size up unless you like 'em snug.

it is better to get the skins wider and cut them. with wide skis however you get a ton of traction underfoot so you really don't have to go full width at the tip (especially true for rockered skis). I would recommend getting the 130 wide skins, they will give you plenty of 'full width coverage' for the majority of the ski.

not especially no. if you are comparing to a skinny ski, it is ok to go down a touch, but with the rockered tip they turn really easily.

yes, no problem. this will mount to the surface of any board.

What up Colin, tough call! Especially if you are thinking of the 170 or 180 Rocker2, since they are 115 underfoot and therefore close in size to the Czars. I would go with Czar if you want to save some money and like a traditional camber tail. Rocker2 if you want the latest release Salomon pow ski with rockered tip & tail. So far I've skied the Rocker2 in 192, 184, & 180 and loved them all.

I think these would be a good fit, they will be a little softer and user-friendly. As you advance and want something more stable, check out the Salomon Lord.

the Salomon Shogun is a little wider but also more playful so it would be a good ski for you to look into.

I would recommend getting the Salomon Lord if you can find it (sold out here). It will be a little easier to ski and has a more turned up tail for riding switch. I would stay in the 160-165 cm range for length I think. The Sentinel is an amazing ski but not especially well suited for park skiing due to heavier construction and flatter tail.

2 very different skis. jj will be better in deeper snow while the Shogun will ski firm snow better. basically the jj is 122 under foot but it does well on groomers too. the Shogun is 100 underfoot so it's more user friendly except in deeper snow.

I order from BC often and receive my orders super fast. granted I live in salt lake city, close to the warehouse. Just curious, what kinds of bad reviews are you hearing?

I guess you would also need to include your 'skier type' in your stats. Are you a 1,2, or 3?

http://www.backcountry.com/therm-ic-thermicare-refresher-w-timer-120v

the 191 is better for stomping airs, and it is easy to ski... I think it will be a good size for you.

I would consider this to be a pretty light ski, due to its smaller dimensions, so I think it will keep you happy on the climbs.

I'm sure you could ski either size no problem. I think it might be more a question of the terrain you are gonna be skiing the most. Tighter terrain or wanting more playfulness go 174. More open or wanting more stability go 182.

I think the 169 will be the way to go, as the amount of rocker is so slight. I think the 177 would probably be more of a jump than is necessary for the Lord.

the 184 and 192 are actually 122 in the waist. the 180 and 174(?) will be 115 underfoot.

I have been skiing the Rocker2s a lot this year and it is super fun/amazing. Coincidentally I tested it against the jj and s7 yesterday. It skis closer to the jj but with smoother characteristics. It's hard to explain exactly why I like it better... part shape, weight, stiffness. I have been skiing the 184 which for me (5'11" 165) is damn near perfect resort pow ski (Alta/Snowbird). I'm anticipating the 192 to take over as my big mountain/deep pow ski (although I LOVE the Rocker). Hope that makes sense;)

I have been skiing the Rocker2s a lot this year and it is super fun/amazing. Coincidentally I tested it against the jj and s7 yesterday. It skis closer to the jj but with smoother characteristics. It's hard to explain exactly why I like it better... part shape, weight, stiffness. I have been skiing the 184 which for me (5'11" 165) is damn near perfect resort pow ski (Alta/Snowbird). I'm anticipating the 192 to take over as my big mountain/deep pow ski. Hope that makes sense;)

thus, a partner is also "required equipment" when in the backcountry.

sth14 driver - http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-sth-14-driver-ski-binding
sth16 - http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-sth-16-ski-binding-sal1819
depending on where you typically set your DIN. Unfortunately these are both out of stock on backcountry. The next binding I would recommend would be the Look Pivot.

sounds like you could go with either the sth 16 or sth 14 driver. If you run your dins 13 or higher go sth16, if you run 12 or lower go with the sth14 driver.

No question. great AT ski and all mountain twin.

it depends on your weight and skiing level/style. Please give a little more info and we can help you out:)

they are not park specific but I think they will be a really good park boot because they have a fairly upright stance as well as a pretty soft flex. they will be stiffer than most park boots however so that could be an issue depending on your size & preferences.

It all depends on how stiff you like your boots to be. these are pretty soft at 100, ghost are pretty stiff at 130.

The ghosts are a good bit stiffer than the shoguns. Shoguns will be a little stiffer than your old boots so they should be good for you I think.

