• Forums
  • Gear Talk
  • Another "Which ski" thread. Armada halo's vs AR7's vs T-halls.

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!

Another "Which ski" thread. Armada halo's vs AR7's vs T-halls.

profile picture
mnfreeskier
Posts: 939 - Karma: 67
Hola NS!
I am a beginner intermediate skier (starting to stomp 5's and 270's out of rails and boxes) from Minnesota and I'm looking into buying Armada for next season. I am 15 years old 5'10" 135 lbs and probably won't grow much more. I ski park 70% of the time but also like to take the occasional groomer and do nollies and stuff just to play around. I am an instructor and teach little 4-year old first timers so i need a reallllly durable topsheet (nobody say suspects or afterbangs haha). I basically want a ski that can rip through the groomers, be soft enough so that i can nollie my way down the mountain and durable enough to take a lot of rails. (i am 70% rails, 30% jumps).

So...
1. Which would be the most durable?
2. Most fun/jibby/ flexible?
3. WHAT SIZE!!!
4. if you want to suggest any other skis, please do! i am open for options!

Thanks guys! +K
-Nick
Jan 17 2011 1:54PM
0 0
profile picture
arandomname
Posts: 1989 - Karma: 18
I would say the THalls.  They're all going to be relatively the same durability-wise, and THalls are pretty soft from what I've heard.  I've never ridden any of them though so dont take my word on it.
Jan 17 2011 1:57PM
0 0
profile picture
Bonobo
Posts: 437 - Karma: 11
Can't speak much for the other skis, but I ride halos in 176 and it sounds like I do pretty much the same stuff as you. I am 5'10", spend all of my free time in the park, and I also teach little kids that run over my skis all the time.
-They have a medium-stiff flex (I'm about 150 lbs), which is great for backseat and switch landings, but still butter great because of the rocker, and are actually really poppy for nollies
-I teach beginning skiers and they run over my skis all the time, so far the topsheets are looking good, some chipping and scratching but that happens to all skis
-Pretty durable, I have about 20-30 ski days on them and no edge cracks or major damage so far, I also do about 70% rails, 30% jumps

From what I've heard, though t-halls are the most flexible and playful of the three.
Jan 17 2011 2:13PM
0 0
profile picture
Ape_Shit
Posts: 181 - Karma: 37
i feel like this thread was made for me. i am the exact same size and the same on rails and jumps but i am not an instructor. and i was looking at all these skis plus the alpha 1's.
Jan 17 2011 2:32PM
0 0
profile picture
Mr.Turtle
Posts: 3690 - Karma: 96
im an instructors and it helps it you threaten the kids, doesn't always work because sometimes they dont notice themselves. that being said my AR7s are holding up well so far
Jan 17 2011 2:49PM
0 0
profile picture
mnfreeskier
Posts: 939 - Karma: 67
dude, SWEET! i kind of want to try something new and i think the rocker looks illl. where do you suggest i get the bindings drilled? i like the look of true center and it feels nice but i am not sure with non-symmetrical skis if its the way to go..
Jan 17 2011 3:04PM
0 0
profile picture
585.
Posts: 4059 - Karma: 77
how big are the jumps you are hitting? i have thalls and the biggest jump in our park is 50ft and it handles that just fine. keep in mind that while thalls are softer than most of the other armada skis, they are still some what stiff under foot to stomp landings. but judging from what i have read you should probably go with either a 176 or 181 thall depending on if you are growing or not. im 5'9" 145 and my thalls are the best skis i have ever owned
Jan 17 2011 3:56PM
0 0
profile picture
mnfreeskier
Posts: 939 - Karma: 67
i usually hit like 5- 10 footers and just play around but i am just gettin into hittin 20-30 footers. i am pretty sure i am done growing maybe another inch or so but i would definitely not get the 181's, they would be too big haha.
Jan 17 2011 6:01PM
0 0
profile picture
Bonobo
Posts: 437 - Karma: 11
The general consensus on NS is -2.5(Recommended) or -1.5 If you are really spending a lot of time on rails. The reasoning behind this is the funny shape the ski has, and mounting forward of recommended will (allegedly) mess up the way the ski was intended to work. I have them mounted at dead center and in my opinion they ski great, apparently Mike Hornbeck does the same; seems to work fine for him.

