finally got the 2.0's out yesterday. Greg,i was also going to bring the 1.0 but on the 26th while lowering the thule from the ceiling hoist i took a wrong step off the step stool and broke two bones in my radius on my right arm so we decided leave the thule at home and pack the skis in the back of the suv. went to urgent care and xrays confirmed. meet with ortho surgeon on Friday and she said she would not cast and be careful so we went ahead and left a day late for our first of 3 ski trips. this one Wp. about 4-6 hours yesterday and a couple new inches overnight. Had to take it easy but love the Ct 2.0. Have to be super careful but really enjoyed. Now time to ice the forearm! following up with new xrays on Wednesday next week.
-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
The Never-Ending Faction Discussion
- Thread starter GregK
- Start date
Thread Starter
TS
You are a true badass. And this is coming from someone who once skied down to the Solitude base lodge after fracturing his clavicle on a mid-mountain mogul field (binding pre-released because a tech set the forward pressure incorrectly).
lol. wife said she was going with or without me!
That explains! I was pretty sure that when the Ortho said "no cast and be careful" she didn't mean "ski carefully"
R.E.S.P.E.C.T.
And for goodness sake, be safe out there!!
Whoa… crazy how much a couple degrees more forward lean can change the way you ski. I moved my boot cuffs from 15 to 17 degrees and felt way more comfortable and felt like I was finally hitting the ski’s sweet spot. No more awkward feeling. I might consider messing around with it some more to see how it feels adding another degree or two. I wonder - do taller skiers tend to feel more comfortable with a more forward lean? That’s definitely the case for me, but I’ve never really thought about it since the STH2’s have given me enough forward lean that it’s always been “set it and forget it”.
As for the skis, I still can’t believe this is 112 underfoot. I feel like it initiates turns as easy, if not, better than my E104’s did. At -3cm from recommended it’s still maneuverable enough to not feel awkward in tight spots and I can slash to a stop anywhere anytime. It definitely feels way more comfortable straight-lining and charging than the E104’s did. The 191 E104’s just always felt like they wanted to turn and started feeling sketchy when I was straight-line hauling… which is weird saying since, again, I feel like the CT 3.0’s initiate turns just as well (when I want them to).
My one and only criticism of the ski is that I do feel like I’ve lost dampness over the E104 and its 2 layers of titanal. Instead of hauling through crud and variable crap as if it were freshly groomed, I’m finding that it just wants to jump and pop off everything. This characteristic is probably incredible for more playful skiers than myself, but I’m the type of skier that takes a look at a tracked out open field and wants to charge (thanks Moment Bibby’s for setting unrealistic expectations for every other ski). I’ve tried this a few times on the CT 3.0’s and I usually have to check my speed once I start getting bucked around. These things just have SO MUCH POP. But I’m also still in early season dad bod form, so I’m sure this characteristic will be less noticeable further into the season. Personally, I feel like this ski shape and weight with a layer or two of titanal could be the perfect daily driver.
Dumb question: how much does mount point contribute to crud hauling stability? Would a more forward mount have a “less bucky” feel? Or would it make matters worse in that regard? Or not really make a difference? I know that, in general, a more rearward mount = more stability. But then again, my 190 Bibby’s were the most stable skis in crud I’ve ever been on and I had those mounted on the line (-6 from true center I believe), so a couple cm ahead of where I have my CT 3.0’s mounted.
Thread Starter
TS
The Bibby or Enforcer have softer tips/tails that suck up variable snow better than the CT 3.0 regardless of mount point. The Bibby will definitely have the highest stability due to its very long turn radius but it also have a much higher speed “minimum” than the CT 3.0, so not as much fun on soft groomers unless you are hauling.
The more forward mount on the Bibby’s helps move your weight forward on the skis, so you need to drive the CT 3.0 more at -3cm and be aggressive on them. Tips will buck unless you are weighing them and will definitely pop more especially if you running a totally flat ski. Put the ski on even a slight edge and it will be much better.
