 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hi there
Have just come back from a great week's skiing (trip report to follow...) in the 3V where I was given a pair of Watea 84 167 cm length to rent and absolutely loved them. Fantastic on all the different types of snow we encountered, only did on piste. Found them a doddle to maneuver, even in soft snow, and really helped to improve my technique. I've been looking to buy a pair of skis for over a year so did an internet search when I got back-found a great deal with bindings for 176 cm length, and wondered whether I would feel the difference? I am 180 cm tall, 84 kg and would classify myself as advanced/intermediate-I do most of my skiing on piste, but might have a play around off-piste if the conditions are right.
Cheers for your help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
snowhound, Watea 84 is stiffer than 78,
I used the 78 for the past 2 seasons to ski with my daughter (got a really really cheap deal on them) they are surprisingly very good off piste, good on piste in soft conditions, excellent in bumps, not good when its hard and have a speed limit when they start to flap a bit.
Have skied 84's as well, stiffer all round, only area where they are not as good as 78's (for me) is bumps, at the rest they are better especially hard packed piste, don't notice increase in width really. So now have a pair of 84's from sales to replace 78's as daughter now skis faster...........
as BobinCH, suggested 176cm would be a better choice for your weight etc especially for any off piste thoughts, i am 174cm and 74kg and used 174cm 78's and now 176cm 84's
The 84's have become 88's next year there is a review on fall line ski mag website of the new one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Thanks for your advice guys-plumped for the 176 cm in the end; reckon they are light and flexible enough to do the same business even if a few cm longer. I also ski quite quickly so hopefully the stability will also come in handy. I got the 2011 versions for £260 from Snowfit-coming tomorrow apparently!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Thought I'd resurrect an old thread rather than start again. I'm getting tempted by a pair of watea 84s 184 length. I'm 5'11" and 174lbs which fits into the weight band for the 184s according the Fischer but they say 6' upwards. Will that inch make a massive difference (left that nicely open for the double entendre brigade)?
I'm after a single-quiver ski that gives a bit more versatility than my current Armada El Reys. I'd rate myself a late 7 grade of skiier, starting to venture away from the pistes and can handle most on-piste no problem, even if the bumps are very graceless.....
The alternative is hold my cash and forgo the bargain and wait til I've tested a few more skis on the PSB???
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I have that exact ski sitting back in the States- I'm 3-4 inches taller and 10 lbs heavier than you and used it as the middle ski in a quiver that had both longer and shorter skis. It has a partially turned up tail, but not a full twin tip- skis longer than my 186 tt (but probably a tad shorter than a completely flat tail). I think I was happy with the length overall and only might have wanted a tad shorter in moguls. A very good all around ski that was better on piste than I expected with no glaring weaknesses.
What length have you skied in the past? You might be able to handle the 184, but might be just as happy on the 176??
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| MEfree30 wrote: |
I have that exact ski sitting back in the States- I'm 3-4 inches taller and 10 lbs heavier than you and used it as the middle ski in a quiver that had both longer and shorter skis. It has a partially turned up tail, but not a full twin tip- skis longer than my 186 tt (but probably a tad shorter than a completely flat tail). I think I was happy with the length overall and only might have wanted a tad shorter in moguls. A very good all around ski that was better on piste than I expected with no glaring weaknesses.
What length have you skied in the past? You might be able to handle the 184, but might be just as happy on the 176?? |
I'm currently skiing 179s which are more basic than the Wateas but it was really moguls and the narrower tree-lines that are the concern with the extra length....I'm kind of thinking that as a single ski they could be just a but on the long side...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lots of good skis out there, probably worth it to demo if you are concerned about the length.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
I'm looking to buy a new pair of skis to replace my Atomic R9s, which were "retired" last year, one option being a pair of Fischer Watea 84s (2011 model).
I read the review of the skis on Epic Ski, and they appeared to fit the bill, ie a good all mountain ski for an expert level skier. However, one of the chain ski shops in the UK indicates them to be more of an intermediate/advanced ski. Therefore, I am asking for advice from the people who have skied them, whether they are likely to be suitable skis.
I generally ski in France, so the chances of demo'ing a pair is limited, so I'm going to be buying them on the basis of reviews and opinions (it's not an issue, I've bought most of my skis in this manner).
Previous skis I have owned: Atomic R9s, Bandit XXs (one pair is currently my touring skis), K2MSLs. I skied K2 Rictors for a day last year and liked them. I skied some Rossi Bandit86s (?) and found them easy to ski offpiste, rubbish on-piste.
When skiing for myself I am generally offpiste all the time (until convinced that the whole mountain is knee deep breakable crust). I also enjoy skiing bumps, and fast cruising on-piste. When skiing with others I ski much more on-piste.