I've had quite a few trips out on the older 182s and these in a 190. In my opinion they are a great ski for tourning. Sometimes the snow can be a little funky, but that shouldn't keep you from enjoying the ride. tip rocker and wood equal fun and stable in all conditions. I find them to be light yet solid if that makes sense. Dukes seem to be the popular AT binding of the last couple years. feel free to follow up if you have any other questions:)

Hi Davey, Here is some info I shared last year:

This is for the 182s. Talked to Cody Townsend, he mounts them on the forward line. He told me Abma finds the exact balance point and mounts them there, ~3cm in front of the forward line. My first pair I mounted standard, second pair mounted between the lines. Didn't notice much difference. I've always liked the standard mount, but others swear by the forward mount... I don't think you'll have a problem with a forward mount, plenty of tip rocker for the pow.

Hope that helps man!

These should be a really good fit. At 90 pounds, he will have a couple years before he needs something with a higher DIN. The 80mm brakes will also be a perfect fit for his Gotamas.

You should be able bend the 90mm brakes easily enough to fit. Yep... mounted right to the ski.

If you like a nice soft boot then yes, they could work very well for you. It is also very wide, so if you have a narrow foot you will be swimming in them. When I skied them I thought they were great but just a bit too soft for how I ski. Chances are they would be too soft. The Shoguns & Ghosts are also 2 buckle boots, but are better for all mountain freeride.

You could go 191 but it would probably be a handful in the trees. I think the 182 would work better everywhere for you.

You could go 191 but it would probably be a handful in the trees. I think the 182 would work better everywhere for you.

I would stick with the 182. The 191 is great but skis quite a lot longer.

If you have any issues with them, then you should definitely return them. However, the comments below are concerning a replacement sole that had the metal tech insert for dynafit bindings. Those soles have been removed from the market so your boots will be fine. If you like the how they fit I would keep them. Lots of people are skiing them here in LCC and love them.

These soles do not have the tech inserts for dynafits. Any photos showing the metal inserts are not of this product. They will work with AT bindings and Salomon bindings with the adjustable toe height... ie: sth16 & sth14 driver.

No, I believe they are exactly the same boot.

Yes you can add a plate to the bottom. You will want to bring them into your local boot fitter. They can screw a plate to the sole and then re-cut the dins so that they will fit into you bindings.

I know of many people that tele on the Shogun which is the same ski (just made in longer sizes).

yup, they are the same skis.

So did you find the Video & Lighting tabs in 'Configure Camera' section?

on hard snow, yes. not all that noticeable in soft conditions.

While many companies are having their skis made in China to save money, I believe Salomon's answer is much better. By sharing a plant in Austria with their sister company, they have helped keep costs down and while maintaining quality (higher quality could even be argued). The skis are constructed exactly as they were in France, the difference I felt with this ski is actually due to the addition of "edge armor" that the previous model didn't have. Salomon Headquarters are still in Annecy, France. This is where Salomon innovation has always been and where it still is today.

just get these:
http://www.backcountry.com/black-diamond-ascension-nylon-custom-sts-skins
they're probably better anyway.

Someone may know better but I believe they are 100% identical.

Hi Drew, I've been using the quest12 quite a bit for touring, about 50/50 (resort/bc), and I find them pretty wonderful. The inserts you're talking about were in soles that looked like the ones on the quest pro:
http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-quest-pro-pebax-boot-mens
The difference was the other ones had a metal insert in the toe which was for use with a Dynafit binding, the recall involved the metal insert and have been removed from the sole. The soles pictured here on the Quest10 are for more all around use and have never had any problems that I'm aware of. They will work with any AT or alpine binding (non-dynafit), I've used them in Dukes and Trekkers/Sth16 and they are great... really enjoying the weight savings over my Ghosts. I've found the walk to be really good. the wide buckle is easy to grab and flip up or down. It's the only boot I've owned with a walk mode so I don't know how that compares with other boots, but I sure enjoy it!

They will be just fine. plenty of flat ski underfoot to grip on even slick skin tracks.

I measured the liner of a new pair of 28.5 (326mm) shells, it is about 300mm. hope that helps ya out.

I'm voting for the 177cm.

Salomon makes a 130mm brake, you might have to call backcountry to see when they will have them again.

the 100mm brakes will take some stretching but I think you'll get them on no problem.

I believe that means its out of stock. try to hit up someone on live chat to see if they know when it will be back in stock.

90mm is what you want.

The sentinel will handle the ice better for sure but its not a twin, and isn't as wide. I think the Shogun is the right choice, you're probably going to like the 182 better, at least at first... I would stick with the 182 for now and then in a couple years or whatever you'll probably want to step up to the 190. ENJOY!

