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 ARV 106 Sizing

profile picture
wdudek
Posts: 1 - Karma: 12
Deciding between 180s and 188s. I'm 6'1", 180lb and ski mostly in CO. Strong skier but generally like to pick though technical terrain/trees as opposed to open stuff. I'll hit 10-20 footers and run out chutes but nothing insane.

My 180cm Chetler 100s feel a little short and noodly, but my 190cm black crows Atris w/ AT bindings feel clunky in tight places and kinda wear out my 9-5 legs tbh....

Any thoughts on how a 180 ARV 106 would compare to a 180 Chetler 100 in terms of stability?
May 15 2020 6:22PM
2 0
profile picture
patagonialuke
Posts: 1624 - Karma: 8,663
wdudekDeciding between 180s and 188s. I'm 6'1", 180lb and ski mostly in CO. Strong skier but generally like to pick though technical terrain/trees as opposed to open stuff. I'll hit 10-20 footers and run out chutes but nothing insane.

My 180cm Chetler 100s feel a little short and noodly, but my 190cm black crows Atris w/ AT bindings feel clunky in tight places and kinda wear out my 9-5 legs tbh....

Any thoughts on how a 180 ARV 106 would compare to a 180 Chetler 100 in terms of stability?


I'd lean 188 on the ARV. While it's a bit heavier than the Atris, I find the ARV to feel much more maneuverable, especially its tail being easier to release and slide around. If the 180 cm BC 100 feels short, I'm confident you'd feel the same about the 180 ARV 106. While the BC 100 is lighter, it's also got a stiffer, more cambered tail and I feel like it skis a bit longer than the ARV 106.
May 15 2020 6:40PM
4 0
profile picture
wdudek
Posts: 1 - Karma: 12
patagonialukeI'd lean 188 on the ARV. While it's a bit heavier than the Atris, I find the ARV to feel much more maneuverable, especially its tail being easier to release and slide around. If the 180 cm BC 100 feels short, I'm confident you'd feel the same about the 180 ARV 106. While the BC 100 is lighter, it's also got a stiffer, more cambered tail and I feel like it skis a bit longer than the ARV 106.


Thanks. I totally feel you on the Atris tail and that's super helpful
May 15 2020 8:16PM
0 0
profile picture
Non_State_Actor
Posts: 4607 - Karma: 15,946
patagonialukeI'd lean 188 on the ARV. While it's a bit heavier than the Atris, I find the ARV to feel much more maneuverable, especially its tail being easier to release and slide around. If the 180 cm BC 100 feels short, I'm confident you'd feel the same about the 180 ARV 106. While the BC 100 is lighter, it's also got a stiffer, more cambered tail and I feel like it skis a bit longer than the ARV 106.


I demoed the Atris in a 184, I'm 5'7" 140 and thought it didn't have quite enough tail, felt loose and prone to washout. If I had purchased them I'd have mounted them forward to try to balance them out a bit.

That said 188 for sure on the ARVs
May 16 2020 12:20AM
3 0
profile picture
gravychute
Posts: 34 - Karma: 46
I’m selling a pair of 2020 arv 106 188 right now.. with Tyrolia attack 16. Like brand new. Message me if you want em.
May 17 2020 2:05PM
0 2
profile picture
dolanslebensraum
Posts: 5959 - Karma: -13,100
mystery3I demoed the Atris in a 184, I'm 5'7" 140 and thought it didn't have quite enough tail, felt loose and prone to washout. If I had purchased them I'd have mounted them forward to try to balance them out a bit.

That said 188 for sure on the ARVs


Where did you mount them? Isnt the recommended mount point really close to dc at -2 cm?
May 17 2020 6:38PM
0 0
profile picture
Non_State_Actor
Posts: 4607 - Karma: 15,946
DolanReloadedWhere did you mount them? Isnt the recommended mount point really close to dc at -2 cm?


