• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Where should I mount my Rustler 11 188s?

ToyBox

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Nov 4, 2018
Posts
14
Rustler 11 188s just came in the mail.

I have the cochise 185 and the recommended mount on these R11s is significantly forward of that.

I am trying to decide between -1 and at the line. Have narrowed it down to these 2 choices.

I have seen a few internet posters who went -1 and thought is was good.

Anyone mount at the line and subsequently wished they had mounted back?

I want to get it right the first time if possible, have several sets of skis with an extra set of holes cause I wasnt happy with my first mount
frown.gif
 
Last edited:

Eleeski

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
2,287
Location
San Diego / skis at Squaw Valley
Schizio or demo bindings for sure. Moving the bindings around is always part of dialing in a new ski (or length).

I always like the forward mount - unless I don't.

Eric
 

Doug Briggs

"Douche Bag Local"
Industry Insider
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Posts
7,483
Location
Breckenridge, CO
I am of the POV that most skis will ski well mounted on the 'recommended' mark. I feel that people's boot alignment, skiing style and general ability to ski dynamically has more to do with how a ski skis than mounting point; within reason, of course. Mount a ski an inch or two the wrong way and it will ski like crap. Move the binding a cm or two fore or aft of recommended and most, in a blind test, wouldn't notice. The problem is that moving a binding is never blind test and the user will 'prefer' a different mounting position because they 'feel' it is what they are looking for.

On a related note, because you mention it, similar length skis will have different recommended mount points because of their contact points, rocker, camber and other features of the ski. Back in the old days when shapes were nearly identical on all skis, you'd expect mount points to be similar with similar sizes. Not anymore.

Extra holes in your (modern) skis are not a problem. Today's construction methods and in many cases wider profiles make skis much more durable and able to withstand multiple mounts. Properly plugged, extra will not be apparent when you ski them. They only problem they introduce is the ability to remount bindings but even then, 2, 3 or ever 4 mounts won't be a problem for most skis.
 

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
Answered in your Teton post but will answer again here.

The Rustler series(especially the 188 and 192cm models) have a large binding mount sweet spot like the older twin tip Blizzard big mountain series had. Can go more forward a cm or 2 for a more playful, free ride/style ski that skis shorter like all the FWT skiers do or back a cm or so to make them a more traditional feeling ski that is a touch less playful.

Rec point is a good compromise between playful and stability but honestly not a huge difference on this ski. That’s why you’ll see lots of +1 or +2 and love it, on the line and love it and -1 and love it. You could always split the difference and go -0.5cm back and I guarantee it will ski great.
 

Tom K.

Skier Ordinaire
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Posts
8,399
If you like the style and feel of the (much more traditional) Cochise, and will be switching back and forth frequently, I'd go -1 on the new boards.

I'm definitely a "traditional" skier, and have been around the block recently with two pair of skis. On both the Enforcer 100s and Ranger 115s, I liked them quite a bit on the line and loved them at -1.5 (respectfully disagreeing with @Doug Briggs blindfold opinion above).

As others pointed out, remounting a modern ski is not big deal, and for me at least, VASTLY preferable to demo binders. In fact, with a little math and some chatting with your shop guy, you can mount the heel pieces so that only a toe re-mount will be required, assuming you know whether or not you're likely to go forward or back from the original mount point.
 
Thread Starter
TS
T

ToyBox

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Nov 4, 2018
Posts
14
Thought long and hard and ultimately decided to the mount the line instead of back. They are forward of my other skis but are working out fine.

The people who mark the line are not always correct in my experience though. I have some head monsters that I had to remount at 2+ and prolly could have gone 2.5 or 3+.

After 4 days tips had a ton of wear from banging together. Skis are just not durable for folks like myself who bang the skis together. Had the shop jank on some tip protectors.

Overall pretty happy with what I have got.

Thanks to those who chimed in!
 

Attachments

  • 20190314_103054.jpg
    20190314_103054.jpg
    86.5 KB · Views: 216
  • 20190314_103049.jpg
    20190314_103049.jpg
    92.8 KB · Views: 218

givethepigeye

Really, just Rob will do
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
1,705
Location
Charleston, SC
Should have read this. I put mine on the line and could not get off them fast enough. I actually went back to the truck to get my SR95’s on an 18” day at the Bird today. But I didn’t like the Enforcers 100 until I moved them back 1.5. Anyway, maybe they aren’t my cup of tea.. Conflicted on drilling them again back or just moving on.
 

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
Always file and gummy stone the tips of any ski dull to prevent chipping. About an inch or so down from where those metal tip protectors end is perfect. No reason for tips/tails that are always in the air off the snow to be sharp.

Maybe the skis are trying to tell you to open your stance more? ogwink
 

Ken_R

Living the Dream
Skier
Joined
Feb 10, 2016
Posts
5,775
Location
Denver, CO
Rustler 11 188s just came in the mail.