I can't remember the exact width of the Impact last but I think it is similar to the quest, ie pretty wide. So I think you'll find the fit and flex to be very similar. Hope that helps!

yeah the 182 sounds like a good choice to me. the 190 is really good too but definitely takes longer to come around.

Dimension wise, the Verdict is the more comparable to the SHogun than the Kilowatt. However, I don't think it has the tip rocker that the Shogun has. I have not skied the BDs but would guess that they would have an edge in the backcounty, and the Shogun would have the edge everywhere else. Sorry, hopefully someone else will chime in with some better info on the BDs.

yes the battery comes out. you can buy extra mini sd cards and another battery to record to your hearts delight.

The Shoguns will be a little stiffer than the old Guns, but just way more solid. They hold on hard snow really well, tons better than the Guns. I'm not sure of the weight difference but it can't be much... The Shoguns are light and lively. I think going to this from the Gun is a no-brainer, it will do everything plus a whole lot more. As for the size, they do ski a little shorter/easier but the 173 will be more like your 174s. If your ok with a 180 then the 182 is the way to go. The 100mm brakes on the Fritschis should fit just right. Have a good one!

no, the hole patterns are different.

My friend recommended mounting them boot center on the line. be sure to measure them though as the lines can be slightly off.

Yes the line on the ski in for boot center. I have a buddy that Teles on the Rocker, so I will check with him to see where he prefers to mount them. I think it is a couple cm in front of the line, but I'll check.

I know a lot of people that love the standard sth14 because it is super light and works well for them. The driver Sth14 is actually being re-released this year because people were sad to see it go. There is never demand for a product to come back if it has issues with pre-releasing. The Sth 14 Driver is back because it works like no other din 14 binding on the market. It is the real deal, it does not pre-release.

I know what you mean, the pro rider is a great ski but not the easiest thing to ski.
-I think you're right on track with the ShoGun, it really does everything well. Having a slight tip rocker really makes it easy to turn. So for taking it from the groomers to the trees will be easy.
-I'm thinking the 191 would be good, but the 182 is a lot quicker.
-I would mount them standard (as marked on the ski) with a Salomon Sth 14.
-Nope, backcountry does not mount skis.

hope that helps!

Because the Atlas has a lot of tip rocker they will turn very easily. the 182 will be especially quick & maneuverable at slower speeds as well as being stable at speed.

not rockered.

I guarantee these will treat you right - http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-sth-14-driver-ski-binding

they will probably be fine in soft snow but not so great in firm conditions or on-resort. They are even more flexy side to side then the Dukes, as they are higher off the ski, more plastic, etc... For touring the Fritchis climb way better than the Dukes however.

I prefer these over the blogs having skied both, mostly because I like having lots of tip rocker but tradition camber in the tail. Skis short when I want it to be very maneuverable (slower tighter conditions) and long when I want it to be stable (fast open conditions). Hope that helps!

I've skied the new ones quite a bit, and they seem about the same, maybe just a little better because they feel bit lighter to me.

Yeah it really depends on what you are filming... when I film skiing, my clips are usually only a couple minutes long at the most. so as long as I DL everything at the end of the day, I don't run into any storage issues. But I could see how you would want an extra and/or bigger card. I do not believe they are sold here.

theres lots of good info in the Q&As below as well, in short though: you'll be stoked!

The 182 does ski shorter because it has some tip rocker. The tip rocker really helps this ski turn easily when your off piste (and ample sidecut for on piste). Couple all that with your ability and I think this is the way to go.

Yeah they are good. fairly light weight but burly enough to handle anything out there. Here are 2 good options for skins:
- http://www.backcountry.com/black-diamond-glidelite-mohair-mix-sts-climbing-skin
- http://www.backcountry.com/black-diamond-ascension-nylon-sts-skins

The 182s turn really quick and easy, and will be better at speed than the 173. but you could go 173 if you are in the trees a lot.

You could also look at the Shogun, it is wider and lighter than the Sentinel so probably better for the backcountry, but not as burly for ripping on hard snow - http://www.backcountry.com/salomon-shogun-ski

I would probably go with the sentinels in a 191cm. It will be a better all mountain/all conditions ski, where the el dictator is more big mountain deeper snow ski.

similar skis, but as the Bents are wider underfoot, they will give you more float in the pow.

I'm seeing 92 - 264 lbs, so you're in there. If you are an aggressive skier you might want to look at the z14. But yes, you can ski in the back seat w/out pre-releasing.

you're gonna love these. rocker makes it so damn fun to ski pow or chop, and easy too. Since the rocker makes it so much easier to turn, you could even think about the 182 if you wanted a true big mountain ski, otherwise I think the 174 will be good.

technically you can change the strap, but I'm not sure that they sell replacement straps. Maybe you will find someone that wants to trade straps with you. Then, with the lens out, carefully peel the frame away from the bottom of the hinged plastic piece that's attached to the end of the strap. then carefully twist the top piece out of the frame. Just know that the plastic piece cannot be removed from the strap.

