I think the Bacon is far more versatile than the ObSETHed. It's great in the POW but it also tears up the groomers and terrain park. It's my quiver of one. Great in the terrain park on rails and jumps, awesome for POW shreddin with plenty of width for float and good at straight lining big mountain lines. It has in my opinion the perfect flex, soft enough for the POW yet stiff enough for the groomers and straight lining big lines.I agree, I think the bacon blows the obseth away as a overall ski, I also use it as my one ski quiver, in powder, super stable in the park and lands it's self on jumps and loves to carve on groomers, very nimble for its size, why bother looking else where.

The lizzies are super soft, the line bacons are more like the s6's but also softer and more playful.

these ski's are huge, i would go with the 175, the 185 would be to much ski to throw around IMO.

Oh yea----- no problem ----- my local shop bent my 100mm brake to fit on a 115mm waist.

I think line is sold out of them or is having a hard time meeting demand.

If you have leg problems you sould be riding a soft ski. the AR6 is softer then the foil and blows it away, you won,t get that chatter on hard snow that you do with the foil, another ski you might want to look at is the line invader or anthem both are real soft ski's but not as versital as the AR6, the armada arv is a little fatter then the ar6 but is also a little softer it's also a great allmountain ski.

Yes they do, imo not as much as the bacons, If you want a less turney powder ski how about the 4frnt ehp or vct. the obseth's are fun all over the mountain and if you loved the 189's you will also love the 179's they ski the same you just won't have to work as hard with them, they are longer then the bacon's because k2's twins all run about 5cm longer then they say, so that might help with the float as well. Both ski's are fun but i think the bacon's are more energetic. This has been a odd winter so far in the sierras also , it dumps 3-4ft. and then gets real warm for 1 or 2weeks and then dumps again and gets warm again, very odd. oh well at least their is snow.

I think you kind of missed the point of the design of the bacon, It is ment to ride like a snowboard or surfboard in powder with that quick turning radius and snappiness, it is ment to be fun playful, toss it around ski, not a charging big mountain ski. At your size you are getting at the max size for them unless you mount them -2 or 3 from rec. The recomended mounting point is farther foreward then you would see on a typical powder ski. If you mount at rec or foreward you do have to lean back a little or they tend to dive some, maybe because of the early taper. The obseth will do better in crud because of the slight rocker to them and you can charge a little harder with them but overall IMHO i think the bacon is a funner ski.

I would go rossie--- fatter, quicker, one of the best non-rockered powder skis out there and just a real fun ski all over the mountain not just in pow.

I don,t see why not, they are fairly light for there size and with the early taper they would be great, and the fact that they are quick for there size.

If you look over at newschoolers website there is a bunch of talk about the suspects falling apart after 10 to 15 days of park use. I would steer clear of them, the ar6 is a way better ski. I would go for them.

I'm pretty sure it's the stance back in mm's is 81 for the 186, 77 for 179, 74 for the 172, and 70 for the 165.The 100 is a directional twin so the mounting point is farther back then you would expect on a twin.

Not really, in a twin tip freeride/powder ski if your good they are about just right for your ht. if you feel you need to go shorter line prophet 100 in a 172, k2 obseth in 169 or 4frnt vct in 168. All would do the same job as the lib.

Nope, not at all. After a while it's less noticeable because the weaker cover is chipped away leaving the harder materials. Both my K2 skis are like this, but after 2 years on my PE's, they have no performance issues, at least not from the topsheet.A trick to help with chipping is to file or sand the top edges of your skis at a 45% angle so when they hit together they are not as sharp so they chip less, it makes a huge difference.

no the 178 sould be about right for you.

the bacons are way under rated on groomers, in all honesty they carve very well on groomers and only start to loose an edge and chatter when it is icey but more then make up for it when in the powder where they float like a dream, flex wise they are similar to the obseth, maybe a tad softer.

They would be fine for you, they measure out at 179mm and with the early taper i feel that they ski about like about a 175mm or so ski. i,m 5'7" and use them as my all mountain. I would prob. recomend that you mount them at +2 or 3cm from the mounting line because your kind of light.

The czar,obseth and goats are similar, the bacons are fatter and softer then the other three and more of a playful powder ski then a big mountain charger. If you love softer playful skis the bacon is the best, it also just happens to carve very well on groomers and does real well in the crud, its my all-mountain ski.

The bacon is the softest of the 3 and would be noodles compared to your legends, its more of a playful powder ski. The prophet 130 is a more directional powder ski and the softest of the prophet line, it's pretty quick for its size yet you can charge really hard on them and carves pretty well for a fat ski. I have not skied the fatypus but would love to try the fattest one i can't remember its name. If you charge real hard the bacon would be to soft and small but the 130 would serve you well.

go 90

Well they are a center mount ski, so i don't know how that would work tele.

If you going with a 172 say your 5'9 or 5'11 and center it go with a 180 because of what I heard with true center skis is they feel too short in the front if there your size my suggestion is center but go a little bigger.I think you guys are missing the point, this a symetrical ski it has to be center mounted, if you want it to ride longer you buy it longer and mount at center, if you change the mounting point it won,t ski as intended. YOU CAN'T go back from rec.

I think you will be fine, i'm 175lbs. and have them at +2 from rec. for your size i would go at rec. or back 1cm or 2cm from rec. and they will float just fine. The rec. midsole is 6cm (2 1/4") back from center a lot of people go 1cm or 2cm back from there if there biggger or if just using them as powder boards, i went +2 because i use them as my all mountain ski including park.

The arv are midsoft in flex so you will get chatter at high speeds on hardpack/icey conditions like all softer skis but will make up for it in softer snow and powder, they are a super fun ski. The 185 will feel fairly tru to length for a twin but are real easy to ski depending on what brand your 175's were the arv's might feel a little longer.

line invader, you can't get any softer then that ski.

This is a more advanced ski, i would not rec. unless your advanced intermidate at best. If you want a twintip the line invader is easy to ski in a 171 or the rossie S2 in about the same size. a little bit stiffer ski would be the fischer addict or last years scratch getto from rossie.

I would assume since they are symetrical that the mounting point is at center and genraly you can't change that without messing up how the ski is intended to work. but a +5 means 5cm foreward of factory rec. mounting line.

After my surgery, I went down in ski length by roughly 10cm for two winters. Now that my knee is up to strength, I've been back to my regular sizes. Obviously, this situation is a personal preference at its finest. But if you're even questioning this, shouldn't you be fixing that knee...?if i had a blown knee i would chose a softer ski then the prophet 100 to make it easy on it, a trick us older guys use after we have worn them out.

these would be a great choice for that ski.

shoot an e-mail over to nordica, they sould get back to you pretty quick. Or just read down to the next question to answer your question.

Not really comparible, the prophet 100 and goats are comparible, but not the bacon's. The bacon' are a fat, mid soft powder ski that happen to carve very well on groomers but start to lose they edge when it gets real hard or icey, but shine when the snow starts falling again, but do bust crud pretty well, the prophet will be the best on hard snow and ice because of the metal in it yet is about the same as the goat in powder.

the prophets blow the fury off the mountain , you will feel like a kid in a candy store when you get them in powder, they ski much smoother without all the chatter on hardpack.

you prob. sould have gone 179mm but the 172 will be ok, mount on rec. since you got the 172's if you go foreward it may make them ski to short.

you could use either the 178mm or if you are an expert more up to the 185mm.

griffons are ok if your light, heavy riders or super aggressive riders are breaking the toe piece, get the 90mm brake it will bend out to fit.

the pandora is a very soft powder ski based off the line elizabeth which is a fat park/powder ski for smaller riders. the kiku is stiffer and would handle speed better, but the pandora is a much funner very quick around ski that carves well yet floats great for light riders.

The line prophet 90 in a 179 or 4frnt msp in a 181 are two of the best east coast ski's for everything.

I just got a pair of these. I would say they ski very true to their size. At this point they might be just a touch big for you, but if you're still growing they won't be for long. They are a pretty money ski and can really handle it all. As far as traditional camber, traditional sidecut powder oriented skis, I would say this is one of the best out there.These skis are very easy to ski, one of the best turning fat skis out there and i feel they ski short because of the early taper, i'm 5'-7" and have them at +2 from reccomended, you won't have any problem with them, if your that light go + 3 or 4 from rec. and have a blast. they only measure out at about 179mm.

