realskiers
Skis and Gear Discussion => Member Ski Reviews => Reviews older than Past 2 Season => Topic started by: Barrettscv on November 19, 2007, 06:32:05 am
-
07/08 model ski review
Where: Loveland Ski Area on 11/17/07.
Conditions at Loveland: 100% groomed manmade snow. Partly cloudy with flurries, 20F at dawn, 30F at 3PM.
My specs: 5? 11", 235lbs. male, 40th season skiing, former USSA & High School 7-day-a-week competitor in New Hampshire, GS & DH specialist.
Skis used in the last 2 years: Dynastar Contact 11, Fischer RX8, WC SC & WC RC, Volkl AC4 & Mantra, Head Monster 77 & 88, Dynastar Inspired by Nobis, several others?
Boots: 2003 Salomon Course (red, 130 flex).
Monster i78M, 171cm 124-78-110mm, 14.6 meter TR @ 171cm.
This was the first ski of the day and a ski a really wanted to try. Unfortunately they only had the 171cm available in inventory; I should use the next size up. I spent several runs on the ski and really enjoyed its all-around performance and ease-of-use. The ski was very willing to perform medium radius turns with total confidence. Tight turns could also be had, with a little finesse. The ski felt stable but lacked solid edge-grip on faster GS turns, I?m sure the longer ski would have been better for me on faster turns. The i78M actually felt easier than the Monster i77M which it replaces. The tail is stiff, but not as stiff as the i77M; so the ski is a little more forgiving while outperforming the i77M in every way.
The i78M is a great all-around ski for a wide range of all-mountain skiers from intermediate to expert skill level.
Head iXRC 1200, 170cm 115-68-101mm, 14.3 meter TR @ 170cm.
This is the sandwich construction iXRC 1200. The ski felt much faster edge-to-edge than the Monster i78M. I followed a young racer on SL skis and I could duplicate his quick edge changes. The iXRC also felt very good at higher recreation speeds, a surprise for a ski this short. As before, Head did not have a size longer than a 170cm, but this ski felt more stable at higher carving speeds than the i78M. It did not feel super solid in choppy snow at higher speeds and was not the kind of stable GS fall-line burner, a step below some other skis I have used. Again the longer ski might have performed better for me.
An easy-to-use hard-snow groomer-cruiser, but not a substitute for a race ski.
Fischer Progressor, 175cm 117-70-100
This is a ski I really want to own. I?ve owned the WC RC, WC SC, RX8 & Scenio S500, so, I?m a bit of a Fischer fanatic. The ski did not disappoint. The ski felt stable and fast like the RC & Scenio. I was a little surprised, I was expecting a SL/GS hybrid, but this was not the case. This ski likes speed and fall-line skiing and feels better the faster you go. I then started working the ski and could make high-C shaped turns with excellent turn in, so the ski is an improvement on the RC and offers better turn shape variety. It also feels very stable at GS speeds, the ski will humble the skier and demand faster & tighter turns with huge g-forces. It would take me a few runs to get expert level results, but this ski will provide hero level performance.
A V12 Ferrari that will deliver huge performance under the feet of a great skier or former racer.
Fischer Watea 94, 186cm 130-94-118mm
Fischer has greatly expanded the mid-fat and wider skis offerings. The Watea series is aimed at the weekend warrior who is seeking a high performance ski that is versatile and easy to use. The Watea 94 is a great ski for groomers. It should also perform well in soft & deep snow, but these conditions were not present. The typical delay in turn initiation exists; this is not a skinny ski. The delay from edge-to-edge can be mitigated by higher speeds and increased edge angle, any good skier should find the ski easy-to-use. The ski carves very well. It will produce high C turns very easily and can make any turn shape except tight SL turns. It also is cooperative at a most speeds, including very fast GS type skiing. I would be very happy with this ski. It felt like a 94mm wide RX8.
The Watea 94 provides high performance from moderate effort. A fat ski for a wide range of good skiers that will be come as well regarded as the RX8.
Nordica Mach 3 Power 178cm 119-72-104mm
Almost all my comments concerning the Fischer Progressor could be cut-n-pasted to describe this ski. It?s a real performance ski and probably the top on-piste performer in the Nordica line. This is my first time for me on a Nordica and I liked the feel of the ski immediately. The ski feels very quick edge-to-edge, almost ?light? feeling. But at higher speeds it is ultra stable with huge edge-grip. The Power version has plenty of metal and race ski construction; it?s an expert ski in every way. It likes fall line GS turns the most, Medium radius turns requires race level skills with high edge angles. It should also be stable in crud with the 72mm wide waist. I was expecting a versatile carving/ all-mountain ski, but the Mach 3 power is something else. It?s an on-piste ski for former racers.
The Nordica Mach 3 Power is a great performance ski for top level skiers. Quick, stable, powerful; this is a high end ski for those with the right skills; others should consider the Mach 3 Carbon.
