Movement Logic X-Series, Review
“Are those for your Movement Goliath Sluff skis?” my friend jokingly asked of some high-DIN all-metal bindings on my work bench (actually destined for Super G skis). At the time I didn’t even realize that he had incorrectly combined the names of two different Movement models, but, whatever, all their models were hefty “freeride” skis, so, same difference, right?
I was therefore very surprised when another friend who is perpetually envious of my Trab Duo Sint Aero skis asked me about the Movement Red Apple 74, which boasts some highly competitive specs in the lightweight yet narrow ski mountaineering category.
I was then utterly shocked by the Movement Logic X-Series with a width:weight ratio that seemed downright impossible.
I know some of you are going to scoff that even a ski 88mm in the waist is still too narrow. In my defense, I submit this excerpt from a Wanatchee Outdoors interview with Martin Volken, the esteemed mountain guide and author.
“If I’m looking at one do-it-all ski, then I’m looking for something that’s 85 to 90mm under foot.” “From guiding I’m fairly confident that going lighter and skinnier (85 to 90mm skis) than the current ‘fatter is better’ mentality is significantly more efficient. Maybe that doesn’t matter on a day trip, but when I’m out with clients who are stacking up 6 hard days in a row, efficiency matters to them by Day 3. Likewise when I’m guiding for 20 straight days, the skis that average things out the best and accomplish the most work for the least effort become really important to me.”
With Martin’s guidelines, I produced a chart summarizing the various offerings in this range (see below).
The table’s “d” is for sidecut depth, which I calculated using the standard formula of tip plus tail minus twice waist (i.e., the bigger the “d” number, the turnier the ski). The “r” is for turning radius (i.e., the smaller the “r” number, the turnier the ski), as stated (or sometimes not) by the manufacturer, which is a function of both sidecut depth and contact length. (Note that a ski can’t have a constant set of sidecut specs and turning radius throughout all the lengths — some models vary the sidecut, some vary the turning radius, and some even both.)
| Narrower AT skis with Volken-esque waist widths, i.e., 85 to 90mm. | |||||||||||
| Company | Model | cm | lb | oz | g | Sidecut | d | r — | msrp | ||
| Atomic | Aspect | 171 | 6 | 10.2 | 3012 | 123 | 87 | 111 | 60 | 18.0 | $630 |
| Black Diamond | Aspect | 166 | 5 | 14.9 | 2690 | 128 | 90 | 115 | 63 | 18.0 | $630 |
| Dynafit | Mustagh Ata Superlight | 169 | 5 | 7.5 | 2480 | 116 | 86 | 109 | 53 | 18.2 | $630 |
| Dynastar | Altitrail Mythic Light | 172 | 6 | 7.6 | 2938 | 122 | 90 | 110 | 52 | 21.0 | € 549 |
| G3 | Spitfire LT | 170 | 7 | 0.9 | 3200 | 123 | 89 | 111 | 56 | $610 | |
| Viva | 166 | 6 | 9.8 | 3000 | 121 | 88 | 109 | 54 | $520 | ||
| Goode | Stash/Reveal | 170 | ? | ?.? | ???? | 130 | 88 | 116 | 70 | 16.9 | $1000 |
| Hagan | Corvus | 168 | 6 | 3.0 | 2806 | 124 | 87 | 109 | 59 | 20.0 | $630 |
| K2 | Wayback | 167 | 6 | 3.8 | 2830 | 124 | 88 | 108 | 56 | 22.0 | $700 |
| La Sportiva | GT/GTS | 170 | 5 | 14.5 | 2680 | 123 | 89 | 111 | 56 | 21.0 | $629 |
| Movement | Logic X-Series | 168 | 4 | 6.5 | 2000 | 125 | 88 | 113 | 62 | 17.0 | $999 |
| Trab | Evo Polvere | 171 | 6 | 0.7 | 2740 | 121 | 88 | 109 | 54 | 20.0 | $939 |
| Stelvio FreeRide Light XL | 171 | 5 | 15.9 | 2720 | 124 | 90 | 112 | 56 | 20.0 | $999 | |
| Volkl | Amaruq | 170 | 6 | 5.6 | 2879 | 127 | 88 | 109 | 60 | 19.9 | $649 |
A few of the models are pushing the upper end of the lightweight characteristic, but most are pretty close to each other. The Dynafit Mustagh Ata Superlight had stood out until now as the lightest, but the Movement Logic-X specs almost look like a misprint.
And indeed those specs are incorrect, even outside of the +/- range Movement cites. But if anything I was relieved rather than disappointed: at 4 pounds 9.8 ounces for an 88mm-waisted 168cm, any lighter and I really would have doubted their descent abilities!
So how do they ski? As fellow guest blogger Lee Lau commented in his Dynafit Stoke review, a ski should be tested in its intended conditions (i.e., a backcountry powder ski in backcountry powder, not lift-served groomers). The problem with such a review basis for skis in this category is that they’re intended as a compromise across all conditions, and thus trying out the Logic-X in all conditions is going to take awhile.
Movement Logic-X, being mounted for Dynafit TLT5 Performance boots, using Speed bindings pieced together from a half-dozen sources, with Fish race skis in the background
Now for my previous experience with a ski in this all-rounder lightweight category, I found the Dynafit Mustagh Ata Superlight to be capable across the spectrum of horrible sastrugi, chalky windslab, steep refrozen nastiness, weird moguls — plus some nice corn. On my second outing with them. All in a single run. (Hurray for New Hampshire’s Mount Washington!)
