its softer than any ski I've skied before. extremely playful and quick turning. fun for butters. dont expect it to be an all mountain charger when the snow gets variable. but it still rips on groomers.
the ar7 is a totally different animal. Compared to the arv/al dente they are stiff as hell.
I personally liked the arv's I have. Light, buttery, and that 92 waist (175cm) is the perfect width for surfing some pow and not too big for anything else you ski on. The tail on the arv is also going to be stiffer then the al dente as well.
needed a new pair of sticks and a friend on Facebook hooked it up. that is all.... if I'm at killy and someone would like to try them, be my guest. ill be there tomorrow and maybe the weekend if I'm not paddling. i have given a bunch of people the option to try em. I'm just getting the word out cuz there sick.
R_G_B 203 OGXC
"I think they're like....kind of in love. I love how they can't speak english so they have to communicate in Wutang."-HurleyS
Because it means it skis really well out of the park too. Also adding a tail rocker would make the tail less stable for landings. Giving it camber right to the tail helps a lot with back seat landings. If it was symmetrical it would not carve half as well either. But try it out, I'll be surprise if you would want it symmetrical after you ride it.
As long as you can ride switch well having a symmetrical ski is not needed. Armada had not had a symmetrical ski ever and it had not seemed to hold any of there team back. Landing switch is not the same as landing forwards either. The way we flex out boots means a switch landing needs to rely on landing on the nose a little more and the rocker in the nose allows this. It would prob be better for q's witch landings with a stiffer nose but then that would make the ski less playfull so overall I think its a goo combo.
went to see them yesterday and the only things that are good about these skis is that they're 98 underfoot and the flex is really soft! however i coudn't tell if the ski itsefl was an all mountain or a park ski... HUGE rocker on the nose, none on tail, super flex for rails and such but if you go to fast, your nose is gonna do the bacon... so if your a park shredder who likes fat skis for surfaces and such well that's your guy
They were actually really stable at speed not flapping at all. I skied the 188 though so the 178 would feel less stable I'm sure for someone my size. The way I see it the big size for you would be a great all mnt ski the smaller could work as a really playfull fat park ski. I'm 5'11 and 170lbs so 188 would be all mtn and 178 park. It's certainly more all mtn but if you like fat skis it is fun in the park.
Bumping this thread to second the AL Dente's edges being complete garbage. I have a pair that I've ridden less than ten times, and I've already got three edge cracks. It should be noted that I don't even go super hard in the park - the edges are just so thin and crack very easily. I have a pair of Line Chronics from 2010 that I've put 50+ days on, including multiple urban rail missions, riding down stairs, sliding across pavement, etc., and they only have five edge cracks.
Here's a side by side comparison of the edge thickness on both skis. As you can see, the Chronic edge looks to be almost twice as thick as the Al dente.
I don't think I'll be buying park skis from Armada again. Those super thick ON3P edges look mighty tempting though...
"When you want to succeed as bad you want to breathe, then you’ll be successful"