Elan 888 Alu, 186cm, 128-88-108mm
The Elan 888 is a high performance mid-fat for strong skiers. The ski has a deep side-cut, so I was expecting an easy-to-use mid-fat for the masses. The ski is better suited to top level skiers who already have great skills and like speed. The ski was quick edge-to-edge with a GS ski performance & attitude. It really likes to run down the fall line at higher speeds. It has a very smooth and reliable feel, like nothing will cause it to fail. I was eventually able to finesse some mid length turns, but it required added edge angle and an aggressive, high energy skiing style. I?m sure the ski is a bomber in crud.
The Elan 888 Alu is for strong skiers who stay close to the fall line & like to rip.
Head Chip Supershape Magnum 170cm, 121-71-107mm, 13.5 meter TR at 170cm
This Head carver is a well balanced design and could be used on-piste by bigger & faster skiers even in the 170cm size. This is the black ski with the Chip technology and the sidecut as listed above. The ski likes to make hi-edge-angle carved turns and in nimble enough for SL turns and quick enough for moguls. It also will remain stable during faster GS style turns. I enjoyed the ski as a versatile on piste carver. It?s not a potential race ski and is not the best ski (in this size) for super-fast skiing, but it is a great ski for ?Vermont? type conditions and terrain.
The Chip Supershape is a great ski for technical skiers looking for performance & versatility in a quick and stable package.
Fischer Cold Heat 176cm, 123-82-109mm
The Cold heat uses the laminate with vertical sidewall construction with the carving Flowflex plate. The feel of the ski is much more carving oriented than the Watea, and is intended for on-piste use primarily. The ski performs well, it is easier than the Progressor and more versatile. It does not require full-time attention and should ski well in softer snow. I could see this ski in Vermont as a one-ski-quiver or as a western ski for skiers who stay on groomed runs 90% of the time.
With excellent carving performance and a user friendly personality, the Cold Heat supports technical development and high performance skiing.
Fischer Watea 84, 184cm 126-84-112mm
Today the longer ski was available and what a difference the right size makes. My impression of the 184cm size was outstanding. Fun, fun, fun, very versatile and high performing. It produced short and medium turns easily and felt much smaller than its 184cm size. The longer length provided plenty of edge-grip and stability on longer turns. This ski was very willing and able to carve any kind of turn at any sane speed; it also required minimal effort while providing thrilling performance.
The Watia 84 is an easy to use and reliable all-mountain tool for a wide range of skiers, but use it in a longer size than you would other carving mid-fats.
Dynastar Mythic Rider, 184cm 122-88-110mm
The Mythic Rider replaces the 8800 as the all-mountain ski in the Dynastar line-up. The ski has more shape and has been strengthened in the mid-section and fore-body of the ski, according to the local Rep. The ski actually feels easier-to-use than the 8800 with good turn-in and the ability to produce High C shaped turns. This ski is more docile than the other fat skis I used this weekend, it does not urge the skier to plunge down the fall-line like the Elan 888 for example. However, like every ski used this weekend, it?s an advancement over prior generation skis of this size and will support all-mountain skiing to a wide range of skiers.
The Mythic Rider provides a wide performance range from intermediate to expert level. It?s a ski that the skier easily controls and can be taken anywhere on the mountain.
Elan Speedwave 14 168cm, 116-70-105mm
The Speedwave 14 uses every technical feature in the Elan product line. It has dual Titanium like the WC skis. It has Speedwave corrugated topsheet for improved tensional rigidity and it features the top-of-the-line Fusion binding system. Unfortunately it?s a bit wasted on me. The ski is too short in the 168cm size and the 176cm was not available. It skied well, was probably as good as or better than the other skis tried here. But size is critical and 168cm is too short for any use.
Another top end ski for carving thrills, but too short a size for my use.
Atomic Nomad Crimson 182cm, 128-86-114mm
The Crimson was the last ski I would try, after 12 hours of testing over two days, I was no longer in top form and was wondering if I was being as rigorous as earlier. Well, this ski got my attention and provided the hottest laps and the greatest wow factor when compared to the other wide skis. The ski has very reliable turn-in and edge-grip. It was light and capable of a wide range of turn shapes. But it was very stable and with a 20 mph tail wind I was plunging down the mountain at highway speeds. The ski provided hero performance on the groomed and would probably provoke some insane mogul and off-piste skiing as well. A good western skier could use this as a carver in a two ski quiver. An east-coast skier could use this as a one ski quiver for all conditions. Atomic has hit a home run with this ski.
The Nomad Crimson is a great ride that will change what and how good skiers ski. Telepathic responsiveness and a wide performance window add up to unforgettable skiing.
-
Ok Michael...you had way too much fun all by yourself. Nice job...kudo's!
Can't wait to get my Watea 84 on the snow.
So....are you running out to buy something new for the boat?
