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

Individual Review Long-Term Test: 2017 DPS Foundation Cassiar F82

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,882
Location
Reno, eNVy
Yes, the Cassiar line is all-expansive, all the way from the powder pig Lotus F124 down to the ski we are reviewing here, the Cassiar F82. The charcoal one.

IMG_0759.JPG

You can read @Tricia's review of the women's counterpart, the Uschi F82, here, and @SkiNurse's review here. And while we are adding links, let's refresh your memory of what the Foundation line is about right here.

IMG_0725.JPG

OK, now on to the Cassiar F82, which is available in 168, 178, and 185. We are testing the 178 cm length with dimensions of 124-82-107 and a 15m turning radius. The F82 is that 80/20 frontside ski that can be skied off piste and in the trees. The shape, along with the early rise in the tip, lends itself to being fun in the bumps as well. As I have said before, visually, the Foundation collection offers some of the cleanest and most stunning graphics around; unfortunately, pictures don't do them justice. As with our other Foundation skis, we mounted the F82s with Tyrolia Attack 13 demos and started the ski off with a proper tune from Skis & More. Soren set them up to shine on the groomers, and shine they did.

IMG_0757.JPG IMG_0758.JPG IMG_0755.JPG IMG_0756.JPG
@Alexzn and I took the F82 to Squaw off the Saddle then up and down Headwall, each for a run, and then swapped. Alex started on the DPS and I on the Renoun Z-77; you can read those results in that thread. Before you ask how these two skis compare, we actually were not trying to compare them; it was just that we took two narrower skis out in the morning when the groomers were fresh. These are two different animals.

Even in the spring corn of Squaw, the on-snow feel is much more positive that another DPS I have skied recently. The 15m radius was smooth to engage because of the progressive tip shape, and the ski held beautifully through the turn due to its flat tail.
  • Who is it for? Yes, this is a great 80/20 ski with a huge sweet spot; it will work for someone who does not want to have to work the ski every single run.
  • Who is it not for? Name droppers. No, DPS doesn't have an extensive frontside resume, but don't look past this fine-looking ski as an option.
  • Insider tip: Sizing is dead on, as are the mount points. If any buyers are reading, stock this ski (and the Uschi 82).
Stay tuned as more testers get on these. :popcorn:
 
Thread Starter
TS
Philpug

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,882
Location
Reno, eNVy
I was able to spend more time on these this past spring. One of my favorite aspects of the Foundations and particularly the F82 was how easy they are to ski. These could be a really good instructor ski because of that ease and its ability to absorb terrain. I also must say I am taken by how clean this ski looks -- in fact, the whole DPS Foundation collection.
 

BS Slarver

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
1,530
Location
Biggest skiing in America
Phil
After reading your piece on the foundation 106, I'm putting DPS in the mix for this years wide board search. Did you spend any time on the F112 ?
The 106 looks pretty zippy, especially with that waist line, your thoughts on the 112 ?

Ideally I'm looking for the enforcer in a 110 /180cm
 
Thread Starter
TS
Philpug

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,882
Location
Reno, eNVy
Phil
After reading your piece on the foundation 106, I'm putting DPS in the mix for this years wide board search. Did you spend any time on the F112 ?
The 106 looks pretty zippy, especially with that waist line, your thoughts on the 112 ?

Ideally I'm looking for the enforcer in a 110 /180cm

Here you go, Foundation Wailer 1120RP2
 

jmeb

Enjoys skiing.
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
4,495
Location
Colorado
How deep is the rocker line on these? If I usually ski mid-180s, but I'm looking for a frontside ski for bumps, groomers, high pressure weeks, etc. Currently on K2 Aftershocks in 185, and Atomic Alibis in 187...
 
Thread Starter
TS
Philpug

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,882
Location
Reno, eNVy
How deep is the rocker line on these? If I usually ski mid-180s, but I'm looking for a frontside ski for bumps, groomers, high pressure weeks, etc. Currently on K2 Aftershocks in 185, and Atomic Alibis in 187...
Minimal rocker in these, very traditional but complent enough to come out of the snow nicely.
 

jmeb

Enjoys skiing.
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
4,495
Location
Colorado
Thanks. Thinking about replacing Aftershocks which are getting near EOL with barely-there edges. While I like their dampness, I'm not sure I want something as chargy as Head Monster 83s (177 for $250). The Cassiar seems like they may give up a bit of dampness and top-end in exchange for some more compliance in the bumps (178 for $350)....
 
Thread Starter
TS
Philpug

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,882
Location
Reno, eNVy
How do they stack up against nordica navigator 80/85? They sound similar
Actually they are more similar than dissimilar. I would say that the DPS is slightly better on the groomers with it's more traditional tip design. I do think DPS's graphics in this collection is classic, beautifully simple, understated and very rich.
 

