Snappy Skis?

A snowHead

Can anyone recommend a pair of mostly-on-piste skis with a tight radius? I am a male, advanced skier.

Length around 160 - 165cm is ideal. They MUST be lightweight. They MUST be snappy, with plenty of rebound for short swing turns.

I currently have some Head iXRC 500s. They are light, with a tight 12m radius and very easy to turn. However, they don't snap or rebound from turn to turn, which makes them a bit unsatisfying.

Thanks in advance.

A snowHead

Whitegold, I'd have thought that any decent pair of slalom skis would do the trick. I have a pair of Rossignol 9S WC (165cm, with an 11.5m? radius) which I think are exactly like the ski you are looking for. It took me some time to get used to just how snappy they are!

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Whitegold, Try the Atomic ST12, that should be 'snappy' enough. Will certainly give you a bit of a 'kick' coming out of the turns.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Whitegold, what do you weigh and how tall are you.. Weight seems to me to help dictate ski choice

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Scottp -- I am about 70kg and 173cm. Ideally, I want a light, short, tight-radius, snappy ski. Rob@rar makes a good suggestion, but not sure I want a hardcore slalom ski for my vacation.

Thanks again.

You'll need to Register first of course.

iXRC500's are an early intermediate ski.

If you like the characteristics, why not try an iXRC800, or iXRC1200SW?

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

I agree with v8, the 1200i should tick the boxes for you.

After all it is free

These are good value and if anything like last years VR27's are good performers too.

Whitegold, Ditto rob@rar, look at the 9S.....

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Whitegold, try the head World Cup SuperShape. I hired a pair last season and they were the business on piste, and (surprisingly) okay off-piste and in moguls. They are effectively a wider version of the slalom ski. Tight radius <12m. Felt like they would blast through anything. They look virtually unchanged for this season. Don't be put off by the experts-only tag, I am certainly no expert. If you want something "snappier" it will almost certainly be less forgiving than your current skis but sharpening your technique is usually part & parcel of upgrading your gear.

snow reports

But be careful, there are 2 versions of the iSuperShapes, the "normal" iSuperShape, and the iSuperShape Speed. In the main we are talking about the normal iSuperShape. Next year there will be 3 versions...... Very Happy

Yes, I mean the "normal" SuperShape, not the "Speed" version. The latter is new this year, and I've not tried it. You could also try the narrower WorldCup SL slalom ski itself of course. Being slightly narrower underfoot it would probably be quicker edge to edge in those short turns. They would also probably be lighter. To be fair the SupeShapes felt a bit on the heavy side, but that was probably down to the very solid hire bindings they were fitted with.

You know it makes sense.

Some previous season Head worldcup SC. 160 is 10m IIRC, 165 is 10.5/11

As not the full slalom ski they are a bit more foregiving

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

Whitegold, I have just brought a pair of Fischer RX Fire in 165 think turn radius is 12m they would tick all the boxes
http://www.fischer-ski.com/en/ ( look under alpine, skis, cross sport) I have only used them on the dry slope but was sking through some poles last night and they certainly give you the the feedback you are looking for I certainly had a big grin on my face at the end of each run.
These sell for £500+ in the uk but just received mine from Ski Bilek which I bid for on ebay, for £255 a real bargain!

A snowHead

marc gledhill, are you planning to try any out? The Perform 1.2 looks interesting.

EDIT: no one likes Dynastar?

A snowHead

comprex, I daren't - I haven't worn the VR27's out yet.

But I'm sure I may be tempted if I call into Glide & Slide in Otley, Leeds - they let you take them to xscape (an indoor snow dome) to have a try.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Great feedback, all. Thanks.

I have narrowed it down, in no particular order, to:

* Rossignol 9S WC
* Atomic ST12
* Salomon Street Racer 10
* Elan Speedwave 10 Fusion
* Fischer AMC 70
* Fischer RX Fire
* Head iXRC 1200
* Head World Cup SuperShape (Normal)

The Street Racer (good rebound), the 1200 (light and moderately snappy) and the Streetwave (light and snappy) are perhaps top of the list right now.

The main problem is that ski testing is so subjective. This makes it very difficult to find a consensus on any one ski.

Separately, does anyone know a website, any website, that lists the weight of current skis and / or bindings? Why manufacturers do not make this readily available is beyond me.

Thanks again.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

Some are listed here:
http://www.skipass.com/guide-matos/ski/2007/

There is a school of thought that has it, if you are skiing the skis as they were meant to be skied, the snow will be supporting the weight and, therefore, such information is not as relevant as all the other stuff published.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Whitegold, must admit that maybe one of the reasons for not listing is that, as comprex suggests, weight really shouldn't be a factor?

