We offer Free Shipping on orders over $50 shipped within the contiguous United States...that's the lower 48 to you and me. If your order is received before 5 PM Eastern Standard Time, we will make every effort to get it out the same day. Make sure to take Free Shipping into account when comparing prices.
Free Shipping (Economy) must be selected inside the shopping cart.
Sorry, but some restrictions do apply:
Good only in the contiguous (lower 48) United States
Excludes freight items (i.e. kayaks, cargo boxes, car racks, some bikes, and some surfboards)
Expertly shredding the line between a big-mountain and all-mountain powder ski is the classic, award-winning Volkl Gotama, which returns for 2010-11 with a rounded top edge for even better handling on deep days. The Extended Low Profile Rocker gradually rises on both ends to provide the ‘Goat’ with the life-changing powder performance for which it’s renowned, but when ridden on groomed snow, the ELP Rocker and sidecut put the entire edge in contact with the snow so you can lay rails all the way back to the tram. For less-than-orgasmic snow days, the Gotama features three levels of flex throughout the multi-layer Sensorwood core: the front is stiff to chew up nasty crud better than the cows you left back on the farm, while the medium-flex center transfers power to a softer tail, giving you seamless transitions between turns on groomers or in tight trees.
Bottom Line:
A Western classic that never stops getting better.
Currently ski 176 Atomic Snoops and and will be skiing trees,
Currently ski 176 Atomic Snoops and and will be skiing trees, bumps, and pow, mostly in CO and PNW. Looking for a ski that will handle anything except the very hard hard-pack. I ski anything, but doesn't always look pretty. I'm considering buying these but not sure if the 178 will be long enough. Should I try and find a 186 on a different site or go with the 178 here? Also considering Kung Fujas, and Salomon Shoguns or Czars. Suggestions? 5' 9" 165 lbs.
Gotamas aren't very awesome in the bumps, but they are grat tree skiis and always awesome in powderr, I would go for the 178 but thats my opinion. The shogns are a very similar ski, but of all those you listed I would Go for the kung fujas or the czars...
I have G3's On a pair of Chopsticks (bigger fatter volkls) and the only problem i had was the tails kept falling off. BUT never fear, G3 makes a twin tip adapter. http://www.backcountry.com/g3-twin-tip-connector-kit With these babys i never have to worry. I'm not sure if BD has a similar type of thing. One last thing. if you are trying to cut down on weight BD makes the 'tractor skin' which has nylon running down the center of the skin to cut down on material. I dont have these but it would be nice. A pair of skins for fat skis really start to add up!
Having put a full year (2010-2011) season on the Gotama, I can honestly say this ski is really good at what it is designed to do. It really performs just as Volkl intends for it to do. Volkl does a great job of developing skis for different types of skiing and terrain and the Gotama fits the bill as a great Side/SlackCountry option. It is a great ski to have for trips out west, and it is very good ski to still use back East in Vermont. It provides enough float for powder days, but I am still able to get on edge for days when I am searching around for leftovers.
I am 6'1 205, and I ski the 186...........I have Marker Schizo 110's..........and am extremely satisfied with my current set up. I plan on keeping the same set for the 2011-2012 season which will include 3 trips to UT and 1 to CO.
Do I get a 186 or 194? I am 6’3” 220lbs, advanced and
Do I get a 186 or 194? I am 6’3” 220lbs, advanced and aggressive. I currently ski on Atomic Beta EX 195. They are great all over the resort. I am looking to go back county with a full AT set up. I plan to do about 6 trips a year in the back country and the rest of the year will be at resorts. What length is right for me? Should I consider other skis instead of Gotama?
I agree, 194 unless you ski tight trees a lot. Performance wise you won't notice a huge difference between the 186 and the 194. I'm 205 and 5'11" and ski the 186 but have demo'd the 194. Didn't feel much different. Both rock!
Looking for a one-quiver westener that doesn´t get me killed
Looking for a one-quiver westener that doesn´t get me killed in the groomers or icy steeps. I´m an intermediate/advanced guy who skis 40-50 days a year. 5'7 and 130 pounds. Like backcountry, pow, trees, chutes and some park and groomers.