I think you could throw the 182s around, but you might want to keep it on the short/quick side... If you lived out west I would say 182, but the trees are tight in the east, so the 173 will probably be better for the east coast pow days. and if it snows a foot+ overnight when you're out west, maybe try to hook up some Czars for the day.

Yes it is true that the sole length is the same for the 28 & 28.5, and so that leaves the difference in the liner. I would recommend the 28 because liners do packout slightly and mold to your foot over the first week. As long as the 28 are not too tight, I would go with them.

you can use the handlebar mount -
http://www.backcountry.com/outdoorgear/VholdR-ContourHD-Bike-Handlebar-Camcorder-Mount/VHR0007M.html
Or, mount it to your helmet with the flat surface mount included w/ the camera.

The Dumonts rip like no ones biz! Go with those or the Lord in a 176.

From what I've experienced, the blogs have more sidecut and arc tighter turns on groomers while the Czar will make longer radius arcs, so picture giant slalom vs super g. In funky snow I found the blog to be "hooky", meaning it wants to turn too much for my liking. In Powder they are both excellent, but I believe the Czar has more tip rocker.

Yeah the 174 Czar will ski shorter because of the tip rocker. if you felt good on the 171, you should be fine.

Hi Larry, I used to be in the boiler makers union, in Cali, welding inside large diameter pipe. While I never used winter goggles under my hood, I can relate to you needs. I've never heard of them being used the way you describe, but if anything will work, these will. The lens quality is top of the line, no distortion whatsoever. I'd say its worth testing a pair to see how it goes. You'll have to be very careful about not scratching the lenses... dirt and debris will need to be rinsed off not wiped. Once you get a few too many scratches on the lens, then you'll need new lenses which are not cheap (not that anything for welding is!) You'll probably want the ignitor shade lens which should be fine coupled with a normal (9) filter plate. Hope that helps.

I think the 177cm would be the ideal length for you. I would also recommend the Salomon sth 14:
http://www.backcountry.com/outdoorgear/Salomon-STH-14-Driver-Ski-Binding/SAL2065M.html
You won't need to set these past 9 or 10, but I recommend this binding because it will not fail you, it is the true benchmark for every other binding on the market.

i think 20L will be the minimum size for your needs.

The 173 Shoguns will be much wider (21mm wider underfoot) than your current skis and just a touch longer. So if you went with the 173 you would immediately get a huge improvement for off-piste skiing. I Have never skied in Japan, but from what I've seen in the movies there is a lot of tree-skiing, so you just want to be sure that you can turn them easily. If you know you can turn a 182 then it would be a good choice too, but if your hesitant... you might want to stay w the 173 because you will definitely love them.

I will check w my tele buddies on boots/bindngs that would be the best for you.

It will, but lots of people like to mount their skis a little fwd. The ski will feel a little shorter and quicker at the start of the turn and a little longer at the end of the turn or if you are on your heels "pointing it". I think you'll be just fine w 1cm fwd.

I have not used the VIO but I have some friends w it. The lens its self is very small but the whole unit ends up being pretty big and bulky, plus there are wires to deal with and its not HD. So the VholdR is the way to go. The one thing you might want to do is get a lens cover to prevent any snow from sticking to the lens when the pow is super deep.

no view finder but you can easily record as a hand held at close range if you need to. the mic isn't that good though so if you want to record audio, make sure you are VERY close.

Awesome helmet for sure! I personally prefer the standard Smith Variant because its easier to put your goggles up w/out the brim getting in the way.

IMO, there is no comparison. Sths are the real deal and will serve you well for years and years.

You should not have a problem stretching the 100mm to fit a 101mm ski. The bigger ones will hang over too far.

You make a valid point, but the truth is that rockered skis are SOOOO easy to ski. They are so maneuverable. The 174 could be better in some situations though for sure. Probably a more 'everyday powder ski' where the 182 would be more of a 'big mountain powder ski'. Judging by what you are on now, stepping up to the 174 will probably be the way to go.

I agree, the 182 will probably be perfect.

For a big ski like this, plus your size and ability level, you probably should go with the Salomon Sth 16:
http://www.backcountry.com/outdoorgear/Salomon-STH-16-Ski-Binding/SAL1150M.html
I think it is the most secure & trusted alpine binding available.