Gary
-
Hi Gary,
Actually, the demo event makes me want to reduce my quiver by selling 3 or more skis. I'll take two of these 3 out west, Contact 11, Monster 82 & AK Rocket. The XXL is too big and the Spats are too specialized. I really should sell these two.
In Vermont I would be all set with the Monster 82 and one of the race skis.
I'll be selling the XXL, Spats & the Elan Speedwave 14. Overly specialized skis are not needed and too much hassle to haul.
I think you & Ron will be very happy with your Watea's & Jim will like his i78M's.
Cheers,
Michael
-
thanks Bud, It sounds like you guys had a great time and you know how much I wol dhave loved to demo all those skis. I can't wait to get on my 94's now. Great write up and sounds like there are a lot of really good skis out there.
-
Michael...sounds like you're making some wise choices in sliming down your harem..
For you, I think the COntact 11's and the 82's are good choices for out west...if we get deeper than knee high...
We rent!
Glad you confirmed my expectations of the Wateas!
See you soon,
Gary
-
I'll be scanning the conditions reports and weather reports (and I'll be hoping for snow)!
Michael
-
Michael:
Great reviews.? What you described in the iM78 will make me very happy.?I'll be glad to have you try my 177's and see what you think relative to the 171's.
May i cut and paste your reviews into the appropriate Manufacturer? ski review sections below when I get back from Thanksgiving so people can find them throughout the year?? Or maybe I can just create a link to this review.
-
Hi Jim,
I'll be placing the reviews later today. I think the longer size i78M will be ideal for you now that I have demod the ski.
Cheers,
Michael
-
Michael, having owned and skied my IM82 on groomed, high speed, slow speed, bumps and boot high, I got a good feel for the ski and enjoyed it's strenghts and adjusted for it's one weakness....hardpac k.
SInce I have not skied the 84 Watea...can you recollect any significant differences?
I'm aniticipating the 84 will arc easier, float a bit better, release from turns easier....the turning radius is about the same on both.
YOur thoughts?
Gary
-
Hardpack? gary, do you mean boilerplate or just firm groomed
-
Frozen granular...hardpack ...
Boilerplate....like the blue ice variety we get in the east...it's slip and slide time.
G
-
yes, agreed. It's a great GS carver on anything softish
-
Michael, having owned and skied my IM82 on groomed, high speed, slow speed, bumps and boot high, I got a good feel for the ski and enjoyed it's strenghts and adjusted for it's one weakness....hardpac k.
SInce I have not skied the 84 Watea...can you recollect any significant differences?
I'm aniticipating the 84 will arc easier, float a bit better, release from turns easier....the turning radius is about the same on both.
YOur thoughts?
Gary
Hi Gary,
I've used the Monster 88 on packed-powder and crud, so I've never felt a lack of edge-grip. Bullet-proof ice is difficult for all skis IMO.
I would say the Watea provides about 90% of the edge-grip of the RX8. The construction & feel is very similar. Keep in mind that the Watea is a new model and Fischer may have found some enhancements since the RX series originated. This should compensate for the added width of these models.
It's safe to think of the Watea as a wider RX ski.
Hope that helped.
Michael
-
Oh I think you just made his day!
-
THanks Michael...
Looking forward to the ride...and you're right Ron....
G
-
Here are some Pics from Loveland: http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?p=805810#post805810
Michael
-
Barrestscv,
What a great post. My friend is checking out the Atomic Crimson and I showed him your review. He found it very helpful. So many skis to choose from - reviews like yours help. Thanks.
-
Nice reviews.
For a Level 7 Mammoth 70/30 skier, what would be better, Watea 78 or Watea 84? Also, for the Watea 84, would you go with your "normal" length, or does it ski better a bit longer or shorter than "normal"? I am coming from old school skis and have to transition my technique accordingly, so 84cm sounds quite wide, but sounds like the Watea 84 is nearly as versatile as many narrower skis...
-
70/30, meaning 70 off or on-piste? What is your height and weight? I am 178, 6' level 8. I bought the 176 as I plan to use it for soft groomed or left overs and piled stuff, I actually own the watea94 as well. The 84 is a fantastic ski it does ski a bit shorter however it has a very slightly turned tail. I would recommend going with a railflex (tyrolia makes heads and Fischers) so you can move. I think the binding needs to be moved forward.
-
70/30, meaning 70 off or on-piste? What is your height and weight? I am 178, 6' level 8. I bought the 176 as I plan to use it for soft groomed or left overs and piled stuff, I actually own the watea94 as well. The 84 is a fantastic ski it does ski a bit shorter however it has a very slightly turned tail. I would recommend going with a railflex (tyrolia makes heads and Fischers) so you can move. I think the binding needs to be moved forward.
