EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion ›  Atomic M2tron thoughts please
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Atomic M2tron thoughts please

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 

I am considering buying a used pair of 150cm atomic M2tron I think from 06-07 off internet (a carving ski for groomers in my quiver)

I think the binding were premounted @ the factory & are able to adjust to fit differnt sizes of boots

I have a 325mm boot & am concerned if atomic places the binding in a position so that a skier can move the binding so that the ball of foot can be somewhat close to center of running surface. ( are the bindings to far back.)

 Also is this a wood or foam core.

How did they ski & durability?

 

 Thanks,

  Darren

 

post #2 of 13

It is a mEtron not m2tron

 

Which model Metron is it. Which Atomic binding?

post #3 of 13
Thread Starter 

atomic M2tron 1.JPGatomic metron 3.JPGatomic metron 4.JPGatomic metron 2.JPG

post #4 of 13
Thread Starter 

Atomicman

 

My pics did not turn out right I blew up the tip, middle & tail but they all turned out the same. If you are able to blow up the tail large enough I think it says M2tron on tail & @ the tip it looks like an M2

 

When I described them to atomic without pic in email they would not comment on the binding

Said the profile was B5 intergated magnesium shell & core power channel magnesium. I have never herd of a core being 100% magnesium would it not likely be mostly wood or foam with a small amount of magnesium. Is magnesium beter then titanium for spring & or dampening?

post #5 of 13

IT SAYS Metron!!!!  Dude that is a small e not a 2!!!

 

there were many models in different years. That is definetly not and 2006-2007. I have the catalog right in front of me and that graphic un a 150cm ski is not in there.

 

It is defintely some form of Metron Beta-Puls.

 

Could be a Metron10 Puls Ti. But definetly not an 06-07 You should really find out exactly what model it is. 150 is very short. How much do you weigh and how tall are you!

 

That looks like an Atomic Device binding. Yes you can adjust the positon of skier on the ski.

post #6 of 13

That pair of ski has beta-puls construction but not in the B5 configuration. The front set of puls rods in B5 configuration is covered by the top skin and is only exposed thru 2 cut outs on the top skin. 

From the color of the maroon tip - looks like a pair of 05/06 M11. But the 05/06 M11 has a much brighter orange color  for the center section. 

The M11 went to the B5 construction during 07/08 season. 

 

Close up of the ski tip also shows something very funky. The maroon paint does not appears to be smooth. Look more like house paint applied with a brush. 

I would steer clear of this.

 

 

post #7 of 13
Thread Starter 

Iam 5 10 170lbs

 

 I wanted to use the ski for night skiing on about a 200 ft vertical groomed hill now & then for just ridding the edge. A lot of speed cannot be created on the hill & to get high G force  a small radius ski is needed. This one is apparently 10M R

 

I tried rental skis in a 145cm 10.8M R &  135cm 9.6M R in a salomon X wing & the smaller ski I was able to get more G force. (but would not feel comfortable on anything smaller)

 

I want a used ski for cost with a small R

 

Maybe your right I should go longer because I have no shape ski yet except for a 173cm that is aprox 40mm underfoot with about a 1 inch riser plate rock solid on ice Elan Phantom. (it is 1 three quarter inches wide underfoot & my boot sole is 2 & three quarter inches wide under foot)

 

 

post #8 of 13

B5 platform and the Beta-puls construction were totally different.

 

The B5 arms were integral to the plate and connected to the ski with an elastomer material.

 

The Beta-Puls is integral to the ski and the plate is separate and mounted over the top of a portion of the arms. Not integral to the plate.

 

Also m11 only came in a 152cm, 162cm & a 172cm.

 

The M11 B5 had the shape of an M11 with the plate/arms of the B5 platform. None of the M11 or M11b5 ever came in a 150cm.

 

2007 was the 1st year of the M11 with the B5 construction.

 

that's why I said it looked like an M10 Beta-Puls. that ski came in a 150 and had the Beta Arms

 

M11 Puls TI in 2006 was Blue/Gol. In 2005 the 1st year of the Metrons the M11 Puls ti had similar graphics to the ski you've shown but again only came in a 152,162 & 172cm.

 

Could be some weird cheapie ski made for a 2nd class sports store, like sports Authoriy or Gart Bros. or something like that.

 

 

post #9 of 13

Yeah, looks like that's the M10 from 2005.  I have some in a 171 and a 13,5 m radius.  Some feel that was the best of the line, a bit less radius and a little stiffer and narrower than the m -11 but not as stiff as the b-5.

 

They pretty much a fatter slalom ski.  I think 150 is pretty short, but for your little hill they might be good.  Definitely a high -g force ice carver.

post #10 of 13

M10 was supposed to be a great ski. I never personally skied on them but skied on many M11 & owned 4 pair of Metron B5.

 

I am not sure that is an 2005 M10 though It is the wrong color.

 

Here is the specs  '05 M10, The photo won't copy into Epic.

 

 

 
M:10 Puls-ti

 

150,157,164,171,178

122/74/108 (13.5m)

This may turn out the be the best buy for level 7 and 8 skiers. Much of the performance of the 5  and 11, more forgiving. Not quite as stable at speed, but nearly as versatile in all other respects. Not for top technical or highly energetic skiers.

carve:4
skid:3
rebound:4
stability:2

straight run:3
quickness:4
lightness:4
forgiveness:4

  

 

 

 

 

 



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by newfydog View Post

Yeah, looks like that's the M10 from 2005.  I have some in a 171 and a 13,5 m radius.  Some feel that was the best of the line, a bit less radius and a little stiffer and narrower than the m -11 but not as stiff as the b-5.

 

They pretty much a fatter slalom ski.  I think 150 is pretty short, but for your little hill they might be good.  Definitely a high -g force ice carver.



 

post #11 of 13
Thread Starter 

I really appriciate the great help you guys were, Iam really amazed @ the knowledge on this site.

 

Newfydog how much you asking for the 171cm

 

Thanks

 Darren

post #12 of 13

The shadow X on the tails means 10; Metron 9s had IX and so on...

 

They ski fair bit stiffer than Phantoms; the Phantoms are little more than a cap ski and can be very deeply flexed without edge engagement, this is not the case for  the Metron X if you get them sized properly.   If you are really used to the Phantoms, the M10s will feel wooden and stiff in an unresponsive way at first, but be patient with them.    

 

See if you can find a pair with a NEOX binding, that will give you more versatility in front/back adjustment.

 

 


Edited by comprex - 4/3/11 at 9:09pm
post #13 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powder Jet View Post

I

Newfydog how much you asking for the 171cm

 

 

Thanks, but I think I'll keep them.  I used to use them all the time, until the novelty of that huge sidecut wore off.  I still take then out when skiing with slower friends and want to make really tight carves.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion ›  Atomic M2tron thoughts please