Author Topic: Supershape Verses RX8  (Read 939 times)

buck

  • Guest
Supershape Verses RX8
« on: December 01, 2006, 04:16:51 pm »
I hear a lot of good things about both the Head Supershape and the Fischer RX8, which one is the better choice? Has anyone had the chance to try both? I have the Supershapes but only have a few runs on them.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


Barrettscv

  • Guest
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #1 on: December 01, 2006, 05:19:44 pm »
Will peace & harmony be broken at Ski Forums.com? ;)?

These two models target the same athletic on-piste skiers, but the skis are distinctive.

I have not skied the Supershape. The RX8 has a light & lively feel and produces a wide range of turns on ice, hardpack or ankle deep snow. It likes to be on edge, carving from one turn to the next. The ski rewards aggressive input, but can also provide a relaxed ride when the skier takes a mental break.

The ski is easy to use and "coaches" better skiing; while thrilling the skier with huge edgegrip, great snow feel and quick reflexes.

Cheers,

Michael
« Last Edit: December 01, 2006, 05:26:35 pm by Barrettscv »

jbotti

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 400 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 961
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #2 on: December 01, 2006, 07:05:05 pm »
I own the Head SS's and I have been on RX8's. They are both truly great skis. One immediate and noticeable difference is that the SS's are sandwich construction/race laminate/vertical sidewall. For me this always has a distinct feel, which I love and I like the feel of SS's better than the RX 8's. Edge hold is superb on both skis. Turn radius is quite a bit tighter on the SS's, and they have a real slalom carver feel, although capable of wider turn shapes. They are both amazingly versatile skis and both can be skied easiliy in up to a foot of powder.

I love a tight turn radius and this is another reason that I love the SS's. I would say that it is a somewhat demanding ski. You have to work to skid them as the ski tracks once it is put on edge. I think the RX 8's are easier to skid and in general they are a more forgiving ski.

Hook up is lightening fast on SS with the wide tips.

Personally, I find the SS's to be the best and most fun all mountain carving skis in existence. I think the RX 8's are great skis, more user friendlly, less high end performance, equal all mountain versatility.

If you love Stockli skis, my guess is that you will prefer the SS's to the RX 8's. JB.

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2006, 07:01:16 am »
Buck, you have broken the silent rule here, we don't compare super powers, This is like, Russia vs. the USA in the 80's. I beleive the term at the time was "detante" :) 

OK, I have not skied the 8's but did own the SC's and Gary will chime in I hope. As said above, these two skis are perhaps the best skis on the front side ever; No doubt. I will not say that erither is better because its not a mater of better, its a matter of which you like better. This sounds diplomatic but its the truth.  The SS in a 170 is a Ferrari, its a stiff, technical ski that is not forgiving and with the vert walls is very precise, its not a skidding ski and do not get caught in the backseat. That said,, its amazingly versitile, super fast edge to edge but can make medium and long turns without fighting you like Metron B5 does.  Read my review in the Head section on both the SS (and 82 for that matter- also note I wrote both reviews before Peters reviews).  Some my differ but I will say the SS is a more demanding technical ski. The 8 is a bit more fun oriented but not less capable.

The 8's I will leave up to others but it is another fantastic ski.

Barrettscv

  • Guest
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2006, 07:29:31 am »
Hi Everyone,

Ron, that's a great answer, and not only because it's diplomatic.

To carry the supercar analogy one step further; The Supersport is an exotic (like a Ferrari) and the RX8 is a different kind of exotic (BMW M5).

Just because the M5 is easier in traffic doesn't mean that its less capable on the Autobahn? ;D .

I also completely agree with J.B. that a sandwich ski has a totally different feel than the RX8 which is a modified sandwich construction. My WC RC (112-66-97mm) has a completely different feel than the RX8 (115-66-98mm). The RX8 will carve with 100% of the precision and 90% of the edgegrip of the WC RC. But the RX8 will permit skidding without chatter and is far more versatile. IMO a very good skier can take advantage of the RX8 and get all of the performance of a sandwich ski while having the freedom to skid a turn every now and then.

