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!
Buying help request: Armada ARVs
- I am 175Lbs, 6ft tall, ski 40% Colorado & 60% Northeast.
- Looking for a ski that will last me a few years and I can take into powder.
- 60% park (only jumps now) & 40% all mountain jibbing and cruising.
I prefer a medium to stiff flex and favor stability.
- will ski probably 15 days a year on average (shitty work and being 24 now). used to be significantly more.
i am split between the 106 and the 96, also possibly the edollo zero if its the more stable version(?). im afraid that the 106 will be not as stable carving on groomers in the northeast. i havent skiied a wider ski yet. i also feel like a stiff edollo could be a phenomenal all mountain ski or go into the arv lineup. or i could be wrong. i haven tried any of these.
I also cannot decide on a length. my last skis were the ar6 2010 171. those are too small, too soft, and are tough in deep snow.
I love armada, great company and reliable skis, my ar6s are still fine with the obvious reduction of stiffness after all these years.
does anyone have experience on any of these, and can make a recommendation?
thanks ahead of time
Subbing for responses because I would very much like to see the responses. Also am 24, it sucks.
lotta personal pref involved of course but personally i like a high 90s waist for my mostly east and sometimes back west skiing lately so id go with the 96. personally i think it does just fine in soft snow and the "skinnier" width is great in the park and for most east coast days in general
for length just get your height ish
and i don't think the e dollo will be more stable, right? isnt the e dollo basically the old ARV with nose rocker and different flex (points)?
im happy to answer more/better, im just in a hurry right now
Last years Armada ARV TI was the same shape as the Edollo, but had a sheet of titanium in it. Really stiffend up the ski, but was still playful enough to take park laps.
peteythefishLast years Armada ARV TI was the same shape as the Edollo, but had a sheet of titanium in it. Really stiffend up the ski, but was still playful enough to take park laps.
yeah those are dope
I have the armada holo 2s which are 94 underfoot for the 178 cm and they are a perfect quiver for park, jumps, groomers, and up to like a foot of fresh snow. I would go with the 96 and it would be your perfect quiver and do everything the 106 can but lighter and more playful.
I prefer a wider ski so I would go with the 106, I personally have the new Faction CT 2.0's are those are great for what you just described but they are a bit pricey. The difference between a 106 ski and a 96 ski would be that the 106 is probably a better all mountain ski, and depending on the mount will carve great. The 96 will just be a little more park oriented.
As far as length, I am 185 and 6'3 and I ride 192 for my big mountain skis which are CT 3.0's (I am a big mountain skier so my park advice might not be the greatest) and 184's for all mountain/park, however a longer park ski would work fine for me, but the biggest 2.0's are 184.
For you in the ARV's I would suggest 184 if you got the 96's, and 180 or 188 for the 106's depending on how good you are and how much you like to pencil spin (Better skiers typically can handle longer skis, but if you like to spin to win then shorter is probably better.)
I agree with most people here and say you're probably going to be happier with the 96mm. I say this mostly because if you want to ride rails as well as jumps then you're going to want the thicker 2.5mm edge as opposed to the 1.7mm you'll find on the 106. The narrower ski will also perform better on groomers whilst still maintaining a bit of float in the soft and being more nimble in the air than the wider ski. If you're 6ft then most people would probably suggest the 184 length but if you're coming off 171cm skis then the 177 might suit you better.
All times are Eastern (-5)