New Quiver Help

[kwilliams]

Ok, I've finally decided to update my gear.  I love my current setup but it's getting long in the tooth.  As it has been several years since I last bought skis, I'm stymied as to what to look at.  First, a small criteria: I'm a deal hound so demoing gear is a somewhat difficult proposition since demos usually cover current year.  So, I thought the good folks of skiforums might help me narrow down my list of possibilities.  If I have a short list of skis, I can hunt for deals.

Skiier Info
Height: 5'11
Weight: 215 (and dropping, I hope)
Level: 7-8 (9 on performance enhancing drugs)
Resorts: Snowbird, Alta, Snowbasin UT
Preferred Skiing: In all conditions I prefer shorter fall-line turns to longer GS or straightlining.  I try to ski 80% off piste, but like a few carvers and moguls now and then.

Current Skis:
All-Mountain: '04 Intuitiv 74 in 182cm.  What I liked about it: Amazing versatility. Could carve well and floated almost as well as my fat skis in powder/crud.  What I didn't like: Required too much forward pressure which killed my quads by the end of the day.  Also, it sucked in the bumps compared to other mid-fat skis I've had.
Powder/Crud: '03 Rossignol Bandit XXX in 185cm.  What I liked about it: Good flotation, but the best thing was how the XXX turned chopped-up crud days into powder days.  It blasted through anything and was unshakable in any condition.  Was still nimble enough to navigate trees and soft bumps.

What I've been looking at:
All-Mounain: Fischer Watea 78, Fischer Watea 84, Dynastar Legend 8000, Head Monster 78, Monster 82
Powder/Crud: Dynastar Legend 8800, Legend Mythic Rider, Nordica Blower, Volkl Mantra/Gotama

Also, length suggestions might be in order.  Looks like everyone's gone shorter and wider.

[gregmerz]

You've got just a great list of candidates already.? Legend 8000 (get the fluid), Mythic Rider, Watea 84 and the Monsters.? The only one I'd say to throw away is the Legend 8800.? The Mythic is the 8800 replacement, it was an improvement and deals abound on the Mythic.? Monsters 78 and 82 are great rides and are available priced attractively also.

I've got Monster 78 and Mythic Rider for this year in 177 and 184 respectively.? In places like you ski I tend to prefer longer turns versus your preference for the fall line.

Hard to go wrong out of this list of choices...

[Gary]

Ok..I've skied and owned the Watea 84 and now own the 94 and found this ski to be over to the top good in a variety of conditions including groomed..surprise, surprise....

Ya gotta look at the Blizzards...getting rave reviews! ?I know Ron just bought a pair of Blizzard Argos but was jonesing on the Blzzard 8.1's and 8.7.s.

For your turn weight, conditions preferred to ski and ski turn preference as described, I'd say finding a ski in that 78-90 mm waist, concentrating on a turing radius of 18-21 meters would be a great start. Since the ski length is part of what determines the radius, and given your skill level, I would suggest a ski length somewhere from the tip of your nose to the center of your unibrow.. ? ..or between your eyes....

Best,
Gary

[jbotti]

Clearly you need my Nordica Blowers!!

Seriously, the skis you mention are all good. I am a huge fan of the IM 78's. These are great all mountain skis and they can do anything. They carve very tight turns, excellent edge hold, nimble enough to ski bumps, and they float enough to ski a foot of fresh. I like tighter turns and I like skis with tighter radii, so even at 6 3" 185, I ski the 78's in the 171cm length. These skis can be had for around $400 new without bindings and $400 used with demo bindings. You can buy an LD 12 for $110 or a FF17 for $140 if you want a burlier and heavier binding. This is a great ski, and I find it much more versatile and user freindly than the IM 82 or the IM 88. If you are definitely going to have a 2 ski quiver with a dedicated powder/crud ski, this ski is ideal as your do everything ski on non powder days (and I ski this ski in a foot of fresh and enjoy as much or more than a fat ski).

I aslo own some Watea 84's and they are fun skis and also quite versatile. They have more of a soft snow bent, and they don't carve as well on hard snow. In general I am not crazy about theri harder snow performance, but they are a blast in anything soft and they incredibly light and nimble feeling. A ton of fun in soft bumps and great in trees (as are the IM 78's). I think the IM 78's are better skis.

I don't know the Dynastar or Volkl skis you mentioned. I have skied the IM 82, think GS turns and incredible stability, great crud buster, lacks versatility IMO as they are quite stiff and if your fore aft balance wavers, these will throw you. Sizing was also an issue in these until this year where the only two choices were 172 and 182. They have now added a 177 length. Also available at decent prices from a variety of shops on ebay.

If you PM me your email address I will send you pics of the blowers if you care.

[Ron]

there are so many good skis in that mid fat zone its hard to really go wrong.  Don't forget Volkl ac40, Blizzard 8.1 or 8.7, last years 8400, dynastar Mithic Riders, 8000, New dyn 4x4, head SS magnum, nordica nitrous, afterburner, TF, Afterburner. you can get Nitrous right now for 420 w binding, new shipped!

[jim-ratliff]

And don't forget to factor in the "all-important" personal preference for ski feel.?

I too have the iM78's and really like them, but Ron and Gary have the Watea's (in who know what widths today? ) because they prefer the feel of the Watea's.? I'm 5'11" and 190 and have the iM78's in 177 (but i'm not nearly as good a skier as the rest of the group).

Also, don't know how you feel about Volkl, but the TigerShark 12 (and all of them actually) had pretty good reviews last year with wide versatility range.? Don't know that anyone here has skied them, haven't heard any thoughts.

