Author Topic: Technical or Tactical  (Read 324 times)

bf_hill

  • Guest
Technical or Tactical
« on: January 29, 2008, 06:40:14 am »
In narrowing down my choices to select a new pair of skiis I find my current selections are a mixture of technical and tactical skiis.  I'm having difficulty deciding on which I prefer and find the decription somewhat vague.  Anyone have any clarification ideas?

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #1 on: January 29, 2008, 09:12:36 am »
Tell everyone something about you and see what they say.? Age, height, weight, skier skill level, where you ski (groomed, off-piste, bumps) and how fagressively you ski.? Do you ski primarily east or primarily one week vacations west or Europe. Are you looking at wokring on carving skills (which should imply a less than 70mm waist), or are you comfortably parallel and not stem-christieing or skidding your skis to make turns.

What was in your database of skis that you were considering (and why).

I will confess that I too get confused by all the titles, because they changes about as fast as I figure out what that are trying to communicate.


« Last Edit: January 29, 2008, 09:16:09 am by jim-ratliff »
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

bf_hill

  • Guest
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #2 on: January 29, 2008, 02:44:21 pm »
Well, this might make you sorry you asked......

Age 53
Wt 205lbs
Ht 5?10?
Fairly athletic.? I run a 28min 5k

Grew up on skis in NY then moved to VT when 13.? Had numerous season passes.? In Vermont I skied with some wild ones who did helicopters on FIS.? They blazed new trails which actually got names! I was the slowest.

Currently, I have slowed down slightly and am more hesitant to do black diamonds if the conditions are not ideal.? I ski virtually all piste now (ha! just learned that!).? I have lived in Florida for the past 20 years and have gone to Vermont to ski almost every year for a week at a time.? This year I am going twice.? My skis are Olin Mark IIIS, 190cm, 20 years old.? I also have Olin Mark V?s, but they are too cumbersome and prefer the Mark III?s.? I tried a pair of the new shaped skis last year and liked the easy turning, but they wandered when I picked up the speed and had to ski them on edge when running (as noted in this site as well).? I like stringing slalom turns in the A.M. and throwing in? GS turns.? In the P.M. I cruise, occasionally top to bottom non-stop.? I read the article about old style skidding vs carving and plan to implement the knee rolling strategy with my new skis but I think I carve some already.

I like Blue moguls but tend to freeze up and bail out on Black Diamond moguls after 4 or 5 turns if conditions are not perfect.? I went out west once and had fun on Black diamond moguls but loved the wide open fast skiing with no ice.? I plan to go out again.? I also plan to do helicopter skiing but will rent or buy different skis for that.?

Using your terminology I?d say I am a combination of Strong and Sport, and mostly old school.? Legs together except on GS turns.? I guess advanced is the best lable since I tense up on black diamonds.? I am one of the first on the mountain and the last to go.? I like a full-bodied amber ale.

After reading reviews on line I was looking at the following because they seemed to be able to cover my skill level, aggressiveness and were fairly multifunctional.? I?m not a powder hound, I don?t think Vermont gets powder ;-), but I do do occasional moguls.

My list so far...Tactical and Technical (*)? I am thinking the second longest in the model (thanks Jim!)

*Fischer RX 8?
*K2 Apache Crossfire? 2006-8? each year better
Nordica Speed Machine mach 2/3
Volkl AC 30? 2008
Salomon x-wing tornado? 2007
*Dynastar contact 9 2006-07? intermediate level ski
*Head iSupershape Magnum 2008 good all round
Elan Magfire 10

I had read about the Elan magfires, but they seemed too........off piste.? ? The Atomics apparently were rated well, but I don?t know why I didn?t include them.

I would love some input on skis and length.? If money were not an issue, the Volkl Tigershark 10 with power would be the hands down choice given yours and others? reviews, but they are not being discounted much and I?d rather keep costs at $500 to $700 (ebay).?

