Skis comparisons

A snowHead

My current skis are Rossignol Attraxion (no number on them) bought from Decathlon for the princely sum of £99 (inc bindings). They are 154cm and specs are 115 70 98

I have been broadly happy with them but starting to feel I would like something longer. I am 5’ 7 and 10 and a half stone.

At the ski test I didn’t get to try as many as I would like due my youngest daughter desperate for one of us to always ski with her so we had to take turns.

I tried the Salomon s/max 10 in 155cm and really didn’t like them. Can’t really say why though?

I then tried the Dynastar Intense 10 in 160cm and liked these to ski in, i then switched back to mine to make sure it wasn’t just liking them in comparison to the Salomons, and going to mine made me feel that I didn’t like mine as much as the Dynastars.

I then tried an 80/20 ski the Vokl Flair 76. Those I found quite skiddy on the icey patches so they are no good for me. Though felt nice on the moguls.

I then tried the K2 Missconducts and they felt immense fun and really responsive.

They are freestyle all mountain skis and I will only ever be piste skiing so concerned whether the K2’s are really going to feel as good into the mountain.

I am also wishing I could have tried the Intense 12.

Based on the above I am trying to understand what it says about what would suit me.

A snowHead

In my experience it’s completely subjective for us recreational skiers - you try as many as you can and buy the ones that you like. These days there are so many different designs to choose from the old formulas of height / weight / ski length aren’t the rigid guide they once were. It sounds like you like the K2s, and that's probably the best guidance you can get.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

The only thing I will say, is the tuning of the ski will make all the difference. A ski that you might love can give a false impression, if either poorly serviced, or in need of a service.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Basically what @telford_mike said. It's difficult to get true real world impressions from a dome though - wrong type of snow, too short a length and time - and you always (nearly always) adapt to a ski eventually, and learn something from it; not to say that you'll always like it. Depends also how good or experienced a skier you are and where you intend to go, what your skiing aspirations are, etc etc.
I had the same troubles as you, wanted to replace and upgrade my long-loved short piste skis but not 100% sure what with despite reading all the reviews. Tried out what I thought I wanted at one of the indoors SHds test and wasn't finding any difference between my old skis and them, so didn't go ahead; other really good skis (apparently) I hated when tested in the dome. Did however buy some other rockered twin tipped All Mountain (wider than my piste skis) skis after the test, and loved them in the dome - though at first was very disappointed and regretted the decision when I took them on their first holiday. But now I am slowly coming to get on with them, at least under some conditions. I have also since bought some narrrower others (Rossi Hero Elite All Turn), and find that although they're only low 70s waist they've surprisingly good on crud and soft and unpisted too, and are a good lightweight all-round ski - although the aim was to give me the slalom/piste ski that I really wanted (OK, I couldn't afford the STs!). Not to say my AMs aren't very nice skis, just didn't initially end up suiting how I skied outdoors, and are a bit limited in my personal view on piste once it's hardpacked or icy (though very nice once any softness). But I have learned technical things from skiing them and they have improved and informed my skiing, so they get skied on when conditon suggest they're the better option of my 3 set quiver (can't bring myself to ditch the old ones yet...)
Antoehr thing - I was also like you and said that I would never ski off piste: and then, once I got my post-test AM ones, I started to think that I might as well try them in the side-of-piste stuff and then in unpisted UK stuff, and then in cruddy and slusy and deeper stuff, and am now a firm convert! So never say never. If you like a ski and can't test it in real conditions then you'll just have to take a punt and try to get it at a good price and grow to love it where it works for you; it might open some new horizons. Very Happy

Sorry can't be much more help at this stage. Ideally you want to go and try and test lots of skis on real resort runs for days at a time (hiring or borrowing) and then learn what you like and don't and take it from there: but it often isn't anywhere near as easy as that, I know Sad

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

@NickyJ, what it actually says, which is a Very Good Thing (although perhaps not for your purse), is that you are now sufficiently sensitive to notice the difference, and care about it.

I have a chum who (is a very competent skier) but wouldn't even notice the colour unless it were pointed out to her.

I don't think your impressions can easily (well not to me as I don't know the skis!) be translated back into a picture - maybe someone more informed can.

