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!

Line chronic or Armada Halo 2?

profile picture
Thawg
Posts: 360 - Karma: 542
I'm in need of some new skis this year, and I have never owned/skied a pair of lines or armadas, so I don't have a personal preference for either, but these two skis are the type that I want to get. From my research in comparing the two skis, they are close in length for what I need(chronic=185 halo2=182), they are basically the same price(chronic=$500 halo 2=$550), the underfoot is almost the same(chronic=92 halo2=95), both have rockered tip and tail, the flex in each is pretty close, and the only differences are the shapes of the skis and the tip and tail widths(tips are only 1mm different, tails are 5mm). So basically I just need to choose one of the two pairs of skis now.

So if you have anything that you don't like about one or the other, state what that is, and if there is something that you really like about either, please state that as well.
Oct 6 2013 10:33PM
14 0
profile picture
brend
Posts: 779 - Karma: 3,608
I have the halo 2 and they are really sick. I have heard that the chronics are not the best for durability (top sheet chipping)
Oct 7 2013 12:26AM
1 0
profile picture
Thawg
Posts: 360 - Karma: 542
I also heard that, that will happen to the chronics sometimes. In a video I watched about the halo 2 Mike Hornbeck said he had been riding the same pair the whole season because they were so bomb proof, which is something I really like to hear. Have you been able to ride the halo 2 yet?
Oct 7 2013 10:01AM
0 0
profile picture
iffe
Posts: 984 - Karma: 120
Top sheet chipping happens to most sandwich construction skis, and doesn't really affect durability. It's just cosmetic.
Oct 7 2013 10:58AM
2 0
profile picture
TallVinny
Posts: 57 - Karma: 109
Man, I have skied on chronics for years and I'm switching to 182 halos of last year, bit tinnier at the base than this year model. I'm 184 cm tall and I have ride a pair of my friend last season and it was super great ski, really responsive and trickable, smooth and seemed pretty durable. As you said, for chronic the top sheet usually chip but it is normal from sandwich construction skis. I went to Halo because I wanted to see new skis, but both pair are really great !
Oct 7 2013 12:09PM
1 0
profile picture
SkiTheYeast
Posts: 2310 - Karma: 392
I loved my Chronics they are the perfect ski, they have the best flex pattern out of any ski ive ridden to date IMO.so what if the topsheet chips every ski does some less than others but it doesnt effect the skis overall ability.
Oct 7 2013 12:45PM
2 0
profile picture
brend
Posts: 779 - Karma: 3,608
I havent gotten to ride my halo 2s yet but i have heard from people that have gotten to ride them that they are really sick
Oct 9 2013 10:28PM
1 0
profile picture
TallVinny
Posts: 57 - Karma: 109
In terms of quality and fun ski to ride, halos are where it's at !
Oct 11 2013 4:20PM
0 0
profile picture
MAvallon
Posts: 246 - Karma: 138
I personally enjoyed the chronics over the halos i think there a little more playful... i liked the halos but they were nothing really special... id say chronics
Oct 11 2013 5:40PM
0 0
profile picture
Twig
Posts: 6336 - Karma: 57,071
I'm interested in this thread, chances are i'll get one of these 2 skis.

I've ridden the chronics and halo 1s. Chronics are softer than the OG Halo. They ski quite differently. The chronics have a more 'surfy, slidey' feel whereas the Halo is more precise and sharp. Halo is also a lot more snappy in it's pop where the chronic is softer and it will hold in a flexed position more easily.

I don't know how much they've changed the Halo 2 though. Apparently it is softer than the OG version and they've made the sidecut longer which would definitely improve the ski IMO so it could be much improved. That is what is making my decision difficult.
Oct 12 2013 8:42AM
1 0
profile picture
Spiri7o
Posts: 2163 - Karma: 1,100
The Armada's !
Oct 12 2013 9:40AM
0 0
profile picture
iffe
Posts: 984 - Karma: 120
Mmm, I'm in the same situation pretty much. My old non-rocker Chronics still have some life left, but I'll probably get new ones after Christmas. Now, new Chronics or the Halos? Not an easy decision to make.
Oct 12 2013 10:28AM
0 0
profile picture
Twig
Posts: 6336 - Karma: 57,071
For what it's worth the new chronics don't feel much like the old ones on snow. They feel quite a bit lighter but also a lot less precise, rocker obviously takes away from the feel of precision but they are also a good bit softer than the OG version.
Oct 14 2013 6:51AM
0 0
profile picture
virgin
Posts: 182 - Karma: 91
Stealing thread! I preordered chronics long time ago and now I'm getting worried if I should have bought blends intead. I ski mostly park with medium jumps and rails but sometimes bigger jumps too so I would like the ski to be playful for the smaller jibs but still durable enough for jumps. Blend look really fun, is there any other difference than widht between chronic and blend?
Oct 14 2013 8:29AM
0 0
profile picture
Twig
Posts: 6336 - Karma: 57,071
blends are much softer than chronics. chronics are also more symmetrical. People ski both for what you are describing but I would probably take the chronics unless you really want a soft ski for butters or prefer a wider ski.
Oct 14 2013 9:41AM
0 0
profile picture
virgin
Posts: 182 - Karma: 91
I would have liked the softness but I suppose chronics aren't too stiff for butters and stuff?
Oct 14 2013 11:03AM
0 0
profile picture
Twig
Posts: 6336 - Karma: 57,071
depends on your buttering skills/size really. Buttering the Blends is super easy, I found the flex of the tips too much on the Blends, chronics are more balanced. If you are really light then the Chronic could difficult for learning to butter. That said I'm 130lbs and had no problem at all on 178s.

I owned Blends and ended up not skiing them that much because I didn't like the flex pattern, most people do but I didn't. They are fairly solid underfoot and then super soft in the tip/tail. That change is really abrupt so it kind of felt to me like the ski supported you to a point, then just completely and suddenly gave way. I like a smoother flex transition more.
Oct 14 2013 11:28AM
1 0
profile picture
virgin
Posts: 182 - Karma: 91
Thank you. I'm 130 too and got 178s so hopefully they will work :D
Oct 14 2013 11:35AM
1 0
All times are Eastern (-4)