Author Topic: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more  (Read 1288 times)

Barrettscv

  • Guest
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2007, 12:35:26 pm »
Here are some Pics from Loveland: http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?p=805810#post805810

Michael

kylepugh

  • Guest
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #16 on: November 26, 2007, 06:53:38 pm »
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.


monologuist

  • Guest
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #17 on: February 20, 2008, 01:33:45 pm »
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...

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #18 on: February 20, 2008, 01:49:23 pm »
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.

monologuist

  • Guest
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #19 on: February 20, 2008, 02:24:24 pm »
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.

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #20 on: February 21, 2008, 09:00:02 am »
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

monologuist

  • Guest
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #21 on: February 21, 2008, 11:29:13 am »
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.

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #22 on: February 21, 2008, 11:38:46 am »
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

monologuist

  • Guest
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #23 on: February 21, 2008, 05:39:58 pm »
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?

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #24 on: February 22, 2008, 08:09:53 am »
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.

monologuist

  • Guest
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #25 on: February 22, 2008, 03:51:09 pm »
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?

monologuist

  • Guest
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #26 on: February 22, 2008, 03:58:46 pm »
...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...

monologuist

  • Guest
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #27 on: February 25, 2008, 01:31:54 am »
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. 

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #28 on: February 25, 2008, 11:23:59 am »
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.

monologuist

  • Guest
Re: Watea 84 & 94, Monster 78, Progressor, Plus 8 more
« Reply #29 on: February 25, 2008, 12:33:16 pm »
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?