I am not a Salomon fan, and have tried many of their skis over the years (up to and including 217cm Downhills). None impressed.

When and where are you next going skiing?

Skiddy Volkls sounds like poor tuning on those particular skis.

You'll need to Register first of course.

@Grizzler, thanks- I am glad it isn’t just me!

I have been skiing for just over 30yrs but that hasn’t been every year and only one or two weeks a year. I would only discribe myself as intermediate as I am happy on blues and reds but tend to avoid blacks for the most part. I am also very conscious of my knee only having half its reconstructed ACL left. Hence why I won’t go off-piste.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

After all it is free

We are going to the Ski Amade region, staying inRadstadt for Feb Half term, then Myrhofen for second week of easter hols.

@NickyJ, it says that you like skis where you can engage the tip easily (which gives you steering control and so feels less "skiddy"). This is strongly influenced by two things - ski flex and binding position relative to true centre of the ski.

To expand:
Your Attraxions are probably the base model designed for beginner/intermediates. Therefore they're soft and easy to flex. Female specific so will have the binding forward. Easy to engage the tip.

The Salomons are a unisex (i.e. men's) ski. Women's specific skis have the bindings mounted further forward than an equivalent geometry male ski (and usually a softer construction) to compensate for female anatomy. Therefore you'll find it harder to engage the tip of a "unisex" ski.

The Intense 10's are a female specific piste ski. Nice upgrade on your current ski - longer, stiffer, more suited to your experience level. 160cm an ideal length. I think you'd find the 12's too stiff. Dynastar mark the 12's as an Expert ski so they'll need driving - that doesn't sound like your kind of skiing.

The Volkls are listed as a beginner/intermediate ski so no more suitable than your Attraxions. Volkls usually have the binding mounted slightly further back of true centre than Rossignol do so again you will find it harder to engage the tip.

The Missconducts are primarily a park ski and therefore will have the binding mounted close or on true centre (to make skiing switch easier). Probably softer than an equivalent piste ski too, so easy to flex. Therefore, despite the width they will be very easy to engage the tip, giving you confidence. Downside of the binding position is that on a mountain unless you have excellent fore/aft balance control you may feel too far forward for normal piste skiing. You're unlikely to have skied fast enough on a dome test to know whether that is the case for you or not but it's not the percentage bet, particularly with a dodgy knee.

I'd go with the Intense 10's. If you liked them in a dome I can't see you being disappointed with them on a mountain.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

@NickyJ, Slightly off topic, but you might recall that I apparently have no ACLs in either knee. That's when I started to play off the crowded, idiot-filled, hardpacked main pistes!
I can't comment on full deep 'proper' off piste, but with the wider AMs, with rocker tips, it doesn't seem to be a strain on the knees or legs and I don't feel that a fall is going to be any more or less likely or have any different an outcome overall. I was very pleasantly surprised at what I could do without knee issues arising; arguably a lot less pain or strain for me than charging down a groomer on edges. The wider skis pivot and skid much more easily, though still a thin enough waist to carve well. Being lightweight helps too, though are torsionally stiff enough.
I am also around the same standard as you, don't ski blacks unless are soft and can be done with slow short turns: just don't like speed and steepness combined, especially sans ligaments. It's been worthwhile learning how to ski the softer, ungroomed stuff, including a few lessons (not enough). I hope to be able to try some full OP when it's available and I feel technically competent enough.

snow reports

@Raceplate, thank you! Your explanations make a lot of sense.

Oh and I have edited the typo above (have only been skiing just over 30yrs).

Oh, p.s., back on topic - probably for your stats longer skis are merited - but one thing I got worried about with my knees was having over-long skis. Didn't want to trip up over them, tip or tail, and also felt that if I fell they were longer so would get ripped off in the snow rather than being able to be held above the snow as my shorter ones can (rarely rip off even when quite spectacular falls). My ACL loss was on the longer AM skis (maybe coincidence?), my most painful fall afterwards ditto. The AMs are technically 166 but that's with twin rocker. My piste skis are 155 and 152; I've skied these between around 9-10.5 stone (going lighter, generally) and I'm about 5' 5". Plenty fast enough for me.
Also longer skis takes a bit of technique adjusting to after being used to skiing shorter too, or so I found, so that might affect your testing impressions (?)
Someone above commented on binding position: if you have bindings that adjust for many boot sole lengths then you can easily go forward a bit by +/- maths to the marked bsl settings. I find the Rossi HE (man's to unisex ski) bindings to be very well balanced as they came, the bindings on my AMs (man's ski) were specifically set forward for me as a woman (though not sure I actually like that - still need to play and experiment). All things which will affect how the ski feels and performs in conjunction with you.

