-
Sold my western skis - had the Watea 98 and they are soft snow biased but when I do groomers they were boring and hurt my knee due to chatter (my theory as some other 98's didn't do this as much). Need a more 50 -50 ski.
Level 8
6'2" 200lbs
56 yo with emerging right knee pain - not bad but get those twinges
Tend to ski aggressively
Use both the Harb and Clendenin methods
Looking at MX 83, would like to know more about the FX and LX lines
Like the Bonafide and curious about the Cochise and Scout (would 108 tweek the knee too much?) and curious about Kabookie and Bushwacker and throw in the Head rock and roll for even more confusion
Problem is in Steamboat there is not a shop that does Kastle and Blizzard.
Let the prose flow! -
-
I think that given the fact that I am usually either on groomed or crud skiing I am going to stick with something in the 80's. I would like a ski that I could venture into the bumps with and would help me get better there but the fact is that I am not a very good bump skier and as a result don't spend much time in them.
Here is what I have narrowed my list to.
Head Rev 85 and 90 184cm - maybe the Rock and Roll
MX 83 183cm
Outland 87 184cm
Blizzard Mag 8.5 181cm (Not sure whether it makes sense to spend time to demo this one)
I would love to try the Kastle Fx 84 and 94 but they don't have them to demo. Curious Gary how you find them on groomers.
-
-
Perry,
We share a common dilemma about a great mid-width western ski. I'm off to Big Sky in late March and there is a hole in my quiver. Like you, I've got some minor knee issues (just old age) and, in the past, found that an 88 width ski beat up my knees trying to keep them on angles. And, I just really like getting quick edge changes that we aspiring bump skiers need. What I believe is that you have to know yourself and what you like, and, not get caught up in the hype of skis that others tout as great for them.
In the Kastle line, the MX are more hard snow carvers, the LX is more soft snow oriented. I really liked the LX82 that I demo'd last year on a soft snow day. It made me smile
You seem to question the Blizz 85 ti, from my reads of it's performance, it's something we both should try. I've also been advised to try the Blizz 80 for a soft snow ski.
The Head Rev 85 gets some fine reviews, and, for sure, that would be on my list. Gary and I saw them last weekend in Rochester for 50% off, it was tempting. I'm a Head ski fan. -
-
LP - you make a lot of sense.
I have gone back and forth on the Heads ( I also like these and ski the SS mag East; owned the Monster IM75 )
I have gone back and forth on the Blizzard 8.5 and Kastle 83. Skied the Bonafide last year - great ski but I agree it is a bit stiff and skied the MX 88 176cm which was amazingly stable - I am 6'2" 200lbs and it was the most stable ski I have ever been on.
My other dilemma is that I may not get to demo the skis I want to. The shop in Steamboat that carries the MX83 doesn't have one mounted in the longer length yet - going to call next week to see if they will. I am not sure I will find a Blizzard 8.5 to demo as most shops have sold out. Add in that I don't go to Colorado to spend time in the shops - kinda impatient to get on the snow it makes we want to just buy something.
Add in that I haven't gotten many ski days - makes buying the Kastle seem unwise. (that will likely change next year though....sigh)
I have found the Head Rev mounted for $500 and tempted. ever ski those or the ipeak 84? -
-
Hi Perry! Welcome back.
I haven't tried the Rev 85, but I did ski the Peak 84 for a full day in soft spring snow last April. I can whole-heartedly recommend it. Some quick impressions, if this would help you...
Pros:
- extremely stable at speed, so much that I had no sensation of going at Mach velocity; almost scary, they are so smooth and quiet
- easy to turn, short/med/long
- very forgiving, but a high performance ceiling (see above)
- excellent edge grip, even on morning refrozen icy corduroy and crud; edge grip is very manageable, and not of the "always on" aggressive type like some skis; easy to release and drift
- smooth and strong release out of turns; strong supple tail, but not kick-butt aggressive; just right
- stable and calm in crud and broken snow; not a bulldozer like of the some mid-fat Dynastars, but certainly doesn't get overly tossed about
Cons:
- at slow speeds it feels a bit numb; not light and flickable; lacks agility
Overall, I would describe it as a very smooth and stable ski, extremely versatile, high performance but easy to ski. Perhaps not the most maneuverable, in that it's not light underfoot, but certainly predictable, easy to turn, and goes where you want it to. OTOH, if you like an agile, light ski, then this one may not have a high fun factor for you.
I skied it in soft spring snow, as mentioned, so no chance to try it in powder. My guess is that it would do OK in fresh snow, but maybe not stellar. From the sidecut shape and flex pattern, it seems more frontside oriented, but I could be wrong. Others here who own it may want to chime in on that.
I am not a good bump skier, so will withhold comment on their bump performance, except to say that they were no problem to handle, save for the occasional unwanted spank from the tails.
FWIW, I am 6'2", 220 lbs, and skied the 184 length. If I were to buy this ski, that is the length I would choose for either eastern or western mountains.
If you want a ski with similar high speed performance (smooth, quiet, stable), but with more off-piste ability, more agile/maneuverable, and a bit lighter feel underfoot, you might take the Dynastar Outland 87 for a spin. I demoed it for a full day a couple of months ago, and was very impressed. Perhaps more versatile than the Head if you venture into variety of all-mtn conditions, esp. off-piste and broken snow. Tails did not have the energy and power of the Heads, so a bit lower performance in that regard, but no slouch by any means. I posted a review here on our forum, if you're interested.
Good luck!
-
-
Svend,
That is so helpful thanks! I have posted on the PMTS site and a guy our size skis the 177cm of the ipeak and given its stability I wonder if that wouldn't help the quickness, fun factor. Would be less float but as you say, it is not going to be the powder board ski of my dreams anyway.
