2009 ski reviews: 87mm plus waist skis, 1st edition
I tested a bunch of skis at Snowbasin. The conditions were near ideal: at least 12” of fresh on top of a deep, soft base, with lots of crud, some untracked snow, and some soft groomers. It was a great way to test skis. These were skied for a maximum of 3 runs, so this is more of a quick review. I will get to ski more of these next week.
Skis tested:
Dynastar Legend Pro 184cm
Fischer Watea 101 192cm
Fischer Watea 94 186cm
Fischer Watea 94 178cm
Elan 999 184cm
Blizzard Cronos mid-170cm length.
Blizzard Magnum 8.7 174cm
Kastle 98 174cm
Stockli Stormrider XXXL 178cm
K2 Outlaw 177cm
Elan 888 177cm
About the tester: ski 30-50 days/year, improving technically, can ski crud and pow well at speed, but working on bump technique. 5 foot 9, 155lbs.
Dynastar Legend Pro 184cm: new for 2009, a bit wider underfoot at 101mm I believe, with a 27m radius. Softer than the 2008 version.
Review: I had this for the first 3 runs, which were completely untracked. This ski was very good: stable at speed, easy to ski, quite damp, but not dead. I didn’t ski the 186cm 2008 version, so I don’t have a basis for comparison. But I really liked it. I took it into a few trees, and it did well there. It seemed to me a bit more like the current 176cm version in terms of flex, but longer in length for stability Maybe a tad forward on the mounting point, but other than that, it carved up the new snow with ease. Not much fun on groomers; the tail wanted to wash out, and it wasn’t trustworthy with much angulation. A really fun ski though!
Fischer Watea 101 192cm: back for 2009, this ski is 101mm underfoot, with a relatively-small 25m radius for a ski of this size. It features similar construction to the Watea 94, but with a softer flex pattern.
Review: I had 2 runs on this ski, and it was a blast. Float and stability were great, and the thing even carved well on the groomers. It didn’t break loose like the Dynastar LP’s with edge angle on the groomers. In the new snow, this thing was unshakable at speed, and fairly nimble. I was pleasantly surprised in the soft stuff how well I could move from one edge set to the next. It did feel long to me, at 192cm, it is a lot of ski. 186cm or so would be money for someone of my size. And, it was very, very easy to ski. Huge sweet spot, but as stable as any ski tested. It has a light, yet easy, almost floating over the snow feel to it. Lateral stiffness is great, but this ski could suit a wide range of skiers. I really enjoyed it, but would probably look at another ski for myself in this width, as I don’t need that extra length. Still, this has to be one of the best 100mm skis around, and was almost overkill for the 12-16” of new we were seeing that day. In snow that good, I didn’t need much over 90-95mm of float, and I felt like I was actually surfing on top of the good stuff, rather than down in it, with some of the wider skis. Still, I can see how bigger guys would like it.
Fischer Watea 94 186cm: Unchanged for 2009, somewhere around a 22m radius, 94mm underfoot.
Review: I had previously skied this in a 178cm and liked it, and also was able to try the 178 later in the day. However, the 186cm was just a bit too long for me. I had to work to initiate the turns on this ski, and it felt a bit stiff as well. The 186cm actually felt longer than the Watea 101 did in the 192cm length, probably due to differences in construction. I took it back after 1 run.
Fischer Watea 94 178cm: also unchanged for 2009, 20m radius, 94mm underfoot.
Review: This was mounted with a SP130 Tyrolia demo binding, FWIW (actually a rebranded “Fischer” Tyrolia binding). So, it had a bit of lift, comparable to that of a Railflex. All I could say about this ski was “WOW!” It was as stable as any ski I tried in the crud, yet had an ease about it that just defied the level of performance that this ski was capable of. It almost felt like it was made for me in this size. The flex was even, I was able to either go slow or fast on it, and crud performance was top-notch. It made crud skiing very easy, and the sweet spot was huge. Also, it did bumps reasonably well, uncut powder was no problem, and carving was adequate. I wouldn’t mistake it for a narrower technical ski, but hey, it wasn’t bad, and better than most of the other fairly wide skis I tested. But, in cut-up crud and newer snow, this ski is money. And, like the 101, it was smooth, light on the snow, but not overly aggressive like some Atomics can feel. Instead, it was snow-hugging, damp, but with rebound when you wanted it, and a huge sweet spot. This is a great ski, and from what I have skied, may be the reference ski for this category. My last review wasn’t as positive of this ski, as I tried it at the wrong time (when I was dead tired after skiing 3 days straight, and had been skiing shorter skis for the most part). This review, as I tested it against many other similar skis, is more accurate in my opinion. The other testers who were on this all loved it as well.
Blizzard Cronos: 88mm underfoot, fairly large turn radius (around 19m), not sure of length (mid 170’s)
Review: This ski performed horribly, which was weird, considering the positive feedback I have heard from several people who know how to ski. I would chalk it up to a bad tune or something else going on, as initiating a turn on it was like trying to wrestle with a greasy pig, and to boot, it had no edgehold whatsoever. It was so far off the other skis I tested that I have to c Magnum 8.7halk it up an outside factor. I will ski it again next week.
Blizzard Magnum 8.7: 87mm underfoot, somewhere around a 17m radius, tested in a 174cm I believe.
Review: This ski is more along the lines of a wide-carver, and did very well all over the mountain. It busted crud, held a nice edge on hardpack, was predictable at speed, had a smooth transition, with no surprises, and overall had a fairly powerful, somewhat damp wood-core feel. I could ski it in any condition and feel confident, and as a carver, it was a fun ride! It reminded me somewhat of the Tigershark 12 feel that I recently skied, but had more width, was more forgiving, and a little more consistent feel in the shovel with regards to flex. The TS12 was stouter, with more power and a bit more muscle.. Much better than some of the "wide carvers" I have skied recently, and more versatile. Blizzard has a good performer here.
