 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Any comments about these. Am thinking about getting a pair. What sort of level are they aimed at (I am 75% on piste but ski hard and fast) off-piste if the powder is nice though so they must be up for that! Any comments will be much appreciated. Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I have some ride 11's, they're a more rigid version. According to the guys in Precision the 11's are too stiff for most people and the ride 9's are preferred by most people. I suspect I've enough weight to make the 11's preferable to me.
Check out Zags though, excellent on piste and off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Cheers, I'm 14stone so the R11s might be a better call for me too! I've got this funnny feeling that I'm going to do better spending a week trying out skis next season and then pay the full whack! Ouch 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Have to disagree on the advice from Precision on the R11's. I'm under 11 stone and find R11's excellent (length 160), they are a big improvement on my previous skis, huge confidence builders and very stable at speed. When I was researching what to buy, I looked at the R9 and thought that the R11 offered a much better overall package for the skiing that I do, being primarily on piste at present. Atomic punt the R9 as a lightweight, carry it up the mountain, ski back down, type of ski.
Possibly not as strong on piste in comparison to the R11.
PS I'm what you would call a developing skier, just got comfortable skiing blacks this season and still have a lot to learn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| AlpineWalker wrote: |
Have to disagree on the advice from Precision on the R11's. I'm under 11 stone and find R11's excellent (length 160), they are a big improvement on my previous skis, huge confidence builders and very stable at speed. When I was researching what to buy, I looked at the R9 and thought that the R11 offered a much better overall package for the skiing that I do, being primarily on piste at present. Atomic punt the R9 as a lightweight, carry it up the mountain, ski back down, type of ski.
Possibly not as strong on piste in comparison to the R11.
PS I'm what you would call a developing skier, just got comfortable skiing blacks this season and still have a lot to learn. |
How tall are you ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Ise, would you reckon that I'd be too heavy (as a moderately aggressive skier too) at 14st and 5'11" for the R9s? Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have observed that assuming equal skier weight and speed, people who skid most/all of their turns tend to prefer stiffer skis than people who carve a lot.
Stiffer skis smear the snow better on groomers (ie, do you prefer a springy plastic knife or a stiff metal knife to spread your butter?). However, excess stiffness limits the minimum radius of pure carved turns. OTOH, even the most rabid carving fanatics still must skid many of their turns, so they still need at least a moderately firm ski for normal mountain navigation, eg, narrow trails / catwalks, crowded conditions, slower speeds, etc. .
The above observation impacts purchasing in the obvious way, ie, "I am a skidder/carver, so I probably should go ultra-firm / normal-firm for my weight".
However, even more importantly, it also helps one categorize advice you get from others. Thus, if someone recommends an extremely stiff ski, either they are a very good / heavy / agressive carver, or they are more average in these attributes, but a skidder.
One final thought - If you are a skidder just learning to carve, an overly stiff ski (for your weight) will not help the process. It will want to make long carved turns, and not encourage you to complete your turns. Hence, the skier will pick up a lot of speed, usually scaring the bejesus out of most folks first starting to carve. Of course, when this happens, the student will terminate the carve and hit the brakes by skidding to scrub off speed. A deep sidecut will help a novice carver, but, if the ski is overly stiff, the short sidecut radius will simply make the ski come around more easily in a skidded/smeared turn instead of resulting in a true carve.
Just my 2 UK pence / US cents,
Tom / PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your posts are very illuminating Physicsman. And just to emphasize one of the last points, if anyone out there is starting to carve, try taking a stiffer ski out on a (European) blue and check out just how much speed you can pick up if you carve your turns properly and with continuity. Just make sure you've got plenty of room and there aren't many other skiers around - it's quite scary the first few times.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
ise, 5'6" in the morning, less in the evening, assuming height reduction during the day and lowering of my centre of gravity, my skiing should improve over the course on the day....... unfortumately the theory isn't borne out in practice 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The best ski in the world is the one you like and you're comfortable on 
I'm surprised though, did you test those or buy them in the UK? At 160 I'd expect it to be less than ideal off-piste and I'm surprised it's ideal on-piste. That said, I was so frustrated trying to find a reasonable carving ski that I'd been toying with trying some 170 R11's but they still have a large turn radius for pistes I thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
ise, you'd have to allow for my ignorance about what makes a good ski. I read a fair bit, researched on the net both manufacturers and reviews, looked for a ski which I considered met my criteria, i.e. a good all round ski, good stability, able to handle a variety of conditions, potential to go off piste if I wish. The R11 seemed to fit the bill.
Allowing for my pre-conceived ideas, the actual use was a revelation - I'd been skiing on 168 fischer drs 100's.
Having not significantly progressed as a skier over the last 3 seasons and still being fairly nervous, I was determined that this season I would grasp the nettle and go for it. By chance I met a guy in Courchevel in December, he had excellent technique and took me under his wing for a few days. He basically took me back to what I felt quite natural for me on skis i.e. carving, then taught me short radius turns. After that week I went and bought the R11s and have used them for a week in Avoriaz (but of a bust, early January, blizzards, monsoons, floods, closed lifts, etc.) and then a week in Saas Fee in February. That week was fantastic, I skied every piste we could find, and came off the piste at night desperate for it to be the next morning.
