Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
Sloggo

Hey GaperJeffey: R:ex question

Recommended Posts

I saw you've got a r:ex/Diamir rig in your quiver. How has this worked for you? I've got Denalis/FR in need of a ski. Me: 5'7", 150, decent skier (off-piste at resort/easy volcano skis in spring/summer, no hucks or warp speeding.) Can get new ones (177?) for about $350. Are the r:ex's mega stiff? I've fondeled them and they did feel quite stout, but was wondering how they ski. Also considering Havocs. Thanks. R:ex seems to be too few characters for the search function.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The REXs (aka 10EXs, TMEXs, MEXs and TM:Xs) completely rock. I'm about the same dimensions as you (me: 5'8" and 155) and have the 177s. I don't think they're too stiff, they really do great in heavy snow--they don't get deflected at all. Iain also has REXs which I heard he skis with Denalis. For $350 I'd get them, I sort of wish I had another pair with Dynafits on them for BC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are great skis if you like to go fast. Unfortunately they do not do quite so well at slower speeds or tight areas. They are not the most forgiving boards out there. For their stiffness they are "reasonably" light for AT. I would take the R:ex over the Havoc. I love mine and use them all the time. I am in the 180's, 6', and have the 184 R:ex from about 2 years ago. The hilarious part is they are considered midfats now. They look downright skinny next to some Karhu Jaks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These are great skis if you like to go fast.

But but but . . . what about their performance in wet, heavy snow? They freakin' rock even if you're not going fast.

 

Reviewing skis is kind of like reviewing MILFs, highly subjective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Havocs are in play because they (using the international standard bending-at-the-shop technique) feel a touch more forgiving and, though it isn't much of a difference, are lighter (by a measley 2 oz.) (173) than the r:ex (177) and fatter (88 vs. 84), FWIW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt you would be disappointed with either of them. Havocs have a bit of a twin tip to them if I'm not mistaken. That's always fun. The R:ex is actually railed in the back from the factory (like many Atomic skis) this is apparently "a feature" according to Atomic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I doubt you would be disappointed with either of them. Havocs have a bit of a twin tip to them if I'm not mistaken. That's always fun. The R:ex is actually railed in the back from the factory (like many Atomic skis) this is apparently "a feature" according to Atomic.

Havocs & Crossbows, hailing from the same factory, also come concave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×