 Poster: A snowHead
|
For the past years, i've been hiring skis, so i got to try quite a few models. I'm currently thinking of buying my own, as the prices of good quality and well maintained hire skis is getting ridiculous (IMV). Also, i've found out that while pogo sticks (slalom skis) are a lot of fun for the first three or four runs, i get bored by them by noon, so maybe being able to use the rental shop as a quiver is not that important to me.
I'm thinking of buying from Conrad Sport, a discounted pair - of course, as i'll be flying to Munchen, next month
So, the skier:
me - age - 35, usually decent shape, height 175 cm, weight 75-78 kg
level of skiing - decent tehnique (a few years ago i took 3 days group lessons and was bumped up from the "red" group to the "black", also got a week of "off piste instruction" with the UCPA)' not a speed demon, but certainly not slow, i like to ski blacks, enjoy the bumps as a challenge, but i'm not "zipper line" level. Enjoy GS turns, but many times i need short turns if it's crowded, skiing with slower people etc. Enjoy deep snow if there is some to be had, but i need a ski over 80 mm in the waist to make it easy (usually i'm afraid to let my skis run and increase speed when i can't see burried rocks etc, so the waist lets me go at a slower pace)
Skis i've really enjoyed (in decreasing order): Movement Spark 172 cm, Dynastar 8000 172 cm Head Magnum 163cm, the older Head Monster 75 177cm, Fischer RX8 170cm , the first generation Rossi xx.
hated: Fischer amc 76 170cm, Salomon X wing 177 cm.
Rossi B2 170 cm - skied for a week with the UCPA, were uninspiring and too short/
The dilema:
The skis i liked are unavailable at Conrad's. What they have (at keen prices) i've not skied:
1) Atomic Sweet daddy Taillierung: 119 - 80 - 105 Radius: 21m bei 181cm - i'd go for the 172 lenght, i like Atomic slaloms, not so keen on their gs skis.
2) Atomic Nomad Crimson Radius: 16m bei 162 cm Taillierung: 126 - 86 112. Deeper sidecut that the Sweet daddy, but wider? not sure about that. also, should i go for the 169 or the 176 length?
3) Atomic Nomad black eye: Radius: 17m bei 171 cm Taillierung: 121 - 79 - 107 - could be a Dyna 8000 replica? Turn radius a bit tighter than the old 8000, but 17 m radius is a nice comprimese for me, usually
4) Dynastar mythic rider in a 172 lenght - how will it cope with the "regular" conditions in the alps? The turn radius should be OK, but.... (also it's more expensive)
5) Rossi B83 in a 176 length? 120 – 83 – 110 R: 17m at 176cm. a bit reluctant as the B2 experience was not too exciting. Also, they are longer so mybe harder to manouver in bumps?
6) Fischer RC4 Progressor - 117-70-100 Radius: 16m at 175cm. Magnum replacement?
Ideally, which one should be closer to the Movement Spark?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Surely the wrong atomic skis above - the atomic sugar daddy must be the order of the day 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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'd probably get on well with the 170 Nordica Speedmachine 14's (65mm waist, 15m radius, damp, smooth, easy to turn) I'm selling, but they're not that new. What you probably want is a two ski quiver, those and something 90mm'ish 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
My quiver is the RX8 and atomic nomad crimson and I'm happy with both
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
sugardaddy, Atomic Nomad black eye's look cool, i am considering a pair but i hear they are a bit soft for fat blokes.
I have heard bad things about the progressors...
how about the AC 40 125-82-110 Radius: 17,8m at 177cm
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
The Nomad black eye is an excellent ski. Quite flexible along the way but very torsionally stiff. I would pimp them out all day long/....
http://www.snowtrax.eu/proddetails.asp?idprod=1396
You should check out snowtrax in general they see to have some pretty good deals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dan100, indeed, i wish i could ski the conditions that would make them my everyday ski.......... What length crimsons do you have? How fast can you tip them from side to side? i.e. going from your skis tipped this way // to them being like \\ . ( i know that the 65 mm skis are lightning quick at this but i'm looking for a ski tha will not feel like a tractor)
.skimottaret, who's fat ? Actually, i'm a little bit worried about that. I am looking at skis that cost 250 - 300 euros, on sale (the mythic rider is more expensive). Economics play a major part, if i were to buy close to full retail, i'd buy the Movements.
arv, have you skied them? Can you compare them to the skis i've skied?
thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sugardaddy, wasnt implying your fat, i meant me..  i am considering the blackeys but at 97kg I think im too fat for them. they could be a good pick for you at your svelt sub 80kg
What is it about the movements that you like so much? everyone seems to rave about them....
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
sugardaddy, haven't skied any of the skis you've skied.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sweet Daddy is a good tourer IIRC, Crimson would be my pick based on specs simply because they look a bit like one of the Nordica Hotrods that I enjoyed but I'd expect it to be a bit heavier than the Movements.