[Ron]

Jim, my wateas are gone now! But yes, I forgot to add a watea 84 for all mountain and the 94 is certanly all mountain but off-piste oriented. I now just own the blizzard Argos and the supershape magnums.  (Shamans are dedicated pow skis for Steamboat) Yuo make a critical point and that's the feel of the ski. Some don't like Nordica's as they are heavier skis, I like most heads but not all, I love Fischers and from what i am told, the feel of the Blizzard is between a Fischer and a volkl. That's a pretty energetic ski!

Gary is correct, I am jonesin' for a 8.7 or 8.1......

[jbotti]

Jim, I have skied the Tigershark 12. I found it to be like every Volkl non powder ski, way too stiff with a flex pattern that does not work well with the way I want to ski. I absolutely hated this ski, as I did the AC40 and the old 6 stars. Maybe if I weighed another 50 lbs I would like these skis, but not at my weight. If you really want to ride and drive the tips you better be heavy or unbelievably strong otherwise the ski sits you comfortably aft and you are resigned to riding the sidecut. Even if one can stay forward it is questionable if anyone can actually bend skis this stiff to tighten the turn radius. I know that people love these skis, but I absolutely hate them and all the top end Nordica carving and all mountain skis feel similar to me.

It's interesting that Blizzard appears to have changed their recipe some at least according to Pete with some softer better flexing skis. If I get a chance I will demo some this season. The shop at my home mountain in Montana carried some last year so maybe I can demo some this season.

[Gary]

JB....interesting cause I feel the exact same way....Volkl and Nordica have for me always had that "I've got to be working hard" to get me down the mountain the way I ski.

That's why my positive experience with Dynastar Speed 63, Salomon GC Coupe, Head SS  and Fischer Watea 84 & 94 all lead me to the same conclusion...those companies design teams have been taped into my sub-conscious mind.....very scary thought.    Other Heads I've had...the IM72 and 77 were a bit damp but serviced me well given my ski skills at the time and as my one quiver ski.  the Head IM82...much more GS oriented but workable in bumps but for me....a nightmare for carving hardpack.....but these experiences really helped my identify what performed for me....yes....."know thyself"!

At 157 lbs.....I want compliant from solid input but not musshy, good tail energy but not Olympic spring board, shovels that begin the arc with gentle forward pressure but not shin scrapers, one I can ski centered with as little fore/aft movement necessary, a ski that I can arc shovel to tail, toes to heel and feel like I'm riding a rail....yep...those manufacturers got me pegged!

Dare I even demo Blizzards....heck, why not....life is learning....for Ron and Phil...and spending! 

G

[Ron]

there's one other issue I want to rais ehere and that's boot fit. I get the impression it's time to evaluate the boot and fit.

[kwilliams]

Boot fit is a great point.  I'm riding some Tecnica Rival RX HVL boots (on account of my wide feet) that were custom fit by the boot gods at Earl's Sport Loft.  The footbed has a lot of life left in it, but the liners in the Rival are packing out.  I also had them stretched way too much when they were new... time for some Ventos or something.

Anyone have an opinion on the new Nordica natural stance gimmick?

[Ron]

whoa!  How old are these babies?  I am thinking new bootds first here. Natural stance?  You mean upright and neutral? Yes, Yes, Yes! Moderate flex with good lateral response, yes. Oh, please keep Glenn from posting on this please!!!!

calling the gang in here for group support

[jbotti]

Someone asked a question about aducted boots (what Nordica is doing with the Agressor Race boots and Fischer has been doing for several years) on the PMTS forum in the gear section. The question was addressed to Harald Harb asking himhis views on abducted boots. I answered the question in the belief that I knew what Harald would say becuase he rarely looks at the gear forum. The comments also mirror my sentiments.

Here is what I said:

Having said this, I feel confident that I know for the most part what he will say. Alignment is something that needs to be dialed in with specificity for each individual. I am extremely knock kneed (at least on the leg where my ankle was broken twice because my ankle is set wrong) and because of this I am quite possibly someone that might benefit from an abducted stance. Moving my toes out slighly will most likely make my knee track more in alignment over my ankles and feet. Even with this change in stance I might still need to be canted outwards a degree or two. The next question is whether this might be better than what I currently have which is 3 degrees of canting on my right boot. With the 3 degrees my knees track perfectly over my boots and there is no A frame evident in my skiing. Perhaps with the abducted stance I might need less canting, but I clearly don't need abducted boots, and I would choose a boot based on fit rather than this feature because I know that we can make any traditionally stanced boot work.

The next issue is probably more important and that surrounds skiers that are not knock kneed or even worse are bowlegged. I personally can't see how increasing the ability to edge the inside would help a bowlegged skier and in fact it would appear that it would make it even harder for them to tip the little toe edge and engage that edge.

I feel confiedent that Harald would say that abducted boots can potentially be beneficial for certain alignments and certain alignment issues. I also think that he would say that anyone who is out selling these boots as superior for all skiers is doing customers a disservice.

Nordica has taken a bold step and pretty much replaced their neutral stance with the abducted stance on all their race boots. Fischer has been there for years with even more abuduction as I understand it. If this works for ones alignment, they are likley great options. Otherwise people should be careful.

[midwif]

Nice critique of the Nordica boot possibilities.
My first reaction in reading about these boots was I wanted to hear a year of feedback first.
It sounded high on the "gimmicky" meter to me, but I had no clear idea of how it could affect stance.

[Ron]

Jim, I had to go back and re-read your post. I can see where the boot may not beneift certain people but don't you think it could benefit many others?