Thanks,
brad
« Last Edit: January 31, 2008, 06:09:31 am by bf_hill »

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #3 on: January 30, 2008, 07:41:01 pm »
Brad:? My three word thoughts on each ski you selected.

Dynastar legend 8000 2008? ?(good choice, better for western than eastern)
Dynastar 4800 2006-07 not so good at fast?? (8000 has gotten so versatile, don't see the advantage)
*Fischer RX 8? ? ? (excellent choice, especially for groomed slopes east or west up to boot top powder)
*K2 Apache Crossfire? 2006-8? each year better? (don't know much about it)
Volkl Tigershark 10 w/ps? ?(10 is better choice than 12, demo unless you know that you like Volkl feel. I don't).
Nordica Speed Machine mach 2/3
Volkl AC 30? 2008
Salomon x-wing tornado? 2007
Dynastar contact 11 2006-07 wider Not for old school style? (pretty advanced ski, I think, 9 is better choice)
*Dynastar contact 9 2006-07? intermediate level ski? ?(good choice)
*Head iSupershape Magnum 2008 good all round? ?(maybe a great compromise.? bit wider than RX8, still good on eastern hardpack)
*Head XRC 1400 Chip 2007? ? (maybe too much ski, magnum is better?)
Head monster i.m 72 srII? 2006-07? great all round? ?(great all around from three years back, magnum is better for heavier skiers I think)
Head monster 78 2008? wider, some off piste? ?(I use this for western trips, too wide for my eastern tastes. better than im72 I think)

I would add the Elan Magfire 10 from prior years.? Nice all around ski, I'm not up to date on this years equivalent models, and seems like they got wider and different reviews.? If I were to narrow your list to 3-4 skis it would be the Fischer Rx8 (66mm), Dynastar Contact 9 (68mm), Head supershape Magnum (71mm),? Elan Magfire 10 2005/06 (75mm),? Head monster iM78 (78mm),? Dynastar 8000 (79mm).
 

« Last Edit: January 30, 2008, 07:42:32 pm by jim-ratliff »
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

bf_hill

  • Guest
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #4 on: January 30, 2008, 08:31:47 pm »
Hi Jim,

I really appreciate your input.  Your comments on the skis are well received, especially on the Heads.  I was leaning towards the magnum as the preferred representative and you have cemented that.  Your Volkl point is well taken and since I might not demo, most salient.  The Fischers are highly recommended everywhere and were on the top of my list as well.  I see you arranged your selections by increasing width so the Crossfire would fall in line with the Contact 9 which I agree is a better choice than the 11 and the Legend 8000 since I am primarily an Eastern skier.

I like your choices. Thanks for the time spent!

brad

Perry

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 200 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 397
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #5 on: January 30, 2008, 08:33:11 pm »
I have the RX 8 and it is a real fun ski.  There are a couple of good threads over on epicski.com about them and other skis.  The reviews on this website are very good.  I have personally tried the Dynastar 8000.  I agree that it is more of a western ski but it really was a fun ride.  I ski in the mid atlantic area, WV, NC, so we get a lot of ice from thaw/freeze cycles.  The RX8 is great in all the conditions i have used it in.

Perry
PS - they may just make you feel like the black bumps aren't so bad ;D

Age 51 level 7-8 skier

bf_hill

  • Guest
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #6 on: January 30, 2008, 09:07:26 pm »
Hey Perry,

I was just looking for the RX 8s.  They are hard to come by, at a discount anyway.  None on Ebay my size.  Speaking of which, we sound like age and skill match.  What wt. are you if you don't mind me asking and what length do you have?

I think a big part of my black mogul issue has been the wrong skis.  Certainly can't be my skiing... ::)

brad

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #7 on: January 30, 2008, 10:41:44 pm »
Brad:

I am 59, 5'11" and about 190 pounds.? As a general rule, I pick the length that is second from longest in a particular ski.? That seems to work well and provides a way of dealing with the fact that manufacturers design some skis to be skied shorter than others.