You know it makes sense.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

@NickyJ, Enjoy Radstadt, just up the road from me so might see you about on the slopes.

A snowHead

@Scarpa, nice Happy

we are staying Haus Suzanne. Really looking forward to it Happy

Don’t suppose you have looked at the range of stuff available to hire?

A snowHead

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

@Raceplate, have pm’d him.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

I'd be inclined to go for the K2 missconduct as you thought so highly of them.

My reasoning, apart from the above, is that "park" orientated skis have a torsional response profile that is far more suited to a skier that doesn't want to overload their knees, or any other part of the leg.

The feeling I interpret from them is that the tip and tail engagement is far more gentle and progressive than pure piste orientated skis. They do after all have to accept landings from any and various angles without a hard hook up with the snow that then blitzes the skier if you are unable to ride out the resulting error.

Generally they seem to give a very easy feeling to skiing, one that makes you feel that you can just throw them at anything without that thought in the back of your mind that it's going to wind up hurting you.

If you get a match of the ski to your own feelings of security and not being caught out, then I think you'll ski them far more naturally and with big benefits to your skiing.

There's also very few conditions they won't cope with, especially for a recreational skier.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

@ski3, you do realise you have set me back to square one of indecision.

I thought I had found a pair of the Missconduct’s £175 delivered.... to realise they didn’t have my length left in stock.

I was sold on the ones via Spyderjon until realised it is another £45 on top to get my bindings onto them... pushing the budget even higher.

So maybe I should just wait till I am in resort and try and hire both.

Anybody know if they are likely to be available to hire?

You'll need to Register first of course.

Been deliberating about this further. Wondering what to do. Worried about letting those ex-demos slip through my fingers, though wondering if I should just try them with their own bindings and not incur the additional expense of moving bindings especially as the bindings it comes with are significantly lighter, however fearful of doing further damage to my knee.

Also been wondering if I should be considering the 169 missconducts. Given my height is 172 if memory serves and my understanding is you should go longer with twin tips?

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Why do you think your bindings on your current skis are better than the ones on the Intense 10's?

After all it is free

As to whether they ARE better hard to say. Certainly the much lighter weight bindings the Intense 10’s come with is certainly attractive. But then I start thinking what if...

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

@NickyJ, in that situation, whether I was skeptical or nit about the Knee binding, I’d be using them unless given a very strong argument not to.

Mind you a chum has just had a knee replacement and is looking forward to getting back on her skis...

@ski3, I have to say that I cannot see (from a physics pov) how a fractionally softer torsional rigidity can compensate for an (airline average adult weight) 85kgs landing on a 60cms effective edge (as it’s the edge underfoot that makes all that difference.

Nope. Cannot see that at all.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

@NickyJ, Spyderjon told me that the Knee was a quality binding, that's all the info I needed Very Happy

snow reports

@under a new name, he then said and you are too young to have one. Hence my desire to protect it as long as possible.

That is exactly why I have a strong temptation to keep those bind transferring them onto new skis, despite their weight.

You know it makes sense.

@under a new name, well how do you think they change the characteristics of a ski.

It's geometry plus longitudinal flex plus torsional resistance that gives a ski it's properties.

The opposite would be loading the ski up with layers of metal carbon etc to the point where most torsional response only takes place at the very extreme, as they do in a jpure slalom ski. That's how they get them to hang on to tip engagement on flat piste right to the very final point the skier can drive them too.

This is just the opposite of that.

Absolutely and entirely possible.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

A snowHead

http://blog.sandwichtechskis.com/2014/03/ski-flex-torsion-vs-bending.html

Link should show more clearly what is being changed. This is demonstrating "their" ski has a higher resistance against torsional load than the races volkl races skis.

