My quiver has been considerably downsized since last year’s weigh in. In fact, I have essentially scraped my entire 2011-2012 quiver (or at least relegated those skis to extreme thin cover only) and started a new quiver from scratch.
Turn Earning duties go to the G3 Tonic. The Tonic is 185cm long with a flat tail and a 100mm waist. I expect this ski to be awesome in the gullies of Mount Washington and on reserved trails at ski areas. G3’s recommended mounting position for AT Boots looked perfect so I mounted my Dynafit Vertical FT12s right on the line and I am pleased with the result. The Tonic’s aesthetics are pleasing to my eye; I can’t help but think of snoliage turns.
The Tonics replace my Fischer Watea 94 in 178cm which was too short for my girth and aggressive style. Had I only known about the Watea’s massively turned up tail, I would have opted for a longer size. In any case, after less than a dozen days, the Watea’s are available for sale or trade. The Dynastar Legend 8000s with Freerides remain on backup duty for June/July Tuckerman Ravine abuse.
My alpine quiver has been substantially downsized into (dare I say it?) a quiver of one. I demoed the Atomic Theory last season with thoughts of replacing my Fischer Atuas (due to the tips going floppy, I’d get another pair if I could).
The specs are very similar and I found the Theory to have that same playful “make any turn” vibe. I was only able to demo the Theory on hard pack so I am anxiously awaiting verification that its powder performance can match the Atua. Performance on hard pack was sufficient enough to relegate my Dynastar Legend 8000s to rock ski duty and permanently closet the Volkl Six Stars.
I agonized over the mounting position for the Look Pivot 14s. Unfortunately, I failed to take note of the boot center location on the demo bindings when I sampled the ski. Atomic has ten suggested mounting points in 0.5cm increments. But even the furthest back mounting point seemed too far forward. I settled on 1cm back from the rear most recommended line.
Only time will tell if that was far enough back. In comparison to my Fischer Atua’s, the Theory mounting is noticeably forward. The Theory’s tail extends well past the Atua’s tail despite the same length. The Theory’s tips are slightly less pronounced so perhaps the variance can be attributable to running length. But with an early tip rise, I would expect more tip and less tail for the Theory.
So there it is: a one ski quiver each for downhill and turn earning. While I’ve previously been of the mind set that all skis are rock skis, I may pull out the Legends or the Atua’s to really trash them on a thin cover day. But otherwise, I have considerably simplified my morning ski selection this season.
2 thoughts on “Simplify, simplify, simplify! 2012-2013 Quiver”
Hi, How did your 1cm behind the furthest back mark work? The reason I ask…… I picked up a 2013 186 Theory a couple of weeks ago and mounted Marker Griffon Demos so I could trim the binding location. Shop mounted boot sole center on team center. I have to agree with you that this seems very far foreword for a slightly rockered, large camber ski.
Me…52 yrs, 200#, adv intermediate to advance (depends on terrain). I skied them here at home for most of a day, changing out skis for side by side comparisons. Home is Wisconsin……..short vertical, nothing to steep and if steeper, short, no need to check speed until at bottom. They skied fantastic…..quick and poppy edge to edge, stable at speed, large carves, quick short carves…..FUN. The Theory is one of the skis I took out west last week. Again….fun, quick etc…….until I got into hard grippy snow, then they would hook/cut very abruptly, especially in the tip. On steeper runs, blacks (out west) they would not even hardly skid, could not scrub speed without the complete lenght of the ski fighting back with chatter, leg tiring, physically draining chatter. They did not get squirlley, still stable, but whith full length chatter. Going medium to faster speeds on steep blues was the same thing unless you just kept carving large GS turns, at which point speed was to fast.
I was able to move the bindings back about 2-1/2 cm from team center. By doing this I did notice the adaptive rocker in the tips now start to work vs always being engaged. It helped, but still not good enough. I did have a gummy stone with me and detuned the tips and tails about 6″ back. Not sure if they are just to soft for my weight, along with pretty good torsional rigidity, on the steeper slopes and faster speeds when the snow is harder or what….. They do ski awesome, carve on softer snow 4-6″, piled up soft pillows etc.
Just curious on what you have found. The fact that I have a blast on them until I need to control speed on steeper slopes out west, means I am not giving up on them. If I have to remount the demos so I can get binding back even further I will. After skiing on them some more, I might get a stone tune and change the factory side from 2degree to 1 degree…….that might take some of the bite out of the steeper angle on steeper slopes.
Any infor or experience that you have had will be greatly appreciated.
Sorry so long.
Thanks
Doug
dbm1143@yahoo.com
Hey Doug,
Regarding my experience, I am currently undecided. I have 11 days on these skis in a variety of conditions including hard pack, fresh groomed, packed powder, and powder ranging from a few inches to deeper than a foot. I am constantly impressed on the Theory’s performance on groomed snow, it really rails. Even on hard pack, it is decent. No race ski but I don’t expect it to be. Powder performance is solid though not mind blowing or jaw dropping. I really don’t feel the early tip rise rocker thing at all compared to my previous board that didn’t have that feature. If anything, I feel it hooks up really easy on groomed and hard pack a bit easier because of it. But natural snow, I can’t really tell the difference.
I don’t like the performance is variable snow and bumps. I feel the tail gets hung up a bit and I occasionally catch the skis on each other in the rear, a problem I’ve never had before. This may be due to the forward mount. Even 1cm back from the furthest back line I think was not enough.
I’ve debated moving them again, but I’d have to move them further back than I may want to have them redrilled, so I have held off and I am trying to get used to their performance in variable and mogul snow. I can’t help but think that going back to a quiver with an even larger ski for variable, mixed, and powder snow might be a good idea and use the Theories as an everday ski I can take any where but is particularly useful on groomed and hard pack for a ski that also has a good sized tip.
Essentially, the jury is still out but I think mounting back is a good idea.
Regarding your placement, what is your boot sole length? BSL is going to be an important factor. My BSL is 345 which is really large (30.5 mondo). If you mount a binding based on boot center, that means someone with a large BSL has the toe of the their binding much further forward than someone with a small BSL. I think that matters. I like to have a lot of tip and not a lot of tail.
The skis are not soft, IMO, and it isn’t your weight. I’m 220lbs 6’1″ and also on the 186cm. I haven’t experienced the specific issues you report. While the Theory isn’t quite up to expectation on chopped and variable and moguls for me, I have no issues controlling them and skiing with ease. Basically, what I am reporting has more to do with me, my preference, and my expectations rather than a performance issue with the ski.
This specifically raised an eye brow “On steeper runs, blacks they would not even hardly skid, could not scrub speed without the complete lenght of the ski fighting back with chatter, leg tiring, physically draining chatter.” I haven’t had any such issues on steeper terrain. I’ve found the ski to be very confident in turns of all shapes and have no issues on steeper terrain. Is this performance different than other skis you have had in similar conditions? Have you skied the same terrain with other skis with much better performance? If so, wouldn’t hurt to move it back further. as it sounds like you’re still on the 2nd line from the rearmost or so.