Check out Cham3S - they list weights (I think for all skis) because a large element of their intended audience are likely to use the kit for use UPHILL - where weight really does become important.

You'll need to Register first of course.

...the other weight factor is the bindings - your skis may well way 4-5kg for the pair. The bindings can add another 3kg to that.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

Does weight matter a huge amount when the skis are on your feet? I skied a few days last season on Metron B5s - infamous for their weight - but I really didn't notice how heavy they were when I was skiing (although carrying them around the resort was a different matter!).

After all it is free

Wear The Fox Hat is spot on, while I found the Head SuperShapes heavy, I think that was mainly down to the bindings. I only really noticed it while carrying them. When on my feet, I actually found them easier to maneouvre than my usual skis, becoz they were shorter, therefore the "swing weight" or turning moment required on e.g. hop turns was less. With the heavy mass of the bindings being directly underfoot, I found no problem pivoting through the moguls for example. So I wouldn't worry about weight too much Whitegold, unless you intend to go touring, or have a very long walk to the lifts in the morning!

Thanks for the additional links.

In my opinion, weight has to be a factor. Mark my words, it will become a selling point for skis in the future.

For the same reason I don't want to lug a heavy coat around the mountain, I also don't want to drag around heavy skis.

Heavy skis lead to tiredness. Tiredness causes poor technique.

The key question is whether the alleged 'momentum' benefits of heavy skis in 'skiing mode' (let's say this is 50% of slope time) outweigh the costs of lugging heavy skis between buses, lifts and pistes (let's say this is the other 50%). I don't know the answer for sure, but my gut feel says not.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Streetracers

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Whitegold, may I suggest randonee gear as an example of light weight driven to the limit of the possible without unacceptable compromise of function?

Say we pair a set of carbon fibre Goode BC 82s at 975g per ski, for 1950g. The Dynafit TLT Speed Lite is 1lb 1oz per pair. You then drive them with Scarpa F1s at 5lbs 5oz/pair. Total weight: 4.85 kg.

4.85 kg. With the lightest setup one could conceivably have an enjoyable ski day on. Compare that to the weight of a dress shoe or trainer, say 300-350 grams, that one might have on ones' foot year-round.

I propose that being out of condition to have a weight like that on your feet leads to tiredness, that lugging instead of skiing leads to tiredness, and that poor technique contributes to tiredness.

snow reports

I am 11st with a six-pack; fitness is not an issue. I carve on any slope; technique is not an issue.

I propose that faux ski snobbery causes many skiers to dismiss equipment weight as a factor.

Not ski snobbery in my case, just sharing my experience. When I was skiing on Metron B5s I really didn't feel they were heavy skis; I just didn't notice the weight. As an added bonus they cut through crud without any hesitation. As a comparison I spent a day last season on Scott Aztecs (not the Pro version) which are very light; there was no advantage to them being light as I didn't really 'feel' the weight on my feet. The downside, however, was that I felt the ski was bouncing around in the icy, chopped up conditions which my B5s would have just powered through. While there's no doubt that I would prefer to carry the Aztecs around the resort rather than the B5s, I didn't think there was any disadvatge to the heavier skis when on or off-piste.

You know it makes sense.

Whitegold, Fischer RX8, Nordica Mach 3 Power, or any SL race ski.

From your request, I'm guessing that you tend to jam your edges at the end of the turn and use the "pop" to rebound into the next turn. If so, you may also enjoy the Volkls like the AC3 and the Allstar.

The SuperShape and the B5 are about the same weight. The SuperShape has less energy and snap. Both prefer to be skied with a modern technique that limits the rebound and redirects that energy into the next turn rather than into unweighting the ski.

I reviewed most of the high-end Nordica line in another thread in this forum.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

Good feedback, all. Thanks.

A snowHead

Update -- I purchased today a pair of Salomon Equipe SC planks at the Brummie Ski Show. 360 nuggets. Narrow and snappy, just what I was looking for. First run will be later this week.

PS. Birmingham Ski Show was good. Busy, with plenty of ski shops, clothing stores and demos. Much better than the dismal London version a short while ago.

A snowHead

I fancy a go with 'snappy, bouncy skis' with a short radius turn. My husband has been eyeing up the B1s I bought last year. What's new for ladies? And what size? I went from Atomic 150cm to B1 160cm. I'm 5"6.

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

Fischer Fires,....great fun all day.....
Blizzard World cup SL....big grinner
Elan FIS SLX... Top ski

And the Volkl Racetiger SL...just behind those 3, IMV

You should be able to lay all those down in good snow

Help!!

Snappy Skis?

snowHeads Forum Index >>> Equipment Reviews/Questions