EpicSki  ›  The Barking Bear Forums  ›  Skiing Forums  ›  Member Gear Reviews  ›  A few 2010 second-hand reviews....Head, Elan, Fischer, Blizzard

A few 2010 second-hand reviews....Head, Elan, Fischer, Blizzard

#61
Rating: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

 

Not from me until next month when I ski them.  The Atlas 94 is a much more nimble version of the Argos, and a better  jack-of-all-trades ski.  It will probably be more damp and powerful than the Watea, which tends to be lighter and more playful, but not as stout at bigger speeds. 

I have skied both of these skis and that is a very accurate assessment. 

Click. Point. Chute.  
Export to Wiki
#62
Rating: 0

If Head were a demand brand, the goofy graphics/color scheme might be forgiven.  But with a brand that's not top of mind and that needs extra effort to be sold at retail, poor graphics can be a major deterrent to purchase.  On the flip side, I think that Blizzard has done a good job of getting away from the uber-Euro BS graphics of a few years back and their new skis become more more salable at retail because they don't have to overcome the "what's the deal with the graphics" hurdle. There's still plenty of explaining to do when you're trying to sell a Blizzard in a shop vs. a Volkl or K2 but at least you don't have to deal with the added burden of trying to sell an ugly puppy.

PS -- I own a pair of Blizzard Supersonics.  When people see them, they ask me how I like my new Volkls.  I own a pair of Head Monster 82's which use for touring.  When people see them they say, hey, it looks like Christmas.  I really like the both skis.

Export to Wiki
#63
Rating: 0

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by skier219 View Post

 

I just snapped up a pair of the Monster 88s from dawg for a steal; have demoed them a couple times over the last couple years and the excellent price was the final motivation I needed.  I will be interested to demo the Peak 88 when I get a chance, to see what it's all about.

 

I have found that testing and demoing Heads is 1) highly dependent on what ski you were on immediately before, and 2) how much time you spend on the ski.  

 

Regarding #1, Heads generally can feel a bit lifeless and dead at first, especially compared to something like a Fischer that has character and communicates a lot of feedback from the snow.  I definitely notice that when I switch to Heads mid-day (on the flip side, the Heads always feel smoother and more comfortable than my Fischers, which is why they make a great afternoon ski).  Unfortunately, I believe this dramatic difference in feel could potentially hamper a demo/review if you're really trying to understand the subtle nuances and characteristics of the ski. 

 

Regarding #2, it took me a couple days of back to back testing to appreciate some features on the Monster 77 a few years back, and I have seen the same characteristics, more or less, in all the Monster series.  Namely, the skis tend to blur into the background and almost become invisible to the skiing experience, creating a more direct emphasis on my actual skiing.  It sounds nuts, but the skis sort of get out of the way and give me a feeling that I am skiing directly on the snow.  I originally disliked that, but eventually came to appreciate the fact that the skis are doing their job extremely well, perhaps better than other skis that "poke" at you every now and then.  I think a ski needs to be pretty competent to do everything you ask of it without carrying a lot of it's own baggage along.

 

I skied my Watea 94s out east today for the very first time -- previously they had only been skied out west -- and damn if they didn't knock my socks off in a new way.  Yesterday they were rocking 6-12" powder and crud, today they were a delight on 2-4" of powder over groomed.  They even did OK on hardpack (far better than the narrower Watea 84).  This has got to rank as one of my all-time favorite skis.  I want to demo the new hull-tip version and see what that's like.  Not sure the ski needs that for crud, as it's already fantastic there, but if it adds some tip float/rise in powder, that would definitely be a plus for me.


Edited by skier219 - Thu, 05 Feb 09 01:12:36 GMT

I would add that skiing the Heads (and maybe any ski) depends on the binding - I hate Tyrolia demo bindings they make a good ski (78, 82 and 88) feel pretty average. Ski them with a Mojo 15 (ie borrow a friends skis if the bindings can be moved to fit) or demo a ski fitted with Railflex II and it is a completely different story.

Export to Wiki
#64
Rating: 0

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew R View Post

 

 

I would add that skiing the Heads (and maybe any ski) depends on the binding - I hate Tyrolia demo bindings they make a good ski (78, 82 and 88) feel pretty average. Ski them with a Mojo 15 (ie borrow a friends skis if the bindings can be moved to fit) or demo a ski fitted with Railflex II and it is a completely different story.