These are a great ski for what you are looking for but there are plenty of cheaper skis that will give you the same experience. Take a look at the Line Prophet 90s or 100s those are solid skis
How are these skis for touring? I am looking at the new backcountry
How are these skis for touring? I am looking at the new backcountry version of this ski for 2011-2012 and was concerned about the elp shape for steeper established skin tracks. Any thoughts?
I am a primarily east coast skier, advanced, just off of the
I am a primarily east coast skier, advanced, just off of the FIS race circuit and I was wondering how these will handle on east coast conditions mixed with powder. I am 5'10 and 175. I will be skiing mostly at Stowe next year, and was also wondering what size I should go for. Thanks.
If you go with this ski, go for the 178. If you were skiing out west in deeper and better snow, I'd say the 186 would do you well. However, with the trees and crud, I believe you'll be happier with a shorter length. That being said, you might also want to consider the Volkl Mantra. Very similar to this ski, but slightly skinnier, bigger sidecut with a smaller turning radius that is a nearly perfect ski 90% of the time. Sure it doesn't have the rocker, but you're a good skier and should do just fine without, especially with the amount of powder days you see out east - no offense intended.
Alright so this ski is the perfect everyday out west ski. If you are looking for a ski that is going to slay the powder, destroy the crud, and rip the groomers this is the one ski quiver(west). I havent had a chance to ski it in a real deep day yet, but im assuming in all but the deepest of days this ski will have no problems. With the ELP rocker it really allows you to get the surfy feel out of the ski with out it being a noodle on hardpack. It can bust through crud at ease thanks to the stiffer tip design. It does suprisingly well on groomers as well. The trick i found is too just not try and overwork the ski. Let the ski make the turns and you will be good. The only cons i have with this ski are that on ice ... well forget about it. (highly not reccomended) and 2nd that the top sheet chips and scratches very easily. But all in all if you are looking for an everyday out west ski or and east caost powder ski look no further the VOLKL GOTAMA is your ticket.
I just got the 178 on sale. I am 5'10", 210 LBS, advanced
I just got the 178 on sale. I am 5'10", 210 LBS, advanced but not expert west coast skier looking to expand my abilities from the standard resort runs. Did I go too short on these? i was comparing them side-by-side with line prophet 100's at 186 and they were almost the same length.
It's really what you're comfortable skiing. The longer/wider the ski, the more float you'll get in pow, but it always comes at a cost. Too long and you won't be as nimble w/ your turns. Too wide and they won't be good for much other than DEEP pow. So you if find that you can whip off turns as you like and feel you're getting the float you need, then you made the right choice. In summary, if you're having a blast on them, you made the right choice :)
Wanted this ski to be the perfect all-rounder for out west, but just not feeling the new design. I have a pair of the '08 Gold Gotamas, and those are some of the most versatile skis I've ever been on — carvy, fun and decent (not great) floatation in soft snow. I also have some Salomon Czars, so I'm down with rocker, but the rockered Goats didn't feel right to me.Rented the 186s for a day at Canyons in Utah. I was hiking to boot-high untracked pow at the top of the mountain, but these didn't surf nearly as well as I expected given their size — my slightly bigger Czars float a lot better.Once I got down to the tracked-out stuff, these were floppy on groomers and downright scary on ice — totally unlike the older Goats which can carve a turn on the hardest of hardpack. I skied these for hours in a variety of conditions from powder to icy runouts, and no stance or weighting adjustment I tried made these work any better for me. They felt big, heavy and slow from edge to edge — basically the opposite of the '08 Goats. They were good at plowing through icy crud, but that's nobody's idea of a good time. The poor hard snow performance could have just been a bad tune, but I would definitely test-ride these before buying them based on the Gotama's reputation alone.
Ok here are the basics first: I'm 5'8" and 170ish lbs. I have a pair of 178's with Marker Baron bindings. I only used these for touring a few times, but put the Barons on just in case. For the most part, these skis were my primary inbounds and sidecountry set up for the season. I'm a type 3 skier and primarily ski Snowbird/Alta/Canyons in Utah.
The 2010/11 Gotamas were the first Volkls that I've ever owned. From a construction and durability standpoint, they have held up great after about 40+ days of pretty intense use. I am pretty hard on skis and my pair have a lot of minor cosmetic dings to prove it. The cores, edges and base were pretty bomber for me, and I've had no construction or quality concerns.
