EpicSki  ›  The Barking Bear Forums  ›  Skiing Forums  ›  Member Gear Reviews  ›  metron m11 vs.m10 help!!!!

metron m11 vs.m10 help!!!!

#1
Rating: 0
demo'ed the metron b5 172 at lake liouse-at first thought it was not alot different than my atomic sx supercrosses on piste but heavyer ,but about 5 runs later I got in the groove with the ski and this ski rocked,super steeps, chowder ,drifted bumps, groomers and pow,what a nice ski,I felt like the ski was giving me a ride!!! Skied over 25000 vert and didn't wan't to go home!!!Tried the m10 in 172 and 162 and the ski just didn't track as well ,they were more work and less enjoyable ,I've skied the atomic r-11 and thought it tracked better than any ski ever, to me the b5 is as good but quicker and much better off piste ,was wondering if anyone has demo'ed all three b5 m10 and m11-a day or more each,for me anything less- unless I hate them after 5 or 6 runs,doesn't do a ski justice. M11 what to think? ski the POW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
#2
Rating: 0
Not to confuse the issue, but Atomic is introducing an M11 B5 for '07. You might want to see if you can find it before you buy.

Ask Phil Pugliese. he's got a pair for sale. He's also skied the M11 and MB5.
Reply
#3
Rating: 0

M10's or M11's - Please help

Hi, I'm split between buying the atomic metron m11's and the m10's.: I can get them both for about $400 with neox 422 bindings. The m11's cost slightly more, but from what I've read they seem slightly better. I've skied for about ten years and am a intermediate-advanced skier (I ski some double blacks at Toas, NM and blacks at whistler, but that's my limit). I'm fairly aggressive and like bumps, powder and trees (when I can find them), but don't enjoy groomed trails that much, though they are probably what I'll be skiing on most. I weigh about 110 pounds, however, and am 5'6". I'm looking at m11 152's and m10 150's. Please help me decide which is a better ski for me! Thanks A Lot.
Reply
#4
Rating: 0
I have had both. My son has the m10 and I had the M11 before I bent them and got the M11 B5. I prefer the M10 over the M11, it doesn't have as aggressive of a sidecut. Both skis are the exact same construction. You might also consider the M10 in a 157.
Click. Point. Chute.  
Reply
#5
Rating: 0

Thanks

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
I have had both. My son has the m10 and I had the M11 before I bent them and got the M11 B5. I prefer the M10 over the M11, it doesn't have as aggressive of a sidecut. Both skis are the exact same construction. You might also consider the M10 in a 157.
Thanks a lot. I appreciate the advice. I've been on 136's recently, so I don't want to step up the length to drastically, or I'm afraid I'll have a hard time adjusting. Also, would you say the m10 or m11 does better of the trail "i.e. powder, crud, trees, etc." because this is very important to me. Would you say the m10's are more/less stiff then the m11's, or by same construction do you mean same stiffness, etc. ? Thanks!
Reply
#6
Rating: 0
they are the same constuction. And quite honestly, for your light weight, I woun't rule out the 9 either. It is the same shape as the 10, but slightly softer flex. I am not sure of the exact dimensions of the 9/10 and the 11 in the 150/152, I know they are sized down from the "grown-up" (just kidding) sized ones. Again I would still suggest that you stongly consider the 157. Remember 7 cm is only 2.5" different. And as far as adjusting, you only have to adjust once, then you will be getting more out of the ski and it will give you what you are looking for as far as powder and crud.
Click. Point. Chute.  
Reply
#7
Rating: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
they are the same constuction. And quite honestly, for your light weight, I woun't rule out the 9 either. It is the same shape as the 10, but slightly softer flex. I am not sure of the exact dimensions of the 9/10 and the 11 in the 150/152, I know they are sized down from the "grown-up" (just kidding) sized ones. Again I would still suggest that you stongly consider the 157. Remember 7 cm is only 2.5" different. And as far as adjusting, you only have to adjust once, then you will be getting more out of the ski and it will give you what you are looking for as far as powder and crud.
Thanks a lot. I appreciate the advice, once more. I agree that the 157's are or will be (assuming I grow) a better match for my height, for they are only about 63", and I'm about 66". The issue now is price. I found a great deal on 150's ($139 + $30 shipping new w/o bindings) in case anyone is interested at: http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-150-cm-Atomi...QQcmdZViewItem
The next best deal for 157's is around $400. Would you still get 157's. I'm sorry I'm so indecisive, but I appreciate the feedback very much Philpug.

p.s. no good deals on m9 157's either, or I would probably go with those.
Reply
#8
Rating: 0
157cm M9 would be perfect for your size. Much easier to turn than m10 or m11. Try ebay Canada there are 2 guys who have stock. (elvistheskiman and ski liquidators) $300US will get you a pair with bindings. The 150 m10 (cheap!) would probably work too if you are not planning on growing.
Reply
#9
Rating: 0
Thanks a lot. I'll consider those too. Do you know if there are any major differences between the m10 and m9's other than flex?
Reply
#10
Rating: 0
A stiffer ski will almost always have a beefier construction even if the dimensions are the same. The M10 is known to be more of a cruiser because it is tougher to bend. What's important is to match the ski to your ability an weight. For example, at 110# you will never be able to bend a Metron B5 into a carve. But, a 150cm M10 might work for you.
Personally, I think you need a performer with a softer flex. Atomic makes some mid-range skis that will blow away expert skis of many other manufacturers. I just bought 2 pairs of 157cm M9's for my teenage daughters. I'm guessing 130#, but they won't actually tell me. They are both expert skiers that can ski any run on any mountain. The skis are Xmas presents so I can't tell you how they like them yet, but.....I know they will.
Reply
#11
Rating: 0

Atomic M11 B5

Let me give my two cents about the Atomic M11 B5s. Like 727, I am 5'8" but relatively light, 136lbs. I am also a ski instructor in the Northeast. My desire was to have a single ski quiver. One on which I could teach (read softer) but one on which I could also play. Unfortunately, I've never had the opportunity to test drive the Metrons but having tested a colleagues ST-11's (yes, I know, they are different skis), I decided to risk buying them. According to the Metron chart, I bought the 158 cm M11 B5 (125-76-109 & 13 meter radius) with Neox 412 bindings.

It took awhile (about 3 weeks) to get used to them but when I did, WOW!
They are soft enough to demonstrate techniques to students but stiff enough to rip it up. They are stable in all sorts of snow, from 6-10 inches of powder (they float nicely) to frozen granular to weird stuff to hard-pack groomers. In fact, two weeks ago I skied them on some lighter snow underneath of which was ice. I kept waiting for them to become unstable...nope, they just kept truckin' along. They only criticism I have, is that at high speeds, the tips tend to chatter. Moving the Neox 412's into the forward position may help- something I'll try in the upcoming season.

Longer GS turns, shorter slalom turns, even some moguls. No problem for my M11 B5's.
Reply
EpicSki  ›  The Barking Bear Forums  ›  Skiing Forums  ›  Member Gear Reviews  ›  metron m11 vs.m10 help!!!!