bogboy Posted July 31, 2014 Share Posted July 31, 2014 Serious question: sorry if it has been discussed before. Does anybody have, or know about the 2014 orange vapor alloy edition. Is it a better ski than the green vapor for 32-34 mph, 15-22 off? Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller gregy Posted August 1, 2014 Baller Share Posted August 1, 2014 I'm far from a expert but my thought is that you would be best with a graphite or lithium because the stiffer ski will support your weight. Senate would be worth trying also. Its just a slightly wider vapor. @eddie_roberts_jr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller rq0013 Posted August 1, 2014 Baller Share Posted August 1, 2014 Orange vapor would be a great ski for you. It's not softer, same flex pattern. Damper ride and a little heavier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller eddie_roberts_jr Posted August 1, 2014 Baller Share Posted August 1, 2014 I agree that the Vapor alloy would be a great ski for 32 - 34 MPH and 15 - 22 off. The flex is about the same as the Lithium edition Vapor. I also don't believe the Lithium edition would hold you back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogboy Posted August 1, 2014 Author Share Posted August 1, 2014 Thank you eddie, and everybody. There are some really good prices now for the vapor alloy, and I think I can take one to the course that I ski at to demo one. My dealer told me that I don't need the green vapor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogboy Posted August 1, 2014 Author Share Posted August 1, 2014 Oh, and I am leaning towards the 69.5". I am 6'3", and around 193lbs. I don't think I like small skis. It should perform better than my 69" triumph? I will see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller eddie_roberts_jr Posted August 2, 2014 Baller Share Posted August 2, 2014 It will definitely be a big step up from your Triumph. Are you working your way to 36 MPH? If you are I would say you'll be better off on a 68" Alloy. The 68 might even be better for you at 34. There are guys heavier than you skiing 34 on 68" Vapors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogboy Posted August 2, 2014 Author Share Posted August 2, 2014 @Eddie Roberts thanks eddie, it's good to hear from you. I am trying to clean up my 32 mph, -15 passes now. My goal is to achieve 34 mph, then go to -22. No way in to 36 mph. But I have always liked a bigger ski. I figured I would be more stable and confident on a 69", especially in a high performance ski. Instead of over thinking it I could bring both sizes to the course. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller eddie_roberts_jr Posted August 2, 2014 Baller Share Posted August 2, 2014 The 69.5" Vapor Alloy should work great for what you've got planned! If you have the luxury of trying both - why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller gregy Posted August 2, 2014 Baller Share Posted August 2, 2014 @skidawg is killing it on a 68 vapor and I think hes about 205 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogboy Posted August 2, 2014 Author Share Posted August 2, 2014 @gregy, & @BMG73, thank you, I appreciate that. I shall call my dealer and make sure he has a 68" also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller skidawg Posted August 3, 2014 Baller Share Posted August 3, 2014 Yes -200-205 lbs (depending on hops n barley) on a 68 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baller gregy Posted August 3, 2014 Baller Share Posted August 3, 2014 @bogboy with the wider front part of the ski, the ski is very supportive in the front which to me makes it feel like a bigger ski. I tried to bury the front when I was try it out and Vapor would just come around with out grab or over turning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogboy Posted August 4, 2014 Author Share Posted August 4, 2014 @gregy, I was wondering about what looks like a low taper rate, and extra support of the front, and possibly rear of the bindings. That makes sense. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now