My eastern ski is a Head i.SL Chip @ 165 (and 170 was the longest they made).? 119-65-103
My western ski is the Head iM78 @ 177 (and 183 was the longest).? 124-78-110

Based on that 'guideline' I would recommend the 170 2008 RX8 for you (and also for the supershape magnum)

Jim
« Last Edit: January 30, 2008, 11:02:02 pm by jim-ratliff »
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

bf_hill

  • Guest
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #8 on: January 31, 2008, 05:16:26 am »
Hi Jim,

That just makes sense.  I can see that the Technical skis tend to have a shorter range of lengths to choose from than the Tacticals, likely because they have a more 'slalom' short turn radius.  Letting go of my dinosaur length concepts has been challenging.  I see a demo facility near Smuggler's Notch, VT has the Fischers, Nordica Speed machine, and the Crossfires with a 3 ski demo rate of $55 a day.  I am so reluctant to demo since I am only going to be skiing for 4 days strainght. It almost forces me to rent for all those days unless I am lucky and they have the ski I want in stock ready to go or are willing to sell the demo.  Since I am going up April 5th to the 10th they might want to unload some of their demos, if they have any left.

thanks!
brad

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #9 on: January 31, 2008, 08:52:53 am »
As a transition plan, demoing different skis for 4 straight days ($220) may be a wiser move than buying a pair of skis (even at end of season prices) that you wind up not liking.? When midwif was demoing at Steamboat before Christmas, she really liked the first pair of skis she was on (a K2) but it only took her 1 run to decide that she didn't like the second (a Nordica).? She liked the third pair of skis so much (Fischer Vision) that she demoed again the next day just so she could ski the Fischer's all day.? She has some more on her list to demo, but it's easy to save more than the demo cost by waiting until the end of the season (or watching e-Bay) once you find something you like.?

Also, this demo shop was actually on the mountain at the top of the Gondola, so that made it much easier to swap skis without much hassle.? If you find a ski you like, most shops will actually apply the demo fees to the purchase price of a new pair of skis (may be limited if the skis are already marked down, but worth checking).

Many of us don't demo because we aren't sure of our ability to feel a difference.? We may not be able to write a good ski review for others, but we can still tell what we don't like, especially when comparing a couple of pairs in a short period of time.

Try to find someone that has some Dynastars and the Head Magnum to demo as well.

NOTE:? One of the things that Peter posts all the time.? With the advent of shaped skis, there is a lot of difference in the feel of the same ski in different lengths, sometimes more different than skis of different brands in the same length.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2008, 10:18:50 am by jim-ratliff »
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

Liam

  • Ski Shop/Ski Patrol
  • 200 Posts
  • **
  • Posts: 399
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #10 on: February 01, 2008, 12:06:03 pm »
I've own the crossfire and the contact 9 (2007 165cm) and have skied the SS and the RX8-all good skis-but I can't recommend highly enough the Dynastar Contact 9's--especially for the aspiring carver looking for all-mountain (east-coast frontside all-mountain that is) ski.

It's sl shape and straight sidewall construction give it that smooth, toothy grip on hard pack, but sightly softer tip and tail make it a fantastc bump ski (round turning technique of course).  once you get confidence to keep it on edge even in softer, lower density crud you'll find it pretty capable in these conditions as well. 

Plus-I'm a fan of the look binding and autodrive system--and the ski looks pretty cool.

They're all great skis-but, for me, and I suspect for you you'll find the contact 9 the best. 

Good luck

bf_hill

  • Guest
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #11 on: February 01, 2008, 12:19:58 pm »
Hey Liam,

Great feedback, especially having tried the RX8.  The Contact 9 is definitely on my list but at the 172.  Are you slightly lighter?  And how is the Conact at running out the bottom of a run at a higher speed?  Does it feel stable? 