No they don,t-- they are the same ski as last years steeze, a great ski that floats well with out rocker.

You might be on the upper end of the weight/height for the bacons unless you mount at recommended (6cm) back from center or go another 1cm back from there. then they sould be fine with no tip diving. I weigh 175 lbs. and have them at 4cm back from tru center +2 from recommended and they float great there with no dive. go bacon over goats, much quicker ski.

same ski just slightly different gothic graphics.

Prophet 100 in a 186 or line mothership in either size if you want a twin. the dynastar in a flat tail. these will suffice.

powder skied out!! thats when you start going deeper into the tree,s to find more or start hiking, they both handle it fairly well for softer skis, the bacons have the early taper to help them hookless as the k2's have slight rocker to help them bust it, the czar works the best in this situation because of the more pronounced rocker to them.

No, I personally feel that the bacon feels like a softer version of the s6 but with a smoother/ livelier feel to it, it has different geometry to the side cut then the prophet and what i like about is that you can really open up your turns like a gs ski or snap them quickly if you need to, and for some odd reason they seam to feel no fatter then a 100mm ski underfoot, but they are a fat ski and do have some weight to them,prob. about the same as the 179 obseth but i feel its quicker. You sould try and demo the czar, it is a fairly light ski and would make a great setup, its strange that it hasn't caught on yet, but wait till next year.

This is a very popular powder ski that just happens to do well on groomers also it would be a great choice for you, as for size i would prob. go 183 as they tend to ski short. have fun.

Not even comparible, the s6 {excellent ski} is 18mm fatter and holds a great edge on softer snow but hates ice and is ok on hardpack but will eat crud and powder all day. Take a look at the line prophet 100, with the metal top cap it holds a great edge on hardpack yet with 100mm under foot it floats well in powder, The volkl is a great ski but lacks a little when the snow gets deep and thats when the s6 starts to shine. you can't compare a powder ski to an all-mountain ski.

The 179cm ObSETHed will ski a whole lot different than your Mantra's because of the added width and the mini rocker (reverse camber). Also, on your sizing, K2 skis in general are measured different than the rest of the industry. A 179 ObSETHed is bigger than a different brand 179. So the 179 ObSETHed and the 182 Czar might be very similar in length. I would really recommend either the ObSETHed or the Czar because of the rockered profile. You will like the rocker in softer snow, and the Rossi S6 is just a regular cambered ski. So unless you want to give up the rocker, stick with the ObSETHed or Czar.As for your experience on the 189's, if you liked the way they skied, despite the length and the heavy feeling, the 179 should give you the same feel, but they will be more nimble, and they will feel lighter. Any ski that is too big (a 189 in your case) is going to feel heavy and it will take more energy out of you to get them to cooperate. In general, the same skis will feel very similar in each of their different sizes, but the ski in your size will feel easier to work with. So like I was saying before, the 179 is going to feel good. In my opinion, you should stick with ObSETHed's because they are so awesome. But I can't really compare against the Czar, because I've never skied it. Keep the questions rolling if you need any more help!Troy,I say go with the Czar for sure. Similar shape with the rocker just in the tip which is a great idea, but the foam core makes it a much lighter ski. I'm debating between the two right now myself. I loved the way the Obsetheds rip, but will by touring with them so leaning towards the Czars.I agree, if you are going for a rockered ski the czar is the better of the two, and if you truly want the obseth at least demo the line bacon first its less hookey in powder and floats better without the rocker plus it skis groomers way better, a very similar flex but much funneir ski.

The TI has metal in the heel to make it stronger.

You won,t notice any performance difference, IMO the griffon/jester crazy is just a hyped-up fad, the jester is a good binding, but the griffon has a lot of plastic in it and now that it is being tested not just talked about is breaking in the toe piece. if you want a salomon binding the sth line is the way to go, def a step-up over the Z line. As for height 99% of the time and people would not notice the difference between bindings if they skied them back to back, and if they did you would be use to it in a run or two. A lot of hype out there is just theory or opinion and does not matter, either you know how to ski or you don,t. And using a griffin or jester binding will not compensate for that. I think one factor people forget about when they talk binding ht. is their boot and the thickness of the footbed and volume will change everything in how a ski performs.

You could ride a reverse camber in 4" and it would feel great, if you already have a all-mountain ski in the ARV then i would ARG for a powder spef. ski. It's awesome.

Honestly, these are so close in dimensions to the PE that I don't think it would be worth it for to to spend money on a ski that will perform the same. They are also not that light weight either, so not much improvement there. I'd look into a different ski. The P.E's are a way better ski, you would be downgrading if you got the scream in's.

These guys will handle it just fine.ESTtoMST speaks the truth!!

No, they are not all that much stiffer then the bacons about a medium flex i would say. The bacons are not as soft as people make them out to be, but they do get a little softer after you put some hours on them. They def. are a fun ski to just play around on (bacons) and are very quick and responsive, you def. can't tell that their 115 underfoot when you ski them.

your to heavy for the px12 in your skiing style, you will break the griffon unless you step up to the jester (more money) i would say STH14, or step up to the px14, but the salomon is lighter. glad to see you based your decision on graphics alone, your like a fish, you see a color you like and attack.

The extremes because of their stiffness are a better all mountain ski for groomers, and yes the ar6 is better in the park, its your choice which is more important to you.

If i was you i would go with something between 100-115 in the waist and maybe with some rocker to them, k2 obseth, salomon czar, moment bibby they all have some rocker to them, for traditional camber skis the prophet 100 in 186 would be ok or even the 130, or rossie s6, if you like soft skis the hellbent in 189 would be a solid choice also take a look at 4frnt ehp.

If your interested in more backcountry use go 183 they measure out at about 179 or so, yes, and i would go marker jester or baron to keep them light.

The flex between them is almost the same, i think the anthems have more pop to them and are more stable off jumps because of the width, but the invader is quicker, if you don't need the width go invader.

My son skis the ar6 as his all-mountain/park ski and loves them, they even do pretty well in the tree's in powder and very stable at speed, the only complaint is that the top edeges chip easy so i would file them at a 45% angle before you ride them, otherwise they are excellent allover the mountain, for your size def. go 181 you might be to heavy for the 176 even tho it would work.

No, stick with the px12 if they work for you, I use the px14 on bacons with no problem at all. have fun on them!!

If your good, i would get the bibby's, they are rockered so they ski shorter then there length, plus super fun skis.

It would be safe to go 176. But if you feel that you could be charging harder in the future or don't mind longer ski's you might get away with the 183's.

No, only symetrical skis a really ment to be center mounted, The factory mounting point is about 6mm back from center, but a lot of guys mount 2mm to 3mm back for better park performance.

The chronic is a park ski that skis very well all mountain due to its stiffness yet still rips the park.

That would be personal opionion, I think they are better, but some people don't. The jester is a good binding, that is lighter and some say give's you better snow feel but pricey. The griffon is a lighter version of the jester with a lot more plastic in it and i am hearing alot stories about the toe and heel piece breaking on them, personally i will stick with LOOK they are tried and tru.

I know k2's twins run long but i don't about their other skis i would guess they would all measure the same way, Twin tips ski short in genral and lines run a little short so it would be a safe bet to go 186 they would prob. feel the same length as your 178's. also mounting spots on twins tend to be more foreward, also making them feel shorter.

It depends on how hard you ride them in the park, Most park skis only last about a year if ridden hard, edges start to blow out and you might get some delam. If you mean by riding them all-mountain in ice and hardpack, they are to soft. take a look at the chronic or suspect or wall for those conditions.

The obseth is about average weight for its class, i would not call it heavy or call it light for it's size, sure you can take it in the park, a lot of kids are riding the hellbent in the park and ripping them, but i def would not call them park skis. I would not say they rail groomers, no ski over 100mm in the waist is going to truly rail groomers, that being said if you are a good skier and can carve a ski on edge it will carve some nice rails for you, but i won't ride them in icey conditions. The vct will ride groomers/hardpack better because its stiffer and maybe be better in crud but that would be a toss-up, neither ski will be better on groomers then your old P.E's because neither is as stiff or as narrow, you are looking for the perfect ski that rails groomers/bumps yet floats well in powder and it does not exist, all skis are going to compromise somewhere, if you go with a fatter powder ski then you have to deal with it on groomers, if you go with a more narrow ski for groomers then you work harder in powder to get it to float, thats why people own quivers of skis, why don't you buy a fatter powder ski now, ride your P.E's on groomers and next year buy a ski to replace your P.E's. for groomers.

because of the rocker k2 does not spec. the same on it as other skis but ican tell you its way quicker then the vct, about the same as the prophet 100, hands down the obseth is better.