On the Atris? I think it's -6-7cm somewhere around that. I assume it was mounted near rec, it was at a demo day on demo attack 13s iirc.
May 17 2020 9:57PM
0 0
profile picture
dolanslebensraum
Posts: 5959 - Karma: -13,100
mystery3On the Atris? I think it's -6-7cm somewhere around that. I assume it was mounted near rec, it was at a demo day on demo attack 13s iirc.

Nevermind i thought u were talking about arv 106 having a rec mount point that far back. Skis feel so much better when your within an inch of dc imo. Idk why atris rec so far back
May 18 2020 12:57AM
0 0
profile picture
Non_State_Actor
Posts: 4607 - Karma: 15,946
DolanReloadedNevermind i thought u were talking about arv 106 having a rec mount point that far back. Skis feel so much better when your within an inch of dc imo. Idk why atris rec so far back


It's a pretty directional freeride ski, not a freestyle ski. The rec mount is -7.65cm on the 184 (thanks Blister!) It's a fun ski nonetheless and there are loads of skiers out there who think -7.7 is a progressive mount point. If I were to own a pair I'd probably split the difference and mount them about 3.5-4cm back.
May 18 2020 1:25AM
0 0
profile picture
migidimigi
Posts: 384 - Karma: 2,813
DolanReloadedNevermind i thought u were talking about arv 106 having a rec mount point that far back. Skis feel so much better when your within an inch of dc imo. Idk why atris rec so far back

I have arv106 at 180cm and i mounted them dead center. I ski mainly park with them so for me center mounting worked really well and the skis are fun and quick for their size
May 18 2020 11:27AM
1 0
profile picture
Titus69
Posts: 9327 - Karma: 17,742
188 for sure, I’m 5’ 7” and have had the 180s the last two seasons, they aren’t the most rockered ski so agility in fresh and tighter stuff is a bit hard so maybe more length will help that. Also mounting wise I think I originally was 2-3 back from center, not entirely sure, but then got a shift put on and had to put them close to center, I went from being pretty confident sending on decent terrain and in most conditions to punching front and tomahawking a shit ton.

glad to hear the 2021s are a bit stiffer, they needed that upgrade
May 18 2020 9:10PM
0 0
profile picture
migidimigi
Posts: 384 - Karma: 2,813
Titus69188 for sure, I’m 5’ 7” and have had the 180s the last two seasons, they aren’t the most rockered ski so agility in fresh and tighter stuff is a bit hard so maybe more length will help that. Also mounting wise I think I originally was 2-3 back from center, not entirely sure, but then got a shift put on and had to put them close to center, I went from being pretty confident sending on decent terrain and in most conditions to punching front and tomahawking a shit ton.

glad to hear the 2021s are a bit stiffer, they needed that upgrade


Hahaha feel you man! The rocker is so low that they are pretty hard to manoeuvre in anything deeper than few inches
May 19 2020 1:58AM
0 0
profile picture
Titus69
Posts: 9327 - Karma: 17,742
migidimigiHahaha feel you man! The rocker is so low that they are pretty hard to manoeuvre in anything deeper than few inches


Yeah for sure, trees in deep pow aren’t really fun on them, I always just end up braking to avoid a tree or slowing down to maneuver. Definitely super fun in not so deep pow, cream, windbuff or a few inches and they’re so fun but once it’s deep those tips just sink, sometimes in super deep pow I felt like a Jerry trying to charge more, one tip sinks the other hooks weird idk. Love hate relationship with that ski, maybe I’ll get the updated version but needs fixing before they can market it as an all mtn ski that rides park instead of a wide park ski that can be ridden in all conditions decently.
May 19 2020 11:06AM
1 0
profile picture
migidimigi
Posts: 384 - Karma: 2,813
Titus69Yeah for sure, trees in deep pow aren’t really fun on them, I always just end up braking to avoid a tree or slowing down to maneuver. Definitely super fun in not so deep pow, cream, windbuff or a few inches and they’re so fun but once it’s deep those tips just sink

Yep definitely not pow skis by any means but damn they are fun for boosting and bombing in slushy spring park 🤤
May 20 2020 6:28AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)