Thanks!
brad

Perry

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 200 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 397
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #12 on: February 03, 2008, 02:35:23 pm »
I got the RX8 second hand here last year.  They are 170cm.  I weigh 195 in the am with everything off  :o.  I think for me that was the right length.  I bought them for the turns and at 170, I have only felt them quiver at speed once last year.  Some of my speed used to come from poorer control of speed on steeps. Now that I have improved a little, I haven't felt that this year yet.

I would say that unless you ski real fast or plan to ski it out west where a little more float would help, 170 is probably a good choice.  Some of the people on epic say they like the 175 with our same size and weight.  I would guess they are younger, faster etc.

Again for me, I was looking for increased quickness, I wasn't sure what the best length would be, but I am not disappointed with the purchase i made.  Of course the best method would be to demo them at both lengths.

Maybe sometime we can makes some turns together.

Perry

bf_hill

  • Guest
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #13 on: February 03, 2008, 08:27:44 pm »
Interesting  8), I was looking at the 170s as well, apparently quickness is their forte.  I really shouldn't be going too fast anyway.  I've decided to go with the shorter lengths and try the new technique.  Since the 170 is the second longest I'm thinking they were meant to be skied shorter.   

I'll be up in Vermont April 5-10 and in December over Christmas break.  Next year, who knows.
brad

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #14 on: February 04, 2008, 07:53:09 am »

You raise an interesting question about the skiers on Epic regarding the length of RX8 for your weight and size.  One of the the hardest things to do is to glean meaningful information from other people's recommendation because, many times, you don't even know what type of skier they are.

Epic, for example, tends to be a LOT of instructors and patrollers.  Not necessarily young, but very skilled skiers.  However, not everyone that posts there is at that level, and it's difficult to know which is which.  I remember that Rob DesLauriers (who runs a well respected all mountain camp with his brother) posted some advice about all-mountain skiing (his Epic name is something different) and it was amazing the number of people that jumped all over his opinions.  In fact, some of the established Epic posters finally pointed out to the "masses" who the poster was and questioned whether they had the background to be so denigrating Rob's opinion.

As far as the young, hot skiers, that seems to be TGR (Teton Gravity Research).  Don't know for sure, since I am neither a young nor a hot skier.

You almost have to find some intersection between your opinion of skis you have skied and opinions others have offered to determine how much credibility their opinions have.  For me, that's the real value of my Realskiers subscription, the reviews are written more for my type of skier as opposed to the really good skiers over on Epic.  For example, the RealSkiers review for the Head Every Thang has the statement that "does everything acceptable well for all but the most agressive female skiers. What more needs to be said"  Bob Peters on epic posted a review where his wife didn't like the Every Thang at all.  Bob is a ski patroller at Jackson Hole and has a pro relationship with Head, and people that ski Jackson Hole all the time are likely well above "average"  skiers. 

"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

bf_hill

  • Guest
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #15 on: February 04, 2008, 09:05:49 am »
Well that just goes to highlight what has been said before, demo, demo, demo.  Not only does the expertise level affect the rating but skier weight and length of ski.    www.skipressworld.c om has an interesting ski selection process.  They actually identify the raters for the skis including their height, wt., and age along with their specific ratings.  That let me see how an older heavier skier found a particular ski and also how he rated different skis.

Since I am trying to select skis before my next trip I am reading as much as possible from as many sources, but the more I read, the more I am leaning towards spending the extra money for 4 days of demos before buying.  Perhaps I can get a deal after a couple days, but it looks like Ebay would provide the best deal.  K2 Apache Crossfires,  Salomon Cyclones, Fischer RX8, Dynastar Contact 9 and Head isupershape magnums are my current choices (in that order...sort of...).  The waists are all around 68 to 70 with the exception of the RX8 (65) so I am definitely leaning towards a more Technical, slalom type ski.

Perry

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 200 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 397
Re: Technical or Tactical
« Reply #16 on: February 06, 2008, 07:25:34 pm »
I agree.  It is one of the reasons I like this forum.  It seems to be more my speed and there are many posters that are my age.  I still want to improve my skiing as much as possible, however,  I'm not interested in hucking any cliffs.