As in 70/30 on-piste/off-piste. I'm 34 years old, 5'10", 160 lbs. I'm a former level 7 or so skier coming off a long layoff and was using old school skis, and this will be my first pair of shaped skis. I'm probably medium-speed and medium-aggressive oriented, had a knee surgery 10 years ago that keeps me from going all-out ever. I ski Mammoth 90% of the time. Some reviewers on epicski are saying to go head height with the Watea 84, which would put me at the 176. But I'm almost 20 lbs. lighter than you and a level below in ability.
Also am considering the Watea 78, but I can get a great deal on the 84 and hear it sacrifices very little on-piste relative to the 78.
-
The ski definitely skis shorter than it is. i saw your post, didn't know that was you. I am Finndog there. If in doubt go shorter. Since you are skiing much more on-piste groomers, don't rule out a nice Dynastar Contact 10 or the LTD. Fantastic ski. If you want to go to the 84, I am afraid the 167 is going to be too short. Did you see that o2 gear has the 176 back in stock for the 329? http://www.o2gearshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=1&products_id=74
-
The ski definitely skis shorter than it is. i saw your post, didn't know that was you. I am Finndog there. If in doubt go shorter. Since you are skiing much more on-piste groomers, don't rule out a nice Dynastar Contact 10 or the LTD. Fantastic ski. If you want to go to the 84, I am afraid the 167 is going to be too short. Did you see that o2 gear has the 176 back in stock for the 329? http://www.o2gearshop.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=1&products_id=74
What do you think about the Watea 78 vs. the Watea 84 for me? Also you say go short on the Watea 84 if in doubt, but you also say you're afraid 167 would be too short. I'm a little confused as to which length it is that you are recommending then. Thanks for the help.
-
I meant the 176, the the 184 will be too long. Sorry. I did not ski the 78 myself. Did you search over at Epic? Dawg most likely reviewed them. Make sure you check here too! Peters reviews are great. They seem more font side oriented but very good. I just read it here and it looks like a great ski. You may be able to get this at a great price as it wasn't a very popular ski. Don't confuse good for unpopular though! I would be looking at the following
Fischer Watea 78 or 84
Dynastar 10
Fischer RX 8 Fire
Volkl Ac30
-
I meant the 176, the the 184 will be too long. Sorry. I did not ski the 78 myself. Did you search over at Epic? Dawg most likely reviewed them. Make sure you check here too! Peters reviews are great. They seem more font side oriented but very good. I just read it here and it looks like a great ski. You may be able to get this at a great price as it wasn't a very popular ski. Don't confuse good for unpopular though! I would be looking at the following
Fischer Watea 78 or 84
Dynastar 10
Fischer RX 8 Fire
Volkl Ac30
Ron, do you think the Watea 84 would be suitable as the wider ski of a 2-ski quiver? Keep in mind that I'm not going to be skiing in snow that is any deeper than boot-high, MAYBE knee high if I actually improve my skills enough. The more I research this ski, the less it sounds like a 1-ski quiver solution for my uses. I was thinking for the other ski, I could take a look at those Dynastars you mentioned, maybe a stiffer Fischer (RX or Heat), or an Atomic Nomad Highnoon or Metron?
-
Now your thinking! Yes, if you can swing it, 2 quiver the way to go. I would go with the 84 and then a Fisher 8 or Dynastart 10 or even a 9 if you aren't overly aggressive. That's a great way to go.
-
Now your thinking! Yes, if you can swing it, 2 quiver the way to go. I would go with the 84 and then a Fisher 8 or Dynastart 10 or even a 9 if you aren't overly aggressive. That's a great way to go.
What about the Fischer Red Heat 170cm. instead of the RX8 for Ski#1? They have them for 370$ shipped at O2 gear shop. And then the Watea 84 176cm. for ski#2? Would that be too much overlap? Or should I even go to something like the Watea 94 for Ski#2?! Would the Watea 84 be wide enough to cover all of my soft snow needs?
-
...Sierra Jim over at Epicski is now saying to consider a Red Heat/Snoop Daddy or comparable 2-ski Mammoth quiver, then and optional full-on fat ski for "real" powder skiing in the future if I ever get good enough to venture here...so that bumps the width up to 74mm/88mm combo...hmmm...
-
Now your thinking! Yes, if you can swing it, 2 quiver the way to go. I would go with the 84 and then a Fisher 8 or Dynastart 10 or even a 9 if you aren't overly aggressive. That's a great way to go.
Have you tried the Watea 94 as well? I'm now thinking the 84 might not be wide enough to be the fat ski of the 2...this is assuming that for the first, it will be between the Atomic Highnoon, Atomic Blackeye, Nordica Nitrous, and Fischer Red Heat. The Dynastar Contact 10 looks promising, just afraid it may not be wide enough for a Mammoth ski.