Keep in mind though that the recommended T-Hall and AR7 mounts are also both at -2.5
Jan 17 2011 6:34PM
0 0
profile picture
mnfreeskier
Posts: 939 - Karma: 67
what would be the advantage to mounting them at the recommended mounting point?
Jan 17 2011 6:45PM
0 0
profile picture
connory998
Posts: 1197 - Karma: 34
mine say factory recommended at -5cm, but i mounted at -2.5 and love them.
Jan 17 2011 6:59PM
0 0
profile picture
Bonobo
Posts: 437 - Karma: 11
No idea, I just know that Armada designed the ski (flex, rocker, dimensions, etc.) around the recommended mounting point, and mounting anywhere but that mounting point takes away from the way the ski was intended to ride. I just can't stand riding an uncentered park ski, so I mounted them center. They work fine for me, but a lot of people will tell you that mounting at recommended is the only way to maximize the performance of the ski. (A lot of people will also say it's just personal preference, so idk)
Jan 17 2011 7:19PM
0 0
profile picture
TheBist
Posts: 187 - Karma: 33
They all have the same Ar50 construction so they are all super durable and since you want a softer ski than i would go with T-Halls or Halos. Im rocking AR7's and they feel like they have gotten a little softer, but since you mostly do rails and you want a soft ski than i would narrow it down to Halos or Ar7's.
Jan 17 2011 7:46PM
0 0
profile picture
J-Evs
Posts: 6387 - Karma: 1,615
how do they handle on groomers/crud mounted dead center?
Jan 17 2011 7:49PM
0 0
profile picture
Bonobo
Posts: 437 - Karma: 11
just fine, haven't had any problems with chatter, they feel really stable at speeds for a rockered, center mounted ski.
Jan 17 2011 8:02PM
0 0
profile picture
J-Evs
Posts: 6387 - Karma: 1,615
woord.
i cant decide between them and the surface double times
Jan 17 2011 8:03PM
0 0
profile picture
gnarles.
Posts: 2587 - Karma: 130
2 of my friends just snaped there halos to day sooo...
Jan 17 2011 8:10PM
0 0
profile picture
mnfreeskier
Posts: 939 - Karma: 67
what were they doing?
Jan 17 2011 10:08PM
0 0
profile picture
JIBpsy^^
Posts: 2851 - Karma: 36
What does NS have to say about the Halo compared to the Alpha 1. I hit pretty much every jump out there from 10 footers to 70 plus I am just now 7n'ing the third park lane which is about a 30 footer. I am looking for something that will stomp flips off 50 ish footers in the future but still slay rails. which one? 
Jan 17 2011 10:21PM
0 0
profile picture
Dmarc
Posts: 1035 - Karma: 83

I have ar7s and they are playful and durable i love them i really recommend them im 5'10 150 and i have 176s and im glad i didnt go with the 171s but the halo park rocker is sick

Jan 17 2011 10:21PM
0 0
profile picture
ownsthepark
Posts: 246 - Karma: 11
Ok so here's the deal. Just got Ar7s for christmas and have skied them maby ten times and I couldn't possibly be happier with them they are soooo awesome ar50 construction is so great, the cap in the tip and tails means way way less top sheet chipping so that is good go on armadaskis website and reed up on the skis. I would recommend for u the t-hall because it is playfull buttery and from what I have heard can go up to 60 ft no problem I don't like rockerd skis so I might be bias but still go with t-halls trust me u will be happy, the ar7 isn't as stiff as it says it is though it is stiff at first but gets softer when u break them in. I know this is super long but I hope it helps , since u are going with armada u will be happy with whatever ski u buy
Jan 17 2011 10:22PM
0 0
profile picture
Bonobo
Posts: 437 - Karma: 11
The Alpha 1 is the faster, lighter, and stiffer version of the halo.
The Halo is going to be lower maintenance and cheaper (~$50)
They are the same ski in every other way, unless there's something I'm missing.
You sound like an alpha 1 guy to me, but it's really up to you
Jan 17 2011 11:17PM
0 0
profile picture
mnfreeskier
Posts: 939 - Karma: 67
thanks guys keep it coming!
Jan 18 2011 11:21PM
0 0
profile picture
mnfreeskier
Posts: 939 - Karma: 67
bump

Jan 22 2011 10:21PM
0 0
profile picture
aaronec
Posts: 37 - Karma: 148
I feel like this thread was made for me! I weigh 135lbs, about 5'11", ride park about 75% of the time, and I'm and instructor. I can't speak for the other skis, but I'm riding the 161 cm AR7's right now (because I like a shorter ski). I have about 25 days on them, and they are absolutely my favorite ever! they are solid enough for backseat or switch landings, yet still flexy enough for butters. I hit jumps that are anywhere from 10 to 50 feet and they hold up great. And with the 83mm waist, they give me a solid landing platform. They come with a default edge at 89 degrees, so you'll have to file them down underfoot before hitting rails. this means you will have less bite on the ice, but it's well worth it. Sticking to a rail or box sucks! The Race Base is very fast as well! I regularly hit 35-40mph and they hold up great, no speed wobbles at all.

Now i don't use these for teaching too often, but they've been ran over a couple of times and aside from a couple of barely-noticable scratches, they didn't take any damage at all.

Overall, a great ski. I have no complaints. 10/10
Jan 26 2011 11:01AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)