I mount my Rockers on the recommended mark (measuring the skis w a tape and taking the more forward of the two)

When I skied the Dumonts I was also blown away by how well they held on firm snow and ripped like a gs ski. I'm not sure how they compare to the Wall... but they are on the stiffer side. wood core, definitely the real deal.

I recommend going w the 180. They turn on a dime, and I think you'll enjoy the longer ski at speed.

I have seen there is a fully waterproof case for the VholdR

the 191s turn pretty long but all the other sizes are very quick. They are wider than your Atomic but with the tip rocker they will make turning a breeze. I'd say go with the 164cm Shogun.

Seeing as these are out of stock you might want to give these a look:

http://www.backcountry.com/outdoorgear/Salomon-Czar-Ski/SAL1408M.html?avad=13673

Here in Utah, lots and lots of girls are skiing this ski.

It really just comes down to personal preference. You could try the fwd mount, (I would go +2cm) or the 177. If the 185 feels long, the 177 is prolly your best bet.

yes, surely does.

I went ahead and contacted a tele buddy of mine who tested these out a couple weeks ago. His words: "tip was stiff, good energy out of the turn, skis short and maneuverable". He has a pair on the way. forgot to ask him about the mount, but I believe they were mounted standard. oh yeah, he also liked them better than the Shogun and he is a Utah skier.

yes, the Czar will be very different from the AC40. much wider, with tip rocker. long story short: they will change your world! (for the better)

for sure. they ski great on groomers.

I think you'll probably like the Shoguns better. They do everything!

Lots of people like to mount these forward of the standard mount. But after skiing both I prefer the standard mount. You can ski & land switch just fine with that mount. You'll definitely want to mount forward if you ski or land switch in pow however. Its hard to say what you'll like best, but that's what I've found for myself.

Really good. 2 layers of titanium give these skis a super stable and damp behavior. I thought they were awesome in cropped up conditions as well as firm snow.

I skied the 185 JJs and 190 Czars head to head about a week ago during a storm that dumped 12"-18". My buddy skis the JJs and me the Czars so we took a few runs on each others skis. I definitely liked my Czars better in the pow. Even though it is not as wide, I found it easier to stay forward on the ski. I believe it is because there is more tip rocker on the Czar, meaning that the rocker starts further down the ski from the tip. What it really comes down to though is that the 2 skis are different styles of skis. JJs are light, have tip and tail rocker, are more 'jibe', if you will. Czars is more 'big mountain' with more tip rocker and traditional (non rockered) tail. never skied the bacons.

yes that is a good call, if your a fast learner you prolly want something that will be solid as you start going faster,... The Lord has a full wood core, so it holds extremely well on ice and is stable at speed. You prolly just want a size that is easier to turn but will not be too squirly later. I think you could go 169 or even 177.

Yo, I think the Black Supernova, Matte White, or Matte Black would be the way to go.

Yeah that could be a good idea. Cody Townsend is an 11 shoe and goes with the 27.5. He says they are really tight at first and then pack/mold to his foot for a perfect (race) fit. Sounds like it is a fairly quick process, and he's into his 3rd season (long ass pro seasons) with them. Myself, I've been hanging onto a pair of conformable liners for the past 4 years. My skinny legs benefit from the foam. I'm a 10 shoe and use a 27/27.5 boot. Based on what I've learned talking to Cody, I'll be trying the stock liner starting very soon, as mine old foams are pretty much done.

I think the main difference is the core material: composite in the Knight and wood in the Lord.

I have not skied the Knight but I suspect that it will be really good for your needs. The Lord will hold a better edge on ice however... so may be some thing to consider.

Can you give a little more background on you ability level? does not sound like it will be your first day on skis... but just want to check. I think you could go as big as the 185.

I have not skied the extremes, but I'm a big fan of the Lord for exactly what you describe. They straight up rip and will handle any abuse you can think of.

Yeah, I think the 176 I would be a better size for you than the 171... I would even consider the 181.

here are the full dimensions of the 190s from the Salomon website: 133-114-123

nice work Rian! knew I shoulda double checked. wider by 3mm.

the 190 is actually not fatter under foot, but holds the same 111mm of girth. so again very similar to the 182, very comfortable at speed, and holds a really good edge.

Hey Henry, The 190 are pretty badass. They are the same width as the 182, so they ski very similar... just longer. Salomon made the 190 in response to people like you and me. So they have the extra length, and with that comes increased stability and float (more ski in front of you). Let me know if that helps or if you have any other questions.

yeah I'm thinking 182 as well, it will be a quick playful ski that will be waaaaay better in powder than your current boards.