-
well, rememebr to always check the fine print. Sierra is a great guy but a shop manager who sells a lot of Atomic skis......They also carry Fischer but not the 94 this season. The Snoop is supposed to be a great ski, not sure its an intermediate ski. I am not an Atomic fan. Have you demoed the Atomics and Nordica's????? Much different skis. Watea 94? I own it and it's my favorite wide ski. It's very versitile, great float, light weight, great snow feedback and so on. I wouldn't call the 94 a good intermediate ski though. How much powder are you going into? What about the snow after an hour when there isn't anymore power? If you are still looking for a ski that will help you grow and learn and you still are staying on blue/greens, then I really think a ski like a 84 is plenty. If you get a big pow dump, go rent for a day. I dont know anything about that red heat.
-
yeah...you know I had considered that, the fact that that guy has a store and everything...just seems like people trust him over there....he says he tried the Watea 94 and liked it, but decided against carrying it since there was too much "stiif competition" at that class of ski in his inventory.
As for powder, the deepest I'll probably ski is maybe boot-high.
So you think the Watea 94 and Snoop Daddy might be a little to much for me to handle huh? And the Watea 84 you're thinking is plenty wide to handle up to boot-high powder? If that's the case, I may be back to looking at the Watea 84 as a 1-ski quiver for Mammoth, b/c if it can handle that, plus provide 90% of the on-piste performance of something in the Blackeye/Nitrous/Recon/Watea 78 class, It would be hard to justify getting 2 skis at this point....unless I go skinnier with the frontside ski as you suggested, but lots of people out here in CA are telling me not to consider any ski that is less than 76/78mm. underfoot.
BTW, to be clear on my level, I would say I am much more of a single-black skier than green/blue...I can pretty much ski any single-black and still maintain good technique, unless it has big bumps. I'm being conservative on my level, b/c I"m coming from old-school skis and technique. Does that change your assessments?
-
yes, that does help. From your earlier description, it sounded much more intermediate with a slower more deliberate pace. I gotta tell you, its a preference thing. You could probably handle a Head 78 which is a great ski, just not enough engery or pop for my liking, Jim ratcliffe here has it and loves it. Gary and I both own the 84. I also own the 94. I have a head Mojo90 which is actually 89mm wide. It's another great ski. Easy to control, good energy and carves pretty darn well. It depends really on what you like in skis, I like lighter, more responsive skis, I like energy and feedback. Heads are typically very damp but quick. I used to really like them but once I got on some of the new Dynastars and fischers I loved that feel. If it were me (and it's not!) I would get a pair of 84's with LD12's on them. It a great ski and right now Dawg (at Epic) is selling them for $389. O2gear may have a pair or 2 left of the 176's. If you can wait, get them or another ski over the summer. There's always deals out there!!!!!
-
Hey, I was just reading Epic and I would agree with Sierra Jim on the Legend 8000. Thats a great ski as well. DAwg has those on sale too.
-
yes, that does help. From your earlier description, it sounded much more intermediate with a slower more deliberate pace. I gotta tell you, its a preference thing. You could probably handle a Head 78 which is a great ski, just not enough engery or pop for my liking, Jim ratcliffe here has it and loves it. Gary and I both own the 84. I also own the 94. I have a head Mojo90 which is actually 89mm wide. It's another great ski. Easy to control, good energy and carves pretty darn well. It depends really on what you like in skis, I like lighter, more responsive skis, I like energy and feedback. Heads are typically very damp but quick. I used to really like them but once I got on some of the new Dynastars and fischers I loved that feel. If it were me (and it's not!) I would get a pair of 84's with LD12's on them. It a great ski and right now Dawg (at Epic) is selling them for $389. O2gear may have a pair or 2 left of the 176's. If you can wait, get them or another ski over the summer. There's always deals out there!!!!!
I think I will go ahead and get some Watea 84's. The guys over at Footloose sports, the pre-eminent ski gurus in Mammoth, CA, are saying the 84 and the 94 are their picks out of any ski for Mammoth!
Unfortunately, there seems to be some conflicting opinions on length. Both SierraJim and the guys over at O2gear have told me I would be better off on 167's than 176's. Guys at O2gear said 176 only if I will be off-piste more than 50% of the time. But you say 176 and seem to know the ski wel, and some other reviews on Epicski also suggest closer to head-height, which would be 176 for me. Do I believe the salesmen or the consumers, LOl?! Unfortunately, I won't be able to demo the 2 lengths to compare...:( I could probably wait until summer, but it seems that the Wateas are becoming very popular, at least out here, so I'd be afraid they might be limited in availability...plus would I really be able to get them for much cheaper than 329$ shipped, from O2gear?!
By LD-12 bindings, do you mean LD-12 railflex bindings or normal LD-12?
Thanks so much for your extremely helpful advice!
-Howe
-
Oh boy...for sure Howe....the 176 length....this ski turns quicker than it's length suggests.
You will love the 84...I'm 5'81/2, 155lbs and ski it in a 176 length....great ride, extremely versatile.
Mine is mounted flat with the Mojo15 binding because it's my boot high and above ski.