I doubt I will be so “lucky” with test conditions for the Logic-X, but so far I’ve skied them on good firm snow, soft yet fairly consolidated snow, nasty ice, and even nastier chunky refrozenness. Yes, on my very first run with them. The Logic-X definitely performs well on anything firm. For softer snow impressions, stay tuned.
Otherwise, some minor quibbles for a design obviously appealing to ski mountaineering applications are the lack of a hole in the tip (for sled construction) and a somewhat upturned tail (thereby hindering anchor applications). I’m also wondering if the base doesn’t hold wax all that well, although this might be the new skins stripping off wax more quickly, but something about the base just always seems “dry” almost immediately after hot waxing. And the camber is traditional, with no tip rocker or early rise or whatever you want to call it. Whether the new trend in tip camber will trickle down to become ubiquitous in skis with these dimensions is of course entirely speculative, but I did notice that K2 has tweaked the tip of its Wayback entry in this category for this season.
Rounding out the X-Series line, the even lighter Random-X has dimensions that compete with the Dynafit Broad Peak and my beloved Trab Duo Sint Aero. The Fish rando race model isn’t any lighter than its competition, but with my 162cm pair weighing in at only 3 pounds 1.6 ounces, any lighter and it might just float away. (More on that later this season once I mount them up for my DyNA boots.)
In Canada, Movement skis are available from Escape Route, and MEC.
For purchase in the United States, Movement is sold direct from the distributor, contact via their website.
September 2011 Update: For the 2011-12 season, Movement skis will be distributed by the La Sportiva North America distributor, but with an emphasis on the alpine downhill line-up targeted toward alpine downhill ski shops (while La Sportiva’s own ski line-up will be targeted toward backcountry ski shops).
(WildSnow guest blogger Jonathan Shefftz lives with his wife and daughter in Western Massachusetts, where he is a member of the Northfield Mountain and Thunderbolt / Mt Greylock ski patrols. Formerly an NCAA alpine race coach, he has broken free from his prior dependence on mechanized ascension to become far more enamored of self-propelled forms of skiing. He is an AIARE-qualified instructor, NSP avalanche instructor, and contributor to the American Avalanche Association’s The Avalanche Review. When he is not searching out elusive freshies in Southern New England or promoting the NE Rando Race Series, he works as a financial economics consultant.)
Comments
95 Responses to “Movement Logic X-Series, Review”
Got something to say? Please do so.
I have skied these since April (preproduction 184s) on 3 continentents in all kinds of conditions. They are crazy light , ski well, seem to have a little more durable sidewalls and edges then the Manaslu. They are my go-to light weight ski.
I am having a hard time accepting early rise tips on bc skis. When I see early rise tips, it means go longer on your ski length or have a ski with poor hardpack ability. I don’t want longer skis! It really feels to me that the early rise tip has been co-opted by the marketing department’s at most ski companies.
How do you think these compare to the Mustagh Ata? I know they’re a bit lighter, but their also near twice the price. Any thoughts on how they compare would be great.
Kevin, there’s a wonderful explanation of rocker here:
http://offpistemag.com/themag/pdfs/offpistemag_rocker101.pdf
Too bad it’s a PDF…
Andrew, like I said in my review, I found the MASL to be an excellent choice across a very wide variety of ski conditions. However, as another print review correctly noted last year, I found the MASL to have a preference for medium- and long-radius turns — can be coaxed into short-radius turns, but doesn’t seem to be its natural habitat.
By contrast, the Logic seems to be more biased toward short-radius turns — something about that tip just really draws you into the turn, although the tail releases nicely (i.e., not “hooky”).
So the Logic skis are packed tomorrow morning’s flight to Denver — mainly a work conference, but I’ll have a few very short ski outings, so hope to get the Logic on some more varied conditions.
Meanwhile, I got in two quick laps today on my DyNA + Plum + Fish race setup: wow! And the new Plum Guide bindings arrived. More on that next week or thereabouts…
My Pre-production Logic Xs are fully cambered, no early rise. Did they change them?
The Logic X does like shorter radius turns. I think due to the fairly broad tip. The only ski I can compare it to is the old Atomic RT 86 wich suffered from chatter on hard or icy snow, and was a tad narrow under foot. I have skied the Logic X in some tight, steep technical couloirs in the Eastern Sierras and Antartica, and on summer corn on the Sisters in Oregon. I was able to push them hard and fast (long radius turns) on the run-outs. I used them in April for a Summit of Castle peak in about a foot of powder with a heavy pack. I have been very happy with them.
My son and I will race the Logic Xs at the Sunlight race next weekend(for fun), then head over to Marble to test DPS 120s, hopefully in some pow.
Sierra, Antartica, Sisters — an impressive range of both condition and geographical locations!
But yes, still full cambered, no early rise tip or whatever. I’m also dubious of any rocker-esque tip in a category like this, although I did notice that at least one review of the tweaked Wayback was more positive than previously (but who knows what else changed in the design).
Hey Jonathan
The Trab Evo Polvere in 171 is 2613 grams, 5lb 12 oz.
I have a pair that I weighed.
Also
The Trab stelvio XL s in 171 I have weigh 2900 grams.
6lb 6 oz.. I was hoping they would be lighter. The Polvere has come thru
as the backcountry ski I was looking for. Significantly lighter than the XL and has the slow speed quickness of the freerando to handle tight tree skiing.
Thanks for the Evo info — sounds like a nice ski. Seems like a wider version of the Freerando construction and sidecut, whereas the Stelvio is a much different design (I think…).
There actually is a ski called the “Goliath Sluff” by Movement. It was available last year in Canada. My buddy owns them.