I think the 182 would be perfect... saves a little weight and will still perform for everything you require.

ok great, I think you'll probably want the 174 then. The great thing with the Czar is that it will ski like a shorter ski when you want it to ski shorter and it will ski like a longer ski when you want it to ski longer... you'll see what I mean when you ski them, but basically this is because of the rockered tip and traditional tail.

If you've got a carving ski, then I say: Czar!! for powder and cropped up powder it is an epic ski, you've be in heaven on the Czar.

You'll likely want the 182, but let us know your height, weight, and ability level if you would like help picking the size.

Altitude does not really make a difference in ski choice. It depends entirely on the type of conditions you ski. If you ski equally on piste and off piste then go Shogun. If you ski the majority of the time off piste then go Czar.

Yes this ski would work for you, either the 173 or 182, depending on what size you've skied in the past and feel comfortable riding. also check out the salomon Lord.

http://www.backcountry.com/outdoorgear/Salomon-Lord-Ski/SAL1409M.html

I've skied both, I'm 5'11", 160. The rocker does not shorten the ski, really at all, on groomers. Because, once you put it on edge, you have full contact.

The length difference between the 182 & 191 is very noticeable... the 182s are a much quicker turning ski. so for the tight trees and laying down tighter gs turns on groomers, the 182 is the way to go. the 191 will be able to bust through crud at speed more comfortably and is a sweet ski for larger gs turns on groomers.

Tough choice for you I'd say... you could go either way. I hope I've helped. If you live in UT you can try my 191s.

If you are thinking that the 185 is too big, the 182 Czar might be a good choice. Its is a little smaller overall, so might be more manageable for you. I live in UT and consider the Czar a perfect everyday ski.
http://www.backcountry.com/outdoorgear/Salomon-Czar-Ski/SAL1408M.html
The thing I prefer about the Czar over the JJ is that it has less sidecut so it is less hooky in funky snow, but The JJ does rip nice gs turns on piste.

100 will be perfect

normally IMO the fwd mount would hinder performance slightly because it would effectively make the ski shorter. but with the rockered tip I don't think it matters that much. to me, the most noticeable thing with the fwd mount is that the tail feels longer. I just got a new pair myself which I'll be mounting between standard and progressive.

I guess I would recommend the 173s. It will give you more ski for the powder days. they turn really well on groomers so an aggressive skier of your size should be just fine with that length.

I think its easier to put your goggles up w/out the brim.

I really recommend you get a ski with some rocker. It really makes skiing even more fun (seriously). I ski Salomon's and would recommend the Czar for a new powder ski. It has tip rocker only and normal camber under foot and in the tail. I know people are still skeptical about skiing a rockered ski, but they shouldn't be. Whatever you get, it should have rocker, I guarantee you'll love.

I'm fairly certain they will not be more than you can handle. The rocker makes skiing pow so easy you'll wonder how you did it before. I personally enjoy the Czars on groomers. For you I think it will be fine as long as you're not expecting a carving ski. Great for sliding around, very stable and predictable, but definitely not a carving ski unless your talking super G radius turns... it will also hold an edge really well on hard snow/ice.

I recommend everyone ski a rockered ski for powder. Its way way easier than traditional cambered skis.

Thanks for asking that question because its an important point with this ski. the Shogun has a small amount of rocker, so as soon as you put the ski on edge the entire ski (minus actual tip and twin tip of course) makes contact with the snow. so you actually don't notice the rocker on groomers. the only thing that you really notice on groomers is that the tip doesn't initiate the turn as quickly as a traditional skis would.

they certainly are. light weight and quick. the 191s are maybe a little long to be considered "playful" for most people, but the 182 and shorter lengths for sure.

I haven't skied the rossi's, but it sounds like they are soft in the tip and tail, stiff under foot with traditional camber throughout. the Shogun is a fairly stiff ski with slight rocker in the tip. this will be the main difference between the two skis... how they will feel different on the snow. The rockered tip helps the Shogun excels in powder, chopped up snow, and is blast on piste. Its not a full on twin tip, but very close, plenty for the park and riding switch. hang tight more Shoguns are on the way.

I ride the sth because I believe in the binding. They are the gold standard in what an alpine binding should do. The sth will give you years and years of great performance.

The ghost would be your higher performance better boot. but the impact 10 is good if you like softer(110) and wider(100). ghost has a rubberized instep that gives you grip in all types of places, on rocks, stairs, icy boot packs, snowmobiles and the like. Also, the ghosts have an extra piece that covers the traditional overlap of the lower, this keeps snow from finding its way into the shell. hope that helps.