Are you serious? I just bought a pair of skis that have Tyrolia (or Fischer x13) demo bindings.  They didn't seem that high off the ski and it appeared to allow the ski to flex properly.  It was such a good buy I couldn't pass it up thinking the bindings would be no big issue???

Export to Wiki
#65
Rating: 0

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vaportrail View Post

 

 

Are you serious? I just bought a pair of skis that have Tyrolia (or Fischer x13) demo bindings.  They didn't seem that high off the ski and it appeared to allow the ski to flex properly.  It was such a good buy I couldn't pass it up thinking the bindings would be no big issue???

 

That gave me a good laugh too!

Export to Wiki
#66
Rating: 0

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew R View Post

 

 

I would add that skiing the Heads (and maybe any ski) depends on the binding - I hate Tyrolia demo bindings they make a good ski (78, 82 and 88) feel pretty average. Ski them with a Mojo 15 (ie borrow a friends skis if the bindings can be moved to fit) or demo a ski fitted with Railflex II and it is a completely different story.

 

What about a Railflex 2 demo?

Export to Wiki
#67
Rating: 0

One of my ski partners was involved in that ski test-

his take on the Atlas was that it was a "Mantra killer"-every thing great like the Mantra (extreme versatility), except for the tip flop at speed on the groomers-

 

I can't wait to get a pair for next season

Export to Wiki
#68
Rating: 0


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by karpiel View Post

 

You guys make it sound like it was impossible to ski on straight skis. Bring on the bigger turn radius skis.


 

How about my 2009 Head Supermojo 105's 191cm, @ 35.4m, is that big enough for you?

Export to Wiki
#69
Rating: 0
Just to get the facts straight, is the 88 the only one of the peak series that as been modified ...???  I just order the Peak 82 and want the performance of the old monster....  I was also considering the 78 but the radius made me go to the 82...  

I am also wondering if 177 the right size for me 5'11'  160lbs...   I almost order the 183 but will be doing a lot of technical training and teaching on groomed...??? and I eared that I wont be losing much float because by nature this ski is not for the deep stuff....

Thanks
Export to Wiki
#70
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shredwolf View Post

Just to get the facts straight, is the 88 the only one of the peak series that as been modified ...???  I just order the Peak 82 and want the performance of the old monster....  I was also considering the 78 but the radius made me go to the 82...  

I am also wondering if 177 the right size for me 5'11'  160lbs...   I almost order the 183 but will be doing a lot of technical training and teaching on groomed...??? and I eared that I wont be losing much float because by nature this ski is not for the deep stuff....

Thanks

The only Peak to bring its construction over from teh Monster series is the 78, the rest were neutered including most of the Woodstock series. 
Click. Point. Chute.  
Export to Wiki
#71
Rating: 0

then maybe the right option would be to change my order to a Peak 78 in 183....????

Export to Wiki
#72
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shredwolf View Post

then maybe the right option would be to change my order to a Peak 78 in 183....????


No, change it to the Nordica Hot Rod Pro (flat), a better Monster. 
Click. Point. Chute.  
Export to Wiki
#73
Rating: 0
We are getting deals thru ski school and can order skis from Rossignol, K2, Salomon, Atomic and Head....!!! Not everything but decent selection
Export to Wiki
#74
Rating: 0
I was happy with the 171 im78.  I'm your height but fatter.  I'd think the 177 would be plenty of ski and more versatile than anything longer at your size.
Export to Wiki
#75
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnus_CA View Post

I was happy with the 171 im78.  I'm your height but fatter.  I'd think the 177 would be plenty of ski and more versatile than anything longer at your size.
 

The reason why I am thinking longer is to get more time between turns....I like to go fast...
Export to Wiki
#76
Rating: 0

Anyone own the 78 in 183cm....

Export to Wiki
#77
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shredwolf View Post




The reason why I am thinking longer is to get more time between turns....I like to go fast...

You said these were for lessons.  Do you have trouble keeping up with your students?
Export to Wiki
#78
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnus_CA View Post




You said these were for lessons.  Do you have trouble keeping up with your students?
 


Good point !  It's going to be more fun teaching on a smaller radius more versatille ski..... but for the morning session where we get to hit the fresh groomers or powder before the public I would probably prefer something longer.... 

