I've skiid this year on my QST 92s that I bought just before the pandemic, for the first time.
I feel they're not right for me though at 168cm, for my 188cm 90kg frame, they're a bit too flappy. As a 'true' Intermediate I feel like i'm struggling to progress on them, especially with carving.
Could you advise on any skis for me to consider? Majority piste, some off piste.
My other question is, how do you know when your boots have a flex too low? My 100 flex boots feel like they're perhaps not stiff enough now, but I'm not sure if that's true, or if I'm just being a princess...
I hope I've made sense above, thanks in advance!
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
If you want to try a more Piste orientated AM ski, you could look at the Rossignol Experience 86 Basalt - probably in a 176. There is a Ti version which is stiffer. There is also an 82 version if you very seldom go Off Piste.
I suspect your boots are probably a little soft for your weight. You should probably be in a 110 - 120....but be guided by a good Bootfitter. My Atomic Boots are a 110, but can be turned into a 120.
BTW. Welcome to
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?
Stöckli Stormrider 88 will give you the support you need with fantastic piste & AM performance. You need to go longer than 168 though - try a 175 if you can find some. Agree with OFB about boot flex - 100 is insufficient. I weigh 15kg less than you and I'm comfortable in a 120 flex Salomon S/Pro.
What the others said, something with a waist of 82-86mm will be much more to your liking and much easier to carve on.
168cm also seems way too short for you. I'd be going with 175-180cm.
Black Crows Divus or Vertis as well if you want to be trendy.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Bulric wrote:
I've skiid this year on my QST 92s that I bought just before the pandemic, for the first time.
I feel they're not right for me though at 168cm, for my 188cm 90kg frame, they're a bit too flappy. As a 'true' Intermediate I feel like i'm struggling to progress on them, especially with carving.
Could you advise on any skis for me to consider? Majority piste, some off piste.
What was your motivation for getting the QSTs in the first place? I’ve only used the 98s, & really like them—but I’d only go out on them if I was expecting to spend a lot of the day off-piste, & willing to sacrifice a good amount of piste performance in order to enjoy the conditions beyond the poles. (They also strike me as surprisingly short: I’m 1.75m, and would usually go about 10cm longer than your 168s.)
If you want to try a more Piste orientated AM ski, you could look at the Rossignol Experience 86 Basalt - probably in a 176. There is a Ti version which is stiffer. There is also an 82 version if you very seldom go Off Piste. I suspect your boots are probably a little soft for your weight. You should probably be in a 110 - 120....but be guided by a good Bootfitter. My Atomic Boots are a 110, but can be turned into a 120. BTW. Welcome to
telford_mike wrote:
Stöckli Stormrider 88 will give you the support you need with fantastic piste & AM performance. You need to go longer than 168 though - try a 175 if you can find some. Agree with OFB about boot flex - 100 is insufficient. I weigh 15kg less than you and I'm comfortable in a 120 flex Salomon S/Pro.
NoMapNoCompass wrote:
What the others said, something with a waist of 82-86mm will be much more to your liking and much easier to carve on.
168cm also seems way too short for you. I'd be going with 175-180cm.
Black Crows Divus or Vertis as well if you want to be trendy.
Thank you all for the advice; I've always fancied some Black Crows, but 'all the gear and no idea' springs to mind!
I think I should invest in some really good adjustable flex boots too.
jmr59 wrote:
Bulric wrote:
I've skiid this year on my QST 92s that I bought just before the pandemic, for the first time.
I feel they're not right for me though at 168cm, for my 188cm 90kg frame, they're a bit too flappy. As a 'true' Intermediate I feel like i'm struggling to progress on them, especially with carving.
Could you advise on any skis for me to consider? Majority piste, some off piste.
What was your motivation for getting the QSTs in the first place? I’ve only used the 98s, & really like them—but I’d only go out on them if I was expecting to spend a lot of the day off-piste, & willing to sacrifice a good amount of piste performance in order to enjoy the conditions beyond the poles. (They also strike me as surprisingly short: I’m 1.75m, and would usually go about 10cm longer than your 168s.)