In deep powder, these skis are pretty amazing. The float nicely and the rocker up front does a really good job of absorbing the big rollers and scrubbing speed as you initiate your next turn. They absorb the chop and power through crud amazingly well. They are also a nice ski in slushy spring conditions. They are definitely not "groomer" skis, but on most resort groomers they perform well when they are on edge. On flat/groomed runouts they get a bit loose (especially at high speed), but they aren't unpredictable. The width underfoot and longer turning radius mean that these skis don't move from edge to edge as quickly as I'd like for some conditions, but generally that isn't a problem for the type of skiing that I do. The rockered tails sometimes threw me off and I would end up in the back seat when I first started skiing these, but after a few days, I adjusted my style and never had any more issues.
I recommend these to any advanced skiers that really like crush pow and blast through the crud.
I'm 5'9 175lbs....looking at a 178 for tele with hammerhead
I'm 5'9 175lbs....looking at a 178 for tele with hammerhead bindings. Mainly resort resort skiing, steeps, non-groomed. Should I go 178 or 186? Just not sure.
I own a older pair of Gotamas (pre-rocker) and love them in the powder and groomers, and decent on hardpack & ice, but i demo'd the JJ's and fell in love. I thought the sales guy was feeding me bs when he said that he had the last 2 pairs around, but after i left and looked into it he wasn't joking. I wanted the 185's and all i can find is the 175, and even that's rare. Don't know about the K2 sidestash though.
Write your answer here...I test drove them all and ended up with the JJ, skied Deer Valley with 39" of fresh and the JJ did the job perfectly in the bowlsand especially in the trees. If the JJ wasn't available I definately would go with the Gotanas.
First day on the Gotamas today in cold spring conditions. Off trail, there was about 5" of heavy crust - normally not worth skiing because it's difficult to turn in and makes you lurch as resistance changes as you break up and down through the crust.
The Gotamas handled the conditions superbly and actually made skiing 5" of nasty crust very fun. I didn't have to work the skis hard or change my technique for the most part. Amazingly easy to initiate turns. Opened up huge sections of the mountain to me that I usually would not have bothered with in these conditions. It would only be a slight exaggeration to say that the Gotamas turned crust to powder.
As for groomed runs, the Gotamas were surprisingly capable. The snow was moderately hard (for Utah) at the top of the mountain due to the colder temperatures. I skied in a conventional stance for carving and . . . just skied. Again, I didn't have have adjust my technique or balance point or work the edges. The Gotamas were very nimble for a ski that's 106 under foot. Very easy to initiate turns and surprisingly quick edge to edge.
I didn't test the speed limit of these skis on the groomed runs, but I suspect the reverse camber will place limitations on the top speed. No metal sheets in this year's model, either (though there is a sheet of carbon), so I imagine you're going to get some chatter if you ski very fast on the groomers. Also, if you run the skis perfectly flat on their bases at speed, they will get a little squirly on you. As noted, however, it doesn't take much to get them on edge. Once they're on edge, they behave very nicely.
I can't wait to try the Gotamas in powder and chop.
Caveat: I have limited experience with skis in 90cm+ range. I have a pair of Mantras (96cm) that I've really liked but have not tried the Rossi S7, the Chet Bentlys, or the numerous other new-breed powder skis that are suppossed to ski well on piste.
I have the 09/10 version and normally rocks just leave gashes
I have the 09/10 version and normally rocks just leave gashes in my skis but I just got a core shot that caused the bases to protrude jaggedly downward. Has anybody else experienced bizarre folding of the ski bases after hitting rocks?
My 08/09's had something like that too. i took the backwoods approach with an old iron set at a fairly high temp. just got it hot and smashed it down the best i could back into the ski. I got it mostly flush with the base, then took it to the shop for a full base grind.
I had a similar thing happen. I cut it out to make a clean area to fill in with Ptex. I was happy to see metal under the base. Yours looks a lot bigger than mine though. You might want more than just Ptex.
I recently purchased the 178s at a considerable discount. I
I recently purchased the 178s at a considerable discount. I am 6'0, weigh 185, and I ski about a 50/50 mix of typical east coast terrain (groomers/bumps primarily) and Alta/snowbird ungroomed terrain. After reading these posts I'm worried I went too short. Should I return the 178s and purchase the 186s instead? Will the difference in length make a significant difference?
