This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips / Telemark Francais Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web since 1998. East, West, North, South, Canada, US or Europe, Backcountry or not.
Real reviews by real skiers. What a concept! Add your own today. Reviews only please, questions can be posted as replies but new threads looking for opinions should be posted to the main Telemark Talk Forum.
Just adding this for any discussion relevant to this ski - rongon, perhaps you can fill us in with more detail later in the season?
lilcliffy wrote:
Your description of the S-125- in the other thread- suggests it is a fatter version of the S-112/S-98- I hadn't expected that...
This is almost exactly what I thought. From all my various accounts with people with the 112, it seemed it was just the 98 with a wider waist. And when Fischer threw the 125 in the line, based on appearance and the 112, I though they had simply just stretched the 112 a bit more.
It seems consistent with the S78/88 line. Essentially the same ski but with different waists.
Good move Mike- hopefully we will get some good info!
Based on Rongon's description of the camber/flex pattern of the S-125, I am very intrigued as to how it would ski...A stiff, cambered xcountry ski with that width and geometry? Either XCD genius or a bit like bull riding....
I wonder if it has a true rockered tip- or if it has the "Nordic rocker"...
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
If the KOM is made in Quebec they make no mention of that on their website. The only "made in" info I could find was in the FAQ and it was about the HOK being made in China in some special factory. This is a major selling point for a lot of people and an immediate turn-off for me. Now, I'm back to being interested in the KOM.
Yes, softer than the others but I just didn't have the time or the reference to make a good call on the Fischer 125s. I almost want to keep the fleet the same throughout so I'm partial to the Fischers.
I have a pair of Voile Hardwires kicking around I'd throw on them.
Yup - KOM is made in Quebec. I saw reference to it on their blog I think... I cannot find the article now.
Personally, I'd opt for the KOM over the S Bound 125. Love the S Bounds, but to me, the 125 seems like an afterthought. The KOM is more of a clean sheet design.
Woodserson wrote:
Yes, softer than the others but I just didn't have the time or the reference to make a good call on the Fischer 125s. I almost want to keep the fleet the same throughout so I'm partial to the Fischers.
I have a pair of Voile Hardwires kicking around I'd throw on them.
There are certainly many good reasons to be partial to the S-Bounds- especially if one needs to complete their collection- I too would find that hard to resist!
You will have to try to squeeze the S-112 in there as well!
That 3-pin hardwire is an amazing binding...I am so out of touch with modern Tele-tech that for years I assumed that the "cables" on the hardwire were not removable! Despite the extra cash, it has replaced the 3 pin-cable in my mind- especially for a ski as wide as the S-125. The fact that you can remove the cables makes it a truefully xcountry-downhill binding to me. Thank you Voile!!!
Cross-country AND down-hill skiing in the backcountry.
Unashamed to be a "cross-country type" and love skiing down-hill.
Agreed, great binding. Good thinking on their part. It answers so many demands across the board.
What do you think? 175 or 185? I was waiting for the KOM to come out in the 174, which it now has, but when I up against them they just seem too short. If I'm going to use them in deep stuff, I would want the 185 (ideally a 180). I'm having a tough time weighing quick-turny awesome vs nice flotation for those lower-angle slower slopes...
On a side, I don't personally have the 112, but let's just say I have a pair available to me on demand... Frankly, there's too much overlap between the 78, 88, 98, 112... I'm drowning in Fischers over here...
You should have plenty of float with a KOM even at 174. It's all about the width!
I calc'd it out once, they have a ton of area, I think more than any other XCD ski even at 185 or 195. The turniness should come from the short effective length (short + rocker).
The only disadvantage in my mind is the weight, and if you are using it with a T4, then it shouldn't be an issue.