Elan 999 184cm: unchanged for 2009, 99mm underfoot, large turn radius (29m?)
Review: The 999 doesn’t have a ton of sidecut, and felt like the Legend Pro a bit in terms of flex and snowfeel. It was nice in uncut snow and on crud, with a damp, yet solid feel to it. This ski won’t turn until you tell it to, which is both good and bad. It lacks the autopilot feel of the Watea series, but is better in a straight line. This isn’t a suitable ski for groomers or bumps, as it is a bit unwieldy in these situations. For big-turn crudbusting, it was very solid, smooth, and easy to ski. I would have moved the mounting point back 1cm at least, as I was hanging on the tip a bit much. It had a fairly small sweet spot, and needs a skilled skier aboard who knows how to stay centered and initiate a turn. But, it does offer a lot of performance, especially to those who want more of a GS/big turn feel to their all-mountain ski, like the Legend Pro.
Stockli Stormrider XXXL 178cm: I don’t do much with Stockli, so I don’t know if this ski is new or not. It had a 89mm waist, 24.5m turn radius.
Review: This is another WOW ski. It was smooth, powerful, had good float, incredible stability. Downsides were that it doesn’t do short turns, moguls, or forgiveness. I found this to probably be the most stable ski I tested in the crud, bar none. This includes wider skis. The Stockli just left the other skis in the dust in rough crud: just stay centered, initiate the turn correctly, get a bit of angulation, and you are off to the races. In deeper snow, the float was adequate, and the ski wasn’t a plank, but not really made for uncut snow. It didn’t want to initiate as well as some, but was fine for most of the new-snow duty I asked of it. On groomers, it was bulky, slow edge-to-edge, and just kind of hung out there when put onto edge. Not a thrilling carver, but OK in GS turns. I really didn’t care for it on groomers, to tell you the truth. Overall, it’s feel was smooth, damp, very muscular, snow-hugging, wood-core feel. Deflection just did not happen on this ski, which made it such a winner at speed in the crud. The downside was that when I was on it at the end of the day (and was tired) this ski absolutely kicked my butt. Earlier in the day, when I was skiing well, it was a great choice. So, keep this in mind when looking at the XXL: you have to be a strong skier, and you have to ski the ski. It won’t forgive your mistakes well, and is meant for a skilled pilot. But, it is as good as they come if you are up to the task.
Kastle 98 174cm : new for 2009, the Kastle line is back. They have 4 models,174cm and this is the 98mm underfoot, 24m radius ski. Full laminate skis, vertical sidewall, ect., with a moderate flex. These will be premium skis, and I have heard $1500 retail thrown around as a target price!
Review: This, simply put, was a great ski. I really enjoyed it: it had a muscular, damp, Austrian feel to it. It was similar in feel to a Fischer wood-core ski, but softer in flex. The 98 was superb in uncut snow (although perhaps a little surfy, and I could have used a bit more length than 174) but it was easy to initiate as well as finish the turn. At speed in crud, it was nearly as good as the Stockli, but had a much larger sweet spot. Again, it was damp, smooth, and relatively easy to ski, although the Wateas felt lighter on the snow. This was more of a mid-weight ski. And, I could throw it around much better than the Stockli. I didn’t take it in bumps, but I did try some shorter turns, which actually went quite well. On groomers, this was probably the best of the wide skis: it didn’t feel like it was 98mm underfoot, but closer to 90mm, in that it hooked up very quickly from edge-to-edge, and held well. I didn’t get that “hanging out” feel that some wide skis on the groomers give me: this one wanted me to ski more aggressively and get it going down the fall line. All in all, this was a very nice ski. Worth $1500? Hard to say, but one of the best skis I tried.
K2 Outlaw 177cm: new for 2009, the Outlaw is 92mm underfoot, has a 19m radius, and the Piston binding is gone.
Review: Well, I can say that this ski felt like a K2, for better or worse. It was relatively smooth and damp, and very easy to ski at moderate speeds. However, with the pedal to the metal in crud, this ski completely fell apart. Keep it in 2nd or 3rd gear, and you will do fine. I found myself willingly skiing short-radius, slow speed “instructor” turns in the crud to keep the ski in control. Nothing wrong with this, as it is totally suited to a less-aggressive skier. On groomers, it was, again, not up to skiing fast. At moderate speed, it carved relatively well, but I couldn’t trust it with a big edge angle, and it made me very nervous at speed with it’s unpredictability. The old Outlaw seemed more stable at speed and more confidence-inspiring, despite it’s lack of power underfoot. This one seems to be a step downward, toward a goal of an “easy skiing” wide ski. But, not for the aggressive skier.
Elan 888 177cm: unchanged for 2009 (same graphic), 89mm underfoot, 126 tip, 110 tail (my measurement with the caliper) 21m radius
Review: I own a pair of these, and it has been my daily ski for much of the season. Nothing really to change my opinion here: it is a great ski for the moderate new snow and crud day. Not a big turner, and more of a GS ski at speed rather than a bump ski, but it can do everything. Great in crud, especially at speed. It doesn’t have a lot of energy, but does have a solid, stable, yet nimble feel to it. I liked it on any condition we skied, save for the deeper pow, which could have used a bit bigger tip to stay up. The 21m radius likes to run as well, and it is sluggish on the groomers, but passable. Very stable, and quite forgiving for the level of performance.
Edited by dawgcatching - 1/16/10 at 11:16pm