However, there is something compelling about a sandwich skis edgegrip that makes these skis desirable.

Cheers,

Michael



« Last Edit: December 02, 2006, 10:18:22 am by Barrettscv »

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #5 on: December 02, 2006, 08:18:09 am »
YEs, agreed 100%, I am calling Gary now to get him to add his .02. I have to also agree that the vert sandwich construction is the biggest diff.

Gary

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2590
  • Location: Rochester, NY
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #6 on: December 02, 2006, 08:43:32 am »
Ding dong...I'm in..

Ok guys...here's my take as I have skied both and currently on the RX8s.

As I see it the "weight" of the issue here is what I see as a BMI index.
Now I think there should be a BMI (body mass index) established for each ski. Must call Peter on this.

At 155lbs, I found the RX8's more compliant. The edge hold on both skis was fierce. I am at a loss though because at 175lbs, I may have liked the SS better. I think that demo centers should have fat suits available so we could be more exact in our ability to judge a ski. So, if I wanted to know with my ski skills what a ski performed like at 200lbs, I could just whip on a 45lbs fat suit. Hmm, franchise opportunity!

After testing the SS, I really felt their performance was on par with the RX8's. Truly, the only differences I felt was that at my weight, the SS required more input and that it seemed to be happier making more turns, I'm sure the turn part is the result of? it's Playboy centerfold dimensions.

I do know that Harold loves his SS and he weighs in about my body weight...but hey, he's Harold.

There's no question in my mind these are 2 awesome skis. It really boils down to how the ski responds to your ski skills and the resulting performance you expect.

Oh yeah.....I think the RX8 has prettier colors!

Best,
Gary


Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #7 on: December 02, 2006, 08:47:34 am »
OK, I'm a boot length of 304, can anyone swap with me?

Gary

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2590
  • Location: Rochester, NY
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #8 on: December 02, 2006, 09:54:08 am »
Yes sireeee bob..

I'm a 307....

You be testing the RX8's for yourself come next week!

G

buck

  • Guest
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #9 on: December 04, 2006, 08:24:42 am »
I had the chance to put some time on my Supershapes (170cm) yesterday. Conditions were rock hard and very fast. The Supershapes are very smooth, very fast, have exceptional grip, are quick turning and very lively! I'm a guy who likes a ski that if your going 100mph, I want it to feel like I'm going 100mph, the Supershape is that ski!!! To the point that they were scary fast and unstable at speed. The slope was smooth but had some ripples near the bottom, when you hit this section the skis came totally unglued requiring more than one Bode type save! I switched over to my 07 Fischer Worldcup RC's (175's) and had no problem at the same speeds in the same section, they were glued to the snow. For my weight (215 lbs) the 170cm Supershapes were maybe a little soft at speed on very hard snow. Under these conditions I didn't get a chance to test the ski's versatility. I bought the ski primarily for skiing smaller slopes at slower speeds with my son. I have the Fischers and a pair of Head XRC 1200's for the bigger, faster runs such as this one. To be honest I liked my Rossignol 9S Oversizes that the Supershapes replaced better at this point.

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #10 on: December 04, 2006, 09:17:23 am »
you liked the mushy Rossi's over the Stiff SS's??????????????????????????????????

Unstable at speed???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

buck

  • Guest
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #11 on: December 04, 2006, 09:43:45 am »
No mush at 173cm! Very versatile ski, edge hold could be better. I haven't given up on the Supershapes don't worry. :'(

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #12 on: December 04, 2006, 10:15:45 am »
Hey what ever floats your boat.  Do you ski old racea style or new style?

Gary

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2590
  • Location: Rochester, NY
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #13 on: December 04, 2006, 11:19:29 am »
hey Buck, you might consider jumping on a pair of the longer SS models.

I know according to the Head.com web site, they? can be purchased in a 175, 177 and 184 length.

Just thought about this.....you might be overpowering that 170 length.