Hi henry--- The obseth is a nice ski, it has just a slight rocker in the tip so that it can rise-up in powder/crud yet is still flat under your foot and has a duel radius sidecut so it will still crave/do well on the groomers. as for flex they are the softest of the 3, i would say about the same as bacons or a tad stiffer, but a really nice feel to it, the ski you demoed was probably last years JJ if it was a 188, a backcoutry powder/jib with very little sidecut (around 40meters) thats why it felt sluggish on groomers and bumps, if you go k2 get the 179 they are about 184, also look at the o9 armada JJ a totally different ski then what you skied, A very versitale fat ski but good luck getting ahold of the 185, they have been sold-out for months. The obseth is a really fun ski, if i didn't love my bacons so much i would be riding those or momment bibby pros. good luck and i think there is another round of storms coming at the end of the week, were getting spoiled on just sking powder in my neck of the woods.

Hi henry-- so your up in whistler- lucky, the 90 is stiffer then the 100 by a fair amount, also you were on a 172 and your a big guy, the vct would give a little more float then the 100 because it's softer and has minimal camber to help it float better, but the turn radius is wider so it's not as quick, the 100 has metal in it so it will ski crud/groomers better, i agree the 186 would lose some playfulness for all mountain jibbing around, maybe its time to try a slightly rockered ski to get the float yet still ski groomers the two best out there in that waist size would be the k2 obseth in 179 or the salomon czar in 182 or maybe it's 184 i can,t remember, see if you can demo those two ski's. if they don't work for you you will maybe have to comprivise and get a fatter ski. also look at the rossie s6 its this years sratch steeze it's around 110 in the waist but a real fun all around ski.

go 179, they run a little long so they will be about 183, they are about average in weight for a ski in this width. they have a great flex.

The goats as you already know are very popular every one and there mother skis them. personally i think there are way better skis for the money, the obseths are one of them, softer, better flex and slightly rockered for better powder performance, not to mention sick graphics. another choice is the line prophet 100, it blows the goat off the mountain and also has sick graphics. a much quicker/livlier ski. As for bindings the jesters would be awesome on any powder ski.

The prophets are just as stable as the volkls but will be WAY better in powder and off-piste, one of the best all-mountain skis you can get as long as you don't ski much park/freeride jibbing, belive it or not i am hearing about guys using the prophet 90 for racing and winning, thats how good they carve. if you ski more groomers go 90 if you want to get into more powder go 100. Another ski you might want to check-out is the 4frnt msp, IMO the best on-piste twin you can buy.

They will work, but the brake is way wider then what you need, maybe you could get a narrow brake.

The reason your'e sinking in powder is your skis are to short,your pretty light so you could get by with the 172 but you sould be on 179's. these in a 172 would ski like about a 168, they are fatter, but very quick skis. the lightest binding for your weight would be the marker griffons. The only other ski i can think of thats mid-fat and short would be the 4frnt vct, i think they make it in a 168. a another ski you might look at is the line elizibeth, its a short powder/park ski that does very well as an all-mountain ski for lighter skiers.

no its not, thats why its so cheap.

The stock brake is 100mm but will fit up 105mm, after that you can start bending.

the k2's are similer to the p.e. and will give you better edge hold for back east conditions and better park performance.

The obseths are more versitil you could ski them on groomers, yet float really well in pow due to the slight rocker. the hellbents are really soft and float amazing in pow but are not the best for busting crud. they are manigible on groomers but you have to keep them on edge not running flat, these two skis are really not comparible. the hellbent is more comparible to the e.p pro. and the obseths to the prophet 100, 4frnt vct, or gotama.

only if your light and a beginner/intermediate. otherwise look elsewhere.

The low tips won't effect sking in pow or crud, line elizebeths, bacons, and prophets all have fairly low tips and they are powder skis, same with salomons pocketrocket.

Ski magazine said the mantras were Utah's one ski quiver a few years ago!SKI MAGAZIE-- why would anyone take advice from them they don't even know how to get off the groomers, You sould read powder or freeskier instead. The mantra as utah's one ski quiver LOL I hope you never land switch or ski REALLY deep pow. what a joke!!!!! Why don't you just stap 2- 2x4's on your feet they would be less stiff and you would save yourself nearly 7oo bucks.

The bambo core makes the hazmat lively, poppy and light. a fun versitil ski, liberty did have problems with duribility a few years ago, but have gotten it sorted out since then. Since you don't say what model 1080 he skis (gun, foil, thruster) it's hard to say if these are right for him. they are very versitil and can do it all, if you guys tend to ski more powder then not, i would go with a wider ski. 181 would be a good size for unless he really charges hard then go 186.

I don't think the low tips has any effect in soft snow or crud, line elizibeths, bacons and prohets have low tips and they are powder skis, as was the 1st genaration salomon gun/pocket rocket.

Well they are symemetrical so you have to center mount them, if your talking about comparing these to a different park ski that is mounted 2cm back. A center mounted ski skis a lot better switch, and is more balanced when spinning off jumps, the downfall is that they don't carve as well on groomers or float as well in powder because of some tip dive, and some center mounted skis are not as stable at speed, they get squirrly.

There is two reasons they felt squirly on you 1) they are twin tips so the tail does not have the bite of a flat tail ski 2) the 177's were to small for you, twin tips ski short, so you sould be on the 183. Imo if you want to keep riding a twintip get the LINE prophet 100 in the 186cm, because of the metal in it, it skis groomers as well the mantra but floats way better in powder. and no there is not a difference in stiffness between the two sizes.

If i was you i get the guns for near free, I skied guns for 2 seasons before getting fatter powder skis, The guns are a fun off-piste powder ski that turn very quick in trees and float real well up to about knee plus depth, they are a mid-soft ski that ski groomers well as long as the snow is soft, They HATE real hard/icey conditions but are fun in softer snow, IMO if you are looking for a off-piste ski they are way better then the mantras. The mantras are STIFF and do ski groomers and crud very well, but the guns will blow them away off-piste. If you go mantra go 184 the 191 would be to much ski for you.

they are a symmetrical ski so they have to be center mounted so you will loose all-mountain performance, and being that they are a park ski they will not like speed to much, if your not using them for park 80% of the time i would look elsewhere.

You won't find a powder ski that small, take a look at the LINE PANDORA or if that is to big you will have to go with ICELANTIC, they make short fat skis for sking powder in tree's. but you sould be on longer skis for powder.

Not really comparible--- The firstblood are STIFF all mountain skis, simalar to the 4frnt msp, that ski well but will chip and fall apart on you overtime, personally i would not buy anything from nithward you will regret it over time, The el rays are a price point all mountain ski kind of like a mix between the ar6 and arv. a fun all mountain ski for the price.

I would go prophet, wider for more float in powder, plus will ski the hard/ice groomers better and hold up better overtime

the brake is really to wide for these skis, take a look at the salomon Z10 instead, or if you want these you could get a smaller brake.

this would work, or better would be the line blend for less money.

no problem-- i love talking ski gear, HEY ITS SNOWING OUTSIDE---- maybe we will finally get some powder in the sierras.

look px12, best binding for the buck.

Hi henry-- by damp i mean smooth feel on hardpack with no chatter or bouncing around kind of like a hot knife in butter. the VCT is not as stiff as the P.E and belive it or not very close in weight to your P.E's, Yes they are a tru full twin-tip with equel ht. tip and tail, the decription above is from the first year it came out when the tail was slighty squared off to put on skins because it was used greatly as a backcountry ski because it is so light. The VCT is desinged so the longer the length the wider the turn radius and more plankey it gets, so the 189 would be for tru big mountain sking areas like squaw or mammoth or jackson hole. they ski switch great you will have no problem. the jester would be the perfect binding on these, keep them nice and light. 4frnt bindings are made by tyrolia and are good , but the jester would be better IMO, if you get these vct's the midsole mounting line is 6mm back from center, mount at 4-5cm back from center for better switch riding. have fun.

the vct imo is a better groomer/crud ski, it is a bit stiffer and heavier then the helix so it holds an edge better also it skis damper,as for pow they are about the same, the vct has little camber and a soft tip so it floats up and turns quick in powder, the helix is livlier do to the bambo core and may feel more snappy and quick because of that, Which ski will hold up better over time def. the vct it will last for years and years and years. They both are good freeride skis but you will be able to charge harder on the vct, if you go vct get the 182 the 189 would be to much. 4frnt is a awesome co. and really stands behind there skis, plus sweet topsheets. liberty had problems with ski duribility a few years back, but has gotten it together since then. For your size and what you want to do i would go vct. better overall/versital ski.

