 Poster: A snowHead
|
uktrailmonster, I skied the AC3s for a day at the PSB. Of the skis I tried (Mission, Aztec Pro, Recon, Eliminator) they had by far the best edge hold on hard pack and I could really load them up: very fast. They're stiff but light and I found them more nimble than the Recon. They were great in carves but not as quick edge to edge as the Aztecs. They need to be worked and they weren't for cruising but they are very smooth and stable...more so than the others. Of 2 skis I would buy it would be Aztec Pro vs AC3 and they're both very different skis. Hope that helps 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Thanks for the comments Sharky, much appreciated. I agree with your assessment of the AC3, I got the same impression on my quick demo. Not super quick edge to edge but very smooth and great hold. I suspect they're too stiff for bumps, but I'm not too concerned about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
uktrailmonster, Would you mind trying the Recons next? They are also on my list of potentials 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
No problem Caspar, Recons on Saturday then. How does your shortlist compare with mine?
Mine's getting longer rather than shorter, but all good fun:-
Atomic Metron M11 B5
Dynastar Legend 4800 / 8000
Fischer AMC 73/76/79
Head i.monster 72/77/82
Nordica Hot Rod Nitrous
Salomon X-Wing Tornado
Volkl AC3 / AC4
Rossignol B2
K2 Apache Recon
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
uktrailmonster, The Recon, the AMC, the AC3/4 and the Stockli Stormrider XL (my brother has a pair and they rock). Have demo'd the B2s and didn't like them. Not sure about the Metrons 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm curious about the conflict of ski types in my list. I thought they were all in the same "All Mountain" category, although with varying bias toward on/off piste performance. Is this what you meant? Your suggested list seems more firmly biased toward the off-piste end of the spectrum, which is fine, but I'm yet to be convinced that 80+ wasted skis are any good on-piste. I'm still wondering how they compare with 70-75 mm skis as true all-rounders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
uktrailmonster, Thats why you should try them, try only skis above 80mm and see what you prefer. One or two skis will prevail.
As for the conflict on the list: B2 vs AC4, oh please! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Have you read this thread? While I am after more of a 60:40 the other way round from you, my experience testing this category (only MK so far) is that they are indeed good and easy on piste as well. Dunno where you are in the UK but EB's got a Salomon test this evening at MK. I'd hope they'd bring the Tornado, Hurricane, Fury, 1080 Foil etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah I did read that thread. Very interesting. If you step back a little, the argument seems to go something along the lines that skis in the mid 70 mm range are quite nimble on-piste, so 80 something can't be too bad and then come to think of it 90 something might not be too silly either! I know fatter skis are getting more and more versatile, but I'm still struggling to see how a 90+ mm ski is not going to be barge-like anywhere except deep powder. We all know the ideal on piste carving width is currently more like 65-70 mm, so there has to be a trade-off somewhere as they get fatter.
If I was considering running 2 skis, I would have no hesitation looking at skis in the 80-90 mm width for a more off-piste biased second ski that could still get by on the groomed at a push. But as I only want to be lugging a single pair around the world, I'm now thinking that something in the mid 70s would be a better compromise for more of the time.
Of course I might be totally wrong. I've only briefly tried the Nordica Nitrous and Volkl AC3 and I got the impression I wouldn't want anything wider than those for everyday use. I've yet to actually try anything wider, so I'm still open-minded.
