 Poster: A snowHead
|
Afternoon all.
I'm looking to upgrade my skis and am after some advice. The budget only stretches to one pair so I am looking for something that will be good for off piste and touring but also have reasonable performance on piste.
I am 183cm tall, weigh 78kg, advanced intermediate skier. Time is usually spent about 50/50 on piste and off piste in resort. I am also planning to use for some touring too (got a trip to Lyngen coming up in April and like to do the odd day tour).
I've been looking for skis that are between 90-100mm underfoot (probably closer to 100) to get the balance between enough float but something that can still carve reasonably, and also not too heavy for touring. Some rocker but not too much. The plan is to mount fritschi freeride bindings from my current skis, with a view to upgrading to the fritschi tecton when this comes out next season.
I'm currently looking at the Dynastar Cham 97 and Fischer Ranger 98 as these seem to be the best suited to my needs and have good reviews. Have also looked at Volka Mantras and Atomic Vantage 100 but these are both a little bit heavier so would be harder work on the up. Does anyone have experience of these skis or any others that might do the job?
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Scott Superguide 95 - I cannot believe how good these skis are! I've tested them a bit, and will be buying a pair as soon as funds allow. I do prefer them to the Cham 97 (which I also love) - I just think there's more performance and confidence in them on not-so-nice snow, but I've not skied the Fischer Ranger 98.
http://www.fall-line.co.uk/seven-of-201516s-best-skis/
Awesome on piste as well as off, and light. Plus sypderjon stocks them so can sort you out and mount your bindings  Hmm, just read again and not sure they come in a long enough length for you - but Jon can advise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Bought a pair of Ranger 98's at the start of the season and used them for 1 trip. Didn't really get much piste experience but did some half day tours and worked well for me on the uphill and downhill bits. Not too much rocker and whilst they aren't as light as a proper touring ski, I was not planning on using them for proper touring so not such an issue. Can't comment on what they are like on ice/hardpack as there wasn't any!
Hired some Cham 97's last season and I would say they were similar. Haven't tried Superguides so can't compare to those.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@fixx, your post beat me by seconds 
Their longest length Superguide 95 is 183cm but as the OP is only 78kg then they'd be perfect. Sensible money too & the pre-cut Scott/Colltex camlock Whizz skins are a real bargain too. Scott are almost sold out so you'd have to be quick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@dangermouse79, Volkl BMT Series
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
I have the same dilemma.
The Volkl BMT 94 is very expensive and to keep the warranty you need to fit specific touring bindings.
As well as most of the skis above the following skis are on the list.
Völkl 90 eight - heavy similar to the Fischer Ranger (1760g / Ski @177cm)
Kästle TX90 - might be too light for difficult snow.
Fischer Hannibal 94 or 100 - as above.
Blizzard Zero G 95
http://www.outdoorgearlab.com/Backcountry-Skis-Reviews
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Mon 6-02-17 17:47; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| moseyp wrote: |
| Dynastar Cham 97 - perfect ski |
+1
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
I skied my mates Cham 97s last season, but this year I've gone with the Scott 95 sg's. Really enjoying them. Very light, yet positive feel to them. The 97's somehow felt more ponderous in comparison. I also use similar sized Atomic Theories and the Scott seem more directionally stable than those.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My ultimate choice of Cham 97 was influenced by the higher price of the alternatives I considered.
When I was in the market, the ski I liked best was the Black Crows Camox Freebird, which was quite similar in feel (on an indoor slope). I'd have bought them if they weren't significantly more expensive. However, I think the Camox construction has since changed significantly to be a "baby Atris".
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Thanks guys for all the replies. More food for thought.
The next question is length. My current skis are 176 Scott Neos. The Chams for example come in 178 or 184cm. I am 183cm and weigh 78kg. The 184s I presume would give me more flotation and stability but I am concerned would be awkward for kick turns and in moguls. Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