Basically it's what the guy in the shop advised me on, but I think I was majorly mislead. I did ask for a ski with more piste than off-piste capability, like 75-25, but alas...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
@Bulric, Can I take it that you are not interested in a Quiver of skis ie. Getting Piste skis along with your AM Skis and then choosing which one, based on the conditions?
I can however understand if you just want the one pair to do everything. As an Intermediate, it is imo very important to get something very Piste orientated, with a reasonably tight turn radius (14 - 16m), to help with Carving.
With spending 25% of your time Off Piste, 86mm under foot is what I'd suggest.
Would also put Elan Wingman in the same category, great ski.
As for the Black Crows, they don't just make powder skis, the Divus and Vertis are narrower AM skis with 82 and 85mm (I think!!) waists. Reasonably tight radius as well at 16 or 17m. I don't own either but tried the Divus recently and it was a nice manageable ski and would be good for intermediates.
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.
Bulric wrote:
Basically it's what the guy in the shop advised me on, but I think I was majorly mislead. I did ask for a ski with more piste than off-piste capability, like 75-25, but alas...
Makes sense. I strongly agree with @Old Fartbag that you'd be best-served with something piste-oriented. When it comes to the question of just how piste-oriented, I think the questions are not only how much time you want to spend off-piste, but also what you want to do and when you want to do it (& not unrelatedly: what you want to be able to do when you do). What sort of off-piste skiing do you do (and want to do), and in what conditions?
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
NoMapNoCompass wrote:
Would also put Elan Wingman in the same category, great ski.
I think the Wingman is a great suggestion.
For the benefit of the OP, there are two models, the 86Ti and the 86 CTi. The latter is further strengthened with two longitudinal carbon reinforcing rods. Both models are supposed to be forgiving.
They come in a 172 (r=15.6m) and a 178 (r=16.5m). Which model at which length should ideally be determined by trying them out.....and maybe, if going for the 178, go for the Ti; or if going for the 172, go for the CTI. The longer length would be helpful Off Piste and the Shorter length more manoeuvrable On Piste.
It should be noted that these have a Left and Right ski as they have the Amphibio Profile.
From what I have read, both the above models would be more forgiving that the Rossignol Experience 86Ti (ie. not the Basalt version which is more forgiving).
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads on Thu 20-04-23 13:50; edited 1 time in total
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
@Bulric,
Quote:
I think I should invest in some really good adjustable flex boots too.
No, just some good and appropriately flexing boots. (I'm not really sure just how many truly well flex adjustable boots exist these days?) On which I agree with all the above probably too soft. But you should be skiing in the boot that fits (whether by design or fitting). Maybe go see a good fitter? Where you based anyway? the collective might have a recommendation... Also, if they're comfy enough, adding an after market "Booster" strap might help?
Quote:
it's what the guy in the shop advised me on
and at best he didn't have the first clue, at worst he's a fraudster. Totally not a ski - IMHO - that you should be looking at. Anything piste oriented would be appropriate, if you can try before you buy that would be good too. Internet opinions are worth the skis they are printed on. Oh, wait, what skis are they printed on?
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.
Thanks again for the advice, I wasn't expecting this level of help! All the ski suggestions so far look like good prospects.
Old Fartbag wrote:
@Bulric, Can I take it that you are not interested in a Quiver of skis ie. Getting Piste skis along with your AM Skis and then choosing which one, based on the conditions?
I can however understand if you just want the one pair to do everything. As an Intermediate, it is imo very important to get something very Piste orientated, with a reasonably tight turn radius (14 - 16m), to help with Carving.
With spending 25% of your time Off Piste, 86mm under foot is what I'd suggest.
This is a review of what I'm recommending:
The quiver approach is something I would consider; just makes things slightly trickier if I decide to fly rather than drive!
jmr59 wrote:
Bulric wrote:
Basically it's what the guy in the shop advised me on, but I think I was majorly mislead. I did ask for a ski with more piste than off-piste capability, like 75-25, but alas...
Makes sense. I strongly agree with @Old Fartbag that you'd be best-served with something piste-oriented. When it comes to the question of just how piste-oriented, I think the questions are not only how much time you want to spend off-piste, but also what you want to do and when you want to do it (& not unrelatedly: what you want to be able to do when you do). What sort of off-piste skiing do you do (and want to do), and in what conditions?
under a new name wrote:
@Bulric,
Quote:
I think I should invest in some really good adjustable flex boots too.
