 Poster: A snowHead
|
Ok, for the last two days I have been giving my new BCs a good testing both on and off piste. To put it frankly I have been amazed by how versatile these skis are. With massive rocker, 120mm underfoot and a turn radius of 19m I thought that they would be pretty limited on piste. But no, they seem to turn quicker than my all mountain 98mm skis, are fine in bumps and can also carve turns cleanly if you have enough space. Short turns need a bit of a pivot motion. They ride over crust and crud well too, really absorb changeable terrain, if you keep your legs soft you should have no problem. They are quite stable at speed, on blue runs you can let them run on edge with confidence.
In jumps they are also confidence inspiring, they are a very forgiving ski but you are better off landing centrally on them as hitting tip or tail first feels a bit unbalanced. Skiing switch is very easy with these skis. I am pretty much a beginner at this but I found that on blue runs I could just keep making turn after turn without getting the tail edges caught.
Off piste... WOW!!! They float like a hovercraft and seem to have no tip dive in deep powder at all. They are also damn agile, for tree skiing you can make sudden direction changes very easily.
I went for my second pair of Atomic Tracker freeride/touring bindings on these and mounted them on the team line which I made out to be 2.8cm behind true center. They feel very balanced at this point, I can see why many people advise not needing to mount them further back for powder skiing. I would be happy skinning for an hour or so on these skis to get to fresh lines, they are not that heavy considering their size.
The only problem I have... is what the hell will I be using my much loved Nordica Enforcers for now apart from touring or for when I fear base damage? Even on piste, I would be happier on either my slalom skis or the Bents, as long as it wasn't too icy. Lets face it, no fat skis seem to like real hardpack.
This pic does make them look a little larger due to the camera angle... 
A few more reviews...
http://blistergearreview.com/gear-reviews/2014-2015-atomic-bent-chetler
http://www.utahoutside.com/2014/03/atomic-2015-bent-chetler-ski-review/
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Sat 4-01-20 10:59; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
To put it frankly I have been amazed by how versatile these skis are. With massive rocker, 120mm underfoot and a turn radius of 19m I thought that they would be pretty limited on piste.
|
Who'da think it 
110-120mm = perfect one ski quiver these days.
I saw what must have been a special edition of the Bents in a shop recently, with an absolutely goregous full wood topsheet. They were def the new one's with the 3d base stuff. They were only in the display window so not sure if they're actually for sale though!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
@Scarpa, interesting, what kinda bumps where they skied in?
Not sure I'd like to even attempt my wide skis in a decent bump field unless super slushy or loads of fresh???
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
@Scarpa, thanks, good review. Totally off the wall question if I may?
I currently ski on Atomic Redster LTs - last year's model. They're 174cm and 121-74-105 - couldn't be more different to those BCs. I can use them ok off-piste but have always been intrigued by these weird wide things, and I'd like to try them. I understand they need to be skied longer than a regular ski - is this true? And how much on-piste performance would I lose vs the Redsters?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@kitenski, The bumps were softish mostly as fresh snow had fallen, a little scraped and hard between them. They would not have been much fun if they were icy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@telford_mike, you go longer because the rockered portion is off the snow (outside of 3D snow), and even when it is in the snow it also makes the skis easier to turn quickly so there's no advantage to short skis.
On firm pistes you'll lose as much on piste performance as you'll gain off piste (even in firm offpiste) performance over the Redsters. Ie they'll be perfectly ok, or better, but not thrilling.
On soft/slushy pistes you'll notice much less difference. Ie you can still have a lot of fun, and the slushier it gets the better they'll get.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@telford_mike, I should imagine that you would definitely notice the limitations on piste. I ski on Atomic SL12s in 165cm if I am sticking to the groomed slopes. If you are after a one ski quiver than maybe the Atomic Access at 100mm underfoot would be more versatile. I had loads of fun on the Bents on piste, but compared to a dedicated carving ski you don't get the same edge grip or quickness of turns, much more of a smearing effect unless you have space to let them rail.
As for length, definitely go longer. The Bents have 30% tip and 30% tail rocker, with the remaining 40% being cambered like a traditional ski. So on the piste they ski short. I am 176cm tall, 75kg and usually ski a 177, the Bents at 185 felt right, but if you wanted them for big powder fields and high speed the 192s would probably be better.
@clarky999, I bet those would stand out 
Last edited by Then you can post your own questions or snow reports... on Thu 8-01-15 16:58; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@telford_mike, your comparing two massively different skis!!
The redsters will be massively better on piste, edge to edge, stiffness, speed, control etc
Wide skis help massively in less than ideal off piste (ie what 99% of us ski!), I've found the rocker and softer flex helps in cut up snow and patchy snow with new, wind blown crust etc etc
Saying that I took my wide (120mm) and narrows (74cm) skis to St Anton last year and just skied the 74cm everywhere inc a little off piste as conditions weren't brilliant...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Thanks for all the info chaps, I'll see what's in the shop next time it snows and have a morning on something around 100mm underfoot. I don't mind skiing deeper snow on the Redsters, but, as Mrs telford_mike keeps reminding me, I'm not getting any younger and I need all the help I can get! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Scarpa, interesting review, and quite surprising too!
Will be in Salzburgerland end of next week - will ski piste a couple of days but prob also do Kleinarlerhutte and Sudwienerhutte if you fancy touring one day. Will PM you ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
@jedster, [yeah, if at least 50% of your skiing enjoyment comes from carving *hard* (soft isn't an issue) pistes then obviously then Bents aren't the right tool!
I'd still say there are plenty of skis around 110mm that could be it though - just instead of a playful pow orientated stuff you'd be looking more at the charger end with metal, subtler rocker, longer sidecut length (as in along the lenght of the ski). If at least 50% of your ski enjoyment comes form offpiste I still reckon you're giving up too much float and stability - for a true allrounder - at 100mm and below
Blizzard Cochise, or Kästle or Nordica equivalents maybe better as they have camber. DPS 105? Also Down CD7.
Last edited by And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports. on Thu 8-01-15 23:33; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I demoed the 175cm Bent Chetlers in November and really liked them as well despite not being able to see further than about 50m. I got to ski them in about knee deep powder and could tell right away the 175cm was too short, I'm 5'9 or 175cm so similar to @Scarpa. I was perfectly happy with them on soft pistes as well and would like to try the longer length some day when I could actually see.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
@clarky999,
Fortunately I don't have to restrict myself to one pair so something like the bents might be a rather nice addition
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@Scarpa, If they made you happy, you definitely aren't showing it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@jedster, haha definitely the way to do it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
in the case of my kids) ski to my level. I want a ski which can be thrilling on hard pistes and still fun to play on between the pistes. Of course I'd also like something for hooning around on powder days with my stronger skiing mates. SO that means that there isn't really a one ski quiver but if I could only have one pair of skis they would probably be <100mm underfoot, traditional sidecut and stiff (like the older mantras and perhaps current bonafides).