It's really talking about the very far end, way into expert level, of the sort of figures used in that construction. Generally piste consumer skis are going to be positioned below this, with more park focused skis stepping downward again.

The Dynastar 10 mentioned above are piste orientated, 12 mtrs radius and aimed toward the expert user by their own rating. That to me suggests a fine ski IF you know you want that, but one that also has the ability to demand a high torque load on the knee if mistakenly applied.
This I'd view as the very definition of "catching an edge" and either releasing, crashing or potentially damaging something.

As some of the references in search for torsional requirements in skis show, it's a balance between this and other criteria within the ski which is a fairly inexact science. Also why you can sometimes find a ski that just seems naturally in tune with your demands.
If you want a ski that builds load demand more slowly and with a wider window of interpretation, then I'd still say this supports your original view of the K2 missconduct.

These attributes, again I feel are more kind to someone with the knee condition the OP carries. I can't see why it wouldn't be wise to use the protective bindings either.

Observations about a twin tip with rocketed tip and tail are, I feel, correct. If your normal piste ski is 160 then the K2 at 169 are going to feel like a 159 pure piste ski when used on piste.

A snowHead

@NickyJ, I'm trying to think of some way beyond a ven diagram to explain how as you better your skills, the less important your ski choice is . . . With the inverse that selective ski choice can enhance your skills. To be honest, you're better off developing your skills on different rental kit to the point where you can actually 'FEEL' how different skis react under your feet as you use your body to drive them.

I think it boils down to whether you wish to develop your abilities or find a ski that will flatter your existing standard . . . and that's where it becomes impossible to tell you what ski to buy beyond just a 'middle of the road, major manufacturer ski to suit your height and weight, then go get some one on one lessons.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

@ski3, too complicated on pad keyboard. Yes and no. But I’m still disagreeing. And your link guy’s argument ibegins with the old bend in shop test which has been bollox since I was in cable bindings.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

@under a new name, he's just showing you how to define and isolate the different directions of flex in that paragraph. It's agreeing with you in essence that longitudinal flex is not the single component that should be used to judge a ski.

Then it goes on to show you torsional flex isolated from longitudinal, which is the component we're talking about here.

So, in your original post you can't see how torsional flex can affect the grip property, and now add longitudinal flex as no way to judge a ski. So how do they alter the characteristics of the ski by design in your assessment if you're dismissing both of the principal components of the ski flex?

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

@ski3, you misunderstand me. (Proper keyboard now).

He starts off by discussing how to "test" a ski by flexing (longitudinally) it in a shop. Any body worth their salt know this is nonsense. Tells you pretty much nothing, not even about how stiff the ski is. ...

My point is simply that the effect of a skier landing a jump in snow is going to be very very little affected by torsional rigidity as the simple fact of the 60 cms of effectively rigid edge under foot entering the snow will overwhelm any "point of contact" effect tip and tail.

And I am totally not convinced that park skis are actually that less rigid than anything else.

"the tip and tail engagement is far more gentle and progressive than pure piste orientated skis. They do after all have to accept landings from any and various angles without a hard hook up with the snow that then blitzes the skier if you are unable to ride out the resulting error"

I really don't see this at all. As above, the length of ski that is actually "active" at this point is (unless you are hopelessly off balance).
underfoot.

Skis that are as torsionally soft as you describe would be horrible.

You'll need to Register first of course.

Just received this from Powder7, a shop in Colorado I purchased a Flylow jacket from a few years ago. They do a 'Best' Ski Gear Guide. Maybe something for you there to peruse.

https://www.powder7.com/ski-blog/category/2019-ski-buyers-guide/?utm_source=Contacts&utm_campaign=b86f8f0f5a-GUIDE_20181019&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_3d65de82df-b86f8f0f5a-16339457&mc_cid=b86f8f0f5a&mc_eid=5fd96c23ad

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Thanks all. Have metaphorically pulled the trigger and given Spyderjon my credit card details for the Dynastar.

After all it is free

@NickyJ, good job you called me last night as another snowHead wanted the same skis this morning.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

@NickyJ, good for you. In both senses of the phrase! snowHead

Help!!

Skis comparisons

snowHeads Forum Index >>> Equipment Reviews/Questions