Ljandrews, I just demo'd the Goats for the first time today. I am 5'9" 155 lbs and the 178s were perfect for me. If you decide to get the longer skis I'd take the 178s off your hands. Where did you find them at a big discount? I'm looking to buy a pair now... (beck.danny@gmail.com)
YES, you went too short. First I'd like to say it is impossible to find a ski that is equally good in both powder, groomers and bumps. In choosing a ski like the Gotama you choose 1. powder and 2. groomers. It is, like any other fat/semi-fat ski, not good for moguls.
So now that we have established what types of skiing the ski is designed for lets look at the length issue. The increased length will give you better floating in the powder, you have the length to ride the 186 and this will support your weight better as well. When it comes to the groomers the rocker will make the ski feel shorter than 186. Without knowing the exact rocker measurements I would say the ski will behave like a 170-175 ski without rocker. So basically by adding 8cm to your skis you will get a better powder experience with out sacrificing the turning ability. A ski with a 105 waist will always be slower from edge to edge than a narrower ski but the rocker will give you the feel of a much shorter radius than what can be expected from a 186 fat ski.
This is something every sales rep at any ski store should know. If they didn't recommend you to go 186 I would seriously suggest you find another dealer that has basic equipment knowledge.
I use a '05/'06 Gotama for powder days. The ski is 183 and I am 5'7 and weigh 155. This works fine. I will adjust the binding position a little for this season to get better position for soft spring skiing in the groomers as well as easier navigation for tree skiing. For days in the icy groomers I use a pair of 170 Atomic SX10 which suits my weight and type of skiing well. I live in Sweden and ski both up here (like US east coast terrain) as well as in the Alps.
These skis really changed my entire experience on the hill. I'm a Denver resident and get up to Keystone, A-Basin or Vail whenever I can. Those mountains (especially Vail)can throw a lot at you and with my previous skis (Head Monster 82's) I found myself not feeling like I could charge everything I came up against in a day. I demo'd several other fat ski models including the Icelantic, Solomon and K2 offerings and was beginning to think I wasn't going to find my fix-all single ski quiver like I had been hoping. The last ski I demo'd were these bad boys... I bought them the next day. I'm 6' 6" and about 240 lbs. Needless to say I need a STIFF ski just to feel stable. The Gotamas are that and a lot more. Even with the weight I carry the skis are quick and limber. My most recent day at Keystone was a hard-charging tuck and go day and the ski performed flawlessly. I highly recommend this ski for a big guy looking for a ski that can handle it.
Hey, I was curious if anyone has mounted Marker Duke bindings
Hey, I was curious if anyone has mounted Marker Duke bindings to these sticks?? I'm looking for the downhill performance of an Alpine binding, but I'd like to able access some of slackcountry just beyond the ropes. Also, does backcountry. com mount bindings too? Or, should I leave that up to the local shop?
Do it! I have a similar setup. I have the chopsticks with Dukes. Love em. I spend equal time skiing them in back country and resort. Same settings. And they just rip. They release when i need them too and hold me in every other time. They hold up well too. This is halfway through the second season and i have zero complaints.
But one thing. If you are simply ducking the ropes and hiking less than half a mile of boot pack i dont think you need AT bindings. You will spend more time taking on/off skins and what not. Plus dukes are heavy. But if you want an at binding that lets you get up to the top and skis like a DH binding on the way down than you picked the right one. Aaaannnd a little weight will just make you a man :D
I just got that set up this year. Have only skied it once in bounds at Breck so far, but the performance was amazing on hard pack/ packed pow which is supposed to be the weakest link for this combo. Obviously too early to give you a legit review about hucking and deep pow performance, but I am not concerned at all. I felt at one with this setup as though I was along for the ride. Read a lot of other posts on here before buying and could not be happier with my choice. I had REI mount the Dukes on boot center with 178 Got. I bought the skis on e-Bay for the best deal, but the bindings at REI for the warranty since they will replace for free if they break.
Mounting position for 170mm?
Just got a pair of 170mm via an
Mounting position for 170mm?