I have the cochise 185 and the recommended mount on these R11s is significantly forward of that.

I am trying to decide between -1 and at the line. Have narrowed it down to these 2 choices.

I have seen a few internet posters who went -1 and thought is was good.

Anyone mount at the line and subsequently wished they had mounted back?

I want to get it right the first time if possible, have several sets of skis with an extra set of holes cause I wasnt happy with my first mount
frown.gif

I demoed the Rustler 11's in 188cm on the line and they felt fantastic. Some skis really require one to experiment but the Rustlers felt great on the line. As usual YMMV. As I learned yesterday, when in doubt, get demo bindings.
 

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
Should have read this. I put mine on the line and could not get off them fast enough. I actually went back to the truck to get my SR95’s on an 18” day at the Bird today. But I didn’t like the Enforcers 100 until I moved them back 1.5. Anyway, maybe they aren’t my cup of tea.. Conflicted on drilling them again back or just moving on.

What didn’t you like about them?

With the tunes of the Rustlers being commonly so off, a base grind and hand tune of the edges would be my first step before moving the bindings or giving up on them. The Rustler 11 is kinda like an even more forgiving Enforcer so it’s rare you get the “I can’t stand them” sort of response about them. Something has to be up there.
 

Jtlange

Getting off the lift
Skier
Joined
Sep 8, 2016
Posts
185
Location
Boulder, CO
I found they were really vague until I sharpened the edges of them and once I did that they turned like I wanted them to. Bases were good for sure but Ive hit enough stuff with them already they might need a fresh tune.
 

givethepigeye

Really, just Rob will do
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
1,705
Location
Charleston, SC
What didn’t you like about them?

With the tunes of the Rustlers being commonly so off, a base grind and hand tune of the edges would be my first step before moving the bindings or giving up on them. The Rustler 11 is kinda like an even more forgiving Enforcer so it’s rare you get the “I can’t stand them” sort of response about them. Something has to be up there.

Weird, I thought I would like them. I bought them to be a more versatile than the 118 width, almost 30m radius Bodacious (the tapered tip one w/o metal). Those I got really cheap , thanks STP, and replaced 186 Gunsmokes. Seemed to have traits I would like. More directionall, some tail rocker but not a TT. Metal underfoot.

Skied them on an 18” overnigh, 30”storm in UT, so it was deep. First thing was the tips seemed really short, I was tentative to push them as I thought the tips would just submarine, they didn’t though. What I did noticed was the shovels got bounced around in deep chopped up snow, the SR’s go right through. I didn’t think they were very damp. They also felt kind of reminiscent of the Gunsmokes I got rid of. Also, if you got bucked, that tail was not really supportive (I guess with the rocker).

Perhaps they aren’t my cup of tea, really just felt not too dissimilar to the old Gunsmokes to me.

I moved my Enforcer mount back 1.5 and liked them, so maybe I’ll do that - frankly though, I’ll probably just sell them.

Anyone looking? Drilled one time Pivots, @ 316

I think the tune is off too, felt sketchy on the catwalks back to lift. Maybe do that first.
 

GregK

Skiing the powder
Skier
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Posts
4,018
Location
Ontario, Canada
Weird, I thought I would like them. I bought them to be a more versatile than the 118 width, almost 30m radius Bodacious (the tapered tip one w/o metal). Those I got really cheap , thanks STP, and replaced 186 Gunsmokes. Seemed to have traits I would like. More directionall, some tail rocker but not a TT. Metal underfoot.

Skied them on an 18” overnigh, 30”storm in UT, so it was deep. First thing was the tips seemed really short, I was tentative to push them as I thought the tips would just submarine, they didn’t though. What I did noticed was the shovels got bounced around in deep chopped up snow, the SR’s go right through. I didn’t think they were very damp. They also felt kind of reminiscent of the Gunsmokes I got rid of. Also, if you got bucked, that tail was not really supportive (I guess with the rocker).

Perhaps they aren’t my cup of tea, really just felt not too dissimilar to the old Gunsmokes to me.

I moved my Enforcer mount back 1.5 and liked them, so maybe I’ll do that - frankly though, I’ll probably just sell them.

Anyone looking? Drilled one time Pivots, @ 316

I think the tune is off too, felt sketchy on the catwalks back to lift. Maybe do that first.

You have the 188cm length? 192cm version is stiffer and damper but they still aren’t going to be as damp as something like an Cochise or something else with full metal. Moment Commander might be up your alley with the mount moved back a touch. They charge for their weight.

Tune, especially a stone grind to flatten the bases and reset the edges would help stability and edge grip so I’d definitely recommend trying that to see if that’s enough for you to like them more.
 

