Head Icon 80 & 2009 Peak 78 (monster)

Some of our new demos have just arrived and I will be trying the new Icon 80 tommorrow as well as the Peak 78 on Sunday.  I had skied the 2008 Monster 78 last weekend so will be interesting to see if there is any noticable difference.

At first glance the Icon 80 seems to be a Slalom ski that is just a bit softer and 1mm wider at tail. Looking at this ski and a 2009 WC iSL side by side the major differences are that the Icon uses Railflex system and does not appear to be as thick or stiff.  The Icon line is the replacement Carver line of skis for the XRC series and looks ideal for a shop that wants less expensive carving skis than the SuperShape and WorldCup series.

The Peak 78 looks identical in consruction to the 2008 Monster 78.  This ski also comes with Railflex system but I believe that is an option as last years was not the railflex system.

On backorder are our Chip 71 skis which I will be trying in a couple of weeks and may be my ski for the next year

Will update Monday.

Mike

The Peak 78 and all Peak replacements for the Monster line take out a layer of metal and this changes the characteristics of the skis noticeably.  Dawgcatching and I reviewed them in another thread ("A few 2010 second-hand reviews...").  See if you concur when you try them.  Don't know about the Icon line.

I skied the Peak 78 this past Saturday as well as the new Icon 80.  The previous Saturday I skied the 2009 Monster 78.

Peak 78

From one week to the next our snow conditions changed quite drastically.  We went from soft snow and plenty of it to very hard snow that comes from a two day freeze after a day of rain.  I had skied the Monster 78 in the soft snow and found them to be stable, fun to carve and liked to ski fast.  A very versatile ski for someone who likes carving but wants a ski for a bigger mountain as well.  When the snow started to get lumpy at the end of the day they just powered thru it where the SS Magnum started to be a bit less firm.

This past Saturday I tried the 2010 Peak 78.  It held quite well on the ice and was firm under foot.  In terms of a pure carving ski was not as solid as the Supershapes but was quite good.  I really liked the ski.  After skiing I took the ski into the shop which had some Monster 78 on hand.  We could not really see a lot of difference despite looking for the reported lack of metal at the tip.  there is metal all the way to the tip but I think perhaps one more layer in the Monster than the Peak - not really sure.  As for skiing - I did not really find the peak 78 to be any softer than the Monster.  Another skier who skied it all Day Sunday in softer conditions found it to be "heavy" but then he skis on a race stock worldcup slalom ski which is quite light.

Icon 80

The Icon line is a new line of Carving skis that is positioned to be more affordable than the Supershape and WorldCup skis.  These skis are for people who like carving and are quite skinny at 66mm underfoot.  The Icon 80 is basically a more affordable version of the WorldCup iSL with same waist and 1 mm wider at the tail I believe.  When we held up a 2010 WC iSL 165 base to base with the Icon 80 in 164 it actually seems the Icon was 1mm wider at both tip and tail.

I am not a little guy.  I skied the Icon 80 for a couple runs on each of Saturday on ice and sunday in new fresh snow.  It is very light but stable.  Comments from a 17 year old racer were that it did not have the spring of the Race Stock iSL that she normally skis on but it did hold.  From a lady instructor/coach who also likes SS magnum and iSL she found it held well but she prefers the heavier feel of the race construction skis as it inspires more confidence on ice.

My impressions of the Icon 80?  It is exactly what it is supposed to be.  When I tried the Xenons in 2008 and 2009 versions I loved them in soft snow and hated them on ice.  the Xenon was a Jekyl/Hyde ski.  The Xenons are gone for 2010 as are the XRC and have been replaced with the Icon series for someone wanting an affordable carving ski.  For this purpose the Icon 80 is a winner.

If you want a big mountain ski you will go for other lines like peak (monster), Jimmi, Richie, Joe, etc... or if you want a high end performance ski likely the Supershape or race skis - however if you want a carver on a bit of a budget or if you have a store that needs more affordable skis than the Supershape you will consider the Icon series.

Mike

Head demo rep in Eastern Canada

I have the iM78, 82, 88 (didn't plan it -- finding ski deals just made it work out that way).  The 78 is different than the other two in that it has an extra layer of metal right next to the base.  If you look at the sidewall, you can see it just above the edges.  The other skis don't have this layer.  All three do have a layer of metal (looks like aluminum) right under the topsheet.  So, it sounds like all the Peaks did away with that top layer of metal, correct?  And in the case of the Peak 78, sounds like it also lost that base layer of metal that the iM78 had.

All metal layers appear to still be in the Peak 78.  I will post pictures I took this morning later today.

I simply do not see any of the three layers missing.  ... and all go all the way to the tip ....

Mike

The Head reps at the trade show said a layer of metal has been removed. 

The Head rep I know said the 78 and 82 went unchanged but for graphics whereas the 88 was titanium neutered over prior year.  Looked over at Peter Keelty’s review which said same.  Otherwise; call Head inside sales if it's a mission for truth...you'll never get it on a forum