 Poster: A snowHead
|
So I've found 2 skis that I love - Blizzard Brahma 82 and the Atomic X9 WB - Now I just need to think of this in terms of a quiver and what is going to work best without too much overlap.
Piste - Atomic Redster X9 WB 75mm / Stockli Laser SC 72mm
All Mountain - Blizzard Brahma 82mm / 88mm
Off Piste - Blizzard Rustler 9 93mm / Rustler 10 102mm
A few options are to drop the piste ski and keep take the narrow all mountain 82mm Brahma and then choose a Ruster 9 or 10 as my off piste ski.
1) Forget the dedicated off piste ski as the Brahma can handle it but might not be as easy or fun as something like the Rustler - it would be nice to have something that was even easier to float and especially release the tail edge for short turns off piste though. I know I like the Brahma though and haven't tested any of the rustler series and I'm more used to narrow skis.
2) I could get the X9 WB and bump up the Brahma to the 88mm version which I haven't tested but should be similar to the 82mm. The reason being they are quite similar in width even though they are quite different skis. I'd e happy to own the X9 and Brahma 82mm though.
3) I could get the X9 WB Brahma 88 and Rustler 93 - I got the 88mm Brahma I'm not sure how much I would gain buying the rustler 9 as well even though they are quite different skis according to the reviews.
4) Get the X9 WB and the Rustler 9 as the Rustler is supposed to be quite like the Brahma but more dedicated for off piste. Then I have 2 very different skis that are 20mm apart in terms of width. Whether I will like the Rustler is an unknown though. Can the Rustler 9 be a dedicated off piste powder ski in the Alps?
5) Get the X9 WB, Brahma 88 and Rustler 10 to cover all bases (but i'm not convinced I particularly like wide skis).
6) Just get the Brahma 82mm as it has proven to cope with everything i've thrown at it pretty damn well so far - Can easily cover piste duties as well as being flexible enough for nearly all off piste conditions. Could also just get the Brahma 88mm which will probably be even more flexible but may sacrifice on piste and mogul performance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Laser SCs are for pussies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
X9 WB
Brahma 88
Rustler 11
Would be a very nice quiver I think. Put Shifts on the latter two and you'd cover touring nicely too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@Powder Pete,
I think your choices are a bit close together. I'd go purer/narrower with your piste ski and wider with your off piste one (if you are going for three pairs).
Say 65mm waist SLs, Brahmas and something a bit wider and more playful like, say, BC Atris or WD Altum
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
I'd be with @jedster on that too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@jedster, @under a new name, I would say the same, other than the piste ski needs to be a bit mellower/all day for teaching on.
Edit: though actually the Brahmas would be just fine for that. So yeah, SLs 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Edit: though actually the Brahmas would be just fine for that. So yeah, SLs
|
That's what I thought
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@under_a_new_name
What Stockli or Atomic ski's do you consider to be for very manly tough guys?
@jedster / @clarky999
I didn't any of the stockli challenging skis apart from the GS. The SLs seemed a little boring. They carved a nice short turn and were very easily controlled but didn't really have the pop and rebound I look for in a ski. The ones with turtle shell had even less like the SX and AX. I didn't get to try the WRT. The SC was great for long and short turns - I rode then with a race plate and asked bindings. The Atomic X9 seem way more lively and aggressive than the SLs in my opinion. Atomics seen more stiff and powerful. I think the laser GS in the 180 were quite a handful and knackering for all day use but I loved them and has a blast riding then. The way they pull you into a turn is really cool and how the energy you build up in the long turns tries to overpower your legs. They like to go fast. I'd be tempted to take a 175cm In them. I haven't tried their FIS.
I was riding the Atomic X9 65mm skis in the 181cm for a week or so. They were quite nice too - very controlled on hardpack. Not too exciting though. The WB just has something that gives you back the energy you put in. Maybe in the 175cm I might find them less damp and more fun. When pistes get a bit mashed up as they often do the X9s didn't really like it though.
The reason i'm not sure about going any wider than mid 90s is due to riding the Nordica Enforcer in the 185cm and them feeling so huge - like driving a truck. Didn't really enjoy it much. Too much ski for me I'd say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Powder Pete, any of the ones that haven't been softened. So e.g. https://www.stoeckli.ch/inten/ski/overview/fis-racing/ski-laser-wrt-sl-fis-2019 I think your comment on the ones you did try support my assertion.
Basically any FIS SL ski would be fun. And I'm not sure how much of a difference you would notice across brands as they are all aiming at the same objective with the same constraints (and in many cases, I am led to believe, the same factory).
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Is that what you ride on piste? Have the non-FIS GS also been softened? Did you try them? I'm not sure about such a short ski like a 165cm and 12m radius. I thought even the 172cm might be a bit short for me https://www.stoeckli.ch/inten/ski/overview/fis-racing/laser-wrt-st
I did find the SL I tried supportive and stable in the 170cm length though. I tend to ski 175-180 ish. I figured if I went too stiff and too damp it would take a lot of fun out of it. Might lack rebound and pop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@Powder Pete, at the mo, since my Nordica FIS SLs expired (I think I got a good 200 days out of them) I have usually stuck to my Bonafides with occasional outings on FIS GS and SGs. I did feel my wife's 155s are a bit "short" and that I could overpower them, but no such issues on the 165s. And they are designed to have very short sidecuts!
If I saw a cheap pair of SLs I could be tempted but as I got away with touring skis this xmas my budgetary flexibility is under a beady eye.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What are your quiver capacity carrying constraints and period you need your selection to cover during a trip?
A 3 ski quiver when you live in driving distance of the hill (& can even pop to the car/appartment to change mid day) is possibly very different to one where you can only pick 2/3 or less to fly with on any specific trip. The former can afford a real powder ski, the latter you probably want sub 115ish as a powder/soft/slush weapon. Similarly at the skinny end - the true piste ski is a SL or GS variant of some kind but they can be hard work off the groomer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
I'm not sure you need a 3 ski quiver, I reckon one piste ski, one off piste ski with touring bindings will see you fine for 99.9% of situations. Otherwise you'll be posting on here at 8am asking what of the 3 skis to take 
The X9 75mm and the Brahma 82mm sound much too close in width to be worth the extra expense IMHO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| I did feel my wife's 155s are a bit "short" and that I could overpower them, but no such issues on the 165s. |
You make this statement whenever SL skis are being discussed, what do you mean by "overpowering" them ?
In modern slalom technique, the only forces generated by the skier are straight down through the boot sole to the ski to decamber it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| kitenski wrote: |
I'm not sure you need a 3 ski quiver, I reckon one piste ski, one off piste ski with touring bindings will see you fine for 99.9% of situations. Otherwise you'll be posting on here at 8am asking what of the 3 skis to take
The X9 75mm and the Brahma 82mm sound much too close in width to be worth the extra expense IMHO. |
They are pretty close in width but they do both offer a different feeling and usage. I'm happy to take the Brahma off piste in the powder and soft chop but I doubt I would be with the X9. That said the Brahma carves well so there is quite a bit of overlap. That's partly why I was thinking of bumping up to the 88 though. I think that could probably be my off piste ski. What kind of thing were you thinking for an off piste ski?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@Powder Pete, I don't live in the Alps, I'm also 52, so have the following, which seem to do me fine so far.
a 76cm all mountain/piste ski - the Volkl Codewall Speed L
a 98cm off piste/touring ski - WhiteDot Ranger R.98
I had 110cm(ish) off piste skis but that hurt my knees on harder snow/crossing pistes to get somewhere, so far the R.98s don't....
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
@rjs, just for you, I’m opening a new thread. Imminently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