Don't waste your time on these skis, go buy the volkl aura instead, the best womens expert ski on the market.

The p4 is a well liked twin by a lot of people that does very well on groomers because of its two layers of metal in it, it also floats well in pow because of its width. I am not a big fan of the p4 for a couple of reasons, first it is HEAVY because of the metal, the heavieste in this group of skis, also it seems slugist till you get it going, and the main thing i don,t like is that the tips are stiffer then the tails, great for crud but an odd feel when carving. they ski more like an conventional ski then a twin. I lot of people love them, but im not a fan. i

Not really comparible, the ARV is a mid-soft all mountain ski that can used anywhere including the park but is really not fat enough to be a true backcountry off-piste ski, The obseths are more of a powder/backcountry ski that can be skied on-piste and park but shines more in pow. look px12, best binding for the buck.

You sould be getting the 178, anything shorter will be to small for you, The blend is softer and fatter and will do better off-piste, the bridge is fairly stiff and will do better on hardpack/ice. you decide which is more important to you.

The bridge is pretty stiff and not know as a good park ski, but will do very well on groomers, The wall is a full blown park ski ment to be center mounted, so you will loose performance on the groomers and pow. take a look at the moment tahoe or 4frnt msp both would be better IMO.

Same ski, just a different top sheet/graphics--- I would stay away from the 12.0 binding lots of problems, The griffon is better, but now that people are using them you are starting to hear about the plastic toe piece breaking, the jester is good but not needed on a park ski, i would go px12 jib on them.

No, if your a good skier you will have no problem, the bacon's measure out at ony 178 and because of the early taper at the tip and tail they ski like about 175 ski.

First of all your local shop does not know what it is talking about or is not familar with twin tips, you sould be riding this ski in the 182 or if they don't have any go 174, do not go any small then that for your size or you will just over power it, i'm 5'-7" and the 166 was way to small for me when i rode it, and felt great in the 182. Now as for the ski, it was unchanged from 06 to 08 just different graphics, it is a great all-mountain ski, at 85 in the waist it skis some powder, carves groomers, and was widely used in the park. the cons of it are that it chattered at speed in superhard/icey conditions because of its foam core and doe's not have a smooth damp feel to it because of the foam core. they are a strong ski that can take a fair amount of abuse, but like all salomon skis have soft bases that get damaged easily. If you could pick up a pair for less then say $275-$250 go for it. Otherwise I would keep looking you can find better deals out there.

The bacon's are a fat-mid soft powder ski, designed for backcountry jib and powder sking, that happens to carve groomers really well and are very stable and smooth doing it, They have a ton of float and are pretty quick for their size,To me they feel no wider then say a mid 90 waisted ski, They are the funnist ski i have ever skied, a total freestyle ski. But there is no way you could charge as hard on them as you could on the prophets, they (prophets) will bust apart any crud and rip down the hardest/icey slopes. they are a directional twin that skis more like a conventional ski, but do ok switch, a ski that anyone can jump on and feel comfertible on, were as the bacon has a more loose freestyle feel to it that some people might not care for, IMO you really can't compare the two. As for all-mountain,it depends on your own personnel sking prefrence to what you consider all-mountain.

yes it would

If your an average skier about 225lbs if you charge hard about 200lbs.

You won' t notice the width at all, just the extra stability and dampness they provide. I went from a 90 waisted ski to a 115 waisted ski and was blown away that to me they felt the same on groomers, but floated like a battleship in pow.

I remember those days growing up in mn and skiing buck hill and those massive mougals. NO. the 100 will not be to big for your hills, it is very quick and you won't even notice the width until you need it in pow. for size go186 because they ski short for their size.---Willie, Good to know there are MNskiers around these parts. Thanks for the help! well I left the cold of MN a number of years ago for the warm beaches of CA, but now live in the tahoe area, way more snow- less cold

No the 165 would be fine, you were on to small of ski before.

Hi henry- The helix is a great ski, i didn't suggest it because, when you were looking at the kung fujus i thought you were going thinner, you are correct it is a lighter more playful ski then the prophet, Powder mag has been raving about this ski for 2 years, and nobody has caught on yet, kind of like line skis until k2 bought them 2 years ago, now everyone is interested, they rip groomers and blast crud, they are not as quick as the prophet because of the turn radius, but you won't notice to much difference because their softer and livelier because of the bambo core, great choice. I would buy these over the prophets in a heartbeat, why more fun ski.

If the waist of your ski is between 90 and 100 get the 100mm, If the waist is between 105 and 115 get the 115,

The kung fujas is basicly the 06-07 seth ski, good all mountain ski, fairly soft but skis real well, about the only complaint about it is that it is heavy. This ski is similar to the line blend that you were looking at before, except a little thinner, I would choose the 09 blend over this ski, but it is a solid choice. If you want a ski thats different take a look at the momment tahoe, hand made in renoe,nv-- solid skis also look at the liberty hazemat- made in colorado, about 95 in the waist but uses a bambo core, super light, really a fun ski, tons of energy in it, It would be my personal choice for a allmountain ski. good searching.

The factory mounting line is at 6cm back from center, I have mine at 4cm back from center, 2cm FOREWARD of the line and love them there. Don't listen about what some people say about bacon's on groomers, they carve big fat GS turns at warp speed, so damp and stable, yet still snap around quickly when you want to, I have been skiing for over 30 years and these are the funnist ski i have ever ridden. Another thing is that they don't feel like 115 under foot to me but more like a 90 to 95 ski, until you hit pow, then you relize the width because you just float, enjoy.

This binding was designed for the park and freestyle sking, it holds up very well.

yes they would, I use the look px14 on my bacon's and love them, almost the exact same binding.

I knew when i saw that plastic toe piece that it wouldn't hold up, you could switch to jesters but thats expensive but the toe piece is stronger, or you could just slap some look or rossie's on them and know you won't have any problem.

great binding, as long as your lighter (up to say 165lbs) and don't charge super hard, then you would need a 14 din binding.

HI henry----If you have any doubt about this binding go on EVO's website and cheackout the HUNTING YETI movie for free, all the skiers are using this binding, after watching it, you will agree that it will hold up for you.

If I'm not mistaken, the '07 model has slightly wider dimensions, larger radius, and is not built with the F.I.T. Core Flex design. However, be advised, the product on THIS page is the '09 model, which I do not think has been altered from last year's '08 model. Hope that helps. (adding) IMO this is the best womens twintip on the market and has been for about 3years now, so much so that a lot of ligher guys including some ski patrolers I know ride it.

Hi henry--- I would go 186, the running surface is about the same as a 182 plus they ski short, I would also mount them 2 to 3cm FOREWARD of the suggested mounting line to make them handle better all mountain and park. In two years you will be ready for the 130's--- such a fun ski.

same binding different color, the factory mount is 8cm back from center, I would 2cm FOREWARD of that line at 6cm back from center. That would work fine for what you want to do.

Why do i keep getting your ?'s---- just kidding----- they are both good bindings, I used salomon for years and both my son and I had problems with the toe piece thats why i switched to look/dynastar/rossie. i don't know if they changed the toe piece on the STH line but i have not heard of any probs with them.

go 181

these would work great, or look px14, rosssie sas140WB, or the salomon STH 14 or 16 would all work good on this ski.

I would mount them 2cm FOREWARD of the suggested mounting line on the ski, that would put them at 51/2 cm back from center, a good spot for a all mountain ski.

See the answer i gave you under the lord

well their was all different 1080's, so i don't know what you rode, but this is a fairly stiff ski that does well on groomers and ice and will ski some pow and trees. it is NOT a twintip, just a slight raised tail. If your coming off the old 1080 i would recomend last years salomon foil in a 174 or the new 1080 model that came out this year , they will have more of that feel your looking for. also look at last years salomon thruster, I know its a park ski , but it is an excellent all mountain ski.

