Atomic Sugar Daddy Ski

2003 Sugar Daddy

Turns of any shape, fast or slow, are easy.in powder, crud, and cordoroy. Does feel a bit nervous at real speed.  Soft, but has pretty good snap.  Can be skied edge to edge very quickly. Real fun to butter on the tail. Did I say its playful?  A charger but not a super charger.

Though the edges looked thin. Durability has been good. Has held up over time.

Me: 6'3", 230 lbs.  Skiing for 40 years

I bought this ski with the Salomon FFV14 binding.  It takes the input given and does not seem to deflect in the snow. At 99 in the waist you really feel the high edge angles (it takes effort to hold it), but it will carve on groomers and has fairly good hold even in firm near icy conditions. The ski has a long turn radius and trying to force it to turn shorter on hardpack causes chattering and skipping of the edge, but in soft snow or powder, it releases a carve easily and short radius turns and speed control are possible. Did we mention this ski is light?

The Sugar daddy became a daily driver for me in Tahoe.  Compared to Gotama, it seems longer radius,  and is stiffer.  Does not feel as rounded in turns or as easy to carve.  Compared to Mantra, better float due to soft tip and wider platform,easier in bumps, not as powerful in crud.  The Atomic Sugar Daddy is very stiff under foot, and more flexible in the tip and moderate flex in the tail  This contributes to solid edge control, deeper snow float, easy turn initiation and a tolerable ride in bumps.   That stiffer flex can punish lightweight skiers who have trouble bending the mid-section for a smooth turn.

I skied the 2008 Gotamas back to back with my 2007 Sugar Daddys. Both skis are 183 cm. These skis are not worlds apart in my opinion. The Gotama has a softer tail and rounder flex. It allowed for a much rounder turn, seemed friendlier in steep bumps and was a very friendly ski underfoot. On easy intermediate slopes I left nice rounded railroad tracks with these, while my SDs don't finish as round, and tend to skid at the end of a turn. With the warm weather and sticky snow conditions I really didn't find a place that these skis were not fun. We even dropped into some pretty steep terrain off the Sugar Bowl cornices off Disney. The Gotamas felt very solid and were easy to release and bring around on the steep.

The SD seems to have more edge grip and would be my preferred wide ski in harder conditions. The SD tends to ski straighter and with a firm mid-body section can straight-line, and may bust crud better than the Got. The SD is lighter and is easier to bring around in turns that are not carved and edged so much as thrown (I know bad habit) think pedal turn. The SD has much more rebound energy stored at the end of a turn, while the Gotama is damper and transitions turns based more in skier input. Skiers that like to use the stored energy in a ski in initiating the next turn will like the SD better. The SD has more of its flex in the tip and tends to stiffen underfoot and become moderately stiff at the tail. This can make the ski seem very difficult to bend evenly for a lightweight skier, but for me it results in a nice turn; however the rebound energy needs to be managed.

I think if I was choosing between the two skis, I would go for the Gotama at this point as it is more easy-going. There are not enough differences here for me to spend the money to retire the new SDs in favor of the Gotama. Overall the Gotama is more forgiving, and would be a much easier ski to flex for a lighter skier. It holds up to a heavier skier and is very versatile in the snow conditions and turns it can perform in well.