Find if you do even VERY long turns on the 190cm CT 3.0 weighting them through crud you can still HAUL but don’t do most of the work for you like a Bibby would.
Would make for a good Christmas card.
Thread Starter
TS
Lots of red and green in there!
Thread Starter
TS
For the Euros on the fence about 21 CT 2.0x, CT 3.0x or CT 3.0 skis act now while Sport Bittl still has stock!
They had lots of CT 3.0 in 190cm(all gone now) and about 50 pairs of 184cm that’s down to 13 pairs a week later.
They had lots of CT 3.0 in 190cm(all gone now) and about 50 pairs of 184cm that’s down to 13 pairs a week later.
considering a 2.0 and 3.0 for GF, since she loves the 102 FRs
Thread Starter
TS
I’d lean 178cm CT 3.0x for a wider, more stable version of that then.
CT 2.0 is more damp and heavier but closer in width to the 102 FR. The Fisher has a great tip shape for going over things like the CT 3.0 that’s better than the CT 2.0.
That's true love... of skiing.
we have 100cm of snow now in 3 days btw, had to share.
grab thoose 194 devastators with pivots and go straightline bumps?
grab thoose 194 devastators with pivots and go straightline bumps?
Thread Starter
TS
Bumps being moguls/small children?we have 100cm of snow now in 3 days btw, had to share.
grab thoose 194 devastators with pivots and go straightline bumps?
Anything but the deacons!Grab some wide skis so you’re on the right ski for once on all this new snow.
Thread Starter
TS
Love!!! You might as well stare at another pair of great skis that you can’t ski because of no snow!I mean…about the CT 3.0 in 184…you know…that’s down to 12 as we speak.
Damn you Greg!
Think you’ll like/love them as they are more precise and lively feeling than the CT 1.0 or CT 2.0 so maybe a bit more closer to your dream wide CT/SR mix. Crud is a riot on them!
Maybe go -2.5cm from CT on them for a good playful/stability mix.
Love!!! You might as well stare at another pair of great skis that you can’t ski because of no snow!
Think you’ll like/love them as they are more precise and lively feeling than the CT 1.0 or CT 2.0 so maybe a bit more closer to your dream wide CT/SR mix. Crud is a riot on them!
Maybe go -2.5cm from CT on them for a good playful/stability mix.
One thing is for sure-there goes my new year resolution to NOT ski fast in a straight line.
-2.5 or -3? This is important.I am not even gonna ask about the bindings because that’s already decided. STH 2 16 of course.
Thread Starter
TS
Since the CT mark is already further back on the more directional CT 3.0, I’d go -2.5cm. A hair easier to initiate turns without giving up much. Even though it’s wider, the CT 3.0 will be much more fun at lower speeds than your Moments on groomers.
Has a slightly longer radius than the 183cm CT 1.0 so no issues with going straight if you are forced at gunpoint…..
Got it, OK.
The Wildcats are very nice ski but not on groomers, will see how the 3.0 will be.
Sponsor
Members online
- AltaSkier
- P-Ute
- freeskier1961
- Rc231
- S.H.
- Johnny V.
- BLiP
- BigSlick
- mdf
- altabrig
- oldschoolskier
- Jack skis
- jdwalk
- GregK
- trailtrimmer
- Wade
- Woodsrider427
- Andy Mink
- Jman
- MissySki
- SpeedyKevin
- salvatore
- Even_Stevens
- Scruffy
- Dwight
- taylortrimble
- NE1
- Willy
- zircon
- Gina D
- tromano
- dovski
- updaply
- pete
- Jms990
- Sandy_NYC
- The Retired Skier
- locknload
- JESinstr
- saboteur
- Posaune
- vankata0808
- wabbitskison
- blackke17
- tomahawkins
- Mike Rogers
- surfski
- elbovino
- ilovepugs
- Dislogical