The railflex may give you a bit quicker edge to edge. Have to tell you I had my binding mounted 2 cm forward. If you go with the railflex, I'm guessing you'll have better performance in the forward mounting position.
Let's us know how things work out,
Best,
Gary
-
railflex rfd12's or eqivelent. Remember that tyrolia makes the bindings for head and fischer so any of these are fine. get whichever. I have head rfd12's on mine.
-
Oh boy...for sure Howe....the 176 length....this ski turns quicker than it's length suggests.
You will love the 84...I'm 5'81/2, 155lbs and ski it in a 176 length....great ride, extremely versatile.
Mine is mounted flat with the Mojo15 binding because it's my boot high and above ski.
The railflex may give you a bit quicker edge to edge. Have to tell you I had my binding mounted 2 cm forward. If you go with the railflex, I'm guessing you'll have better performance in the forward mounting position.
Let's us know how things work out,
Best,
Gary
OK...another vote for the 176! Just for good humor, I asked the guy at O2gear again which length to get, and he still maintained that for 70/30 use, to get the 167! I told him that there were some folks on the ski forums telling me that 176 was the way to go, and he warned me that he reads these forums and that I should be careful b/c most of the poeple really didn't know what they're talking about! I told him that the guys I had been corresponding with seemed to be particularly knowledgeable though, and that they were in fact moderators...Upon further reflection, he said , yeah, I could really go either way, but 167 would be better for all-mountain 70/30, but I should go 176 if I were going to be going 50/50, 30/70 or just as a soft snow specialist. He was worried mainly about my light weight, not my height or ability so much.
Sierrajim also still maintains 167 would be the best fit, citing that he'd only put me on the 176 if I were 180 lbs.+ or level 8 +...he felt that at my weight, I'd get pushed around too much by the 176, at my ability...
Too bad there isn't a 170 to split the difference! Out of curiosity, where do you guys ski? I'm having a tough time going against what Sierrajim is telling me, mainly b/c not only is he familiar with this ski, which you guys obviously are too, but he is particularly familiar with Mammoth...
My only point of reference in terms of shaped skis and length is the Volkl AC2, which I rented for a week up at Mammoth recently in a 170cm. That seemed about right to me in that ski, so as a final point of reference, are you guys still gonna say , no question the 176, or is more of a toss-up?
-
Did you ask the gurus at Footloose? You are 5' 10'' and 160, Right? you ski blacks and plan to ski this on groomed soft snow and pow? You are a level 7. If you are really a 7, meaning you can carve parallell turns, handle some speed, are comfortable on any blue and can handle easy bumps? You can do all of this with confidence and good form? . I agree regarding the 70/30 however if the groomers are soft groomed powder, it could be 60/40. I thought the idea was to ski more off-piste? If not, I still love the dynastar 10. you can get that in 172 I think.
I ski primarilly at Steamboat. I am a solid 8. Gary is a 9, skis in Rochester NY and out west.
Go with what you feel is best. I don't want to talk you into a ski you won't like. As I said in one of the first posts to you , if in doubt, go shorter. I am 2" taller and have 15 pounds on you. Get the 167 and ski it for a couple of seasons, improve and buy a new pair! :)
-
Alright Howe....you could ski either length for sure.
If you are more of a laid back skier that likes to cruise, nice easy turns with similar turn shapes... then go with the 167...if you like to crush, use lots of energy skiing the trails edges, look for off camber stuff, get air on jumps, love speed and the forces of GS turns and dance in the slopped and crud snow...get the 176's.
If you ski at all out west, the 176 for certain is the better choice. If you ski eastern snow only, then figure out if your a cruiser or crusher!
I'm extremely comfortable on the 176 length but then again, I like to crush mostly and cruise partially. Just depends on your mental attitude on skis.
The rest we've talked about. I've got about 30 days on my 84's so I think I know a little something about that ski...well beyond demo.
Just understand who you are and buy accordingly!
Gary
-
So I pulled the trigger on the Watea 84. Sierra Snowboard has em on sale for 299$ right now....I went with the 167cm.after asking a dozen or so people about it. If it is too short, I will know after a day or two, then I'll just unload them. In the meantime the 167 is sold out from Fischer and they have lots of 176 left, so I can always get the larger size if I regret the 167 I figure.
Since I can't seem to find any demos of this ski or the Atomic Highnoon and Blackeye, I might just buy all of them if I can find good deals on them and then sell off the ones I don't like! Is this stupid?
Anyway regarding bindings, I think I will go the way of the Railflex as you suggested Ron. My question is this...It seems that I can get either 78mm brakes or 95mm brakes for them...is it usually done to bend a set of 78mm brakes to fit an 84mm ski? And if I go with 95mm brakes, will that be problematic on 84mm skis?