Export to Wiki
#79
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnus_CA View Post




You said these were for lessons.  Do you have trouble keeping up with your students?
I would get the 177 if it were me, 183 is a lot of ski. I tried it, and it felt like a 2x4. You aren't that much bigger than I am. 177 is super fun, very stable (171's feel more like a carver/bump length, still stable but not overly so)  and you are unlikely to outski the 177 unless you are really flying in some super dodgy snow.

Village Bike and Ski 541-593-2453 Skis: Kastle, Head, Elan, Stockli, Fischer, Blizzard
Export to Wiki
#80
Rating: 0
What dawg said above....177 is MONEY!
Export to Wiki
#81
Rating: 0
Just an aside, but this thread makes me really want to demo the atlas
Export to Wiki
#82
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by skier219 View Post

I just snapped up a pair of the Monster 88s from dawg for a steal; have demoed them a couple times over the last couple years and the excellent price was the final motivation I needed.  I will be interested to demo the Peak 88 when I get a chance, to see what it's all about.

 

I have found that testing and demoing Heads is 1) highly dependent on what ski you were on immediately before, and 2) how much time you spend on the ski.  

 

Regarding #1, Heads generally can feel a bit lifeless and dead at first, especially compared to something like a Fischer that has character and communicates a lot of feedback from the snow.  I definitely notice that when I switch to Heads mid-day (on the flip side, the Heads always feel smoother and more comfortable than my Fischers, which is why they make a great afternoon ski).  Unfortunately, I believe this dramatic difference in feel could potentially hamper a demo/review if you're really trying to understand the subtle nuances and characteristics of the ski. 

 

Regarding #2, it took me a couple days of back to back testing to appreciate some features on the Monster 77 a few years back, and I have seen the same characteristics, more or less, in all the Monster series.  Namely, the skis tend to blur into the background and almost become invisible to the skiing experience, creating a more direct emphasis on my actual skiing.  It sounds nuts, but the skis sort of get out of the way and give me a feeling that I am skiing directly on the snow.  I originally disliked that, but eventually came to appreciate the fact that the skis are doing their job extremely well, perhaps better than other skis that "poke" at you every now and then.  I think a ski needs to be pretty competent to do everything you ask of it without carrying a lot of it's own baggage along.

 

I skied my Watea 94s out east today for the very first time -- previously they had only been skied out west -- and damn if they didn't knock my socks off in a new way.  Yesterday they were rocking 6-12" powder and crud, today they were a delight on 2-4" of powder over groomed.  They even did OK on hardpack (far better than the narrower Watea 84).  This has got to rank as one of my all-time favorite skis.  I want to demo the new hull-tip version and see what that's like.  Not sure the ski needs that for crud, as it's already fantastic there, but if it adds some tip float/rise in powder, that would definitely be a plus for me.


Edited by skier219 - Thu, 05 Feb 09 01:12:36 GMT
I have to agree in part - I ski Head now due to great support and prices. I did not consider them for at least three years as I always demo'ed them with the 'rental' binding which is a total difference to the railflex or the race bindng & plate. It completely reduces the feel fo the ski. I have had the Supershape Speed (170cm) and Monster 82 (177cm) with RFD14 for a year now and they are great skis. Sure they needed some love to get the bases as fast I like them from new (but this was compared to how Stocklis come from their factory) but people are amazed at the difference when they try my ski over the rental binding ski.

I am afraid that unti;l the demo/ rental binding improves one has to borrow a Head ski with a plate or a railflex to get a true idea of how it is going to ski.

Considering the Chip 78 to replace both Supershape Speed and 82 but do not know if I can be bothered with the whole base prep thing again.

Export to Wiki
#83
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shredwolf View Post

We are getting deals thru ski school and can order skis from Rossignol, K2, Salomon, Atomic and Head....!!! Not everything but decent selection

Hi, I assume that "thru ski school" implies you are a instructor?  If so you should be able to call up the rep for almost any company and tell them who you are a instructor for and get a pro deal.  I am a rep for another outdoor sport and I can get pro deals; havent used them because blow outs are a better deal (very $$$ conscious).  The head rep was amazed at the price of monster 72's a year ago from a online dealer.
Export to Wiki
#84
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post




No, change it to the Nordica Hot Rod Pro (flat), a better Monster. 
Arguably; I know several people who would dis-agree with that conclusion, especially if they are on the light side. 

Village Bike and Ski 541-593-2453 Skis: Kastle, Head, Elan, Stockli, Fischer, Blizzard
Export to Wiki
#85
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by Shredwolf View Post

Just to get the facts straight, is the 88 the only one of the peak series that as been modified ...???  I just order the Peak 82 and want the performance of the old monster....  I was also considering the 78 but the radius made me go to the 82...  