The 100's will do ok in the park, the problem is that the mounting spot is about 8cm back from center so you loose some of that park performance.you could move it foreward a little to help but if you only ski park now and then they would be fine. As for the blends you could spend all day in the park and feel like your riding just fat park skis. as for bindings look px12 or 14, rossie sas120 or 140, salomon STH 12 or 14 or marker griffins would all work good.

178 sould be fine, but if ski more then 50% backcountry i would go 185.

no, to small for you, you sould get the 176cm.

yes they would, they would rip, for a binding take a look at the rossignal saphire 120 pro wb, it's a great womens binding.

This is not a backcountry or jib ski at all, it is a on-piste groomer ripper that can handle a little pow and some trees.it has just a slight raised tail not a twin tip at all. If your looking for a backcountry/jibbing ski you need to change direction and take a look at some different skis.I would recomend the line prophet 100, the line blend, volkl bridge or gotama,momment tahoe or ruby ,4frnt vct or msp, or rossignal S5 or last years brigade, all would work well for your needs. As for size at your ht. and weight you sould be riding a ski around 178 to 182.

The metal in the heel makes it a lot stronger binding, which was a weak spot on the Z 14.

The seth is a great ski, but might be a little soft for how you ski, it is kind of like the armada arv for flexibility and not much stiffer then my bacons but such sweet graphics. I would take a look at the 4frnt vct, volkl gotamas, line prophet 100's, or motherships or momment rubys or bibby pros, they might be a better choice if you charge hard, but the seths are great skis but i don't know if they are the best choice for back east.

It skis groomers very well and holds a great edge on ice, it is fat enough to ski some powder and trees. and is a stable fun ski, the only down fall IMO is that it is not a twintip, just a slight raised tail ski that skis like a traditional ski. The pimp by atomic is a similer ski but fatter and is a twin, if you can get past the name.

Its a great ski for the price, at 88mm under foot it will ski some pow if your small, carve the groomers and work all over the mountain, its light and holds up well. go for it.

The prophet 90 is an excellent backeast ski because of its metal, it does well on ice and hardpack and will do ok in up to boot deep powder, The blend is more of a freestyle ski that will float good in powder, ski off-piste,ski park yet still carve the groomers. The 90 will give you better groomer performance and the blend better powder/ off-piste. Both will work for you, just decide which is most important to you.

Salomon sth10 or 12, look or rossignal px12 or sas12, or rossignal saphire 120 WB would all be excellent bindings for these skis. Just keep in mind you need at least a 90mm brake for these skis. good luck and happy powder hunting.

The only difference is the troublemaker binding is color-matched for the troublemaker ski. They're excellent bindings you won't be dissipointed. And they say dynastar on them instead of look.

If you are a advanced intermidiate skier and looking to get into powder you need a ski way wider then 78 under foot, you sould be looking around 85 to 95 under foot, Take a look at the armada arv-w , or rossignal scatch womens bc, line celebrity, or 4frnt pique, All excellent skis that ski powder well yet still rip on groomers. don't be afraid to go with a wider ski they are way more stable and will improve your skiing and be more versital all over the mountain.

These would work ok on groomers but not a good choice for trees, for size you sould be on a ski around 177 to 179. take a look at the LINE prophet 90 or VOLKL bridge or mantra, all 3 are excellent eastcoast skis and will rip the groomers yet work well in the trees/glades. they are way better then the salomon and cheaper.

The reason your p.e. did not work for you is because they were to small for you, at 5'11" and 230 you need to be on ski around 180 or longer if it is soft, go with something around 90 to 100 in the waist and if you are going to do any park stick with a twintip, LINE prophet 90 or 100, HEAD mojo 94, MOMMENT tahoe or ruby would all be excellent choices, they rip groomers yet still playful elsewhere.

If your aggressive you sould have no problem with the 177. A 170 will be to small for you.

if you are a decent skier get the 185, if not 178. you know this is the same ski as last years brigade just different graphics so if you can find your size, you will save a lot of money.

If your going pow go 177, the turn radius is still 19 so they will be quick enough in the tree's yet be more stable in the open areas.

go to the ski size guide on this website and start there.

Two totally different skis, the lord is an all mountain ski thats fairly stiff and will do well on piste but not fat enough to be considerd a serious off-piste ski. The czar is a backcountry powder ski. So it depends on where you like to ski and what. either way if your an expert go 185mm.

I have not skied the rossie, but on the other two,the hellbent is very much a powder ski, soft tip@ tail but stiff under foot, they are manigible on groomers but you have to keep them on edge not running flat. The new JJ's are the future of ski,s. I thought they were kind of on the stiff side, but rip everything and float well in powder, this ski can do anything. the rossie--- why bother just buy the armada and save 120 bucks over another overpriced-- overrated rossi ski, rossiignal has been a follower not a leader in the freeride/freestyle scene for years, Just an old race company trying to survive in the modern freeride era.

Yes it is, but it would be a good all mountain ski but kind of heavy, The new lord is way stiffer then the old foil and is not a tru twintip, just a slight raised tail for the masses. If you already have powder boards I would for the 09 blend, Its the most freestyle ski of the group, and would be the best in the park. The 90 and lord are great on groomers but not so much in the park, The 100's are awesome but a more big mountain ski but they rip on groomers also. For something different take a look at the MOMMENT TAHOE"S they are fun in the park and stiff enough to kill it on the groomers and super light.

you sould get the 135, if this is the ski you wan't. But for your size you sould be sking around a 150cm ski, so maybe you sould look at a different ski.

Yes these would work just fine, the brake is not to wide at all.

For beginner to intermediate the tru love would be a better ski, this ski is more of a intermediate-advanced ski. for size go 149mm.

This seems to me to be a more advanced demanding expert ski, unless you charge hard this is going to be to much ski for you. My wife who is 45 and has been skiing all her life switched to a soft twin tip ski 3 years ago and swears she would never ski a conventional ski again. It opened up a whole new world of sking for her, plus softer skis are a lot easier to ski and absorb all those impacts better then older bones do. If you look around there is some excellent women's twintips out there, my wife who is a advanced-expert skiier loves the volk peal. good luck in your decision making, but keep in mind skiing is ment to be fun so why not get skis that put a big smile on your face everytime.

You don't need these for your skis, they are the hyped new binding to get but IMO over rated and not even proven to be reliable. return them and get either the look px12 or dynastar px12 jib there virtually the same binding and designed for that ski and freestyle sking and if you look around you can save yourself some money.

These will fit on any ski not only salomon, they are good bindings, but if you ski hard they will break, my son who weighs 140lbs broke a pair in the park, and i had problems with the toe piece on a pair of guns. but if you cruise groomers and don't ski to hard they will work ok. If you like salomons the STH 14 or 16 are excellent as are the look px's or rossi sas2 or axial2 bindings.

The sas2 is more of a freesyle binding, and axial2 is more of a big mountain binding, they are almost exactly the same. But the sas2 mount lower on your ski,s and the axial's are a little more heavy duty. Both are excellent, but seeing that you going to put them on b3, which are big mountain skis go axial2 they sit a tad higher to help in carving.

The lifters are only about 5mm so you would not notice them to much if at all, Yes you could mount without them (a lot of people do) just make sure you either get shorter screws or grind down the ones that come with them or else you will have extra breaks under your skis.

You could use these, but they are rossie's price point ski and are not that advanced of a ski, I would recomend rossie's scatch brigade over these, they are a fatter for powder, yet still work well on groomers. these are to skinny for any powder skiing, Also take a look at the ARMADA AR6 or ARV, LINE chronic, or even LINE blends.SURFACE watch lifes or SALOMON suspects or last years foils. these are all good choices and would be better then the s2jago. allso the s2 is aimed at lighter skiers not for people your size. For length go around 178mm unless you charge hard then go longer.

they will work in the park, but they are more of a big mountain ski. The suggested mounting is about 7 to 8 cm back from center so they would be unbalanced for spinning and they are to stiff to butter, but their is guys who mount them more foreward to get better park performance out of them, they are super stable off jumps, so if you just dabble in the park now and then they sould be ok, If you are looking for a more freestyle type ski look at the 09 blends almost same diementions but softer and more park freindly.

