Head Peak 84

[jbotti]

This ski is getting some rave commentary by a lot of different people. Harald Harb has just raved about this ski. Even Phil and Ron, who have traditionally not liked Head Skis have said that the new Peak series is poetntially best in class (Phil's words not Ron's. Ron skied the Peak 90 and thought it was an excellent ski). Evidently Head listened when everyone told them that they had ruined the Peak line by making the skis so soft. So hopefully what we have here is a wider IM 78 (which is still to me the gold standard in a versatile all mountain ski, better than the MX88 (which I have never skied) because the TR is so much tighter). The Peak 84 has kept the tight TR of the Im 78 and the 170 has a TR of 15.4!! This means the 177 will most likley be in the nid 16's whioch will make this an awesome ski off piste and also to rip on groomers. This ski also come standard with the Power Rail which is an exteremely adjustable binding so one can play with the for aft placement of the bidning and switch it up depending on conditions.

I have been looking for this ski and I have gone through several pairs and many demo's to find this (I should have just waited for Head to make it). I still kind of like my Watea 84's but they are too soft (and rock skis now anyway after some edge damage). I bought a pair of the Sultan 85's but they lack the dampness and the rebound that I like in a skii like this (very different feel from the IM 78's). I have demo'd the Stockli VXL but the TR is too wide for my taste and that is my issue with the MX 88 (and above 85 under foot skis start to feel real slow edge to edge to me). I also demo'd the Salomon Enduro but the tune was an issue so can't really tell. Seemed like a nice ski, possibly stiffer than I want. Ditto for the Blizzard 8.1 (tune was fine, couldn't bend the tips to tighten the TR).

So anyway, this will be a ski that I buy early next year. It may be the only ski that I buy next year (and that would be great for a change!!).

Here is the link to Ski-depot with dims and specs

http://www.ski-depot.com/miva/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=310421&Category_Code=head2012&Product_Count=15

[gandalf]

So, are you predicting the Peak 84 as Peter's RealSkiers ski of the year for next year??

[Gary]

Pretty flashy little suckers...you know the turning radius?

I think I'd get it without the powerail....

How different is this over the ipeak 82?

Someone have a review of these?

G

[jbotti]

"So, are you predicting the Peak 84 as Peter's RealSkiers ski of the year for next year??"

Based upon the comments so far you would think that it has to be a strong contender!

[jim-ratliff]

Gary:

I agree, that is a pretty flashy looking color and graphic combination.  Would look especially good with Orange boots or lime-green pants.  Share your thinking about why you get them without the Power Rail?

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Gary]

WOW Jim...you are becoming a solid replacement for Ron and his suave color co-ordination detail...good on ya!

When I purchased my Kastle MX78 it was suggested by others that I get the plate and binding....

My thoughts were that since this was going to be my ALL mountain ski, Ireally didn't want too much sensitivity to the edges of the skis the extra stand height the binding plate offers.

I found with my Marker binding flat mounted, it made drifting and skiing broken snow cake. The BONUS i got was that the skis were really solid edge to edge without a powerail or binding interface.

I also think the feel of the ski arcing underfoot is more true, more apparent, more supple.

My thinking goes no further....

[jim-ratliff]

Color coordinated detail??  I've been getting lessons from a masteress  (is that a word for a female master)?

But your brother and sister skiers won't be easily able to sample and share your wares if you don't have an easily adjustable binding on your new, awesome Peak 84's. 

JBotti:  I learned my lesson last year -- I am NOT trying to race you to see who can buy a pair of Peak 84's first.     But I am very glad I have the Chariots.

[Gary]

Ah I see but you must know while Lynn is the Supreme Master...you are you but a budling...however if you wish to take on the gruling task of color co-ordinating fashion editor, take solace and comfort in the wise words of midwif!

Now as for sharring my skis with my fellow ski buds...indeed if you are 26.5 or in the vicinity of 306mm...come on over and step in....the skis be fine!

So Jim....are you looking for a stylish, fun, co-operative yet powerful 84 something underfoot as your go to all mountain ski? hmmmmmmmmmmmm

[jim-ratliff]

NOPE.  I already have (2) Goto All-Mountain skis.


If the "mountain" is east of the Mississippi, then I have my Head SuperShape Magnums that just do wonderfully. 


If the mountain is west of Kansas, then my Ullr's Chariots do the whole mountain quite well.  If I get a really icy day out west (and the Chariots would be too much work) then I'll just stay in bed.     


However, I have considered getting a Progressor 8 that comes with the Power Rail so I could travel with both pair of skis and only one set of bindings.  The Power Rail is SOOO much easier work with than the Rail Flex.  I put them on my Chariots and probably benefit from the stand height on firmer snow (but the height is less than was the Rail Flex).

[jim-ratliff]

John:

OK, so what is causing you to lean in the direction of the Peak 84 as opposed to the Movement Jam (also an 84 waist and deep sidecut)       

Also do you know whether Head has jumped on the rocker bandwagon or is the Peak line still a classical cambered ski?