Ron is 175lbs and skis them in the 170 length. I ski the RX8 in a 170 length at 155lbs. My son, 6'3, 255lbs skis it in a 180. Now we are not in the gates with these but they are our most all conditions go fast skis.

Seems you like everything about the SS except the stability issue.......I'm thinking length might be the answer.

Gary


buck

  • Guest
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #14 on: December 04, 2006, 12:26:32 pm »
The longest length available in the Supershape is a 175cm, the Supershape Speed is available in 177cm and 184cm. I have the Speeds in 177cm (more GS) and they ski great, I wanted the Supershapes(more slalom like) shorter. I was trying to create the ultimate Head quiver, SL, GS and all mountain! I pretty much have to stick with the 170's at this point, I have a brand new pair of 2006 170cm SS's (For Sale) and a pair of 2007's 170 SS's used twice.  The 175's would work better for me no doubt but in that length they become too similar to my Fischer Worldcup RC's (175cm) and 177cm SS Speeds, I was trying to mix it up a bit!

Gary

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2590
  • Location: Rochester, NY
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2006, 12:55:41 pm »
Now I understand what you are trying to accomplish.

Haven't held a SS since last season.....is the binding adjustable?

I'm wondering if the position of the binding has you too far forward putting to much pressure on the tips of the skis?

If the binding were adjustable, maybe moving it back 10-15mm might help. I know on some bindings, you can take them apart and "cheat" them back a couple of clicks.

If not....sell, sell, sell!

ALso, I was curious to the answer to a question Ron asked....What year SS are they?
The reason I ask is that a Head rep told me when they first year model came out, they were softer flex then the following years.

Gary


buck

  • Guest
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #16 on: December 04, 2006, 01:04:18 pm »
Gary, the bindings are not adjustable. The plate is predrilled and it may be possible to mount the binding in a different position? I actually own both a pair of brand new 2006 SS's (the first year made) and a pair of 2007's which I skied on yesterday.

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #17 on: December 04, 2006, 01:46:02 pm »
gary the ss is mounted with ff bindings

Gary

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2590
  • Location: Rochester, NY
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #18 on: December 04, 2006, 02:37:02 pm »
Buck, do both skis feel the same on snow?

I thought the first season? was 04/05. If 2006 was the first season..is what the Head rep told me true that they were softer flex? He said they made solid improvements to the ski the next year marketed.

Bindings:
 Check to see if somehow the adjustment can be cheated back on the binding. Bindings adjust to an indivuals boot sole. The installer aligns the center mark of the ski to the mark on on the side of the boot. If you could not set it to the center mark but drop it back 5-10mm.? If you're not comfortable with this....check with? someone you trust that can help. I have done this on my own bindings where I needed to move it forward and it worked fine.
Even a few mm may make the difference in how the ski handles for you.
 
Ron, not familar with? the Head ff bindings.. OK....pre-drilled....there is a factory setting, understood.
Still, I believe there may be way to adjust as stated above.

Gary

buck

  • Guest
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #19 on: December 04, 2006, 06:26:20 pm »
Gary as far as I know last year was the first year of the Supershape. I never skied my 05/06 pair of SS's, their brand new and for sale. I was told they are the same other than graphics, flexing them they feel about the same. The Free Flex bindings are mounted right on the boot sole center mark. The ski is maybe just to soft for my size, the 175cm would have been a better choice.

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #20 on: December 04, 2006, 06:39:25 pm »
Buck, do both skis feel the same on snow?

I thought the first season? was 04/05. If 2006 was the first season..is what the Head rep told me true that they were softer flex? He said they made solid improvements to the ski the next year marketed.


Gary:? Buck is correct, 05/06 was the first year for the SuperShapes.? What you are remembering is that there was a big difference between the skis that were available to the spring testers in spring of 05 and what was delivered for retail sale for the 05/06 ski season.? Head stiffened the ski (especially the shovel) quite a bit, and I believe that people were also skiing it too short.? Peter tested it at 160 (all that Head provided for spring testing?), but most people in the 180-200 lb range wound up skiing it at 170 (once the characteristics were known).?

