or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Atomic beta carv 9.18 vs beta ride 10.20
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Atomic beta carv 9.18 vs beta ride 10.20

post #1 of 4
Thread Starter 
Hi all,

I need some advice on ski selections. I am 5'6", 140 lb, advanced intermediate skier. I live in upstate new york and normally ski east, once a year west. I want to get a pair of atomic skis but couldn't decide whether to go with beta ride 10.20 or beta carv 9.18. I have read some reviews on beta ride 10.20 saying it is a bit heavier to ski on. I consider myself a free ride cruiser and only ski moguls occasionally. I like to ski fast and thus worry the carv 9.18 may not be stable at high speed. I am thinking to get a pair of 170 cm with atomic binding.
Please help with your advice. Thanks in advance.

post #2 of 4
I know very little about either ski, however I think you're on too long a ski. I'm 5'10" and plan to ski a 160 this year.
post #3 of 4
Well Alex i have skied both of those ski's, at least last years models. The 10.20 has changed from last year and there is now a 11.20 beta ride too. Iam going to assume you mean last years models the 2000-2001 models. The 10.20 ride ski is what is called a mid fat and it is great at plower through "crud" and is very stable at high speed as i really got flying on those last year when i demoed them. Great edge hold on hard pack i thought. The 9.18's are deffintly softer and have a narrower waste so there not exactle a good crud blaster but are a bit faster from edge to edge compared to the 10.20. I demoed the 10.20's and owned some 9.18's in 180 length. Iam 5'8" 150lbs. My choice would be the 10.20's as you can really fly on those, but i did have my 9.18's going fast but i think the 10.20's more stable at real fast speeds. But your pretty light so the 9.18's mite work well to. I live in western NY and at the beginning of the year last year every day it snowed a ton, and i skied mostly at night so when i got there the hill was all chopped up crud and the 9.18's got kicked around alot so i ended up getting some midfats for better crud blasting, i got K2 Mod X because they were better in moguls than 10.20's but the 10.20's were my second choice. I demoed over 15 differnt ski's at two seperate demo days.

If your talking about this years models i dont really no for sure as the 10.20 has been changed alot and the 9.18's use that device binding setup were binding comes with ski and mounts on rails.

Rusty are you skiing on one of those shorty slalom ski's like a Atomic 9.16 Race or something similar, as 160 is a short all around type ski but great on a 9.16 slalom race ski or the like. <FONT size="1">

[This message has been edited by dc9mm (edited September 05, 2001).]</FONT>
post #4 of 4
I actually used three different models and lengths last year;

Volkl G-31 183
Fischer Alltrax 68 173
Elan CRX 176

Plan to ski the HCX in a 163 to start the winter. Haven't decided on an all mountain, deep snow, spring slop ski.
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 beta carv 9.18 vs beta ride 10.20