Just got a pair of 170mm via an online purchase. An associate at the store mentioned he skied the Gotamas and preferred a +2 mounting for a pair of Marker Griffons. Any thoughts from the rest of the peanut gallery (or better yet experts!)?
From the peanut gallery - I bought (2009) 186 cm with the variable griffon. +0 washed out on turns and I liked my Volant Chubbs better on groomed... I ended up with +2 forward, +1 1/2 might be the best with powder over my head. +2 and I found myself leaning back slightly in the deep but easier to rip on the groomed. At plus two, I doubt I will adjust these bindings again. If I move these bindings to a new ski, I will leave it at +2. I might add that i am only 160, 5'10, and will be 59 this year. I thought they were too long at first before moving the binding forward. I am glad to have the extra length now
This is the year to get these fatties if you've been thinking about going over to Volkls. I've been demo-ing these Gotomas for a few years and have enjoyed them in varying conditions. The new rocker that's in these 2011's is something else.It makes these the most responsive boards I've ever tried. These sticks are great in the powder and the crud, turning into real cruisers under these conditions. In the past I've skied the 176,and 183's. I bought the 186, remember that new rocker?, for more stability at speed without sacrificing manuverability, and gaining added float. Very sweet!!
Most definitely -- the new Gotamas are super fun skied tele. I have Voile SwitchBacks on mine, with boot center positioned at the -1cm line. I am very happy with this mounting position. Since the 186cm Gotama is a fairly heavy ski, you would probably get more out of it by mounting Hammerheads, but the SwitchBacks are much nicer for touring and they seem adequate for controlling the ski in powder (I haven't skied this setup in anything else).
I put my pinline about 1cm back from chord center. This put the center of my 30cm boot 1cm ahead of the "FR" line on 06/07 183's. I have 4 days on this setup and it feels right on. I've had them on groomed, crud, and hip-deep powder and haven't had trouble with either stability at speed or flotation.
These skis flat out rip.
I found this on a forum, I personally don't Tele but it seems like this is what you're looking for
of course. i've owned 4 pairs of volkls over the last 3 years and although I've never mounted any of them tele I see plenty of people on the hill that do. They would be a great resort option, but since volkls tend to run a scooch heavier (that's why they ski so stable) they're not ideal for lots and lots of touring and climbing.
ive skied about 2 weeks on these and i have never been more satisfied. there really fun in the powder, but they do really good on everything eltse. they feel a little uneasy in the park, but other than that, there amazing. i mounted them with marker barons and these did pretty good in the backcountry,the tailclips are just a little hard to keep on.
hey guys. I just bought the Gotama in a 178 and am mounting it
hey guys. I just bought the Gotama in a 178 and am mounting it with a marker griffon. I am about 150 lbs. 6 foot tall expert skier. looking to ski lots of trees, drops, natural features, and pillow lines. I will be skiing maybe 10% switch tops and the rest will be just regular. I was wondering where would be the best place to mount? Any suggestions and or tips would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
I bought the Gotamas earlier this year and have tested them out in a variety of conditions (Snowbird, Tremblant, Killington). In the soft stuff they ski ridiculously well, as expected. Also, I was surprised at how well they carved on groomers, although they do ski a bit shorter than their true length due to the slight rocker. More out of curiosity than anything else, I gave them a test drive on some icy East Coast conditions, which went basically as expected. Clearly these skis aren't meant to grab an edge on ice, but on hardpack they actually skied a little better than expected.
Only downside that I could find was performance at high speed, on the harder-packed snow. As long as you're holding your edge they ski great, but between turns and in the tuck (when you lose your tip and tail edges) they lose some lateral stability and can chatter a bit if you hit a rough patch.
Overall I'd say these are a great all-mountain ski that absolutely shred in the good snow.
I'm 5'11", 230 lbs. I consider myself expert level
I'm 5'11", 230 lbs. I consider myself expert level or a tad under depending on the snow. Live in Utah and Love tree skiing. Should I go with the 194, or would that be a bit too long? Also, has anyone compared these to a BRO 188? Thanks
Trying to decide on buying the Gotama 170's or 178's.
Trying to decide on buying the Gotama 170's or 178's. I'm 5'8", 150lbs, ski about 20 days per year, and am moving on from a pair of '07 171mm 4Frnt MSP's (92mm @ waist).
