A very good buddy lent me his 3 year old VIST DEMO SC (supercarve) skis for a day. It was the most remarkable ride on a ski I have ever experienced. The dimensions of 116/66/101 mark this as a balls to the wall carver, and indeed, it is. My daily ride is a Blizzard Supersport in 167. Certainly no slouch and a ski that I have greatly enjoyed. But the VIST is is another dimension, literally and metaphorically. In 174cm, and with the VIST plate, it is a stiff bugger for me, at 173lbs and 5'9. That took a bit of getting used to. But put that ski on edge, bend it and it will carve deep into the earth's crust before giving way. On ice/hard....well, what ice/hard. Part of that was the killer tune my pal, who is a master, put on these beasts. Surprisingly, you can also toss it into short turns given its 14m radius. So a most peculiar ski - one with both strong GS and SL qualities. But what was most remarkable was the utter smoothness of the ride. Damp without being dead. Nothing phased this ski. Conditions, I have to say were perfect - packed powder and light snow that kept refreshing the trails. Certainly, not a ski for more than a few inches or crud. But for the East coast (Sugarloaf), it is a star.
Now this ski has no speed limit. Or if it does, I will never see it. I never thought my Supersonics did either until I put the VIST's on my feet. I was skiing at least 10mph faster than I ordinarily would. And felt good about it. I caught some air on a trail that I could ski blindfolded - I never catch air. But I have to say, by the end of the day, I was toast. These skis are some work. I wonder if the 167cm would be a better fit - what with the added stiffness with the VIST plate.
The next day I skied with the Supersonics. They seemed well, rather flimsy. Quicker for certain, but almost skittish. Definitely not the heft, stability or tenacity. While the Supersonics were "deferential," the VIST's had expectations. I rather liked that. Made me stay on my game. If I can ski these all day, and well, I will be a better skier.
And so now I am looking at a pair of these remarkable VIST Front Side 2's which is the current incarnation of the ones I skied. They are expensive - like $1800 with plate and bindings - though not much more than what one would pay for a new pair of Kastles with plate and bindings (not that they are cheap).
I would like to hear from anyone who has lived with a pair of these, or has skied another model, particularly the VIST Crossover 3 - the mid fat in their line.
Have to say that this ski is one that is like a good coach - will make you better, and kick you in the ass in the process.
David
Now this ski has no speed limit. Or if it does, I will never see it. I never thought my Supersonics did either until I put the VIST's on my feet. I was skiing at least 10mph faster than I ordinarily would. And felt good about it. I caught some air on a trail that I could ski blindfolded - I never catch air. But I have to say, by the end of the day, I was toast. These skis are some work. I wonder if the 167cm would be a better fit - what with the added stiffness with the VIST plate.
The next day I skied with the Supersonics. They seemed well, rather flimsy. Quicker for certain, but almost skittish. Definitely not the heft, stability or tenacity. While the Supersonics were "deferential," the VIST's had expectations. I rather liked that. Made me stay on my game. If I can ski these all day, and well, I will be a better skier.
And so now I am looking at a pair of these remarkable VIST Front Side 2's which is the current incarnation of the ones I skied. They are expensive - like $1800 with plate and bindings - though not much more than what one would pay for a new pair of Kastles with plate and bindings (not that they are cheap).
I would like to hear from anyone who has lived with a pair of these, or has skied another model, particularly the VIST Crossover 3 - the mid fat in their line.
Have to say that this ski is one that is like a good coach - will make you better, and kick you in the ass in the process.
David
If you are expecting to get rid of the Blizzards and ski the Vists instead, in even slightly varied conditions - mild bumps, variable surface, serious steeps, etc., it would probably pay to test them in those conditions too, first. I have skied on skis that felt somewhat like what you describe with the Vists - including my old Fischer RCs with a very heavy plate/binding setup - and subsequently found that while they were stunning on consistent hard snow, they were really no fun AT ALL for a lightweight like me for a short run through the bumps or in even a couple of inches of soft snow. When I went to the Supersonics I made a calculated decision to trade some stability and grip for some versatility. And there are, for sure, times when I miss the stability at high speed. So I do understand your "skittish" comment. However, another side of the picture for me is that - at least at my strength and weight - I'm actually turning in better race times on the more "skittish" skis. I think it's precisely because they're lighter and quicker and I can make micro (or macro) adjustments faster and more safely and more confidently, because I'm skiing the skis and not vice-versa. There are times when it's fun to ride a big solid freeride bike, but I'm actually a much better rider when I'm on a nimble XC bike, if that analogy makes sense. Something to think about, perhaps.