-
I suspected as much! Good job. You will love them out west for sure. The 78's should be fine. Who ever mounts them should be able to adjust for you. Enjoy them but please let us know how you wish you bought the 176's :)
-
I suspected as much! Good job. You will love them out west for sure. The 78's should be fine. Who ever mounts them should be able to adjust for you. Enjoy them but please let us know how you wish you bought the 176's :)
So I just want to report that I did end up getting a pair of the Watea 84's in a 167cm. and put some LD12 railflex on them. I've skied on them a couple times now and the descriptions you guys have given are pretty much spot on. As far as the length goes, yes, I could easily see myself skiing the 176cm instead. The 167's are fine for the most part on the groomers, but I haven't been able to test them in some fresh powder at this late point in the season, but I can imagine that I might want a little extra length. Bottom line is for a 70/30 ski, 167 for me is ok and 176 might be better as a 50/50 or 30/70 ski.
I'm now considering getting a second ski as a on-piste/skill-improvement type ski...something in the 68-74mm range maybe? Turning radius under 15m? Something that will facilitate a transition to modern technique, excel at short and medium turns, excel at the harder end of western-snow.
You guyys mentioned the Dynastar Contact line. Which would be most appropriate for me? The Limited/11 is billed as an expert ski, but I've heard that it is actually a forgiving ski? Is it appropriate for a 160lb. level 7 skier trying to improve carving skills? The 9 on the other hand seems to get more mixed reviews and the 10 even more so...Is the 9 enough ski for me? I hear it is a pretty soft and light ski; can it handle mixed western conditions or will it falter in crud and wetter spring stuff? Is the 10 just a compromise between the 2?
One thing I've realized is that I am perhaps a little more aggressive and faster skier than I was thinking before I got the Wateas. THere are certainly some who rip down the mountain harder and faster than me, but the last couple of times out, I noticed that I probably ski faster and more aggressively than about 80-90% of the people around me....not sure if that is really saying anything as I'm not sure how skiing ability breaks down by % of people?...
-
Hey Howe...Ok..now that you have the Watea 84, you want to make sure you don't get a ski that is "too" similar in turning radius and versatility. As you stated, the longer Watea might have been the spot on choice but having said that, what you have will take you dancing in shin to knee high powder using good technique.
I think from how you described your skiing, finding a ski with a side cut that would give you around a 13 meter turning radius would be the "ying in your yang"!
The question here is which ski.......I'm thinking something in a 160 or 165 length. I ski the Head SS in a 165 length and ski that up to boot high snow. That other personal favorite of mine is the Fischer RX8...I think these 2 skis are great choices .....
The RX8 is probably the more forgiving of the two.
I can tell you from what I see on the mountain that skiing fast is certainly no indication of a skiers skills or the rating format for ski levels. Being able to ski a variety of conditions and terrain in control at a variety of speeds probably is more of the benchmark.
Still, you want a ski that is fun, versatile, and fits your skiing style. If the Watea worked....I know the RX8 would be a homerun.
Best,
Gary
-
I would throw the Contact 9 in there as well. I don't think it is quite in the same class as the SuperShape or RX8, but I demoed it recently and was really quite impressed. Although it feels lighter (and sounds different) than my Head i.SL Chips it was an extremely capable ski. Also, as you and Gary mentioned, for working on skills and technique you want a pretty versatile ski, one that you can arc and edge at slower speeds but one that also remains stable at higher speeds. I didn't find anything that the Contact 9 didn't do pretty well including some soft snow and some icy Black trails (I'm 5/11" 190 pounds, 59 years old, green icon and I believe it was a mid 160's.) I would certainly rate the Contact 9 as a better fit than either the 10 or 11.
-
Hey Howe...Ok..now that you have the Watea 84, you want to make sure you don't get a ski that is "too" similar in turning radius and versatility. As you stated, the longer Watea might have been the spot on choice but having said that, what you have will take you dancing in shin to knee high powder using good technique.
I think from how you described your skiing, finding a ski with a side cut that would give you around a 13 meter turning radius would be the "ying in your yang"!
The question here is which ski.......I'm thinking something in a 160 or 165 length. I ski the Head SS in a 165 length and ski that up to boot high snow. That other personal favorite of mine is the Fischer RX8...I think these 2 skis are great choices .....
The RX8 is probably the more forgiving of the two.
I can tell you from what I see on the mountain that skiing fast is certainly no indication of a skiers skills or the rating format for ski levels. Being able to ski a variety of conditions and terrain in control at a variety of speeds probably is more of the benchmark.
Still, you want a ski that is fun, versatile, and fits your skiing style. If the Watea worked....I know the RX8 would be a homerun.
Best,
Gary
Yeah seems like the RX8 is a pretty popular ski...but most people who ski them seem to be east coast skiers, no? Is the RX8 a good choice for a frontside ski for big western mountains where you need to be able to deal with quite variable snow, loads of afternoon crud, heavy springtime " mashed potatoes" and corn?