James

Out There
Instructor
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Posts
24,431
I demoed a Rustler 9 that was so badly messed up it was unskiable. Wasn't a hanging burr. I had to go rent another pair of skis because the shop was now over an hour away round trip. The things were dangerous on the wet compressed snow. Weird. I'm sure a good base grind and edge setting would fix it.
 

ski otter 2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
2,920
Location
Front Range, Colorado
Weird, I thought I would like them. I bought them to be a more versatile than the 118 width, almost 30m radius Bodacious (the tapered tip one w/o metal). Those I got really cheap , thanks STP, and replaced 186 Gunsmokes. Seemed to have traits I would like. More directionall, some tail rocker but not a TT. Metal underfoot.

Skied them on an 18” overnigh, 30”storm in UT, so it was deep. First thing was the tips seemed really short, I was tentative to push them as I thought the tips would just submarine, they didn’t though. What I did noticed was the shovels got bounced around in deep chopped up snow, the SR’s go right through. I didn’t think they were very damp. They also felt kind of reminiscent of the Gunsmokes I got rid of. Also, if you got bucked, that tail was not really supportive (I guess with the rocker).

Perhaps they aren’t my cup of tea, really just felt not too dissimilar to the old Gunsmokes to me.

I moved my Enforcer mount back 1.5 and liked them, so maybe I’ll do that - frankly though, I’ll probably just sell them.

Anyone looking? Drilled one time Pivots, @ 316

I think the tune is off too, felt sketchy on the catwalks back to lift. Maybe do that first.


(I was happy with mounting the Rustler 11s (180, 188, 192) on the line. Usually I experiment with mount point, using Schizos on fat skis.)

It's just a fact o' life that often, we are skiing the tune as much as the ski. At SIA, for instance, the Stockli booth was the only one with multiple burred up tunes, some worse than others. (I had only one other poorly tuned ski in two days of demoing, and that one was only a little off, not like at least two or three of the Stocklis.) With a few of the Lasers, it was a good thing I already knew how well they skied and thus did not hold the tune against them. But with a pair of SR 95s and another of SR 88s, at least, the tunes were badly off, and your description of skiing the Rustler 11s reminded me of that. The SR 88s, in particular, were poorly enough burr-tuned or edge-high tuned to be dangerous.

FWIW, at an earlier demo this year, I skied on a powder/crud day three lengths of the Rustler 11s one after another, all on the line: 180. 188, 192. I can concur that the 192 was noticeably more stable in chop/crud - more like the Bodacious than the Gunsmoke or Peacemaker. But the other two lengths surprised me with how well they did in at least colder snow chop crud, on the line. At the same time, the 188 to me was not as stable, and it lacked the slow-it-down playfullness of the 180s - definitely not as stable as the best powder/crud skis, to me.

On the other hand, we've had some really heavy, wet snow deep days this past month here in Colo, and that's forced me to re-evaluate powder/crud skis. Some of my go to powder/crud skis worked much better in that unusually deep/heavy stuff when moved back a bit: 3/4 cm to 1 1/4 cm back. And a few of my shorter "go to" powder skis just got overwhelmed a bit on those days. (While some didn't.)

So, by the way, I definitely disagree with Doug Briggs on this, though often would defer to him practically on principle: the ability to move powder skis forward and back is a big deal, wonderful and obvious at times - not a bit subtle enough to be subject to the placebo effect. And it depends on the ski whether or not, say, moving 1/2 cm forward or back is an an obvious big deal or not. For some fat skis, it is. Others, not so much.

Also, the amount of "slip" detectable with a demo or Schizo binding in powder, but also elsewhere - now, that, to me, is subtle enough to be either undetectable or placebo effect material for real, even though I understand that at times there have been demo models that are a problem in this way.

I am of the POV that most skis will ski well mounted on the 'recommended' mark. I feel that people's boot alignment, skiing style and general ability to ski dynamically has more to do with how a ski skis than mounting point; within reason, of course. Mount a ski an inch or two the wrong way and it will ski like crap. Move the binding a cm or two fore or aft of recommended and most, in a blind test, wouldn't notice. The problem is that moving a binding is never blind test and the user will 'prefer' a different mounting position because they 'feel' it is what they are looking for.

On a related note, because you mention it, similar length skis will have different recommended mount points because of their contact points, rocker, camber and other features of the ski. Back in the old days when shapes were nearly identical on all skis, you'd expect mount points to be similar with similar sizes. Not anymore.

Extra holes in your (modern) skis are not a problem. Today's construction methods and in many cases wider profiles make skis much more durable and able to withstand multiple mounts. Properly plugged, extra will not be apparent when you ski them. They only problem they introduce is the ability to remount bindings but even then, 2, 3 or ever 4 mounts won't be a problem for most skis.
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top