Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Armada TST (183cm) vs Line SFB (184cm)

profile picture
schlonginator
Posts: 3971 - Karma: 27
Looking at these two skis and can't decide...

Both have great reviews in pow, so guess my decision comes down to performance on hard pack/groomers, ice and bumps (although I won't be hitting many).

I need a true one ski quiver.

Anyone know anything about the flex? Are these too noodley at higher speeds?

Cheers
Schlong
May 26 2013 10:37PM
5 0
profile picture
p-fo
Posts: 9372 - Karma: 6,155
TST is a directional big mountain ski. Stiffer, meant to be skied forwards down big things. It may have an upturned tail, but the rocker is only in the front.
SFB is a more playful ski meant for the style of Eric Pollard: switch pow, 180s off cliffs, etc. It's closer to symmetrical.
May 27 2013 12:57AM
2 0
profile picture
50Kal
Posts: 2826 - Karma: 5,367
Everything above is true.^ But if going switch in pow then SFB.
May 27 2013 2:20AM
1 0
profile picture
schlonginator
Posts: 3971 - Karma: 27

How big is the rocker on the front? From what I've seen it looks as though it would get real chattery at higher speeds?

I'm getting old these days (as you can tell from my profile) so not as much time in the park but still want something I can hit the jumps with from time to time, but also stomp the occasional switch three off cliffs and land switch out of rails. Stupid question but are the tails on the TST 'functional'??

Sounding like the SFBs could be a 'truer' one ski quiver (bumps, groomers, rails, jumps, pow)...
May 27 2013 3:21AM
1 0
profile picture
VD.
Posts: 4054 - Karma: 4,564
The TSTs do get quite chattery at high speeds. ... If you're going to be going switch, you'd want a bidirectional ski over a directional ski.
May 27 2013 5:51AM
0 0
profile picture
p-fo
Posts: 9372 - Karma: 6,155
One of my friends has the TSTs. You could land sw in the park and not catch, although the swing weight is probably shit for spins, but in pow it's kind of everything you don't want for landing sw. You have noses that want to float, and a tail that doesn't, so it's just gonna make it as hard if not harder than on normal park skis.
The SFBs are most definitely more of a one ski quiver, although they're probably not built to take as much rail abuse as the Chronics or Afterbangs.
May 27 2013 4:01PM
0 0
profile picture
bieberhole69.
Posts: 654 - Karma: 1,387
I've tried these out and as far as skiing forward, they rip. I was flying down groomers and ice and i didnt notice too much chatter. Also might want to look at the atomic rituals in 182
May 27 2013 10:01PM
0 0
profile picture
bigwhite.steeze
Posts: 8227 - Karma: 1,030
landing switch in deeper pow on the tst...questionable. landing switch in the park or on hardpack, no problem.

i tried the tst out on a demo day basically for shits and giggles knowing i'd never buy a pair, and was surprised when it ended up being in the top 2 favorite skis of the day. took it to one of the gnarlier areas of my mountain which was severely chopped up (no pow in a few days) and they charged! blew through everything and navigated tight tree's with alot of speed, almost too much speed as i had to work to slow these puppies down a few times or else i'd ditch into a stump for sure.

if i were to buy an everything ski that could send any part of the mountain in any condition, i would think these would be first on my list.
May 28 2013 8:18PM
0 0
profile picture
bigwhite.steeze
Posts: 8227 - Karma: 1,030
also adding they were fairly stiff so i couldnt see high speed hardpack/ice/chunder/groomers being any real problem..
May 28 2013 8:19PM
0 0
profile picture
ECSkiier
Posts: 238 - Karma: 198
ive demoed the TST's and at high speeds on groomers they were kind of chattery, but in the pow they were solid.
Jun 21 2013 3:36PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)