-
I would throw the Contact 9 in there as well. I don't think it is quite in the same class as the SuperShape or RX8, but I demoed it recently and was really quite impressed. Although it feels lighter (and sounds different) than my Head i.SL Chips it was an extremely capable ski. Also, as you and Gary mentioned, for working on skills and technique you want a pretty versatile ski, one that you can arc and edge at slower speeds but one that also remains stable at higher speeds. I didn't find anything that the Contact 9 didn't do pretty well including some soft snow and some icy Black trails (I'm 5/11" 190 pounds, 59 years old, green icon and I believe it was a mid 160's.) I would certainly rate the Contact 9 as a better fit than either the 10 or 11.
Again, is the Contact 9 a ski that can deal with heavier cruddy conditions, or wetter spring stuff? How does it compare to the RX8?
-
Again, is the Contact 9 a ski that can deal with heavier cruddy conditions, or wetter spring stuff?? How does it compare to the RX8?
I haven't skied the RX8 so can't give you a comparison. I think the Contact 9 would be an excellent groomed snow ski and excellent for working on skills. I didn't notice any tip deflection in piles of snow or easy, soft bumps. It handled packed powder in the trees better than I do; it did get deflected by tree roots ;D. I would feel comfortable skiing it anytime I would my other slalom footprint skis, but for heavy cruddy conditions or wetter spring stuff I would probably ski my iM78's (177) anyway. My summary, felt like a very good groomed snow ski with good versatility, and believe it would be better for someone really trying to work on skills because skill development should imply slower speeds. Speed masks technique problems (speaking first hand here).
-
No question in my mind the RX8 is a great front side western ski....well, cause I skied one out west. As far as skiing soft snow, mash potato's, crud broken snow....if your ski skills are good, strong 2 footed transitions, then no problem carving up that menu. If you want more forgiving, go a bit wider but you loose a bit of that quick turning you're looking for. Anyways, you've got the Watea's for those conditions....did you forget... ??? needing anything to improve memory.. ::)
Ah just busting on ya...
That Watea can ski it all....but for when you're in the mood for laying down precision carved short radius turns, I know the RX8 can perform that and then some for sure!
Although I have not skied the Contact 9 or 10 I have skied the Contact Exclusive or 11....and it is a rippn' ski too. I'm sure it's siblings are highly capable of awesome front side performance and real skiers reviews really likes the 9.
Demo if you can but I know with either choice...you'll be smilin' all the way to the lift line!
G
-
No question in my mind the RX8 is a great front side western ski....well, cause I skied one out west. As far as skiing soft snow, mash potato's, crud broken snow....if your ski skills are good, strong 2 footed transitions, then no problem carving up that menu. If you want more forgiving, go a bit wider but you loose a bit of that quick turning you're looking for. Anyways, you've got the Watea's for those conditions....did you forget... ??? needing anything to improve memory.. ::)
Ah just busting on ya...
That Watea can ski it all....but for when you're in the mood for laying down precision carved short radius turns, I know the RX8 can perform that and then some for sure!
Although I have not skied the Contact 9 or 10 I have skied the Contact Exclusive or 11....and it is a rippn' ski too. I'm sure it's siblings are highly capable of awesome front side performance and real skiers reviews really likes the 9.
Demo if you can but I know with either choice...you'll be smilin' all the way to the lift line!
G
hehe...yeah...I guess I shouldn't be too concerned about the crappola snow abilities of the RX8, since it is supposed to be my hard snow groomer specialist! The Wateas are quick for a midfat, but I didn't trust them (or I didn't trust myself on them) in the early morning half-frozen corduroy on a steep double black or half frozen steep mogul field, and sometimes I just shoot up to Snow Summit/Big Bear around this time of year and ski only until 1pm or so when the sun gets strong and the frozen granular stuff gives way to mush.
Anyway, I may not demo since I am looking out for a great deal on one of these guys, and may have to jump on em if the price is right. I've seen the Contact 9 fairly widespread...best prices so far have been in the 350-400$ range.. The RX8 seems to be scarce, and not very deeply discounted when found. The Contact 10 and Limited seem scarce as well and not often deeply discounted....I also am noticing that their turn radius is more in the 14/15m. range rather than 12/13 range..
Do you guys have a feeling about 165 or 170 (172)cm. for the RX8 and Contact 9?
-
I would think 165.
-
Yep...I think Jim is right on...165.....those Contact 9 could be very appealing.
Now for those hard snow mornings on your Wateas...
Move the LD12 bindings into their forward position and ski that sucker like a slalom ski...go ahead, trust it. Keep you hands out in front of your body so you can see them at all times....no go rip a few!
I say this because mine in the 176 length are surface mounted. I had them re-mounted 2cm forward and oh boy...what a difference. Ski it centered, ski it hard.....even at the length....it feels very responsive on hard pack and soft snow both.
Ok, so when you buy the Contact 9, bring it with you to Real Skiers 3 this year.....would love to get it a ride!
Best,
Gary