Physically, I'm 6ft 1in, 205 lbs.
Opinions on whether the skis are suitable, or whether they are too soft.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Check out the Dynastar Sultan 85s too, excellent all rounder for a good skier, particularly in bumps and cut up snow, stiff and stable at speed. Presumably easier to get hold in France too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
My review of the 84 is above and I have also heard good things about the Sultan 85s similar to what 999 says. I am a solid advanced skier and don't think the Watea 84 is too soft for me. I have heard it described as an easy expert ski which means an intermediate can probably handle it (and/or grow into it) and a pro might might not find it to be enough with it being well suited for those in between (which is likely where you fall).
However, if you spend the majority of your time off piste, the only reason not to go wider might be bump performance. For on piste carving, I like my 84s much better than my 96 mm under foot Fischer Atuas/Misfits that are 186 cm, but with a full twin tip which makes them ski shorter than the 184 cm Wateas. I like the Misfits better for all off piste, including bumps.
Just saw that it is only alone that you spend most time off piste, but you still might want to go with something in the 90-100 mm range. Lots to choose from in this category including Watea 94 (if you like the sound of the 84 but want wider and possibly a bit more demanding). From the current years models, the Bizzard Bonafide has been getting great reviews, but it seems like there are a lot of good choices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 for the replies:
The Dynastars would definately be easier to demo in France, and I did like the one pair of Dynastars I owned........before they got written off (after two weeks of skiing!) I think my preference is for K2, Volkl, Fischer, Stockli, Atomic in preference to Dynastar, Rossi, Salomon.
I'm definately looking in the 80-85 mm range. I ski mostly in France - if I am ever fortunate enough to get epic conditions whcih justify something wider, I'd happily hire. My perception (please correct if wrong) is that skiing on a wide ski all the time, will result in a significant reduction in fun on-piste and in bumps, as a pay off for a marginal improvement in off-piste performance in very infrequent conditions.
| Quote: |
Just saw that it is only alone that you spend most time off piste
|
............ My preference is to ski off-piste (irrespective of snow conditions), this occurs when 1) I'm on my own or 2) I'm skiing in a group of the same standard (usually a guided group or a instructional group). When skiing with groups of a lower standard (when I usually become defacto guide or instructor) then I ski a greater proportion of piste/bumps, offpiste is usually then limited to when the offpiste conditions are near ideal.
It sounds like the Watea 84 will suffice for my requirement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JWP1969, FWIW, I had one pair of Dynastar Legend 8000s that delammed from on trip to a snow dome, and got replaced on warranty, the second pair delammed over a season and got replaced on warranty with the Sultan 85s, which lasted ages, and my Dad now uses. Absolutely bomber construction, don't lump them int he same camp as Salomon, and way ahead of K2 too. They had a problem with glue in certain batches apparently, but that has been resolved. My Dynastar Big Troubles are still going strong after waaaaaaaaayy more (hard) skiing (and abuse) than a ski should be able to take. IME they also tend to be stiffer and higher performance than other skis in the same categories.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
However if you're skiing mainly offpiste I'd go 90-100mm(+), with tip rocker. Take a look at the new Voelkl Mantra, and the Dynastar Sultan 94.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Watea 84s were sold before I got my indecisive a*@e in gear. However, good news is I'm off to Verbier in 2 days. A chance to demo some skis. What should be on my list?
I've contacted a rental company about taking out their Atomic Blaekeye Tis, Crimson Tis, Rictors and Aftershocks. Obviously the Watea 84s and Dynastar 85s if I can find them for a demo. Any others that I'm missing?
I'm trying the Blackeyes/Crimson and Rictor/Aftershock because I want to feel for myself the difference the extra mm's under foot feels like. As stated previously, I skied the Rictors beofre and liked them. I skied the Rossi Bandit 85 (??) and didn't like them at all on piste (easy to ski off-piste).
Clarky999,
| Quote: |
JWP1969, FWIW, I had one pair of Dynastar Legend 8000s that delammed from on trip to a snow dome
|
My Dynastar's didn't delaminate - I bent the shovel, put a crack through the base (under the boot) and pulled out an edge............not fair to blame Dynastar really, other than I didn't ski the skis particularly aggressively, just the normal style, and the skis were retired very quickly. Could have been unlucky or maybe the skis are just not as rufty-tufty! (it's a technical term)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Just got back from ski trip. Skied on the Atomic Blackeye Tis all week. (Rental company couldn't lend me a wider pair of skis to compare)
I found that I could ski them off-piste in all the conditions I found. Only really deep (2' +) powder wasn't available. Undoubtedly a wider ski would have worked better off piste. On-piste and in the bumps they were a blast. Overall, they're still in the hunt. On the next trip, I'm definately going to try a wider ski for an extended period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