This is for the 182s. Talked to Cody Townsend, he mounts them on the forward line. He told me Abma finds the exact balance point and mounts them there, ~3cm in front of the forward line. My first pair I mounted standard, second pair mounted between the lines. Didn't notice much difference. I've always liked the standard mount, but others swear by the forward mount... I don't think you'll have a problem with a forward mount, plenty of tip rocker for the pow. Not much info on the 190s as of yet.

You should get these: http://www.backcountry.com/outdoorgear/BLD0457/Black-Diamond-Ascension-Nylon-STS-Skins.html in the 140mm if you need them now. Or get the glidelite: http://www.backcountry.com/outdoorgear/Black-Diamond-GlideLite-Nylon-STS-Skins/BLD0794M.html when more come in. You usually always want to buy skins that are wider than the widest spot on the ski. The exception would be a rockered ski where the widest part of the ski does not touch the snow often when skinning.

You definitely should NOT wear the avalung under your outer layer. The CO2 you exhale will fill your jacket and come right up through your collar and into your face again. Some good points about the fastening methods of the retrofit. Make sure the tube does not get crushed and also that its secure(If you go that route).

i just wanted to add that the xwing lap is not that stiff... more on the softer side if anything, but because it is so long it skis very well, nice even flex. I passed a pair onto this powder hound I know...not a rowdy skier at all, but weighs around 200, anyway he loves 'em.

Gotamas are made in China while the Shoguns are made in Austria. So that could be a possible trade off, because the goats are made in China they might not last as long. The goats are wider so more float in powder but wider is not better when it come to firm snow or skiing on piste. thats another trade off, Shoguns won't float quite as well in the pow but will be better most everywhere else (that is also of course a matter of personal preference).

Yup, 182 will probably suit you better than the 173. the slight rocker will also help in the trees, it gives you a greater ability to "smear" your turns and stay in control.

I think the 177 would be the way to go. the lords have a little more side cut than the pockets, so if u like to ski fast the 185 would be good too. they are quite a bit stiffer than the pockets so I think you'd like the 177 better. you'll love these things!

the 182 will be better for sure on deep days. if you've skied a similar length in the past... Yeah you might wanna go that route... especially if that's the way your leaning. go with your instincts ;)

Yo Chris, I just added my 2 cents on your ghost boot question. after reading this I'd be inclined to recommend the shogun boot and the 173 shogun ski. I think this because of your size, the fact that you are gonna be hitting the park, bumps, and trees, and because you are in Breckenridge where it can be FRIGID... and boots get stiffer in the cold. all these factors point to a softer boot and a quicker ski. I'm interested to hear what others think.

I would just add one thing... if you are a lighter weight and/or less aggressive advanced skier you might want to go shogun.

Hey Tom, the biggest difference is that these are way bigger than the lords. 198 cm vs 185 cm (longest lord)and much wider too. You should look at the shogun: http://www.backcountry.com/outdoorgear/Salomon-Shogun-Ski/SAL1803M.html it's salomons newest all mtn ski that is also wide enough for pow and has some rocker to smear through the crud. the lord is also very good but smaller than the shogun so not as good in pow and crud.

No, they are not full metal. they are a salomon sth 16 that says atomic on it. I switched from the full metal 916s to the Sth 16s 3 or 4 years ago and love the lighter setup. I was a little skeptical at first but they have been every bit as good as the 916s. the toe wings are still adjustable and all the most crucial parts are still metal on the toe and heel.

one of the best things about these boards is that they have enough rocker to smooth out crap snow, while still maintaining nearly full edge contact on firm stuff. of course, more rocker = better performance in variable snow (zipper crust, mashed potatoes, etc...), but its a trade off because more rocker will be floppier on firm snow. the shogun will be better than the verdict in variable or crap snow. I will upload a picture later to show the amount of tip rocker that these have, I think its perfect for an all mountain ski.

I'm not sure when the 191 are coming in, but as far as the bindings go, I'd definitely go with the higher din dukes. You might be able to get away with the lighter ones, but I wouldn't risk it.

all great skis. the biggest difference between the czar and shogun (and lord) is the width underfoot - 111 vs. 101 vs. 88. so then what it basically boils down to is... how deep is the snow? If it snows frequently in the 8-10"+ range then I would recommend the czar. It will be the most fun on the deeper days, wider w/ more rocker. shogun will be really good everywhere, turns better on piste than the czar, but has less width for the deep days. so if you get 4-8" days more often and want a better ski on-piste, then the shogun is probably the way to go. hope that helps!

Hi Don, the shogun is very stable at speed, very damp. You will love it in the bowls, makes life a whole lot easier.

