EpicSki  ›  The Barking Bear Forums  ›  Skiing Forums  ›  Ski Gear Discussion  ›  Volkl tigershark 11FT
Forum Nav More Forums | All New Posts | New Thread

Volkl tigershark 11FT

#1
Rating: 0
10/14/09 at 9:08am
  • Joined: March 2007
  • Post Count: 89
Has anyone skied this ski?   I liked the edgehold of the Tigershark 10 and thought the 12 was too wide.  This ski might just be the ticket for Eastern ice  with some versatility.
Export to Wiki
#2
Rating: 0
10/15/09 at 11:35am
  • Joined: March 2007
  • Post Count: 89
Does anyone know anything about this ski?
Export to Wiki
#3
Rating: 0
10/15/09 at 1:50pm
  • Joined: September 2000
  • Location: NTS, PA
  • Post Count: 21,815
 Pretty much replaced the 10 and 12. 
Click. Point. Chute.  
Export to Wiki
#4
Rating: 0
10/16/09 at 5:53am
  • Joined: March 2007
  • Post Count: 89
I understand there is no longer a 12, and the 10 only comes in the non switch version for 2010.  The new 11 seems to be a waist width between the 10 and the 12.  It is 75mm.  The few internet reviews I can find, state that the edgehold is fantastic, which would be wonderful for us Eastern skiers.
Export to Wiki
#5
Rating: 0
10/16/09 at 6:05am
  • Joined: September 2000
  • Location: NTS, PA
  • Post Count: 21,815
 IMHO, you could find a leftover AC30 for around 500 without much sacrifice in edge gip. 
Click. Point. Chute.  
Export to Wiki
#6
Rating: 0
10/16/09 at 9:26am
  • Joined: October 2005
  • Location: Tahoe
  • Post Count: 3,105
Or an '09 Blizzard Mag 8.1 for a better ski at the same price (or less).

SJ
www.starthaus.com   (Check out SH ski deals #2 in the special deals forum)
Export to Wiki
#7
Rating: 0
10/16/09 at 1:40pm
  • Joined: February 2008
  • Location: Idaho
  • Post Count: 35


Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 IMHO, you could find a leftover AC30 for around 500 without much sacrifice in edge gip. 
As a current owner of N/S Tigershark 10s( and former owner of AC3s,30s,AC4s,) I believe skier weight and technique/ability and ski length can make a big difference in which of these skis you might prefer.
As a high-level 155 pounder, I find my 168cm Tigershark 10s to be much smoother(not as much energy kickback) than my 170/177s  that I owned in the other models(with comparable edge grip.)
For 2 "silly" mms of difference(73 vs.75 mm waist), you can find both switched and n/s 10s out there(ski has not changed) for some unbelievable prices.

Export to Wiki
#8
Rating: 0
10/16/09 at 6:04pm
  • Joined: March 2007
  • Post Count: 89


Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 IMHO, you could find a leftover AC30 for around 500 without much sacrifice in edge gip. 

I have never skied the AC30. 

I once owned the AC40 in 177cm. 

I ended up getting rid of the AC40.  I found it slow in transitioning between edges, lacking  some of the quickness I enjoy for Eastern skiing.  I am sure some of this was related to the 80mm+ waist.    (Although the Rossi CX80 has a similar waist and I thought this ski easily outperformed  the AC40).

 Edge grip was decent on the AC40 but not stellar.  The AC40 seemed to be a good ski but was not exceptional at any one thing.

In comparison the Tigershark,  seemed to be much higher in performance (much quicker,  wonderful edge grip on ice, and better in the bumps with the switch off).   I had a few days Vermont which were windblown and icy.  The Tigershark 10 just railed on the ice. 

I guess this experience with The AC40 has always (and possibly incorrectly) negatively biased me against the AC series.

I realize the AC30 is narrower in the waist than the AC40 and  may be quicker and with have greater edge grip.
Export to Wiki
Forum Nav More Forums | All New Posts | New Thread