No, just some good and appropriately flexing boots. (I'm not really sure just how many truly well flex adjustable boots exist these days?) On which I agree with all the above probably too soft. But you should be skiing in the boot that fits (whether by design or fitting). Maybe go see a good fitter? Where you based anyway? the collective might have a recommendation... Also, if they're comfy enough, adding an after market "Booster" strap might help?
Quote:
it's what the guy in the shop advised me on
and at best he didn't have the first clue, at worst he's a fraudster. Totally not a ski - IMHO - that you should be looking at. Anything piste oriented would be appropriate, if you can try before you buy that would be good too. Internet opinions are worth the skis they are printed on. Oh, wait, what skis are they printed on?
If I'm being honest, I only go off-piste, between pistes, if that makes sense? So nothing near serious...
I'm based in Gloucestershire, not sure if there's any highly rated places near me?
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
@under a new name, Some Atomic Boots can have the flex adjusted by +/- 10 Flex points by adding or removing a bolt at the back.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
@Old Fartbag, yeah, I know, not convinced. I think the Lange touring range varied only in the strap between certain models.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Old Fartbag wrote:
@under a new name, Some Atomic Boots can have the flex adjusted by +/- 10 Flex points by adding or removing a bolt at the back.
Indeed. Being pedantic, I believe that you can only stiffen boots such as the Atomic Hawk Ultra if you have already softened the flex by removing the screws. In other words, a 130 flex boot can’t be adjusted to 140, but can be adjusted to 120 then back to 130.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Bulric wrote:
I'm based in Gloucestershire, not sure if there's any highly rated places near me?
Solutions4feet in Bicester is the best shop near to you.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Bulric wrote:
Hello All,
Long time lurker, first time poster.
Hoping for some thoughts/advice on two points...
I've skiid this year on my QST 92s that I bought just before the pandemic, for the first time.
I feel they're not right for me though at 168cm, for my 188cm 90kg frame, they're a bit too flappy. As a 'true' Intermediate I feel like i'm struggling to progress on them, especially with carving.
Could you advise on any skis for me to consider? Majority piste, some off piste.
My other question is, how do you know when your boots have a flex too low? My 100 flex boots feel like they're perhaps not stiff enough now, but I'm not sure if that's true, or if I'm just being a princess...
I hope I've made sense above, thanks in advance!
If you flex forward at the ankle in your boots so that you're pressing your skins against the boot tongue, door the boots support your weight or collapse?
I'm slightly shorter than you and about 5kg heavier than you and have a 130 flex salomon boot. I was collapsing my previous salomon 100 flex boots. A proper boot fitter will guide you but i suspect you need stiffer boots.
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?
I think QST 92 seem a reasonable assuming you told the shop you ski some off piste. That you find them "flappy" might just mean they are not the ski for you. As others have said they do seem on the short side and at 90kg they are maybe too lightweight for you. One review I just read said "lowest score for the QST 92 was for torsional stiffness/edge grip. high scores were for quickness/maneuverability and versatility". Which seems to match up with what you found.
As for the boots, a good boot fitter will tell you the flex ratings aren't too a standard/scientific. Which is basically why (among other reasons) you need to go to a good boot fitter. As mentioned S4F would be a good shout for your location.
@Layne, but they very much seem too short and if admitted "true intermediate" I wouldn't be reaching for that ski ... and certainly not in that length.
Reviews are pants and connot be trusted.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
lower wrote:
If you flex forward at the ankle in your boots so that you're pressing your skins against the boot tongue, door the boots support your weight or collapse?
I'm slightly shorter than you and about 5kg heavier than you and have a 130 flex salomon boot. I was collapsing my previous salomon 100 flex boots. A proper boot fitter will guide you but i suspect you need stiffer boots.
Yes pretty much what happens, at least I know what the issue is now!
If I was in your position (ie. Close to the Alps and easy access to a trusted shop), I'd probably feel the same.