What time is the EB Salomon test at MK? I only live about 30 mins away, but the earliest I could make it tonight is about 8 pm. I'd really like to try the Tornado too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
uktrailmonster, Try the approach suggested, you'll kick yourself. If you must follow your list, start with the narrowest and progessivley work up, don't comprimise follow the order to the mm. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Ok Zookeeper , I promise to take the fatboys more seriously on-piste. I'm hearing some great reviews of the Head IM82 and Volkl AC4. Unfortunately, I can't demo either of those before going on holiday 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
uktrailmonster, 1900-2200 for the ski test. I don't think anyone has said that more than 85mm will be nimble on piste but some sure have implied that 83mm give or take a couple can certainly be considered to be so (or at least that's how I've interpreted it). Personally, on the limited gos I've had, I found the Afterburners and the Mission/Rosa honestly very easy turning. I admit I'm (currently) going for a 2 ski quiver but as SZK says, give'em a whirl.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Cheers slikedges. I doubt I'll make it over to MK tonight. I'm still at work and I've just remembered my left arm and right leg are both partially out of action after a big shunt on the mountain bike yesterday. I think it makes it a whole lot easier to buy into the mid-fat thing if you decide to go for a 2 ski quiver, which is what I'm trying to avoid at the moment. I'll have to reserve judgement until after testing something on the fat side of 80 mm. Let me know if you get a go on the Tornado and similar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
uktrailmonster, somewhat disappointing selection, ?20-25 Salomons, various flavours of XWings, Streetracers, 1080s, some ladies skis, though backed up by the EB shop demo line-up. They didn't have the Fury or Hurricane, but I skied the Tornado in 162cm, the 1080 Foil in 158cm (too short for me but other one was a 174cm and probably too long for me) and the Equipe 3V Race in 155cm, as well as the K2 Public Enemy in 169cm.
The slope was a little icy so it was a good opportunity to test out edge hold a bit though some of the skis had been on a dry slope recently and could probably have done with a service. The Tornados did pretty well on edge hold and were pretty easy to turn and railed round nicely. The Equipe 3V Race was unsurprisingly the clear winner in the conditions but to be honest the others were comparable. I'd've preferred the Foils in 166cm but they skied easy if with slightly less edge hold and carve stability. The Public Enemies were the least turny of the lot but still easy to do short skarved turns on and, at least in the confines of MK, railed very nicely and were good on edge hold. I spent more time on the PEs than the others but think IIRC I preferred the Nordica Afterburners and esp the Scott Mission/Rosa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
uktrailmonster, Ehh? If you loved the AC3 and want to then test the IM82 i'm lost. You say that the AC4 might be a step too far, then add the IM82 to your list! Go on, get on that AC4. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
smallzookeeper, I think it's pretty simple. I'm happy with the on-piste compromise of skis like the AC3, but I'm not sure about going any wider. Hence why I'm interested in trying the AC4 and IM82, to see how they feel on-piste compared to the AC3 and similar. My local shop doesn't stock either of those, so a demo is probably out of the question for now. I'm going to assume that the wider skis are better off-piste, but I want to see how much of a compromise they are on-piste. Bear in mind that I haven't skied on anything wider than 77 mm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
uktrailmonster, Any ski above 80mm will ski better on piste than a ski less than 80mm will ski off-piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
uktrailmonster,
What SMALLZOOKEEPER says, and the hard pack performace isn't too shabby at all... Don't expect to go hacking through moguls and ice like a specialist ski might but I'm on Outlaws, Missions etc this year.... Itr depends where your playground is...
If you are thinking Recons at 78mmm, then the Outlaw (88mm) isn't far behind that on-piste but it should slaughter it Off-piste. Ditto the Missions.
Now I like the Recon...fine ski, but I'd add the XL to the list for 60/40 on piste. However, because I'd rather be out back somewhere, I'll go 80mmm plus and reign it in on the 4 o'clock run if necessary. The X-wing Fury, Missions and Outlaw..and others that I haven't tried appear to be a new breed... I'd at least try them, they'll be more help in the difficult stuff and no great hinderance on the hard pack IMV.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Ok, you're doing a good job of talking me round to the idea I might prefer something at the fatter end of the spectrum for the added off-piste performance. That AC4 really does look very tempting. So you're basically saying I'll gain more off-piste than I'll lose on-piste going fatter, which is a fair argument. The counter argument (promoted strongly by realskiers.com) is that fat skis are a bad idea if you want to improve your carving technique. I guess that wouldn't be an issue for either a pro, who had no improvement to make, or someone with a multi-ski quiver. But it puts me off going wider for my one and only pair.