I guess I finally found equipment I could trust and the confidence to use it, maybe that was more important than the R11s themselves.
Anyway, enough of my saga, that's why I'd recommend the R11's
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
AlpineWalker, that's interesting, I really must try some shorter R11's for on-piste. The manufacturers do talk some total nonesense about skis and some users make it worse by swallowing it uncritically or turning it into some sort of pseudo-science. Accoriding to Atomic you've the wrong ski at the wrong length
One of the things I like about my R11's is their stabiliy, it might be they're giving you the confidence to start carving at more speed. They also seem to reward being skied fairly positively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
I guess I finally found equipment I could trust and the confidence to use it, maybe that was more important than the R11s themselves.
|
I think that is so important. It's mostly in the mind isn't it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Chris, move quickly if you have your heart set on one of the R: series. Atomic are dropping them for next season to be replaced by the Metron range. Still some R:'s knocking around in ski shops both on the continent and other here. I've got the 11:20 and really like them at 170cm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
> ...my guru told me to 'learn to love the hill'... bit of a Yoda meets Grasshopper moment ...
At least you are not yet at the point of telling the fellow selling hot dogs at the baseball game, "Make me one with everything".
Sorry, old joke.
Tom / PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
I'll just echo Steve Sparks comment about the Metrons - they have a brand new 125-75-115 Zag-like shape, and the Metron B5 is officially next years "dogs b0llocks" ski by all accounts!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
They certainly have me interested.
The skis I have used the most on-piste for the past two seasons have been a pair of Head xp100/IC200s with a fairly dramatic 123-67.5-107 shape.
While great on-piste, I feel that my Heads are too twitchy in irregular heavy snow, and that the waist needed to be increased and the tip-to-waist sidecut reduced. If you add 8 mm to each of the Head's dimensions, you come up with a 131-75-115 shape. Since the Atomics hold the tip to 123 mm and the other dimensions are spot-on, this seems to be exactly what I have been looking for. I am definitely going to demo the new Atomics as soon as I can get my hands on a pair.
Because of their width (and swing weight), I anticipate the Atomics will be more clumsy in tight moguls than a narrower design, but certainly still usable. In addition, be prepared for lots of "clown shoe" comments. For the past couple of years, I have even been getting these even with my 123-68-107 skis because most people simply aren't used to seeing such extreme widths and dramatic shape. This doesn't bother me one bit as the design works extremely well.
Tom / PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Chris Angus wrote: |
| Any comments about these. Am thinking about getting a pair. What sort of level are they aimed at (I am 75% on piste but ski hard and fast) off-piste if the powder is nice though so they must be up for that! Any comments will be much appreciated. Cheers |
Hi Chris,
I have the 9.22 which is essentially the R9 except for colour changes and a slightly altered spatula. I ski essentially 100% off piste, about 40 days on the 9.22s this year.[1] It is a light but stiff ski thanks to the Powerchannels, handles well in powder and crud and on hard snow although like all shaped skis doesn't provide as much grip on icey surfaces as one might like. I did ski at least one mogul run this year and it was a good responsive ski for that.
As with all Atomic skis you should talk with your shop about where you are going to position the bindings as some skiers find that the standard boot centering is odd... too far back.
The good thing is the price which is still quite reasonable. You can pick a pair up for around 300 euros. The ski is pretty tough.
I ski 180cms but you may find this too long if you are essentially skiing on piste.
[1]I mention that only to say that I'm not really competent to judge if it is a good piste ski suited to carving or whatever because I've not tried.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Dear Chris
Superbe skis, I had the chance of skiing them late in the 03 season as a test ski and couldn't wait to buy them for the 04 season. They are very lightweight and probably tend to suit a lighter skier. I've skied them slightly long and slightly short and there is a subtle difference. If you intend to ski 75% on piste go for a slightly shorter ski, slightly longer for powder. I find them very responsive, however my son (who skis Atomic SX11's) thinks they are a bit soft in the flex for any fast, hard carves. He may be right for his type of skiing as the SX11s are a bit too twitchy for my taste.
I compared them to the Salomon Scream 10s (and some K2s) before parting with any cash and the R9's were so much easier to handle in soft powder or pisted snow. Do yourself a favour and try some out next season then buy them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
welcome to snowHeads Mike 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Mike.M and welcome (from somebody ordinary, not someone in charge!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi 'all, just finding my feet here!
Chris,
After being a Volkl man for years, i demo'd a pair of R11's last season, in Steamboat, in a 170....and absolutely loved them! Now i know 'feel' is a personal thing,but they excelled in various conditions, on groomed, ice , crud and ,after one overnight dump of 14", they handled boot top powder easily.In fact i loved them so much my wife got a late season deal and bought me a pair for my 40th birthday
I'm 6ft and around 13 and a half stone, level 8, and the 170 length was ideal for me. I don't think you can go wrong with these ski's.
Does anyone else think we are becoming obsessed with whats just 'around the corner', i.e next seasons skis and not fully appreciating what we are skiing at the moment?Technology is developing so fast, i wish i could pause it for a while and fully enjoy my new, but already last seasons R11's, or my G3's.Either i'm getting old or i need a bigger quiver
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Welcome to snowHeads excitableboy, and calm down !!!!! Nice 1st post. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
That's calm Ian, "!!!!!" 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Nobody's ordinary here 