However, in NI, with the good ski shops closed down and no Alps in sight, I have bought every ski that I have owned through reviews and research (except my first ski, where I was given "advise" and was a disaster). Aside from the fore-mentioned Lange SLS, they have all been terrific and exactly as I expected them to be. These have included Volkl Renntiger and VP19 SLX; Salomon Force 9 3S and X-Scream Series; Atomic Beta Ride 11.20 and SL11 and currently Scott The Ski and Dynastar SZ-12.
The secret is to read as many reviews as possible and pick the traits that are common to most of them...and of course get feedback on here.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
@Old Fartbag, my opinion on "reviews" is based on knowing a couple of "skiing" "journalists" whose reviews were, at best, "reviews of reviews" with no new nor actually real experience involved. Anyway, outside of race skis, reviews even if conducted on actual skis on actual snow are (IME) enormously subjective.
And your point on where I live is, I fear, a little unfair. Even when I lived in Edinburgh and London I still spent some time trying skis out (usually for curiousity) as I was mostly renting anyway (tech was changing too fast to buy at the time and, anyway, skis are too much hassle through airports for weekends). SO when I did buy I tried a few pairs thoroughly and decided that way. Not beyond the will of any skier, no matter their position. [/off topic]
Try before you buy. Obviously, retailers don't want you to think that way ...
After all it is free
After all it is free
Old Fartbag wrote:
under a new name wrote:
Reviews are pants and connot be trusted.
If I was in your position (ie. Close to the Alps and easy access to a trusted shop), I'd probably feel the same.
However, in NI, with the good ski shops closed down and no Alps in sight, I have bought every ski that I have owned through reviews and research (except my first ski, where I was given "advise" and was a disaster). Aside from the fore-mentioned Lange SLS, they have all been terrific and exactly as I expected them to be. These have included Volkl Renntiger and VP19 SLX; Salomon Force 9 3S and X-Scream Series; Atomic Beta Ride 11.20 and SL11 and currently Scott The Ski and Dynastar SZ-12.
The secret is to read as many reviews as possible and pick the traits that are common to most of them...and of course get feedback on here.
I fear I'm in the same boat, but I've had some great pointers of where to start in this thread.
Although I'm now starting to think a more dedicated piste ski may be the way to go!
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 wrote:
@Old Fartbag, my opinion on "reviews" is based on knowing a couple of "skiing" "journalists" whose reviews were, at best, "reviews of reviews" with no new nor actually real experience involved. Anyway, outside of race skis, reviews even if conducted on actual skis on actual snow are (IME) enormously subjective.
And your point on where I live is, I fear, a little unfair. Even when I lived in Edinburgh and London I still spent some time trying skis out (usually for curiousity) as I was mostly renting anyway (tech was changing too fast to buy at the time and, anyway, skis are too much hassle through airports for weekends). SO when I did buy I tried a few pairs thoroughly and decided that way. Not beyond the will of any skier, no matter their position. [/off topic]
Try before you buy. Obviously, retailers don't want you to think that way ...
My opinion on reviews is based on a lifetime of successfully using them to buy skis, without getting a dud....but that certainly doesn't mean you are wrong. I would always advise people, if possible, to to try before buying. Having both rented and owned skis for more years than I care to remember, I (like you) have built up my own knowledge base.
I think my comment on where you live (and with access to a good shop) is reasonably fair, in the sense that if I was was in the same boat, I would never buy without trying first.
Of course whether you like a ski, is going to be subjective - but a description of its general characteristics, much less so. Nobody is going to describe Scott the Ski as a stiff and damp hard charger without a speed limit; or a Blizzard Bonafide as a light, playful ski that gets flappy at speed. When I look at reviews, I am concentrating more on how the ski reacts/behaves, than whether the tester enjoyed it.
I do however think that one can actually be testing the Tune of the ski, as much as the ski itself.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Quote:
Although I'm now starting to think a more dedicated piste ski may be the way to go!
A nice stiff piste ski can be a delight to ski on and will be able to do side of piste stuff. What I've done based on the advise from Jon is to have one set of bindings, and 2 sets of skis, and I can then take both and swop bindings over
I'd definitely say you want a longer ski. I'm 178cm tall and have a Völkl Code Speedwall L 178cm as my piste ski and a 185cm R.98 offpiste/touring ski.