I use the look px 14 wide brake on my bacons and love them, you could go px12 or the rossie bindings that are the same as the look, salomon STH 14 or 16 are good, or try the MARKER griffins, keep in mind that you will need a brake of at least 100mm and if you weigh more then say 170lbs and charge you sould go with a din of at least 14. All these bindings will work for you, it boils down to personal prefrence and price.

The 90 is is very close to the 100, except it is stiffer , more like the vokl bridge, and of course 10mm less in the waist, The 90 is more of a eastcoast groomer/ ice ski kind of like the mantras. IMO they are not fat enough for tru off-piste use, they are a little quicker then the 100's but not by much you wounldn't notice the difference, go 100's over 90's. Also take a look at the 09 line BLENDS they are the same width as the 100's but a more freestyle type ski that are just as versatile but lighter and softer in their flex. I think for where your at in your skiing and want to go, they would be a great option plus save yourself 100 bucks, You don't need a stiff ski unless your charging steep crud/ icey most the time, softer skis are funnier and easier, and more foregiving, plus if your good you can ski a soft ski anywhere.

I choose the bacon's for several reasons, first they are fatter, not just in the waist but the tails are only 3mm smaller then the tips, giving them way more float, the flex on the bacons is soft , smooth, and symetrical, where as the p4 is stiffer in the tips then in the tails, also the bacon's are lighter. But the big reason is that to me the p4 felt like just a conventional ski with a raised tail, and i know alot of people like that in a twin tip, But i come from a strong surfing backround and the bacon's have that floaty, loose surfey feel to them, yet still carve on the groomers. There is no way the bacon's are going to charge as hard in big mountain open areas, but they were not built for that, they are more of a fat playful powder ski. If i had to choose another ski other then bacon's it would be momment bibbys or ep pro,s. and possibly surface live lives 2 .

Yes it will work, But the marker 12.o is not known as a very reliable binding, I have heard of lots of problems with it. I would look else wear. maybe checkout the LOOK-ROSSIE line or the salomon STH 14 or 16, If you like markers take a look at the griffin's or jesters.

A friend of mine who is 6ft and 200lbs just got 183's and they seem ok for him. You could mount 1 inch back from center to make them ski shorter and you wouldn't loose to much pow performance, But if you are a real strong skier and are used to longer ski's keep them they will work better off-piste then the 178, I'm 5' 7" and ski 183 bacons as my all-mountain ski. the 178 running surface is about the same as a 174 ski so that might be to small. IMO i would keep the 183 and mount 1 1/2" back from center.

Yes it will, but you will loose switch performance if that matters to you, and also it won't spin as well if your doing jumps, If you are just using them as powder skis then it will be fine, also if you weigh more then 200lbs it will help with tip float because they are fairly soft skis.

Write your answer here. These are brand new 09 skis, salomon is releaseing a newer version of it's original 1080 ski ( who knows why ) I guess it's supposed to stir up some sort of nostalgia, But with so many good ski's out there now why bother. Twin tip skis have changed so much since then, in dimentions and are so speicalized for how you ski I'm sure you could spend your money elsewhere and get a much better ski.

No not really, the suspect is their full blown park ski for more serious park use, it has a wood core and reinforced edges so it is durible and can take a beating, The threat is salomon's price point park ski, it has the old foam core and is aimed at light weight riders who are just getting into park riding and cruise the groomers.

Yes--- I ride mostly bc and like to land switch in pow. I would not go any futher towards center, guys who mount on the line say they get slightly better powder performance but lose a little when riding switch. unless you are real heavy mount there.

Same ski as last year, the dimensions change with length but the only change from last year ( or 07's ) is cosmetic.

Yes they are, they are basicly the missions with a raised tail, they are a good ski and good deal. If you have never skied scott 's before they feel like conventional skis but with raised tails , as there race heritage, some people like that feel though.

I belive they are metal and i know they don't have the upward toe release they are pretty heavy bindings but industructible.

The factory mount is 2 1/4 inches back from center. I mounted mine 1 1/2" back from center and love them there, some guys mount them on the line for better pow skiing, and some mount them only 1/2" to 1" back for more all around and park use. it would depend on what you want out of them. but 1/2" will not make that much difference.

The 100's in 186 would be almost the same size as your 179 p.e's as k2 skis run long and lines ski measure short. I would go 186, i think the 179 prophets might feel to short for you.

IIf he is an excellent skiier he sould have no problem with 179's, also how tall is he, and how big are his last ski's. If you measure the 179's they are shorter then 179. also what doe's he like to ski, if its groomers and park stick with the 172,s but if it's more powder and off-piste ride the 179's. I can tell you that my son who is 16 and about 140lbs rides AR6's in 171 in the park and is looking at getting EP pro's for his powder ski. there is not that big of a difference between the two sizes and they are easy to ski. I would also think about if he wants a ski this stiff for his weight, but that would be determined by what he's used to skiing. I know that most kid's my son's age are riding ski's a lot softer then the 100. But we tend to ski a lot of soft snow and park.

From my experience salomon and nordica sizes are about the same, the only difference is nordica's run wider in the middle and toe box area's.

Not really, they are a park ski with only a 80mm waist and fairly narrow tip, they would be easy to learn on but would be to small for backcountry use, The scratch girl bc is a awesome backcountry ski that is easy to ski and also works well on groomers maybe look at that ski instead.

No you can put any binding you want on this ski, imo-- look or rossi px 14, salomon STH 14 or marker griffins you sould go with a din of at least 14 if you charge, and it has a brake of 100mm.

Look or Rossie px 14 or 15, salomom STH 14 or 16, I won't go less then a din of 14 for your size. just make sure they have a brake of at least 90.

Prophet 100's in a 186cm would work well for you, you can ski the Big Bear resorts or drive 4 hours to Mammoth ( i live in the tahoe area but still think mammoth is the best resort in the state ) I would stay away from the marker 12.0 binding, its a piece of junk and at your size you would break it, go look or rossie px 14 or salomon sth 14 or 16, as for boots I love my salomon x- wave boots, Technica are excellent too alot of it is how they fit your foot, every boot brand fits a little different. Don't worry about going a little long with the prophets they run short and if you have never skied twin tips they also ski short, Prophet 100's would kill it at mammoth, lots of deep heavy snow and steep bowls of crud that the 100 will blast apart with no problem, good luck.

It's funny you sould ask this question, I also live in the tahoe area and when i fist picked up the mothership i thougt it would be the perfect ski for sking the heavy snow at the top of kirkwood or mammoth a day or 2 after a big dump, there stiff and kind of heavy but i bet you could never find the speed limit of them, also the turn radius is 24 m so they should be fairly quick. imo i would go prophet 100 , softer, quicker, lighter yet still has the metal in it to bust crud. The motherships might be to much ski unless your charging hard all the time.

This is the same ski as the scratch brigade of last year, and yes it skis well on groomers, probably not as well as your b2's, but will work very well in powder. it,s a great ski all over the mountain including the park, but will really shine in the trees and off-piste.

The karhu 100 (telemark ski) is the exact same ski as the prophet 100. their is a review of it in the 07 powder gear guide, they loved it, and called it one of the best telemark skis out there. So i guess your answear is yes. ( karhu and line are both owned by K2 and use some of the same molds, also the karhu 130 is the same as the prophet 130.)

Sounds like 172 would be perfect. I'm about the same height/weight as you and I ski 177s in the resort, 173s in the backcountry. With fat skis you can definitely go shorter than you normally would, and I like a slightly shorter, turnier ski for touring excursions. (adding) If you ski mainly backcountry go 179cm, the prophet 100,s run short by about 3 to 4 cm. also the only difference between the 172 and 179 is 2 1/2 inches and the turn radius about 1/2 meter, they are quick skis, and won"t have any problem in tight tree"s with them, also you will love the extra stability at speed with the 179,s. The 172,s are ment for super light riders or people who only ski super tight trees. So if you are at least a advanced intermidiate go 179 i no guys that are your size that ski the 186cm and love it everywhere.

No-- the tails are just slightly raised kind of like the old rossi bandits, they sould ski well on groomers because there really stiff, also for your size i would 177cm the 169cm would be to short. 168 would be to the top of your nose im 5 11 and skied a 168 now a 174 but for someone 5 8 go with a 168 177 is too long for you unless you like longer skis. (adding) Im 5-7" and ski a 182cm , their is big advantages to ski a longer ski such as stability at speed, busting crud, float in powder not to mention carving ability not just slidding your skis around. The allmountain ski models of the past few years are ment to be skied a little longer then say 5 years ago, also salomon skis run short, example their 174 gun is only 171, so most twin tip or partial twintip skis are shorter then there size indicates except for K2, they are about 4cm longer then there size

Prophets are bullet proof, Line had a problem in 06 with their invader park ski,s but that problem has been solved, Since K2 bought line 2 years ago their quility is top notch, Their bases our the toughest in the industries, and there topsheets are super durible.