Movement seem to be winning a lot of friends generally - does it show if you focus on being good at one thing and keep the tech gobbledegook out of it then quality is still recognised?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Sweet Daddy is a good tourer IIRC, Crimson would be my pick based on specs simply because they look a bit like one of the Nordica Hotrods that I enjoyed but I'd expect it to be a bit heavier than the Movements.
Movement seem to be winning a lot of friends generally - does it show if you focus on being good at one thing and keep the tech gobbledegook out of it then quality is still recognised?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
I've skied the Nomad Crimson for a week & it's a crackin' all round ski. It's has advantages over the Blackeye & no downsides so would be the better choice of the two. With your stats you should definately get it in 176cm. If you go for them make sure they have the Neox binding (rather than the 4Tix) which although a tad heavy, is more than compensated by the lightness & low swing weight of the Crimson.
300 euros for the Crimson's + Neox would be an absolute steal. The wood cored straight sidewalled High Society FR's that I offer ski very much like the Movements & I could do get close to that price in the flat but not with bindings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sugardaddy, I'm by no means an expert, but after a week on RC4 Progressors, I loved them - however, they wouldn't suit you at all, as every bit of technical information published on them says that you either have to be heavy or very fit to get them working, and heavy in this context means 90Kg+, which I manage with some to spare... They're also not rated for off-piste or deep snow, although I had no problem with them in 6" of fresh powder last year in the Ski Amade region. On piste, they were excellent, and the dual radius system worked well for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| sugardaddy wrote: |
dan100, indeed, i wish i could ski the conditions that would make them my everyday ski.......... What length crimsons do you have? How fast can you tip them from side to side? i.e. going from your skis tipped this way // to them being like \\ . ( i know that the 65 mm skis are lightning quick at this but i'm looking for a ski tha will not feel like a tractor)
.skimottaret, who's fat ? Actually, i'm a little bit worried about that. I am looking at skis that cost 250 - 300 euros, on sale (the mythic rider is more expensive). Economics play a major part, if i were to buy close to full retail, i'd buy the Movements.
arv, have you skied them? Can you compare them to the skis i've skied?
thanks |
firstly I'm not an expert - you can tell the difference in width if i ski the rx8s and the crimsons on the same day.
however they manouvre nicely and you can arc them nicely in GS turns on piste
i'm taller and heavier 95kg and 6ft 3 -some would say i should be on the 183s
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
skimottaret, hmmm.... svelte.... can you tell that to my wife? 
About them Movements: two years ago went to La Plagne in Jan. We had flight tickets and the snow was horrible everywhere else. La Plagne had a nice base, but it was hard and icy. So, i hired some Dynastar Contact 10 - slalom sidecut with a 72 mm waist. Nice ski, but not really for me - i could feel that they were less agyle that a real slalom, while not really a high speed long turn ski (i like the Head's ability to just blast through everything). So after 2 days, i took a Salomon 3v (slalom ski), not bad, but they were a bit trashed so lacked the "watch out, or i'll have you #ss" feeling i though they should have. By noon it started to snow, and it kept on snowing all night, adding close to 30 cm of new snow. not too light, but, hey St Anton was mostly green pastures at the same time. So, in the evening, i went into the shop looking for wider skis. They had Head Mojos (90mm wais), a pair of Scott Missions in a 183 or 186 length (they looked so long and heavy, i know they are supposed to be user friendly, but looked a bit intimidating) and the guy in the shop suggested the Movements, which looked really cool and in a 172 lenght felt instatly right (it's coming out a bit like goldie locks). The plan was, ski wednesday on them, then cahge back to some GS skis. So, in the deep snow, they were stable, had enough float to ski gentle slopes and were stable enough on the steeper slopes and when the snow was tracked. A really big improvement for me over skis with a mid 70's waist. On piste, they were stable, and i could ski fast gs turns. Not a carver of course, but easy to do short turns, if you don't mind skidding a bit. So i decided to keep them, and the next 2 days i skied them on hard slopes. Confidence inspiring, nice edge hold, carve nice arcs if you have enough speed and still plenty manouvrable. So, i felt that while noticible slower edge to edge compared to a dedicated slalom ski, they were quite as nimble as a 72mm waisted ski, while adding much more stability and float. Compared to the Dynastar 8000 (older gen) they felt similar, just a bit more powerfull and substantial.
spyderjon, thanks for the offer on the High Society (they seem fantastic), but i'm not from the UK (postage etc). I read your Crimson review over at Epic, but i'm still worried that : a) they have a too deep sidecut b) they'll have a too light feeling (as mentioned, i like to know that i can just blast through stuff like soft bumps and crud) c) a bit too wide for the mogul fest that many alp slopes turn into if there's abit of new snow.
dan100, thanks, i guess that's what i want to hear
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
sugardaddy, I had my doubts about the Crimson too, but have to say i was shocked and impressed by this ski. It has become the only Synthetic core ski that the shop now sells.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
spyderjon, how did you find the crimsons edge to edge? after skiing my karmas at 87 i have my doubts about being able to carve short turns with these but if they are light and stiff may be worth considering...