I am also wondering if 177 the right size for me 5'11'  160lbs...   I almost order the 183 but will be doing a lot of technical training and teaching on groomed...??? and I eared that I wont be losing much float because by nature this ski is not for the deep stuff....

Thanks

Our regional rep said the 78 and 82 are unchanged, the 88 is definitely softer this year.  Since we didn't stock the 82 (had a bunch left over), I can't say for sure.  See if you can find one and ski it back to back with last year's; might be the only way to tell for sure.  With ski companies, the left hand never knows what the right hand is doing....wish it weren't the case. 
Village Bike and Ski 541-593-2453 Skis: Kastle, Head, Elan, Stockli, Fischer, Blizzard
Export to Wiki
#86
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post




Our regional rep said the 78 and 82 are unchanged, the 88 is definitely softer this year.  Since we didn't stock the 82 (had a bunch left over), I can't say for sure.  See if you can find one and ski it back to back with last year's; might be the only way to tell for sure.  With ski companies, the left hand never knows what the right hand is doing....wish it weren't the case. 

This echoes what I've heard as well.  The 78 and 82 are unchanged this year (sans topsheet), while the 88 is slightly less burly.
Export to Wiki
#87
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnus_CA View Post




This echoes what I've heard as well.  The 78 and 82 are unchanged this year (sans topsheet), while the 88 is slightly less burly.
I think that since the 88 was changed, it was assumed that all of the skis were softened. We measured deflection on the 78 and 82 for last year's vs. this year's: no change.  The 88 is probably about 10% softer in flex, close to the 78 now, whereas it used to be a bit stiffer (according to the printed flex number on the ski).  They aren't printed on there anymore, so it is hard to say exactly.

Village Bike and Ski 541-593-2453 Skis: Kastle, Head, Elan, Stockli, Fischer, Blizzard
Export to Wiki
#88
Rating: 0
Scott,

What's your personal preference as a do-it-all, if you could only have one ski between the Sultan 85, Watea 94, and the Atlas?  Any other 85-95 mm wide skis that I failed to mention that best these three in this regard?
Export to Wiki
#89
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnus_CA View Post

Scott,

What's your personal preference as a do-it-all, if you could only have one ski between the Sultan 85, Watea 94, and the Atlas?  Any other 85-95 mm wide skis that I failed to mention that best these three in this regard?
Tough choice between those. I like all and could live with any (the Elan 888 should be on your list, along with the Stockli VXL and Kastle MX88).  Out of all of those, the Stockli and Kastle are my absolute faves, and they also cost much more than the other skis (you can probably buy 2 skis for the price of each of those).  I could happily live with any of them, and will be skiing all of them regularly.  The Atlas is probably best if you like a heavier, stiffer, ski; the 888 is best for lighter skiers looking for a powerful ski; the Sultan is very smooth and probably the most forgiving, and the Watea 94 is has a lighter, more lively feel that appeals to many. There are some other good skis as well, but those are the ones that I am most familiar with.

Village Bike and Ski 541-593-2453 Skis: Kastle, Head, Elan, Stockli, Fischer, Blizzard
Export to Wiki
#90
Rating: 0


Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post



Tough choice between those. I like all and could live with any (the Elan 888 should be on your list, along with the Stockli VXL and Kastle MX88).  Out of all of those, the Stockli and Kastle are my absolute faves, and they also cost much more than the other skis (you can probably buy 2 skis for the price of each of those).  I could happily live with any of them, and will be skiing all of them regularly.  The Atlas is probably best if you like a heavier, stiffer, ski; the 888 is best for lighter skiers looking for a powerful ski; the Sultan is very smooth and probably the most forgiving, and the Watea 94 is has a lighter, more lively feel that appeals to many. There are some other good skis as well, but those are the ones that I am most familiar with.
 

I really want a slightly more damp, more burly Watea 94, with little sacrifice in nimble feel.  Smooth and forgiving are my kind of adjectives....heavier, not so much (hence my nit with the im82).  I'm afraid to try the VXL/MX88 because I don't know how I could bring myself to pay that much for a ski!

Export to Wiki
EpicSki  ›  The Barking Bear Forums  ›  Skiing Forums  ›  Member Gear Reviews  ›  A few 2010 second-hand reviews....Head, Elan, Fischer, Blizzard