So you could keep your QST92s for the snowier days (albeit they are not really long enough though) and supplement with a 76mmish piste ski and I think you'd have a lot more fun!
Worth chatting to Jon about quiver killers and also what ski he'd recommend to supplement the QSTs
Trying before you buy is great in theory but personally I have found it to be largely impractical given I don't live in the mountains and ski a couple of weeks a year.
I have found reviews to be very helpful. With reviews of anything you have to use some intelligence and common sense but it can give you pointers, help to contradict or reaffirm your opinion.
It's not an exact science. On the plus side there isn't just one great ski or just one ideal ski for you.
One ski I bought because my mate had some and said they were good, one I bought on the advice of a guide (and then bought it's successor), my current ones I bought after mine bust and I had to hire some - and liked the first pair they gave me. But I've bought skis for my wife and kids based on reviews - and they have worked out fine.
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.
There are some great shops, e.g. Freeski in Meribel who will let you hire specific models on trial that you are interested in.
But agree that isn't the case in most resorts.
I also agree tuning and general servicing can have a massive effect. A bad service and tune can make the perfect skis feel terrible.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Hmmm, @NoMapNoCompass, it's been the case in pretty much every resort I've rented in. Which is not a tiny list (although it doesn't include Austria).
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Some are better than others in that regard I meant, in terms of brands and ranges of that brand. All will usually let you try before you buy I know
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
@NoMapNoCompass, ah, yes, sorry, misunderstood, quite that. Some indeed better than others.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Old Fartbag wrote:
NoMapNoCompass wrote:
Would also put Elan Wingman in the same category, great ski.
I think the Wingman is a great suggestion.
For the benefit of the OP, there are two models, the 86Ti and the 86 CTi. The latter is further strengthened with two longitudinal carbon reinforcing rods. Both models are supposed to be forgiving.
They come in a 172 (r=15.6m) and a 178 (r=16.5m). Which model at which length should ideally be determined by trying them out.....and maybe, if going for the 178, go for the Ti; or if going for the 172, go for the CTI. The longer length would be helpful Off Piste and the Shorter length more manoeuvrable On Piste.
It should be noted that these have a Left and Right ski as they have the Amphibio Profile.
From what I have read, both the above models would be more forgiving that the Rossignol Experience 86Ti (ie. not the Basalt version which is more forgiving).
Just doing some more research on these... any thoughts on the 82's?
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Bulric wrote:
Just doing some more research on these... any thoughts on the 82's?
Given I haven't skied on them, I'm not sure I can help that much - Only to say I would expect them to be a little quicker edge to edge, have a slightly shorter turn radius and have a little less float in deeper snow.
IMV. The one you go for will depend on how much time you spend away from the Piste. Think of the 82 as a wide Piste Ski and the 86 as a narrow AM ski.
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?
Bulric, honestly if you are only doing your off-piste between pistes in resort and it only constitutes 25% of your overall then I would probably go with the 82 over the 86. The former will be more fun on piste and you won't notice a massive amount of difference off.
Elan aren't really a sexy or fashionable brand but I have skied both the Amphibio and Wingman 82 and they are brilliant skis.
@NoMapNoCompass, oh I don't know? Never heard of Glen Plake?
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Old Fartbag wrote:
Given I haven't skied on them, I'm not sure I can help that much - Only to say I would expect them to be a little quicker edge to edge, have a slightly shorter turn radius and have a little less float in deeper snow.
IMV. The one you go for will depend on how much time you spend away from the Piste. Think of the 82 as a wide Piste Ski and the 86 as a narrow AM ski.
NoMapNoCompass wrote:
Bulric, honestly if you are only doing your off-piste between pistes in resort and it only constitutes 25% of your overall then I would probably go with the 82 over the 86. The former will be more fun on piste and you won't notice a massive amount of difference off.
Elan aren't really a sexy or fashionable brand but I have skied both the Amphibio and Wingman 82 and they are brilliant skis.
Thank you both, I think the 182s are the winners then.
Just so happens that snow and rock have a pair of 178cms on sale too...
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