I’ve been skiing Movement’s for almost a season and am quite impressed with the versatility of the skis. I have both the Sluff and Logic (not the Logic-X but ‘standard’ construction), mounted with plates to swap between telemark and Dynafit.
Both skis are lighter than many comparable models and I find them to be a lot like a German sports car – a ‘precise’ feel for skiing and very capable as the speed increases. Yet also fun even when the snow is not ideal.
The bases seem to come from the factory with a lot of deep texture but mostly in the form of lines straight down the ski. A stone grind or even hand scraping fixes it fairly quickly. Very impressed with the way that snow does not stick to the topsheet at all, in contrast to Black Diamond and Atomic skis that I also have.
Dynafit Titans are perfect for the Sluff (I could see this as an all-around ski where there is good powder) but could use a lighter boot on the Logic if I wanted.
Going a bit off-topic, at the other side of the weight spectrum I see the Atomic Aspect. It looks interesting but nobody on the net seems to have tried it. Since you give a precise weght for it, maybe you had it in hands and you can tell something more about it?
The Movement ski sounds interesting. Most comments are from riding them. What is the better length for a 6 foot, 175lb, good skier, less than expert. I bought the Manaslu too short (169) and couldn’t ski them. I purchased the Goode bc 172 and are too short. I ski everything and keep going short for tight tree skiing. My use would basically only be for bc. Thank you S
Forgot the notify of followup comments!
Anyone have any more info on the Trab Evo Polvere or know of any reviews of them?
Nobody seems to mention that the Mustagh Ata Superlight has dual radius (sidecut), depending which ski you put on your left and which on your right leg. I have 169cm and they can be either 23,7m or 18,2m
@ B.
That’s a whole lotta funny!!
Doesn’t G3 have a asymetrical ski where the dual radius works that way – a tele-specific ski.
I thought the Dynafit skis just had a different turn radius on the front half of the ski vs. the back half, but that they were not asymmetric.
They are not asymetric.
I’m sure this is a fine ski but why the sidecut radius is so low is beyond me. To me a radius around 23-27m seems to be the sweet spot for ski mountaineering, it’s just much easier when skinning in steep terrain and on the downhill just as well, be it side slipping in a steep chute or letting the ski run a bit in good conditions. It seems to me a tapered (and maybe slightly upturned) tail helps much more when navigating tight trees than a narrow sidecut. Dynafit’s Manaslu for example has a rather long radius, but you can initiate turns out of your ankle …
People’s preferences are different, of course, but what am I missing?
Read most of these new comments yesterday while riding the chairlift at Loveland with the Logic-X. Great conditions for testing, since conditions were . . . pretty much everything! Gotta love the contrasting wind scouring and wind loading. Overall, I was very pleased with how well the skis performed in both nice powder and more slabby snow. No crusts unfortunately (well, that is from a testing perspective.) The only big drawback so far is the lack of mass (since Logic-X + Speed binding + TLT5 boot = absurdly little weight on my skis) in certain conditions, especially steep semi-moguled terrain, where deflection comes into play. Plus I’ve found myself in pivoting situations essentially overcorrecting the ski in terms of where I want it to go, since so little rotatational force is necessary to get the entire package where I want it to head.
Some specific responses:
- Atomic Aspect, can’t remember where I pulled the official spec weight, but no other info, sorry.
- Scott, how did you end up on a 169cm Manaslu for 175 lb? I weigh 145 lb and that size is perfect for me (especially in the tighter glades we have in the northeast), but no way would I want to add 30 pounds onto that ski. For the Logic-X, the next size up from mine, so 176cm, would probably be okay for you. The 184cm though, that seems like it would be a bit unwieldy for you. That
- Dynafit pointlessly adds confusion to their specs with the so-called dual sidecut. All ski sidecuts are something other than a portion of a circle, so any ski has multiple turning radii if only a segment of the ski is measured. (Pet peeve / rant time: only Elan has ever used a parabola as the basis for a ski sidecut, so “parabolic” skis were specific to Elan.)
- re sidecut radius in general, my impression is that skis intended for softer snow tend to have straighter sidecuts, and skis intended for firmer snow have righter radii. So far I’ve really like the Logic-X sidecut, as the tip draws the ski into the turn very reassuringly, but the tail releases well. This morning in particular the ski arced very nice GS turns on the Breckenridge groomers for dawn patrol this morning. But I’m sure some others will prefer straighter sidecuts for mountaineering terrain – plenty of choices out there, which is why I created the table. (Okay, back to work conference now…)
Re- Goliath Sluff name.
There was first a 191 Goliath, then in 2007/2008 a 184 was added but the shorter 184 had different dimensions. The next season 2008/2009 it was given the name Goliath Sluff.
For 2009 and forward it’s just been called the Sluff.
So . . . are those cool fish jaw things the slots for your tip fix(es)?
jonathan, have you weighed the fish @ 3 pounds 1.6 ounces ?
is it real world?
Re fish, confirmed on both counts – review coming up soon…
Beautiful pictures..Great to keep up with your trip..Be Safe
Also, is anyone other than mountain outfitters and MEC that are sellign the Trab Polvere?
I’m curious about the tips on the Evo Polvere. They look like an alternative to early-rise tips–just make the tips much taller! My old XC skis always had high tips; now most downhill-oriented skis have very low tips. Is that to help skiing cut-up resort snow?
Hi Mom, thanks for the well wishes! The final outing was a mix of lift-served powder in the morning at Loveland and then a couple skin laps across the highway later on that day. Once again skied great, although still requires some adjustment coming from a “heavier* ski like the Manaslu. Setup is now packed for a California biz trip later this month. (And yes Mom, I’ll be sure to call again and send lots of pics!)
Hi Mom, just another update for yet another combo biz-ski trip, once again packing only the Logic-X + TLT5 combo. The first day was riding the lifts at Alpine Meadows for typical mid-April conditions (a mere three months early). The setup skied perfectly in perfect corn (although really any setup should, since that’s the whole point of perfect corn) and also did well in the mankier sections, even as some aspects were starting to freeze back up in the afternoon. (As a side note, although I can understand how the Dynafit toe might be susceptible to occasional prereleases, I can’t understand all these claims for prereleasing within the first few turns. I skied all day riding the lifts at the same speeds I would have on my alpine downhill gear, making the same highly angulated turns I always used to as an NCAA alpine race coach, ranging from fast slalom-radius turns on the pitches to gs-radius turns on the flatter sections. The big caveat though is that I weigh only 145 lb, so that could be a critical factor.)
The next morning was a quick outing to Silver Peak: the overall super lightweight aspect of the setup was great skinning up the long flat approach, and the edgehold was excellent skiing down the steep frozen pitches (though sure would have been nice if that famous Tahoe sun had poked through to soften up).
BTW, the only mods I’ve made to my TLT5 are custom footbeds, a zip tie to keep each removable tongue’s girth-hitched fabric loop from disappearing, and substituting in Booster Straps for the original velcro straps. I especially like the Booster Straps for tightening up the very top of the upper cuffs, thereby ensuring immediate response from shin pressure as opposed to first having that little gap. (The same effect can be achieve by really cranking on the boot buckle + velcro strap, but then you feel like the circulation is getting cut off.) This also makes the forward lean feel a bit more upright, even though of course the rear cuff position is unaffected. The Booster Strap is also very quick & easy to loosen up & retighten, plus it’s unaffected by snow. Does add an ounce or so per boot though, but I’m willing to live with that. (Although not much more!)
Shef, funny you should mention the TLT 5ers, I’m liner molding my TLT 5 Performance at this moment! Having some trouble with ankle bones getting pinched due to thin liner and lasting of heel area for some guy in Montebelluna, Italy, but I think I can get them working and start testing with some uphilling this afternoon.
Lou, I had the same issue getting my TLT5 Performance boots to fit. The liner was just too thin around my ankle bones. I tried molding, but that just made it thinner in the exact places I needed it to be thicker. My problem was the shape of the plastic, so molding a thin liner didn’t help. I eventually threw in a Garmont G-Fit liner from a pair of Megalites, and they have worked well and provided the extra padding I needed. They do limit the range of motion a bit. I may order the Intuition Pro Tour liner at some point to get the rear flexible part of the liner back. Has anyone tried that liner in the TLT5?
I just got back from field testing. I’m having my usual problem in that the liner is too thin around my ankle, and the boot has too much volume around my ankle. that’s in a size 28. They feel quite sloppy, not snug at all. That’s after molding. With a normal boot I’d just downsize the shell one size down so the ankle area fit, punch out the toe area, and I’d be done. But the hinged toe makes it harder to punch out. I do have a bunch of Intuition liners sitting here ready to go, perhaps I’ll give that a go.
I just started using Pro Tours in my TLT5s. See my comments as Harpo here:
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=200054&page=27
I like the boots, but let’s just say I have ZERO need for 3/32 of an inch metatarsal foot flex. I’ll bet Dynafit is glad to be rid of that in the Evo, what an evolutionary dead end the metatarsal bend trend was…, wonderful they can concentrate on other things now.
Lou, do I recall correctly that for your TLT5 you went up a full size from your Zzero4?
Yes
But I also have the smaller TLT5 here as well. Using them would require punching out the toes, and I’m just not feeling like I’m up to possibly ruining them, due to the hinge area doing something funny when I’ve got all that heat and pressure going on.
But we shall see. I’m swimming in them now, but a thicker liner would take care of that.
Lou,
This might be preaching to the choir, but I will put my foot in my mouth anyway. The Intuition liners should help fill some of the volume around your ankle. The first time I cooked my Pro Tours, they were too tight, so I had to cook them again, which gives you a slightly looser fit. Also, pay attention to what size liner you use relative to what what size shell you have. With my liner, I went down a size because I had such a tight shell fit; if you want to fill up volume, you might want to go up a size for the liner, or go for the same size.
I also went up a size between my Zzero and my TLT5 because I didn’t want to have to punch my big toe and 6th toe; so far my TLT5 shell fit is perfect.
I sort of like the proto bellows on the TLT5, especially when I use them with my Dyna/Karhu Guide combo. I have sold the F1s I used to use with this combo, as well as my Zzero 4cs. Do you know how much weight this feature adds? IMO, it has no disadvantages regarding downhill performance, kicking steps, or using rigid alu cramps.
Tony, all good thoughts, thanks!
Lou, I’d like to change out the top plate of my older Dynafit bindings for the new plate with user friendly “heel lift” tower. Are parts available for the bindings? where can I get those parts? Great website! Cheers, CA
Craig, I doubt there will be an upgrade readily available, but you never know. If they decide to sell, it won’t be available till next fall, so stay tuned till then.
My view is that if the heel lifters actually work and are durable enough (both unknowns), Dynafit could sell an upgrade kit and make more money, so perhaps they’ll do so. On the other hand, for a company to provide another “SKU” is a big deal, as it involves everything from catalog changes to dealer order form changes, not to mention trying to figure out how much product to inventory, etc. So we shall see…
It’s funny. I was about to ask: “Lou, do you know if one can get rid of the top plate of the new Speeds and use them the old way?”.
But I’m probably going to get the current model. Afterall it’s a proven design, I’m not that agro skier, and I learnt how to take skins off without releasing, so ice in the inserts shouldn’t be a problem.
He he, if those new ones don’t work that well, look for an imediate market for the old stuff. In terms of swapping, it’ll probably have to be the whole heel unit, including the base plate. This due at least in part to the fact that the new heel units are rigged to only rotate in one direction.
Are you sure that the new heel units are rigged to only rotate in one direction? The guy in the Dynafit video moves it in both.
The new heel units have to rotate 90 degrees both clockwise and counterclockwise, otherwise the lateral release would be compromised.
I suspect that it’s the rotation to 180 degrees that’s limited in one direction or the other (or even both).
Jonathan and all, yes, once in alpine mode there is enough movement both directions for release, but after that the rotation is blocked so you can only move it in one direction. They did this in response to complaints about inadvertent rotation of the heel unit while in touring mode. The idea being that with the flip-up lifts, you don’t have to do very much rotation, though you do still have to rotate to go to heel flat on ski mode. I guess we get to reach down now to do that. Jury is still out on this. The unit I played with in Europe was not a production unit and the rotation block was not dialed.
Here is a link to my review of the Trab Evo Polvere over on TGR:
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214673
Jonathan, any comments on performance of Logic-X versus Manaslu? Thanks.
Despite having put in lots of vertical on the Manaslu over three seasons now, I can’t speak to its versatility, since I’ve used it only in powder, where I think it’s perfect.
By contrast, I’ve now used the Logic-X is all sorts of conditions, and it’s performed very well in everything. As good as the Manaslu in powder? No, but still pretty good, especially two days ago, when I had no idea what conditions would be like, so I took the Logic-X, and we ended up with bountiful powder in which the Manaslu would have been perfect, but the Logic-X was still fine.
The Logic-X compares directly with the Dynafit Mustagh Ata Superlight. I find the Logic-X to have much more of a short turn bias as compared to the MASL, which is what I prefer, although other skiers might prefer the MASL for precisely that same characteristic.
Jonathan S.
I am curious as to whether you think there is a minimum weight for a setup that you would not go below. While we would all like the minimum for the up, does going too light compromise the down too much? For example, do you think you would get too much deflection with a setup like the Logic-X’s + ATK RT’s + TLT5′s? Or perhaps another way of asking the question is will you be replacing the bindings on your logic-X’s with a lighter version anytime soon
Thanks for the help,
-Michael
Michael, that is an interesting question I’ve thought about, although like many such questions (pondered on many long skintracks), I hardly have a definitive answer.
That said, I’ll admit that in some snow conditions, sheer mass can convey a performance advantage. But in others, the exact opposite is the case, especially hop turns on steep terrain.
Would the Logic-X ski better in certain conditions if I just attached some removable lead tape (like with tennis racquets) for the descent? Probably, although I think it also depends on the speed of the skier. At lower speeds, I think it’s less of a factor. And I also suspect that the difference in skiing performance would be unnoticeable between the old Dynafit Speeds bindings I have on the Logic-X versus the new RT. (BTW, just finished up three powder days in a row – with possibly another tomorrow, although the wx fx is right on the edge – that were supposed to be the ideal test of the La Sportiva Hi5 + RT, but unfortunately FedEx messed up the delivery right before I left for the trip, argh…)
Thanks Jonathan. I look forward to hearing about impressions of the RT bindings.
Jonathan – Thanks for the comparative comments, they’re very helpful. Now I just have to sell some body part(s) so I can afford a pair…
FWIW, my experience with the Manaslu is that it is excellent on anything that isn’t too firm and okay there if speed is kept down, although this can be a tad frustrating at times. The Manaslu absolutely eclipses anything else I’ve used on soft snow, though I admit powder is rare here in Oz and I’ve no need to try anything wider unless I spend time in the Northern hemisphere, if then. Maybe the extra carbon in the forthcoming Manaslu will help hard-pack performance too.
Still, it sounds like the Logic-X is more of an all-round ski and thus maybe the ideal tool for local conditions here, apart from the price. A short turn bias would suit me too. Of course, then there’s lighter boots and bindings to go with it. Hmm….
We’re finally about to go into consistently consolidated springtime snowpack mode, so that means the Logic-X will be retired for the rest of the season and the Trab Duo Sint Aero will get prime billing.
Reflecting on the season with the Logic-X, although more specialized skis were often used (especially the Dynafit Manaslu and Movement Fish-X), I skied pretty much every type of snow conditions I could imagine, along with some conditions that I had not really imagined before (and hope not to encounter again…), and the Logic-X performed well across all of them. Add to that a nearly rando race-ish weight, especially when combined with the Dynafit TLT5 Performance boot, pretty much the only downside this season was how anyone is supposed to be able to find them.
Fortunately for this coming season, Movement has a new distributor here: La Sportiva of North America. This is a bit of a surprise and somewhat confusing since La Sportiva now has its own ski line, which includes a directly competing model, the GT.
However, the two ski lines will have different sales networks and reps, with Movement targeted more toward alpine ski shops and La Sportiva skis toward backcountry/outdoor shops. And this distribution arrangement is only for North America, not Europe.
The bottomline though is wider availability of Movement skis and a whole new line of tightly targeted backcountry skis from La Sportiva.
Thanks Jonathan, that’s interesting about La Sportiva selling both brands. I wonder how they distinguish between alpine ski shops and backcountry/outdoor shops? One has a tuning machine and professional ski mechanics, while the other is a clothing boutique with a wax bench (grin)?
Jonathan and I swapped a better chart into this post, and I added a bit more text.
I updated the chart for the detailed specs from the Sportiva North American website (as opposed to the Euro La Sportiva website, which still doesn’t have much info).
The specs in the chart are for the shortest length of the men’s/unisex GT, although two shorter lengths are available in the women’s GTS version. Either way, for all five of their new ski models, the website provides detailed dimensions and weight for each ski length.
I updated the chart for the new Goode his & hers 88mm model.
(The entire line is totally revamped — lots of wide rockered models on the website, and although weights don’t seem to be listed yet, you can probably rest assured that they’re very light!)
Jonathan,
I’ll be in Europe next month and will be shopping around for a race ski. Right now I would say it is Fish-X vs. Hagen vs. Trab/Dynafit World Cup race versions. Still as happy with your Logic-Xs going into the new season? How do you think they ski when compared to the Fish-Xs when you factor out the weight distance? Thanks as always.
A fine way to spend some time (and $) while in Europe!
My Fish-X summary is in a comment at the end here:
http://www.wildsnow.com/4228/rando-race-gear-review-2/
(A comparison with my Logic-X really isn’t meaningful, especially given the mass differential: although the Logic-X + Speed bindings is absurdly light, it’s still almost 2/3 heavier than the Fish-X + Plum 135.)
Hagan race skis seems to have a nice rep for skiing well. They weigh a few more ounces than the competition, but the price is way (way) less, which is especially important if you have a limited budget and might put those extra $ toward lighter boots (where the oz/g count more than in the skis and bindings).
Trab is of course the original established player in this market, and at point was utterly dominant. Lots of new competition though has eaten into its market share. But still a kind of benchmark. Nobody ever went wrong buying a pair of lightweight Trab skis, whether for racing or otherwise.
Dynafit might just be the Crazy DNA ski according to Skintrack.com, although then again, so many of these branded skis are probably made by other factories. I’ve mounted up a pair of the more budget-oriented Dynafit Performance race ski for Jerimy — I’m not sure if these are just slightly heavier production outliers of the WC, or a truly different model. Bill has been sporting the WC race ski with the La Sportiva RT at our races. I’m about to remount a 2010-11 Dynafit WC + Low Tech Race setup for Race, so might have some impressions just from mounting.
Scratch that prior remark about the Hagan race ski being a bit heavier — I just received an email from the U.S. distributor:
*****
The 2011/12 X-Race by Hagan raises the bar and sets new standards. Hagan has improved upon the highly successful X-Race by substantially reducing its weight while maintaining its excellent handling and durability. The new X-Race is 90 grams lighter – a full 11% lower than the already light 10/11 model.
The X-Race is now an incredible 700 grams in the 160 cm length. Yet it retains the stable, reliable design for which it is renown. The Cap Air Superlight Core, balanced ascent and descent characteristics and durability deliver everything required for success in ski tour racing. The X-Race is lightning fast on the ups, superb on the downs, and durable. Hagan skis are not “race day only” skis.
*****
So that’s actually pretty much the lightest spec on the market (except for a Merelli model that is under the magical three-pound barrier).
I’ve also updated the chart here for the new Hagan Corvus with an 87mm waist at a little over 6 pounds.
Availability of Hagan skis in the U.S. is pretty limited, but the distributor is about to place an order with the Europe hq, so if you’re interested in one of their models not carried by a local ski shop, might want to get in touch with him.
‘Just saw a few pair of the Logic X over at Neptune Mountaineering in Boulder, CO. I’m not sure if they’ve got them on their website yet but they’re in the shop for sure.
I put ‘em on the scale myself over there- 2.28 lbs each in a 176cm- with the plastic wrap still on! ‘Makes my Manaslu feel like a tank! …Hmmm…
Thanks for this review of the Logic-X Johathan. I’m impressed by how thoroughly you tested the ski and by how well you felt that it performed in so many different situations.
What would you think of mounting a set of Fritcshi Eagles on the Logic-X for a knee-friendly, light-weight, touring setup? Even though the binding is much heavier than a Dynafit, the package ends up being lighter than many other combinations.
I’d want to use this for touring in British Columbia’s coastal and interior regions. On the coast we can have powder up top but icy sections through trees heading down to highway elevations. The same thing can happen in the interior when skiing out to logging roads from higher altitude lodges.
I converted from tele to AT last year out of concern for my 56 year old knees and I don’t think that I’ll ever go back. I used Dynafits on a pair of Tonics and Eagles on the Movement Source. Although I much prefer walking up on the Dynafits I feel safer skiing down on the Eagles although maybe only in my head.
What do you think Jonathan? And to anyone else with an opinion about this please feel free to share it.
For those kinds of highly variable conditions, sure, the Logic-X would make a fine choice.
As for variation incarnations of Diamirs being more knee-friendly than Dynafits, I doubt it, since alpine downhill bindings (and by extension plate-style AT/hybrid bindings that function essentially the same way w/ regard to release-retention issues) are not very safe for soft tissue damage to the knee. Intriguingly, the so-called “Knee Binding” aims to prevent the “phantom foot” ACL injury by being the first binding (unless the ill-fated Line binding is counted) to release laterally at the heel, which is exactly how Dynafits release laterally (albeit symmetrically, unlike the Knee Binding’s asymmetrical release).
Jonathan, thanks for your thoughts on the knee friendliness of Diamirs versus Dynafits. I found a post at tetongravity on the biomechanics of Dynafit toe release dating back to 2008 that you might have contributed to. Have you been thinking about this issue for that long?
I’ve read a bit about the Knee Binding and there is a shop here in Vancouver, BC, that has them for sale. I’m encouraging my girlfriend to check them out. She’s starting to ski more aggressively on-piste with her Movement Silks and Dynafit Speed Classics. We bought her that rig for touring but she doesn’t feel ready yet to venture into ungroomed territory. I wish Knee Binding had a touring version that I could look at.
I’ve brought home two new skis this month: the 164 Stoke and 169 Logic-X. I can only afford to keep one pair. I’m finding the decision as difficult as finding a demo source for these products. Your review and comments along with the reviews of others here are a great help. Thanks again.
Patrick, my interest in this dates back to my alpine race coaching starting in the early 1990s, when on avg one athlete would end each season early from a knee ligament tear.
The basics are that once alpine downhill bindings mastered fairly reliable vertical and lateral release in the 1970s, lower leg fractures dropped by about 50%. But at the same time taller and stiffer boots doubled the rate of soft tissue knee injuries, which ensuing advances in binding design did nothing to ameliorate (although shorter skis have helped).
The various Diamir iterations essentially employ 1970s binding design for release-retention characteristics, but that’s hardly a drawback on account of the above, although the toe pivot is entirely exposed to the elements and to deal with vibram sole friction for lateral release Fritschi has gone back and forth over the years with mechanical vs fixed toe AFDs. By contrast, the Dynafit lateral pivot is much more sealed up, and typical friction issue isn’t present since there’s no clamping element.
A key consideration though is whether you can keep your normal RV setting on your backcountry bindings. So if, say, on your alpine downhill bindings you use a 7, but on Dynafit you need a 9 (or, even worse, ski with the toe levers in tour mode), then yes, all sorts of leg parts are at risk. (My Dynafit settings are actually much *lower* than my alpine race setups, although that’s mainly because I’m skiing different terrain in the backcountry and at different speeds.)
I think lift-served skiing is different though because the actually amount of skiing vertical is so much more. I mean, 5000’ vertical is considered a solid backcountry outing, but at a rather diminutive ski area less than an hour from my house, that would take only a little over half an hour on a weekday morning. So investing in a dedicated alpine downhill setup is a good idea. Jury is still out on the Knee Binding, and who knows when any sort of definitive verdict will ever arrive.
Fortunately though for your Stoke v Logic-X conundrum, the decision is very easy: keep them both! I can understand not buying both in the first place b/c of budget issues, but can you really bring yourself to return both of them? I mean, that’s like offering your kid up for adoption because the braces bill is too high…
Please elaborate why you would keep both skis? It seems like the skis are the same with minor differences? – light going up and light coming down.
They’re very different skis: the Stoke is significantly wider, heavier (although still very light for its width), and has tip rocker.
So if that was a two-ski quiver, then Logic-X for consolidated snow, could-be-anything snow, and super-long tours. Then Stoke for unconsolidated snow.
Jonathan, thanks for writing more about the pros and cons of these bindings and for providing information that will be of interest to my girlfriend as she reevaluates her on-piste setup.
Why I’ve ended up with these two skis at home:
1. I have two 6-day lodge trips planned for the BC interior; mid March in the Cariboos and early April in the Valhallas. The Stoke seems to be designed for those alpine environments. It’s light weight for its girth and although I favor shorter turns I’ve read that it will do those too. I might be inclined to track a little wider in those big open spaces as well.
2. The rest of my time in the backcountry will be day trips off the Coquihalla, Sea To Sky and Duffy Lake roads. I imagine that the Logic-X would be better suited to the variety of conditions that could be encountered in those areas. They are exceptionally light, which will help me to keep up with younger folks , and their sidecut is a good match for my short turn bias.
On the other hand, does anyone familiar with BC coastal conditions from Dec to Apr think that the Stoke would be a reasonable choice over the Logic-X?
3. The lengths that I want, Stoke 164 and Logic-X 169, are in short supply. Best to put them on the card until I decide which one to keep as fortunately I can return either. I might try your braces argument though Jonathan; wish me luck.
I also have a Movement Source with Eagle bindings that I use for lift area skiing. Each ski + binding weighs in at 2.66kg and with 134-94-120 there is a lot of surface area to skin up. The Logic-X would pare that load down by 1.12kg per foot!
Does any of this indecision feel familiar, particularly before the season starts?
In the end, I decided to return both the Stoke and Logic-X and settled on a 169 Manaslu. Thanks to all who posted very helpful reviews of these three skis.
J, can you speak to the durability of the Logic X? How many days do you have on them?
Also, are they a foam core ski with a mounting plate? What do they use for the mounting plate?
Only a fair small amount of use this past season (37k earned, plus two lift-served days), so can’t speak to durability. (Although the skiing I did get in represented a very broad range of conditions, so it does speak to versatility.)
I didn’t notice anything special when mounting them.
I skied the X-Logic last year for long tours in soft conditions in the Wasatch and off Roger’s Pass. For the weight, they are amazing. Durability??? Hard to say since I was using them in early season conditions and hit my share of rocks. Maybe not a big deal on most skis, but when I badly compressed an edge, most ski shops seemed to be at a loss as to how to fix it given the minimal amount of material to begin with. I’ve likened them to bubble wrap with spray-on carbon fiber…
But, they ski great.
Hi Jonathan,
I am 5′ 7″, 165 lbs and wonder if you have a length recommendation for the Logic X…. I almost ordered the 176cm a number of times but now I wonder if the 168cm would serve me better?
Thanks for your thoughts (and anyone elses?)