I would agree with you that at 215 and on the SuperShape, Buck should be on a longer ski.? Actually, for the speeds he describes and his skiing style and ability, he should be skiing the i.SL (non-chip) instead of the SuperShape.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2006, 08:08:12 pm by jim-ratliff »
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

Gary

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2590
  • Location: Rochester, NY
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #21 on: December 05, 2006, 11:26:21 am »
Thanks Jim...I knew that something had occured with the first production SS on the market.

I agree, the 175 could be a much better fit for what he is describing.

Still, I've got to believe something could be done with the 170's and I'm going to ask around.

Gary

Ron

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2992
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #22 on: December 05, 2006, 11:55:55 am »
Definitely should be looking at the isl but how about the Nordica Speedmachine III or the Head supershape SPEED, this is a had corp race ski. he may even want to look at the Atomic Superspeed. At 70mm it mat be a good alternative. The probelm here is that once you go wider, you start to get softer, its inherant to the design. Thats where the 82 may be good for him, its very stiff for a mid and with the vert walls, its may be the ticket- BUT it won't have the same performance of a race ski.

jim-ratliff

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2739
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #23 on: December 05, 2006, 01:42:08 pm »

I only mentioned the i.SL as a way of saying that Buck should consider real slalom skis and not rec. slalom based on what he was describing as his ski style.  Since he was looking for a Head quiver, I only mentioned that one ski.

SuperShape Speed.  My understanding is that this is pretty much the same as the old (but excellent) Head i.Race.  it's more of a GS ski than a slalom cut, and it sounded like he was happy with the 1200's for a long radius zoomer.
"If you're gonna play the game boy, ya gotta learn to play it right."

buck

  • Guest
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #24 on: December 05, 2006, 02:15:02 pm »
I have a pair of Supershape Speeds in 177, great longer radius GS type ski. I wanted a physically shorter, tighter turning, easy, more forgiving and versatile ski for playing around on smaller hills with my 5 year old that could still rip it up on occasion. Most of my ski's are longer in length and radius, I wanted something different with the Supershape. I haven't given up on it yet, I've really only been out the one day and I was wearing new boots.

Gary

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2590
  • Location: Rochester, NY
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #25 on: December 05, 2006, 02:54:24 pm »
Hey Buck, shorter skis react quicker to skiers input. I know you said stability was a problem with the SS 170's.

Try this on a green slope with those 170's on: Pick up stationary as a object as a focus point downhill (remember, green slope)now lift one ski off the snow, aim towards that fixed object and see how you track. Do not try and move your body around to stay straight. Just go where the ski takes you. Do the same with both feet.

If you track straight, that eliminates alignment issues. If you pull to the inside or outside, it demonstrates the inablity to get those skis flat. These issues would not show up as readily with longer or wider skis. With shorter skis, it's going to be much more difficult to track straight if you are out of alignment.

What do you think?

Gary

buck

  • Guest
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #26 on: December 06, 2006, 08:11:51 am »
Hi Gary, I do have alignment problems but have corrected them as much as possible with extensive boot sole canting and custom foot beds. I wanted a ski with a little more side cut to spice up our boring little midwestern slopes, its maybe a hair more than I wanted. I need to keep in mind it's not a GS race ski, my expectations were maybe a little high. I was actually looking for a more relaxing ski for playing around on smaller hills under various conditions with my 5 year old. I have not skied this ski in the element that it was purchased for, only on a hard GS course minus the gates. I believe the ski is short for my weight and aggressive skiing but I haven't given up on it yet!

Gary

  • 6+ Year Member
  • 1000 Posts
  • ******
  • Posts: 2590
  • Location: Rochester, NY
Re: Supershape Verses RX8
« Reply #27 on: December 06, 2006, 11:08:02 am »
Well, if they're the fun play around skis....

you'll learn to love them or leave um....time will tell.

Good luck!

Gary