I'm torn between buying something along the lines of the AC3 or even IM72, which I know will allow me to improve my on-piste technique and still be ok in moderate off-piste conditions. Or just f**k it and get a wider ski and hope I can make it work well enough on-piste.
I'm glad we're having this debate by the way, because it's helping me decide what I actually want from my skis
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| JT wrote: |
If you are thinking Recons at 78mmm, then the Outlaw (88mm) isn't far behind that on-piste but it should slaughter it Off-piste. Ditto the Missions.
|
Yeah, but that's back to the argument that if 78 mm is ok, then 88 mm can't be bad and if 88 is suddenly ok, then maybe 90+ would be acceptable too... But I'm already wondering whether 78 mm is right on the top limit for something that, if I'm honest, is going to be used on-piste at least half the time. Maybe I'll be less concerned after I've spent some time on a decent 80+ mm ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe Katie would if you asked her nicely beforehand? Or is it just that they daren't bring the fat sisters out in public?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
>> The counter argument (promoted strongly by realskiers.com) is that fat skis are a bad idea if you want to improve your carving technique
What is the thinking behind this? Surely having to get them on edge to carve, should actually improve your technique?
regards,
Greg
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FenlandSkier, I've asked the question and it's more to do with what k2 have avail for demo than what they deign to bring
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| uktrailmonster wrote: |
| JT wrote: |
If you are thinking Recons at 78mmm, then the Outlaw (88mm) isn't far behind that on-piste but it should slaughter it Off-piste. Ditto the Missions.
|
Yeah, but that's back to the argument that if 78 mm is ok, then 88 mm can't be bad and if 88 is suddenly ok, then maybe 90+ would be acceptable too... |
how do you know that isn't true? there's a lot more to how a ski handles than how wide it is under foot. i spend most of my time on skis that are 97mm underfoot. their edge hold is great because of how stiff they are, the fact that they don't have a huge amount of sidecut and their construction generally. they aren't great in moguls (ok they suck in moguls) but a GS ski of similar length, stiffness and sidecut would also suck in moguls
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Seems a bit of a backwards way to advertise a product though, not to have available what people specifically ask for?????
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FenlandSkier, I think it's short-sightedness (of a kind not amenable to Lasix ) - the commonest MK demo skis are piste, mid-70mm all mountain and freestyle but skis are getting fatter and mid-70mm are apparently out-selling piste skis for the first time. They probably didn't think anyone would want to demo mid-80mm skis in a snowdome! Remember most of these demo skis were issued 6 months ago or longer. Next year I'm sure there'll be mid-80mm demo skis in the UK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
OK fair enough a snowdome isn't the best place to test a pair of fats but we're the customer and we've got money to spend, you'd think they'd be able to rustle something up on demand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
FenlandSkier, I said that too, but apparently it's all got to do with tight margins and cost bases - in other words, "that's just far too sensible" 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
I'm reading this with interest, My ski quiver is Dynastar Legend 4800 and Fischer RX8. The latter have fantastic edge hold on piste at speed. With hindsight I wish I had fatter skis for all mountain use. I bought the legend 4800 as an all mountain ski with a bias for piste use. They are good on piste but fall short of the Rx8 there. they are v. good in soft slushy bumps and slushy spring pistes and in my limited experience are ok off piste (much better than RX8).
However what i do find is the Legend are nowhere as stable at speed when carving as the RX8s (probably no surprises there). You don't feel you can throw caution to the same extreme int he RX8 ( the difference between going round a roundabout with a sports car and a SUV is the best way of describing it). Do you not get the same problem with the fatter all mountain skis?