SMALLZOOKEEPER, interesting.... i thought it sounded light and flimsy but you rate em eh? how would you compare them to the AC30?
sugardaddy nice write up on the movements, thanks, if i could get a deal i may consider but they are a bit pricy....
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
skimottaret, AC40 is the closest comparison, i would say the Crimson is accesable and the AC40 a Volkl.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| skimottaret wrote: |
| spyderjon, how did you find the crimsons edge to edge? after skiing my karmas at 87 i have my doubts about being able to carve short turns with these but if they are light and stiff may be worth considering....... |
No problem but I wouldn't call them a stiff ski par se. They're longitudinally stiff mid section but with a nice progressive flex toward the tip'n'tail with very good torsional stiffness thoughout their length. For your stats you'd definately want the 183 length. If you want shorter then go for the 176 in the new 08/09 version with the added metal layer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
spyderjon, thanks... i still keep thinking AC30 is the one. I have a demo tee'd up but only in the 170 which might not be fair head to head against Spyderman 184 stormriders...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
skimottaret, have you tried the Stocklis yet?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
beanie1, will do on tuesday but i cant see going for 184's at 21M radius. they will be fun to try out though and i may go 174 with them...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
sugardaddy, I have the crimsons - from Conrad - at 176 and am very pleased with them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stoatsbrother, thanks, sorry for being so direct, how much do you weight? (just trying to decide between lenghts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
sugardaddy, he may prefer to p/m you that one
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
skimottaret,
XL in 174 will be a blast around the pistes, but you're too heavy for it to work well off-piste, IMV, you'll be concentrating on keeping those tips up too much, which isn't a good long term idea...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JT, Yeah that is my feeling as well... I demoed spydermans stormriders in 184 last night (cheers!) along with some AC30's in a 170. Both nice skis but very different from my RC4SL's that i have been skiing this last year. The race skis are so stiff and turn just by putting em on edge, little pressure is needed if you are centered on the ski. When i skied the AC30's i was quite skiddy at first. The tails felt real stiff to me but after a couple runs started to get on the tips and found i had to pressure the turns a lot in addition to tipping em on edge, but when i got used to them the ski really flexed well and held a good edge. Although they were short for me they felt real nice and progressive when they loaded up. Similar to the recons but a bit livelier i would say. I bet they would be an excellent bump ski.
Then onto the Stormriders and they felt very long at first similar to 8000's i skied last year and although had great edge hold they didnt like being rushed and in short turns i had to slow everything down to get them to carve. I found they tracked off on their own if i wasnt steering them well, and a few times the inner ski would ride an edge and go off on its own due to my dodgy technique. They were great for medium radius turns and i bet would be a blast on piste and in the chopped up stuff. But would i buy them for short rad turns and bumps, probably not and the 174 is a bit too short.. I would trade my karmas for some stocklis any day though....
So just ordered some AC30's in a 177...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
skimottaret,
Yep, as we thought, in between lenghts for the XL's as much as you can tell in a Snowdome.
I'd do the same for your purposes
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Wed 16-07-08 11:41; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
I just found a formula on a cycling site which is applicable to skiing.
The formula for calculating the number of bikes needed,
X=N+1
Where
X = number of bikes (skis) needed.
N = number currently owned.
In my case for skis N = 5
I guess the definition of the expression "needed" might require further study, but in the mean time........
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
jbob, X=N+2 might be better for skis
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
sugardaddy, I am 177cm tall and weigh about 86kg during the ski season, I ski mainly off piste, but don't huck cliffs.
jbob, andy, X = (N+1)/F where F is the fear quotient relating to how fierce your significant other is... If all new skis came with a voucher for a free handbag life could be much better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
jbob, Hello Jimmity Bobberty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Greetings Littlezoobloke,
I am going to have to dip on the grapes, going bike riding instead, same area Bayone to Roscoff.
Any sign of the precious thing I left behind in Cham.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
jbob, Angus is fine. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
stoatsbrother,
| Quote: |
... If all new skis came with a voucher for a free handbag life could be much better.
|
Nah, you need something much more practical- a pair of designer shoes maybe? (comfy ones too, that she can wear without excruciating pain for at least 10 minutes ). Thing is, skis are much cheaper.
About them crimsons, seems like the 176 works very well for you and spyerjon, so while it seems the 176 could work very well for me in good snow conditions, the 169 could be better if i expect harder slopes and less new snow. Optimism vs realism?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I should have added they're not bad in bumps tho relative to the uselessness of their owner in bumps
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dan100, Oh, then I know those skis very well, I've often skied on them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