If you charge hard and ski more big mountain, ( steep,fast open lines) go 186cm, other wise go 181cm. also depends on what size your on now and if you prefer a little longer ski. with only 5cm difference it won,t be that much difference. good choice they rip.

I am a huge line fan but in this case i would go for the hazmats, they are softer, fatter, and more playful. The 90,s being stiffer will give you better hard snow performence, but not by much. any where else the hazmat will shine also the bambo core makes them so lively and light.

I would go 186cm, the prophet 100's run tend to run short, The base running surface on the 186cm is about the same as a 181 to 182cm ski. the 179cm i think would be to small for you, Also they are very easy to ski compaired to your mantra,s, Even at 186cm they are very quick in tree,s and will float like crazy.

These will be great for all mountain they are a little stiff so they will be better on the groomers and such but in exchange will not be as much fun in the pow. the Bacons are also a great ski but I have skied them and I see them as a more big mountain backcountry kickers and trees ski. I would deffinatly go with the Bridges for your needs. ( adding ) I would agree, The bridge is a better all-mountain ski if by all-mountain you ski about 50% groomers and icey conditions, I ski bacons as my all mountain skis but i ski mainly fresh snow and groomers only when i have to. and then perferible park, bacon,s are fat at 115mm but they are just as quick as bridges and have more pop to them. Truth is it depends on how you like to ski, If you like to rip down groomers with friends and do some tree,s now and then go bridges. But if are more playful looking to launch off everything, and constantly looking for the untracked deepest snow and dabble a little in the park go bacon,s.

I believe this ski is softer, just because of the origin of the creation of the ski its a backcountry jiber used for kickers hard landings. Great overall ski I even heard that a few patrollers up in WA use it as their do everything ski. (adding) I own a pair of bacon,s that i love, I use them everywhere. The flex is softer then the obseths, but not by much, the main difference is that the flex on the bacon,s is symetrical in the tip and tail making it very smooth, also the early taper in the tip and tail causes less hooking in deep powder.

The extremes are close to the P.E. of past, fairly stiff and heavy but good all mountain, The AR6,s are awesome, their softer and very playful, they kill it in the park and do well all mountain and quite abit lighter, and have a smooth even flex. Go armada

The line blends in 183cm are only about 179cm in length but are softer the the 100,s they might be to small for you. The 100,s come in a 186cm and might be better for you. How about prophet 130,s or the new motherships for 09, they might work for you also. or K2 obseths in 189cm.

The recomended line on the skis is 2 1/4 inches back from center for powder mount their, most people mount a little foreward of that for all mountain.

Go with the Marker Griffon. The Griffon and the 12.0 have the same Din but the 12.0 has the biometric toe, which tends to pre-release a lot. The griffon,is based off the jester it is a little lighter it was a totally new design last year engineered with a wider platform, better suited for wider skis, and better energy transmission from the boots to the skis. It also has a relatively low swing weight which helps in the air, in the park, and when carving turns. The griffon also has zero ramp angle for a more balanced feel, whether riding forwards or backwards (adding) personelly i won,t jump on the griffon bandwagon, If you check them out yhey have lots of plastic to them, thats why there so light also the toe piece is mounted with just 2 srews. i don,t know about you but if i was dropping 20 to 30 feet i would thinking gee i hope my toe piece says on when i land. after looking at them i decided to stay with look bindings------- just my opinion.

Line skis have been around for about 10 years and have been making the prophet 100 for about 5years now. Both are great skis . But i would go for the lines there less expensive and IMO are better. Also volkl had a problem with cores last year and bindings pulling out but i think they fixed this year.

if all you ski is park then these things will be great. Of course they are going to break and delam after 2 runs and you will have to buy another pair. they are light so for the one jump you hit you can pull some grab or spin(unless the jump is over 6-7 feet tall, then the invaders will simply explode unpon impact with the ground), but realistically these skis are good for nothing. Line is good for nothing. Simply garbage. Dont waste your money. just answering this question has made me sickHeyDon't listen to all this crap about line skis. These are perfectly fine park skis. They aren't your 6th season and still going strong ski by any means, but if you are just buying them to hit the park, your fine. Honestly, a lot of people who broke these things were riding the invaders that came out like four years ago. Since then, the entire company has changed, been bought out by K2, and they pretty much started over with their basics of constructing skis. They are a lot more durable than the piece of junk skis line used to put out when they were an independent company. I'll admit that Line used to be horrible, and they really did break and de-lam, and everything else, but skis change in four years, and these definitely have. Like someone said in their review, these skis aren't even made in the same factory as the ones that were having problems, they are actually made on the same stuff that the k2 skis are made on. Line has gone through major changes over the last few years. (adding) Line is one of best skis around, yes they did have problems with their price point ski the invader the first year they came out but now the got that problem worked out. NO brand of park ski is going to hold up for more then 2 seasons if you ride it as intended thats why they cost less. Even volkl walls rated one of best out there had problems with breaking and bindings pulling out last year so they changed the core for this year. Do you think park pro,s ride the same ski all season. Heck no they change skis as often as their underwear because they destroy them. Line and K2 are the only ones progressing freestye and freeride sking, the rest are just following. Get a pair of LINES sidewall const. skis and they will last forever pluse LINE has one of the best warrenties in buisness.

Yes Do you ski Park if you ski parks go with the 90's if you think you want to do more back country go with the 100's---------(willie) YES because the 100,s do ski well on piste. But they blow the 90,s away off piste, also because of thier extra stability they handle varible conditions better or if your hauling someone off the mountain or maybe getting that private fresh snow you patrolers sometimes get. I have never heard anyone say that they wish they got a narrower ski but you hear peaple say they wish they wen,t wider. once you get used to wide skis you kick yourself for not riding them years ago.

If you know of a good mounting shop they could bend a 100mm to fit on these, But not all shops will do that, They will charge you any where from $30 to $50 bucks to replace it with a wider brake. or you can stick them in a vise and attempt it your self. I don,t know where you live but a good hardcore shop sould do it for you no problem.

The mantra,s work great on piste because of there stiffness but not so good off-piste for the same reason. Because your pretty light they might be to stiff for you, The bridge is fairly stiff too but would work way better off-piste for you yet still carve the groomers. If you sold on volkl skis i suggest looking at the gotoma,s over both of these. They do well on groomers but shine off-piste. Other skis you might look at are armada ARV,s in a 175mm or 185mm if you charge they are softer and way more playful then the others also vct,s in 182 or line prophet 100,s and K2 obsethed,s all fun playful skis that ski groomers well but rip off-piste.

Don,t worry about it, the lifter plates are only 5mm you won,t even notice the difference. If you are concerned just have them mounted without the plates but you will have to get shorter screws or grind down the screws they come. stick with the px 12,s they are great. I use px 14,s on my bacon,s and love them.

Both great skis. The lines are softer, quicker and more playful. The vct,s are damper, smoother and handle speed better in the longer lengths. the lines are cap const. vs the vct,s are sidewall but chip easy. If you want more of a big mountain ski go vct, but if you want more of a playful ski that can also handle anything save $150 bucks and get the 100,s unless these 168cm can work for you but vct,s run short by about 3 to 4cm,s.

Interesting---- I picked up the coomba,s the other day and flexed them and was blown away by how light they were. way lighter then my line bacons or any other BC ski i know about. I was suprised because K2 is not known for having lite skis. If i wasn,t a twin tip fanatic i would consider these. They had a great flex- soft tip with a stiffer tail. To bad they don,t make it in a twin tip because they sure seemed like they would rip.

No the 100 will not ski as well on ice as the 90, the 90 is quite a bit stiffer then the 100 so it wins there. As for groomers they both ski it well you can just lay down big fat GS turns. The advantage of the 100 is that it feels so much more stable because of the extra width under foot, pluse if you get in any powder or trees it floats well. they both have metal in them but the 100 busts the crud better because of the width. Go 100 once you get used to the width you will know why its one of the best skis on the market and then you will want something wider. If you go 100 get the 186cm for your size as they do tend to ski a little shorter.