Now I just need to compare info on the Rev 85. Softer tip, less groomer performance, but better in bumps and probably other off piste conditions. The PMTS board doesn't like it but I am not a strict PMTS devotee. I highly respect there assessment of skis though because they are serious about performance (but mostly groomed carving) I think they really don't like the early rise fad and that makes sense for groomed/carving type skiing.
I just need Gary to chime in since he knows my skiing and given that he buys 3 pairs of skis a year, generally knows the market
-
-
Perry:
I'm smaller (as you know), about 185 pounds. I demoed the 170cm Peak 84 last year and really liked it. I bought a 177cm Peak 84 because Phil made me an offer I couldn't refuse and only had that length. I certainly didn't feel like the 170 was too short for me or that the 177 is too long. I'm only going to use the 84 on western trips; if I were planning on using it here in the east as well I would probably have preferred the 170. I find the ski really versatile, not demanding, and pretty quick edge to edge (not the same as a 70mm waisted ski ((or a 100mm waisted ski)). I think you could go for the 177 with no problem. You're taller, but not that much heavier than I am (I hope).
However, I will also say that the reviews on the Rev 85 have been so glowing that, for $50 difference, I would be real tempted to take a chance on the 85. Same waist width, bit of early rise to ease powder skiing? Neither choice is a mistake, $50 increment for the latest and greatest is a dilemma.
-
-
Jim,
Thanks that is helpful and thanks for the tip on the ipeaks - the only problem is that it has created a dilemma. From my research, it seems pretty clear that the ipeaks would be a better groomer ski - everybody pretty much says this...and the Rev is a better off-piste ski. Phil calls the Rev more playful. I have to say it is hard to know given that he is selling skis and probably has the REV and not the ipeaks. He does have a rep of being pretty down to earth.
I keep thinking about the Rock and Roll - the length is right in between at 180 and should be perfect. JB's and others including HH have been pretty glowing.
Last thought is that the ipeaks 90 might split the difference between the 84 and REV 85.
So you can see that I have a firm grasp on what I want to do!!
-
-
Given what you said about your knee, I wouldn't go wider than mid 80's. It seems that is where skis begin to "feel" wide to me.
Get the ski that covers 80-90% of your skiing and then wing it. I recently spent a day at Vail in 20+ inches of snow and a 74mm waisted ski, and still managed to have a blast.
And I'm pretty sure that I got Phil's last pair of Peak 84's at a tremendous price back in October. -
-
Once again sound advice
Back to the 84 vs 85 dilemma and 177 vs 184
Quite a bit simplified
I think I would do the 84 in 177 and the 85 in 184 due to the Rocker. The Watea I had both tip and tail rocker and it skied shorter than my SSmag 177 and it was a 186 -
-
Perry, I wouldn't be hesitant to go to a 184 for the Peak 84. My comments about maneuverability were meant more in a relative sense, when compared to say, an Outland 87, or a light Fischer or Atomic. The Peak 84 in the 184 were by no means hard to bring around -- I could make short, long, medium turns at will. It was very easy to ski in that length. It's just not as light and flickable as other skis I've tried; simply more damp, more measured in it's movements. Sort of in between say a light agile Fischer, and a damp crudbuster Dynastar (if you've ever tried one of those...Mythic Rider, Sultan 94, for example).
The tip of the Peak 84 is rather soft, and that makes it easy to bend and crank out short turns -- just pressure the tips, lay 'em over and bring 'em round. They do not lock you into one turn shape either, which is a quality I really value in a ski. Once in a turn, you can basically make them go where you want and change direction easily.
So, if this is to be primarily a western ski, I don't have any problem recommending the 184 length to you. But you can ask Gary - he was with me the day I demoed these. He is a pretty observant bloke, and doesn't miss much. -
-
I had a phone discussion with Philpug yesterday, and, was talking about the Rev 85 as a possible candidate for my Big Sky March trip. Phil is very positive about the 85 and felt it would be a great fit for me as I'm a short radius turner, rather than a GS ripper. So if the right deal shows up, I may do it.
As to length, I'm inclined to go shorter as the reduced turning radius fits my style better. I've spent this season on a shorter Hart Pulse (170 when the traditional thinking would recommend a 178) and I've no regrets whatsoever, but, that's solely based on what makes me happy. So if I get a Head 85 it will be the 178. BTW, I happen to like the black based Rev graphics.
Perry, mentioned Gary and his FX 84 vs MX 78. In NY last week, 3 of 4 days he used the MX 78 as the snow was traditional east coast packed hard stuff. He told me the prime difference between the two skis was the MX's hold the edge until a distinct releasing movements occur, whereas, FX 84 initiated turns much easier, a plus in soft snow. Gary did modify the rear of his MX 78 to ease the releasing aspects. I hope he chimes in, but, that's my interpretation.
All this fine tuning makes my head hurt! We had 10 people skiing last week, nobody said their skis sucked.
-
-
LP - I just pulled the trigger on Rev 85. 184cm (actual dims are 86 under foot) $500 with binding. hard to beat. PM me if you want info
-
-
That makes two of us Perry......mine came in today 170 cm with PRD14's....and Dan....no go on the "trade"....I had them mounted when I ordered....and they are way too sexy
Perry.....I demo'd a set for two days and was really impressed. I have some...but not a ton of time on various other skis in this category so my comparitive ability is limited. Nonetheless, they are stable, forgiving of flawed technique (+1 for me) and reward when I accidentally get it right.......Enjoy
-
-
That makes two of us Perry......mine came in today 170 cm with PRD14's....and Dan....no go on the "trade"....I had them mounted when I ordered....and they are way too sexy
It was worth a shot.
Have fun with them! -