[jbotti]

I have not skied the movement Jam but I think all their skis are much more focused as Off Piste skis. Diana had a pair that was 93 underfoot in MT. I did not ski it, but Max skied it and so did Harald and it was a softer ski that was great in pow. I am looking for a ski that is distinctly similar to the IM 78 but just a bit wider. I also love Head skis and whereas some will say that they lack pop, the good Head skis pop like crazy when they are bent. The give out as much energy as the skier is capable of giving them. If you don't bend the ski, they will feel damp (and some call this lifeless). The beauty of the IM 78 is that it just rips hard snow. I love being able to do both on one ski for days when there is not fresh snow (or maybe just a little). And I do hate giving up what the IM 78 gives me on groomers and this is why I only break out wide borads when there is a lot of fresh snow (98mm under foot daily drivers are just not for me because I give up so much on groomed terrain and wheras you can put them on edge, it's hard to call it high level carving).

In reality all I  really need is the IM 78 but there are some days when just a little more float and a litttle wider ski would be just perfect as long as it will still rip groomers. I think the Peak 84 is that ski. We will see.

[Svend]

John, in case the Peak 84's don't quite meet the mark, have you looked at the Fischer Motive 84? Well-reviewed everywhere I've looked.  Said to have a similar feel to the Progressor 10, but wider and slightly softer, more versatile in soft snow.  Here are some posts by Dawgcatching. 

http://www.epicski.com/wiki/2011-mid-fat-ski-reviews-by-dawgcatching#user_fischer84
http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/99308/2011-fischer-motive-84-and-motive-80-full-length-reviews

There seems to be a lot of performance built into those -- race plate, Flowflex binding, etc..  Interesting......

I agree about the iM78 -- it is an excellent ski.  I demoed a pair for a day last year at Louise, and despite a crappy rental shop tune, I really liked the feel of that ski.  Lots of power, smooth, damp, stable, seamless transitions from hard to soft snow and crud.  I really liked it.  Hope the Peak 84 turns out to be similar.  Just curious, have you tried the Head Chip 78? Seems to be the same as last year's iM78, but with a chip.

[jbotti]

Yes, I skied the Chip 78 when it first came out. On hard/groomed snow it is wonderful and it is damper and stiffer than the non chip version. Off piste I did not like it at all. It was much too stiff with way to much kick in the tail. We were skiing in 12-15 inches of fresh and cut up snow on top of some good sized bumps. Everyone that skied it that day (me, Harald Harb and Max 501) all had the same opinion. This is not a ski that I would own. If I want a ski that will rail on groomers but fail off piste there are many better options (Fischer Progressors, Head I speeds etc). The Chip 78's lack of versatility killed it for me and others.

I have heard good things about the Motive 84. I just have more faith in buying a Head ski that I haven't demo'd than I do a Fischer ski. That Head damp feel is one I know and like very much. I have also had a lot of issues with Fischer skis when I go to base grind them. I have had sevral pairs of Fsicher skis that are bowed. This happens when you don't allow proper time for drying when you put the skis in boxes and ship them too quickly. They ski great until you need to grind the bases. Then when you take a way additional material from the bases you end up with a ski that rails. I had Wille Wiltz (famed WC ski technician) work on a pair of my skis for hours and he could not get the ski to stop railing. I have this issue on my Progressors, and to lesser degree on my Watea 84's (I won't grind them because I know what will happen) and my Watea 94's. It may be that I have just had bad luck, but I am done buying Fischer skis.

[Svend]

Bowed? Do you mean edge high? Concave base profile? This is interesting, as I had trouble with my '08 Progressors being edge high, and railing.  A stone grind cured it, and I had no issues after that (I sold those soon after the grind, though, but for other reasons).  However, I now have the 2010 P-9's, my wife has a pair of P-8's, and our daughter has some Fischer twin tips.  So far so good with all of those, but as we are rather into the Fischer line, I am most interested to hear more about your experiences so I can keep an eye on all of ours.  Tell me more....!

BTW, may I ask what edge bevels you were putting on your Fischers when you were having the railing problems?

And Ditto liking the Head damp feel.  I have liked almost every higher-end Head ski that I have tried -- the SS Magnums and iM78's being standouts.  The only one that I really couldn't get along with too well was the '09 Supershape Speed, but in retrospect that might have had something to do with boot problems and alignment issues.  Oh well, they're gone, and were too short anyway.  At the moment I do not own a Head ski, but could see myself getting another pair one of these days.   

[Gary]

I'm surprised you had such a bad experience with Fischer JB....I'd have to believe the manufacturer would take them back if there was identifiable manufacturing flaw. Althought I've never had that problem mainly in part since I've never had to base grind a pair, it would be interesting to hear from others who may have had this very same experience.

I know Terryl, Svends wife is on a pair of P8's and they were base ground at the begining of this season and there was no problem...as a matter of fact they skied better. Still after owning a pair of Head SS where the skis actually de-cambered after about 60 out....I'm guessing anything can happen.

I have not skied any of the newer Heads but rememeber the first days of the IM72 and IM 75 and I actually found them too damp and short in the energy department. My faith in Head was then renewed with my purchase of the Head SS. It should be noted that I liked a ski with a bit more energy and feedback. I've heard that the newer wider version of the Head skis are much more repsonsive...nice!

My Kastle 78 are damp in the sense they seem to quiet down or absorb vibrations through out the ski but have plenty of energy (and sometimes too much in the tail in bumps) for all mountain skiing.

It's fun to hear about the new gear and what their manufacturers are bringing to the table. It's nice to know they are producing such great products today.    g