Wow--- it is hard to find a ski that floats well in powder and skis well in bumps because as you go fatter you tend to lose quickness. Both the prohet 100 and goats float well in powder and are quite nimble in trees they are both quick skis and will ski bumps to a certain degree. The vct.s in 182cm are similar but not quite as quick. I have never skied the new kung fujas but i hear they are like the old seths. If that is true i would choose the other two over them. I ski line bacon,s as my all mountain ski and they are very quick even at 115mm in the waist but i tend not to ski bumps and live in the tahoe area so we get lots of fresh snow. The 100,s are softer then the goats if you prefer a softer ski after getting beat up by your mantra,s also look at the mommet bibby pro they are as fat as bacon,s but rockerd and stiffer but pretty quick for a fat ski. As for steepness both goats and prophet 100,s will handle as well as your mantra,s do but now you can do it switch.

go with the blends the are more of a freestyle ski and the 90,s are a freeride ski, meaning the blends will work way better in the park pluse they are 100mm in the waist so they float well in powder. the 90,s are stiff and are more of a groomer ski. 183cm is perfect for you as they are only about 178cm's same as my 182cm line bacons.

go 183cm goats run short also take a look at line prophet 100 or 4frnt vct in 182. both these skis are similar to goats but imo have a better flex to them.

OH YEAH... they are soft so go 185mm, they are so fun. also the 185cm is fatter under foot making it more stable.

same ski, different grapic only.

Because you have to ski every where go prophet 100, there is no disadvantage to get this over the 90, it will work better in powder, crud,and the width will make it more stable in varible conditions, pluse it is softer making it more foregiving.

The factory mount on these is 89mm or 3 1/4 " back from center, it is a directional ski so it mounts futher back. you could mount it maybe 1 inch foreward of recomended to help it ski switch but i would not go any more then that foreward of recomended.

If you are using it for off piste go prophet 100. don't even consider the others if you are a good skier they will all feel the same in quickness. but the 100 will be more stable and float so much better. also the prophet 90 is a stiff ski not as good off piste imo. None of these skis is going to work real well in bumps but they will rip in trees. The arv,s are so much fun to ski but they are not fat enough IMO for off-piste when the snow is deeper. Take a look at the K2 obsethed, with 108mm under foot and slight rocker they are quick and float well they will work better off-piste then the kung-fujas.

Yo hombre.If you are looking for a quick ski, with decent float, I think the Kung Fujas might be more up your alley (almost exactly like the seth from two years ago). Not to mention the K2 skis are vertical gosidewalls, unlike the cap construction on the lines...Go K2 obsethed, the kung fujas are not fat enough for deep powder there only 95mm where the obsethed are 108mm BIG difference in pow. Also only the prophet seris and the price point park skis by LINE are cap constuction the rest are side wall constuction. maybe you can look at the new line blends there 100mm in the waist and more aimed at all moutain @ freestye sking. The prophet 100 is the quickes of this group it will work well in the park also because of its light weight thats why its regarded as one of best skis you can buy. But the K2 obsethed will work the best in powder. also look at the 4frnt vct such a fun ski,just so expensive.

They added vertical sidewalls instead of the slanted ones on last years. (better hardpack performance) also they changed the core this year after having bindings pullout last year, they went to a stronger wood.

they would work well, just mount them foreward of reccomended line which is about 2 1/2 to 3 in. back from center, a lot of peaple use them in the park as a fat park ski.

I use look px14,s on my bacons so IMO look px12 or 14,s or rossi 120 or 140 binding would work well just make sure it has a 100mm brake.

I am 46 years old and ski off-piste most off the time, but i live in the tahoe area so i ski line sir frances bacons which i love for every thing. I switched to soft skis a few years ago and found them a lot more foregiving on older legs. I can ski fast, launch off any thing,bottomless powder,trees and ski the park with no pain at the end of the day. So maybe you sould look at getting some wider, softer skis. Bacons would be to wide for the east coast but maybe gotama,s or line prophet 100,s or VCT,s in a 175cm. If you want more freestyle type skis look at line blends or move up to salomon guns they are a fun foregiving fat soft ski. all these skis are fun on groomers but will excel off-piste

For a twin tip they can handle speed @ ice pretty well, plus they carve like a gs ski. But keep in mind that no twin tip ski is going to handle ice like a race ski,and because of the raised tail they sometimes don't hold an edge as long. But if you are a good skier you sould be able to ski them just as well. prophet 90's are very stable at speed and love to carve. IMO if you have never skied twin tips and try them, you will never go back to conventional ski,s. twin tips open up a whole new world of sking for you.

The 90's do carve better on hardpack and in icey conditions, but if you are a good skier you won,t notice that much difference with the 100,s. The big difference will be in powder where the 100 will float much better when it gets deeper then boot deep. Also the 100 is just as quick in tree,s as the 90 but is so much more stable when launching off jumps. If you plan on using it 90% off piste go prophet 100 as the 90 is more off a on-piste ski. Also i would not even consider the other two skis if you plan on sking more off-piste as they are more on-piste grommer ski's that will work well in the tree,s if the snow is not too deep. The mantra is a stiff ski that rips the hardpack @ ice but not so much off-piste.

With out a doubt the prophet 100,it is fatter, stiffer, carves like a gs ski and floats well in powder, rips trees, stable at speed, nimble enough for the park. maybe thats why it's considered the best ski made in the 100cm waist group. The ARV is a fun playful ski, but is a little soft for a tru all mountain ski unless you like soft skis. If you are looking for more off-piste performence go prophet 100. IMO the ARV's are not wide enough.

Go with the 181 they have extended tips @ tails ( like line,s early taper ) so the running surface is shorter then you would get in a 181 ski also the tips @ tails rise up quite a bit also taking away running surface. plus they flat out ski short. I was looking at these skis last year but ended up getting line bacons instead because there a lot lighter and fatter and flex was better. The p4,s are stiffer in the tips then the tails which i did not like.

The wall is total park ski and the karma was a stiff all mountain ski that was replaced by the bridge that is wider to be more usefull. The wall is a great ski in the park but not so great out of the park. If you decide to get walls make sure you get 09,s because they had problems with binding,s pulling out last year,so they changed the core for this year.

These two skis are totally different. The arv is soft and rips all over the mountain including the park. The msp is a stiff all mountain ski that rips groomers,ice and some park. Both are excellent skis it just depends on if you like soft skis or stiff skis. If I had to choose i would go with the arv's because they are more playfull and rip powder better because there softer.

Hey if you want to be doing back country skiing go with the scratch steeze or the 2009 s6 which is more and the same for more money. My buddy said there great skis and they have rossignols WRS in them (Weight Reduction System) and there 110 in the waist of the skis so... little wider but aparently it does really well on groomed runs too. The main difference between the prophet 100 and the old blend is that it has metal in it making it more of a directional charging twin. It is one of the best skis made, and blows away any ski rossi can come up with. Maybe you sould look into the 2009 blend which is 100cm in the waist this year and is a little more freestyle oriented.

anthems are soft like invaders, they are designed as a wider park ski but will ski all mountain well as long as the snow is softer. There a little soft for icey conditions. They have a ton of pop and are a very fun ski. If your light they would even float you in powder. They are center mounted so don't be afraid to ski them long.

I wouldn't. They are a intermediate binding, VCT's are a advanced/ expert ski. You would be better off with a loox px12 or px14.

NO, i skied a pair of thrusters ( almost the same ski) for 2 years and they held up great. The only thing about salomon skis, is that the bases tend to be a little soft and scratch easy, but the core held up fine. From what I heard salomon has some of the least warrenty issues out there. There just not real innovative in there desings.

Go 181cm's, 171's would be to short. If your advanced or ski big open mountains go bigger.

No, you sould get 178cm. You would out grow 168's before the end of the season. The running surface on 178's is 144cm's so thats about the same as a 173cm ski. If your worried about the length mount them 1 inch forward of the mount line, which would be 2 inches back from center.

Right now for your height you sould get 178cm, If you think you will keep growing or an advanced skier I would get the 183cm. Line skis tend to ski a little short.

I just received a pair, they measure out at 178cm. I can't belive how light they are for there size about the same as my 175VCT's. But the build quility is so much nicer.