I ski resort runs at a very high level. I am getting more and more comfortable skiing the park, pow, and trees with each season.
So given I want to be nimble enough for the trees and have previously skiied 171mm's (although I've improved over the past 3 years), is it worth going up to the 178's or should I go with the 170's?
I'm 5'9", 160# and skied 170 last year, demo. I actually weighed ~145# at the time and thought the 170 felt good, but they do ski shorter than their length due to rocker. They're fairly stiff up front, so that helps stability. We're talking just a bit over 3" in length difference, so not a huge amount. I've actually just purchased 178 and getting mounted up, but keep thinking I should go back down to the 170 length I demoed. Either way, you'll be fine. The longer will weigh a smidge more, but be a bit more stable at high groomed slope speeds. They'll also float better and keep the tip up better in pow. The shorter length will appear and feel more nimble through trees and likely be less intimidating visually when putting through tight spaces.
The only reason I can see that you'd want to go up to 178's is if you're worried that the 170's won't be stable enough at High Speed, or won't provide enough flotation in pow. At your size you're probably fine with the 170's, especially if you never noticed any chatter on your MSP's at high speeds.
178's would provide more flotation in the pow, but the 170's will be more maneuverable in the trees, and easier to spin in the parks.
This new rockered/ early rise profile makes these Gotamas even better than the originals. I skied a 190 non rockered most of last season, this year I am skiing the 194 and love it.
I mounted these with HammerHead telemark bindings, and they compliment each other very nicely.
This will be one of two skis that I ski all the time, they were powerful in the chopped up 1 day old stuff at Alta yesterday. You have to stay on them, and if you do they do what you want them to.
Dear Ski aficionados,
I am interested in purcahsing this quiver
Dear Ski aficionados,
I am interested in purcahsing this quiver of one as a backcountry touring ski, as well as a go-to ski for the in area days when the cold smoke has been mostly skied out. Regarding touring: I cant seem to find a weight listed for the goat in a 186. Anyone know the answer, and anyone have any comments for backcountry tourability of the goat. Many thanks,
194 all the way. I'm 6'3" 205lbs and demoed the 194 last year and loved it. My everyday ski is 186 and narrower under foot with these, but for charging pow, I was so happy to have the extra ski and added stability.
This ski is fantastic. I went back and forth quite a bit about getting either the 194 or the 186. I decided that for the majority of the skiing that I am doing (Tahoe) the 186 is perfect. I love a big ski for powder but most of the time I am skiing variable conditions, trees, mank, and tight lines so the 186 is the perfect length for playing around. This may replace the Sanouk as my favorite ski ever....
178 should work nicely! New Gotama measures true cord length which means they come out of the box a little longer then most. If you were looking for a high speed resort ski for mixed terrain and snow conditions I might recommend the 186 but whereas you are looking for a BC tele ski the 178 should give you more versatility and maneuverability in tight spots.
hey i'm 5'9 ish and about 165 pounds, expert skier (although
hey i'm 5'9 ish and about 165 pounds, expert skier (although I didn't get on snow last year), do most of my skiing in the northeast, currently ski on 05/06 179 prophet 100s with duke bindings and am looking to replace these... I'm currently unsure about what size i should pick for this ski, i'd like it to turn like my 100s as I need a ski that will be nimble in trees...would the 186 be about right? I'm afraid with the rocker the 178 would just ski too short...Also I realize the turning radiuses are much different so i'm curious as to what people think about that as well...I do want something at least as stiff as what i'm skiing on now though...so i've narrowed it down between these, and this years prophet 100s
For east coast trees I would recommend the 178. Volkl's ELP (elongated low profile) rocker design helps the skis maneuverability at slow speeds by allowing the ski to pivot with ease and helps the stability of the ski at high speed by keeping more edge in contact with the snow. The Gotama floats high in the soft snow and rips the groomers... would be a great option for east coast soft snow ski.
I would get the 186. I have a 186 and 178. I am 5'6" 150lbs. The 178 is perfect me. I consider the 186 a "go fast" ski for me. The Gotoma is really quick edge to edge and performs well in steep couloirs and trees. I think it with be a great ski for you.
This ski will never turn as easily on hardpack snow as the prophet 100, no matter what length you get. However, with the added rocker the ski will be plenty nimble in fresher snow in trees in the 186 length.