Unless I sell the 4800s for a decent price (10 days use minor scratches) and can get a good ski bilek price on a fatter all mountain ski, I can't afford to change though I'm becoming more interested in off piste and might prefer a fatter ski given my ownership of the RX8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| kitenski wrote: |
>> The counter argument (promoted strongly by realskiers.com) is that fat skis are a bad idea if you want to improve your carving technique
What is the thinking behind this? Surely having to get them on edge to carve, should actually improve your technique?
regards,
Greg |
Have a read of this, it's quite an interesting point of view:-
http://www.techsupportforskiers.com/buying_guide.html
The main argument against wide (as in above 80 mm) skis is that they require a much higher degree of skill to get on edge, which they reckon can only be developed in the first place on narrower skis (closer to 70 mm). I'm not saying I agree 100% with this, because I haven't tried carving on 80+ mm skis, but I can see their point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
In terms of off-piste, it is also possibly worth considering realistically how deep the snow is that you'll be getting into regularly. I reckon skis around the 78-82 width will be great in anything up to knee-deep. I've had my Nitrous in (at least) boot-deep and they are fantastic for GS turns in that depth, as well as shorter radius turns. Unless you will be getting seriously and regularly off-piste and into the deep untouched stuff with a guide I would say that anything much fatter than that is overkill surely??
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
dan100, well i tried out some RX8s at MK (ok - maybe not the best place but i got a reasonable idea) and they were not in the same league for power, egde hold, stability as my fat skis, dynastar legend pros. Now, it is also the case that the Legend Pros and the 4800s are hugely different skis. It is also the case that it requires a bit more work to get a fat ski on edge but that doesn't mean that carving on them is the preserve of pros only (I can manage it so it can't be that hard). uktrailmonster, you sound like you're probably a pretty good skier and have a good chance of handling a fat ski on piste - I'd definitely encourage you to give them a whirl
[am I sounding like Parlour about a year ago now? ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Conor, I was thinking along the same lines. Remember I'm looking at a 60/40 bias in favour of on-piste. If I go way off-piste with a guide I'm happy to hire a dedicated powder ski for the occasion. I've been happy in the past skiing in knee-deep powder on mid 70s width, so I'm wondering if 80+ is overkill for me too.
Arno, I'm not too worried about handling a fatter ski on-piste, but I'm concerned that it might be unnecessary and may even hinder my future progress. I'm very surprised that you thought the RX8 had worse edge hold in MK. How do you judge stability in a snowdome? I couldn't even get the AC3 out of first gear down there!
I can't imagine using Legend pros as a 1 ski quiver either. That's the sort of weapon I'd consider hiring if I was going heliskiing with a guide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
uktrailmonster, i agree that the snowdome is probably not a fair place to test but with the RX8s i felt that if i pushed them much harder than i was at MK they wouldn't take it. I'm a pretty big guy and am used to skiing quite stiff skis - the Legend Pros and some Atomic SX11s are the core of my quiver (well, I used the Legend Pros all winter then dust off the SX11s when I go for my summer instructional weekend with easiski!) - so that might put my comments in context
believe it or not, the Legend Pro isn't seen as a true powder ski in some quarters. I'd really recommend giving things like the Blizzard Titan 9 (92mm underfoot in the 188 length) or the Kneissel Tanker a try if you can find them. They're built like race skis so you can really rail them on piste but they have enough width for proper float in the soft stuff
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just to revive my old thread, I missed the last 2 weekends at the snowdome (due to shunting my mountain bike over at Chicksands) but I'll be back in action this weekend to resume my testing. I'll try to demo the Recons next. I'm still very much undecided exactly how wide to go, but it will certainly be mid 70s minimum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
uktrailmonster, week today is the MK EB K2 test...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
I tried the Volkl AC3s at MK today
|
Hey what length did you go for? Great thread so far am looking for similar skis so keep testing!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
bigtoe, the only demo pair available was 170 which is really a bit too short for me (88kg, 6'1"). I'd certainly go 177 if I bought them.
slikedges, unfortunately I'm only home at weekends for the next few weeks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