The shogun will cover more of the mountain in more conditions than the tornado. So if you ski on and off piste and could only choose one I say Shogun, it is wicked fun everywhere, and carves really nicely. But its not as quick and snappy as the tornado, so if you prefer a racier ski the tornado is it. but the tornado is much narrower so I wouldn't recommend it off piste. Shogun is about as close to one ski quiver as you can get. hope that helps!

I say Shogun. Its the perfect CanCan ski. great at speed so it will be excellent for those fast Canyons cruisers. Its got a little rocker in the tip, noticeably helps on the deep days and smooths out the crud. plus they are the odds-on favorite to outlast anything else: full wood core w/ edge armor... made in Austria vs China. can't wait to ski 'em again! they kicked ass at snowbird all spring.

the ti version has a sheet of titanium in them while these are w/out. it all depends on if you want a lighter ski or one that will hold a little better on ice, and be a little more stable at speed. I would say the ti will be worth it if you like to ski fast on icy slopes. I had a hard time deciding which one I liked better, they are both super fun.

i'm looking into the weight difference. but i can tell you now that both ti & no ti will be offered next year.

I would really look at the 166 Czar.

these skis will do everything for you here except the deep heavy snow. to really handle that kind of snow you'll probably want to go wider. they perform great in mashed potatos but will require more work on the deep days.

these may be too stiff your liking. They were built to ski the whole mountain, including hard icy slopes, so they have bomber construction (on the stiffer end) in order to really hold an edge. If your ok w/ a full twin, check out the Salomon Suspect, or Gun

the x-wing fire is a low end ski made just for sports authority. I would say it's for beginner/intermediate use. A better fit for your level, would be the x-wing hurricane.

184 fury sounds like a good match to me.

the obsethed has rocker in tip and tail where as the czar is just the tip. on firm snow, the contact point extends to the tail of the czar but only to 20 cm from the tail of the obsethed, so your stance is very centered on the k2 and more back on the czar. the tail releases more easily at the end of the turn on the k2 (nice going slower but a little squirly at speed). much shorted radius sidecut on the k2 than the czar, which is very noticeable on both soft and firm snow. persponally I like a shorter radius side cut on hard snow and a longer radius on soft & variable snow.

this fits more like a baggy glove. not sure how to compare it to the medic but it has a nice roomy fit so i think Large probably too. I'm 5' 10" and wear the large.

Hi paula-- Iv'e put lots of hours on this ski and it is a fun ski, but i would reccomend the line prophet 100 over these skis anytime, they will work better on groomers and float more in powder plus last longer due to the wood core and you will sve some money. for size if you gun go 181, but if you prophet go 179. as for bindings get the look px 12 legend wide or salomon sth12.I hope no one minds that I deleted all that, probably not the most helpful dialogue anyway...

Hey Mike,The fury definitely fits in the "aggressive ski" category. it can handle whatever you throw at it for sure. it will eat up crud but for deep bumps its pretty stiff. Check out the Salomon Lord 185. It might be a better choice because its is really sweet on groomers but also more versatile for bumps & crud. but make no mistake the lord is also quite aggressive.

very decent. light & wide. i see alot of people in the backcountry on this ski. also check out the salomon Czar. It will ski even better in variable conditions.

Yes I think this would be a great fit. I really love how the lord skis on the groomers and firm snow. the lord is a good balance between being wide enough for some pow and skinny enough for some bumps. the wider the ski, the better it will be in the powder, but it will be worse in the bumps. this a good middle of the road ski. for a softer ski, check out the Suspect.

i think this would be a good ski for you. I would look at the fury as well. they will be your stiffer option, so faster when racing. the hurricane is lighter w/ a more gentle flex so they will be a little more user friendly in the trees and bumps. i hope that helps.

yes, they work well for skinning. as the czars are only rockered in the tip and 110 mm under foot, you get plenty of ski/skin contact with the skin track, and therefore great climbing traction.

i would agree that the lords are would be quick, but I also found them to be very versatile. stable and damp at speed but still lively in the bumps.

I have not used them for touring, but If you like the dimensions, I'm willing to bet you'll love them. of course you could find something that is all feather light, but whats to use skinning up if the ride down is lame. the lords will eat up all bc conditions, and since they are still under 90 mm in the waist, they are still a lighter weight touring option.

there are many things to take into acount when choosing a ski size. most of all though is your ability and style. at your height the 174cm will be good for an advanced skier.

I skied these in Stratton VT after an ice storm that coated the mountain. I found that the construction of the ski makes them very torsional stiff & stable at high speed. the lord also has a nice side cut so you'll be carving it up with the best of 'em.