Got these skis at the beginning of last year and have loved every minute I have spent on them. Wide enough to float in the powder yet the subtle rocker allows them to rip on the hardpack as well. Got the 178's matched with Marker Griffons mounted +1 after reading numerous reviews and recommendations to do so. All in all an awesome ski! Praying for snow so I can get back on them.
I posted this same type of question under the Line SFB ski, but
I posted this same type of question under the Line SFB ski, but thought I 'd get more exposure here... I'm 5'9", and 155-160 lb. I've never ridden the Line Sir Francis Bacons, but I understand they're a bit stiffer this year - not super floppy. Are they anything like the 2010 Volkl Gotamas? I demoed the goats (170cm) in early 2010 (previous graphics) and loved them, but would also like to consider the SFB (172cm) with it's 115mm underfoot for those trips through the trees in CO and NM. Any feedback on the all mountain, groomer, crud ability between these two skis? Thanks for any input regarding these planks.
If you had a one ski quiv, it would be the Gotama. It is performs well on the groomers and in the crud. The slight rocker helps float over variable conditions, but there's not enough rocker to make the skis flop on the groomers. It is adequate for powder. The Gotama really shines in steep couloirs. Bottom line, it's a really fun ski: playful and forgiving!
I picked up a pair of these in the middle of last season. My first impression was that they are gonna be just OK. Wow, i was impressed. These Skis rock. They definitely love being in the powder and do well in chop also. They tend to plane out better at higher speeds, and handle very nice going faster also. I didnt experience any hookiness or instability either. These skis are definitely an upgrade form the previous years gotamas. there faster, fatter, more playful, and more fun overall. I would highly recommend these to someone lookig for a mid 100 waisted ski that rips.
to answer Jluecht, Im pretty sure the 09/10, 10/11 models are close to the same, althought the 10/11s have a partial cap construction, as the 09/10s have sidewall. Im not sure if the weight maybe slightly different due to this, but i would imagine the 10/11 to be more durable because of this. as far as the Specs are concerned, the turning radius are the same, and the other specs are the same also. ----- To answer Twi, I have skied the 05/06, 06/07, and the 07/08 models.
My post would duplicate yours. I had the solid black top Gotama and thought they were awesome. I couldn't believe how much better these skis perform. They are stable straight lining down a groomer to the lift and even better off-piste than than the previous model.
I have the '09's and it's the best pair of skis I've ever owned. Excellent in bumps, believe it or not, provided, of course, you know what your doing to begin with. Last season I had two experts/sales people tell me the 10's actually lost some quality from the '09's.
I'm a bit under 5'7'' and about 155 pounds. I ski a pretty bad 162 cm Solomon ski right now, but I am a very aggresive skier at about level 8. Would the 170 cm Gotama's be best for me? I am going on 2 week backcountry trip in Teton Valley this winter.
I would recommend the 178. I am 5'6" 150lbs. I originally ordered the 186, but it was a lot of ski to throw around especially in tighter terrain. I ski the 178 now and love it. With that said, I mounted my bindings -2 back from the freeride line. This gace me a little more up front so the ski is still stable at high speeds and quick in tight spots.
It's an awesome AT ski. I have mine mounted with a dynafit and love it. It the ski I use in the Tetons all spring. It is a little heavy, but it's worth it on the way down. The only draw back is the rounded tail. A square tail makes it a little easier to use as an anchor. Other than that it is a sick backcountry ski.
Yes, this would be an awesome AT Ski. The rocker actually helps when blazing trail, the ski isn't too heavy, and you will appreciate having a rockered/fat ski once you get to the top of your line.
There isnt' a ton of surface area for the skins to come into contact with the snow, but I also ride a full rockered ski for A/T. As long as you really make sure you plant your feet well the skins will stick to the snow fine and you won't have a problem.
When it comes to skis that incorporate some sort of rocker technology you should choose a longer ski because it will ski shorter. If you do ski aggressively and enjoy fast speeds and will be skiing a lot of powder with this ski then I would definitely go with the 186. If you are a skier that does a lot of tight and quick turns in their skiing you might want to go with the 178, but I think the 186 would still be manageable. Hope this helps.
Comment on Brian Campbell's review >