Marty, for ski mountaineering use I’d think the shorter ski would be nice. But if you’re doing mixed resort/backcountry use or you’re an aggressive skier (or this is mainly a powder ski), I’d trend to the 176. You’ll probably like either length, once you get used to them. Lou
I feel like the 168cm length is perfectly designed for my 145lb + preferences (generally on the shorter ski side of things, and generally shorter radius turns). At 165lb, my rec would be the next size up for the 176cm. Also depends though on your preferences and what other ski lengths you like.
Anyone have any thoughts about mounting the new TTS tele binding to the Logic-x ski. Add in Scarpa F1 carbon boots. Maybe too stiff for tele?
Thoughts? Well, yes, at least with the combination of a Dynafit or other Tech toe, Scarpa F1 Carbon boots, and an ultralightweight all-around ski mountaineering ski like the Movement Logic-X, you’ll then realize that the only element missing is the matching Dynafit or other Tech heel: TTS, the gateway drug to modern backcountry ski gear.
Jonathan thank you for your comments. As a tele skier, I will leave off the Tech heal and stay with the TTS cable connection to deal with my heals. My free heal has not translated into a free enough mind to venture into locking down my heal.
I guess my query is whether this ski is a good fit with that boot and the TTS rig. Exceedingly light and a little pricey no doubt. Never having touched the Logic-X, I am unsure about the ski stiffness and how that might work as a free heal ski. I get the impression this ski on the far end of stiff skis.
Hi David, when you bring up telemark here, you’ll usually get some good discussion but jokes will also ensue, as we are pretty much an AT fixed heel website, and for many years we were the black sheep of the hip free-heel family. You can always head over to telemarktips.com for the guru wisdom. Meanwhile, do consider freeing your mind and trying some Dynafit heels as well as toes. Lou
Lou, after having visited telemarktips and found minds freely wandering around with loose ducks as the excessive heft of their foot braces, at times, weigh down the ability to focus, I came to the alter of AT for some locked in advice based on the wisdom of your fixed footing.
Let the healing commence.
Life is long. I go both ways. Sometimes I lead with my knee and sometime I lead with my head.
Embrace non-denominationalism and just ski.
Amen brother. One day together we’ll heal in the wisdom.
Next, you need to consult skibewankanoobie, he’ll simply caress your knees and a jolt of forbidden knowledge will shoot from your toes to your scalp, and you will know the truth. So powerful is his mojo, no need for speech.
D, I think the bellows on both the f1 and f3 are softer than the bellows on tele boots as they are designed to go downhill with more support from the locked heel and under bellows puck. I don’t know anything about how they would work with the tts. I would guess one of the ntn boots with dyna fittings would work better with the tts.
Regarding boots and the TTS.
I have been playing on the system with my TX Pro’s and found the boots to soft.
I was lucky enough to keep my original ultra stiff bellowed TX’s.
They work great, I just moved the cuff over from the TX Pro’s.
I think the bellows of the F1 and F3 are stiffer than the TX Pro’s and that is why a few TTS folks are using them.
The TTS system works great and I now spend a bout half my time in the TTS over the NTN.
Main interest is whether this ski is too stiff for this combo of ski, binding and boot. Each works best when the package is balanced. Don’t you think.
Jon thanks for the info on the TTS. The first thing that caught my attention to the F1 Carbon is the the light weight. Between these boots and the TTS binding a lot of weight has been shaved off. That is why I first came to this WildSnow article. If a Movement Logic-x ski would work well with this gear, over all wight on the up would be fantastic. I am expecting to get my first pair of TTS bindings next week. Have not yet picked a ski to mount on.
Hey David,
Skied my new set up yesterday, dps Wailer 99 with the TTS system and I used my TX Pros.
I had just come off a couple of days on NTN with Gotama’s so a lot of change.
The weight exchange is obvious and welcome.
The initiation and power in the TTS is amazing.
As discussed in other forms a longer cartridge travel would be great, I ordered mine with G3 race. I’m going to see if there are cartridges with more dynamic travel available.
Having said that by the third run, (long runs at Revelstoke) I got the balance of the system.
As discussed I think I will try my stiffer TX’s the next time out.
The dps Wailer is a great ski but I need more time to play on it after I get the boot binding combo dialled.
I did skin up for a quick walk and that was amazing compared to pushing the NTN on Gotama’s.
A couple of challenges on the rear climbing wire as the heel throw sits right over it when released for touring.
I’m pumped and I think the TTS has a great future.
As a side note I had my local Tech guru put quiver killers for all mounts and drilled for the Dynafit heel so I can switch the whole system over to complete AT if I want to lock the heel down (Maybe when I’m older).
Given that Wasatch Ski is taking a methodical approach I think he will offer a real solid solution and alternative to NTN when he releases the system.
As in all Teli systems there some trade offs. But I think the TTS has the least over all when considering weight, power, touring and durability.
Keep us posted when you get your gear rolling.
Enjoy.
Jon I am confused by your comment about the heel throw sitting on top of the climbing wire. I would have thought the heel throw would drop behind the back of the heel riser as in any tele setup where the heel riser is properly positioned under the boot heel. Maybe I am not understanding your issue.
I just received a pair of Wailer 99. Glad to hear you are pleased with that ski as a TTS setup. I wonder about the F1 Carbon and lateral support for that ski.
Can anyone tell me how to found the mounting point on a pair of Movement X-Logic 176′s? I am the proud new owner of a used pair.
I haven’t read through this whole thread recently so my apologies if it is already mentioned. I couldn’t find any obvious marks on the sidewall of the ski.