Superbman

Getting off the lift
Skier
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Posts
348
Location
Western, MA
Well, Sierra Trading Post was pushing these out the door for @350.00 so I took a plunge site unseen on a pair in a 178. I've been looking for an east Coast mixed use ski for a bit to noodle around in bumps and trees and groomers on firmer, low snow days (which, alas, tend to be most days). I had been scoping for a pair of QST 92's, and started leaning towards a Navigator 80/90-- but this seemed like the neatest ski at a fine price.

It'll be my first DPS, too.
 

MattD

aka Hobbes429
Skier
Joined
Jan 1, 2016
Posts
364
Location
North Carolina
Looks like an interesting ski, but I'm wondering about sizing. If one would usually ski something in a 170cm for hard snow (168-172cm depending on the length offerings and stability of the particular ski) is a 168cm or a 178cm a better bet?
 

SmileGuy

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Jun 19, 2017
Posts
60
Phil
After reading your piece on the foundation 106, I'm putting DPS in the mix for this years wide board search. Did you spend any time on the F112 ?
The 106 looks pretty zippy, especially with that waist line, your thoughts on the 112 ?

Ideally I'm looking for the enforcer in a 110 /180cm

The enforcer skis very short imo, maybe the 185cm would work, especially since it's a powder ski. What's your height and weight?
 

eok

Slopefossil
Skier
Joined
Nov 18, 2015
Posts
856
Location
PNW
I have a pair of K2 AMP Rictor 82xti that I've pretty beaten to death, so I'm looking to replace them. The thing I appreciated with my Rictors: they were not super demanding but could rip and give back whatever energy I input. How would the F82s compare, as an 80/20 ski?

To be honest, I'm looking to "step up" the slot my Rictors fill and have the Atomic X83s and Head Titan on my short list (X83s look like a better fit for an 80/20). But, the F82s sound interesting too.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Philpug

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,882
Location
Reno, eNVy
I have a pair of K2 AMP Rictor 82xti that I've pretty beaten to death, so I'm looking to replace them. The thing I appreciated with my Rictors: they were not super demanding but could rip and give back whatever energy I input. How would the F82s compare, as an 80/20 ski?

To be honest, I'm looking to "step up" the slot my Rictors fill and have the Atomic X83s and Head Titan on my short list (X83s look like a better fit for an 80/20). But, the F82s sound interesting too.
The F82 will be a solid replacement for the K2's, if you are looking to step up, I think what you are saying about the Atomic makes it the step up you are looking for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eok

eok

Slopefossil
Skier
Joined
Nov 18, 2015
Posts
856
Location
PNW
The F82 will be a solid replacement for the K2's, if you are looking to step up, I think what you are saying about the Atomic makes it the step up you are looking for.

Thanks.

I also gave the K2 Superchargers a serious look. Seemed like a logical step from the Rictor 82xti. But: K2 doesn't seem to care if anyone knows about them or buys them - so why should I. Plus: I'm weary of K2's basic ski profile for their more piste oriented skis (Rictor, Charger, iKonic). 15m @ 170 and 17m @ 177 across almost all their frontside lines for years now. OK, there's the Turbocharger - but it's virtually an anomaly for K2 at 13m @ 165. Would have loved to try a Supercharger construction with a 15m@175 profile.

In any case, the X83 seems like a much better value by comparison.
 

jmeb

Enjoys skiing.
Skier
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
4,495
Location
Colorado
@Philpug -- DPS website doesn't specify whether to tap their skis or not on binding install and haven't returned call yet (guessing overwhelmed with Phantom launch.) Mounting a pair of these Foundation 82s up tomorrow night and wondering if you know whether they suggest tapping or no. I usually associate 4.1mm drill with tapping and metal. But no metal so maybe no tap?
 

bremmick

Booting up
Skier
Joined
Jan 30, 2017
Posts
155
Location
Utah
Looking at getting these F82's as a high pressure day ski. Currently running Enforcer 110's in 185. I'm 6'3 and 205.

Looking at these in the 178, given the limited rocker. Is that the right size?
 

Tytlynz64

Getting off the lift
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Posts
491
Looking at getting these F82's as a high pressure day ski. Currently running Enforcer 110's in 185. I'm 6'3 and 205.

Looking at these in the 178, given the limited rocker. Is that the right size?
Looking at these as a practice ski/low tide option. Maybe @Philpug can give us an idea of the weight limit on these. I am 6'7 265 and looking at the 185 to practice technical aspects. I may be too heavy.
 
Thread Starter
TS
Philpug

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,882
Location
Reno, eNVy
Looking at these as a practice ski/low tide option. Maybe @Philpug can give us an idea of the weight limit on these. I am 6'7 265 and looking at the 185 to practice technical aspects. I may be too heavy.
I shall call you "Sir";) . Honestly, I don't think there is a ski that is designed for you but I would look to something with some metal as close to a 190 as possible.
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top