or low to mid 150
I'm also thinking the Head Absolute Joy, in my mind it seems like the natural progression and at 80 underfoot not quite such a big jump as say the Volkl Blaze or Yumi. You could try the BP's in an 84, you never know they might be great for you.
Did you get to ski the new BP 94? I was so blown away by them!
No. They didn't have them. I was mostly wanting to get on narrower than 90 anyway so I don't know that I'd have taken them out anyway.
Ah well they are fantastic if you ever get the chance. I’ve never really liked the Samba or widest Black Pearl when it changed to that.. always felt too demanding and stiff. But they somehow kept this new model a charger yet made them playful too.. sort of like your description of the 88. That perfect hybrid between strong and playful that’s so hard to find. Zero chatter at high speeds, no slip on ice, carved like a dream, so easy to enter and exit turns, forgiving of lapses in balance.. I will definitely be getting a pair when I am able! They even excelled in completely scraped off icy bumps.. words I’ve never uttered about any ski before. Lol
Less demanding, more maneuverable. Lighter without giving up smoothness and stability.
Really... huh it seems like they added more metal from last year so I would have thought that would make them more demanding. Interesting. I did feel like last year's felt very groomer oriented. They did a lot of things well that my race skis do well (good edge grip, good tail pop, damp, didn't feel like they had a ton of rocker), which is why I didn't get them. Maybe adding more rocker back in (I'm assuming from what I've read about them) makes them feel more easy going?
The metal is in strips in different layers.. one down the middle that seems widest and then one along each edge. The idea is not have the full sheet of metal attached to each other in one wide strip allows for strength/stability underfoot but actually reduces the torsional rigidity a bit to make it more easygoing. At least that’s about the gist of what I was told.. and whether it’s that that does it or not fully, it is how they feel. Which is pretty cool!
Its the tail rocker that appeals to me. I was always getting hooked up in the back on the 2nd to previous model esp off piste.
The BPs have never had metal except under foot IIRC, and it was the one piece I always felt was missing. I had a feeling I'd like this version, but was skeptical and the minute I took two turns, I was off like a rocket. I took them out two more times (much to the annoyance of the rep HA HA) just to make sure it wasn't just a fluke that I'd skied them back-to-back with a ski that I wasn't as smitten with. It wasn't a fluke.
I still consider metal underfoot metal, even if that's the only place, but I'm also only 95 lbs. lol It doesn't take a lot to make a ski too burly for me. I always get nervous when they start adding lots of metal to a ski I like.
Torsional or longitudinal (tip to tail)? Can a ski have too much torsional stiffness? Doesn't that generally help with edge grip?
Apparently the metal was a "binding reinforcement" piece.
Torsional in the tips and tails, it allows for the ski to be less stiff in those areas while still maintaining stiffness under foot.
Is this different than the titanal band underfoot that they added to the Yumis years and years ago? Because I had both the all wood Yumi and the titanal band underfoot version and (at least at my size) I could feel the difference.
The difference is underfoot. The new model is more stable underfoot, the front/shovel is still very steerable. Several friends who are long time fans of the BP liked the change and felt that it came back underfoot slightly quicker. Two friends who are "petite" liked the change and did not find it demanding.
