or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Atomic 10EX

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
This is purley to gloat. My 191 10.EX's came yesterday. Now we just need some better snow at Mammoth to avoid any more core shots! I don't think that I have had a greater desire for powder than I do now that I have these in my quiver. Yippee!!
post #2 of 14
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bandit Man:
I don't think that I have had a greater desire for powder than I do now that I have these in my quiver. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Well say goodbye to the rest of your quiver -- the 10.ex is a one ski does all. Most versatile ski I've ever had.
post #3 of 14
Mine are sitting here still in the package. I bought them because I liked them out at Squallywood. Man-O-man do you believe that I bought something as long as 184cm?

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ November 21, 2001 06:43 AM: Message edited 1 time, by Pierre eh! ]</font>
post #4 of 14
Thread Starter 
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pierre eh!:
Mine are sitting here still in the package. I bought them because I liked them out at Squallywood. Man-O-man do you believe that I bought something as long as 184cm?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Pierre eh,

I know that you are a short ski advocate, so yes, it was a surprise to see that you got the 184! I have only skied the 184, not the 191 and upon performing the good 'ole hand flex test, I am a bit intimidated by the 191 (I realize it is not like a real man to admit that). Those things are stiff! I think that I got the right size, but only that first run through a wide open bowl will tell. This is my last Atomic hook-up for a while, so I want to make sure that I do it right.

Deep Snow...Deep Snow!!
post #5 of 14
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bandit Man:
... and upon performing the good 'ole hand flex test, I am a bit intimidated by the 191 ... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Over the summer, there was quite a bit of talk on Epic that Atomic was going to design the 2001-2002 10ex's somewhat softer in the shorter lengths so that they would be appropriate for lighter skiers. Do you know if they have actually done this?

Tom / PM
post #6 of 14
Tom this years is softer , personally I didn't notice a huge change other than it was less likely to spank your ass if you screwed up on hard stuff. A buddy who is lighter (him 155lbs. / me a svelt 225lbs) did notice them to be a bunch more forgiving this year , but note they are still not for the meek.
post #7 of 14
Leeroy - Thanks for the info. I'm interested because there should be a pair of 184's in the mail headed my way.

I'm about 210 lbs, and my old 191 Volkl Explosiv's (and a lot of the other fatties currently on the market) are too flexible for me on everything except really soft stuff, so I went with the 10ex's. From what you said, fortunately for me, it sounds like they didn't soften them up too much this year.


I'm usually able to sneak in a few trips out west per season, so hopefully I now will only have to lug one pair with me. The Explosiv's are a great ski - just too specialized for my needs.


Tom / PM
post #8 of 14
I stopped in at Jan's Mountain Sports the other day and there were some Atomic 10EX's in a 178. The flex on that ski was a lot diffrent then the 191. However the 184 felt like it had more flex then the last seasons 184?I am not sure if it was a softer ski then then last seasons or not? It sure felt that way to me.
post #9 of 14
Thanks for the info on the flex. The frustrating thing for me is that I can't lay hands on the various fatties around home.

Around Washington DC, only a single shop carries any fatties at all, and even in that shop, the selection is woefully limited. They seem to think that nobody ever takes an airplane to a place where they might need a fattie, and if they do, they will buy it there.
post #10 of 14
This year's IS slightly softer than last year's, but it is still quite stiff for the fat freeride category.

The shorter lengths are not softer than the longer ones, it just feels that way since on a longer ski you have more leverage to get it to bend. This is always the case. Some manufacturers make the longer ones stiffer to compensate, but they don't feel stiffer when you flex them because of the greater leverage.
post #11 of 14
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Utah49:
I stopped in at Jan's Mountain Sports the other day and there were some Atomic 10EX's in a 178. The flex on that ski was a lot diffrent then the 191. However the 184 felt like it had more flex then the last seasons 184?I am not sure if it was a softer ski then then last seasons or not? It sure felt that way to me.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They make this years 10.EX in a 178? I thought 184 was as short as they go?
post #12 of 14
Thanks for the info, AC. Yup, I know they are relatively stiff. That's precisely why my short list consisted of the G4 and the 10ex, and I excluded most of the other mid-80's width fats. I went in this direction because I wanted the crud performance & versatility. In addition, I'm pretty big, and will still have available my soft flexing cafeteria tray - my old Explosiv.

On a side note, much to my surprise, I've heard several people comment that they consider the Explosiv to be relatively stiff. I certainly don't. They must mean relative to other fats of the same vintage.

Just to get an idea of how much they reduced the stiffness this year, if you had to put a number on it, would you guess it is more like a "I can barely feel it" 5% or more like a "Geeze, that's a lot softer" 20%?


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AC:
Some manufacturers make the longer ones stiffer to compensate, but they don't feel stiffer when you flex them because of the greater leverage.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The first part of your statement is probably not known to all that many people, and that is entirely understandable, but you would be utterly amazed how many people don't understand the second half, even after you explain it to them or have them flex a yardstick with their hands first close together, then far apart.

Tom / PM

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ November 30, 2001 01:42 AM: Message edited 1 time, by PhysicsMan ]</font>
post #13 of 14
Snowdawg,

I was vary suprised to see the 10EX 178 on the ski wall at Jan,s.Like you I was under the impression that the Shortest 10EX was a 184.I ask about a demo however they are not letting any out for demos untill there is a bit more coverage.What they don't trust me not to hit a rock ! :

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ November 30, 2001 11:10 AM: Message edited 1 time, by Utah49 ]</font>
post #14 of 14
You can get the 10EX in as short a length as 168cm. Not all the shops have the shorter lengths though.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion