EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Blizzard VS Head for EC All Mtn Ski
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Blizzard VS Head for EC All Mtn Ski

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 

Thinking of a ski for East Coast all mtn soft snow/chop days. Suitable for cruising that day out on frontside groomers, pop into glades, easy skiing through chop, etc.

 

I know Dynastar and Rossi pretty well, have a Tigershark 12 I never warmed up to. Still moving slowly toward the thicker waisted skis as we get alot of soft snow then sheer ice (ala Mt. Tremblant) and a very nasty crash 2 years ago on a Rossi CX 80. Hardpack days I'll take my GS cheater ski...

 

Looking for a slalom-esque radius and thinking 170cm (my Rossi 9S are 165cm and Dynastar Course 178cm).

 

Thinking about Head Supershape Magnums or a Blizzard ski.

 

I don'y know either brand firsthand - Anyone suggest Head/Blizzard model and lengfht to try? I'm open to other suggestions in Rossi or Dynastar also.

 

Thanks folks!

post #2 of 16

your idea of what ski you should get is all wrong.

 

You do not want a tight radius skis for all mountain skiing.

You do not want a sub 85mm waist

You do not want a superstiff ski like a Head Magunum

You DO want some sort of rocker

 

once you change your thoughts I ll get back to you.

 

 

post #3 of 16

I would agree with BinPA in most respects, that these are not really ideal shapes for the conditions you describe.  Wider skis these days are much grippier and more competent on harder snow.  I am in VT, and ski 109-116 waisted skis as my daily drivers.


There are a host of options out there in this genre, of which the Tiger 12s are not a shining example.  For crud performance, early rise or tip rocker will be an asset, but i would not suggest a full rocker ski, unless you know you want it.  If you have not skied wider skis, you will need to adapt your style to them to get the most out of them, especially on hard snow. But with proper technique, width does not mean poor hard snow performance.

post #4 of 16
Thread Starter 

Okay - mind officially open. But that waist width seems awfully thick.

 

Glad I didn't mention the Dynastar 4X4 lol

 

New Suggestions please?

post #5 of 16
Thread Starter 

Also, obviously I'm missing something with the new rocker introduction to AM skis. I was on the bench last year - what did I miss?

post #6 of 16
Thread Starter 

What about Dynastar Sultan/Legend 80 or 85's?

 

I see some on sale here for $485 shipped....reviews are good, there is just not any contrast to the race style skis I'm used to. Thoughts on the Sultan?

post #7 of 16

You might want to consider a Blizzard Magnum 7.6 or a Blizzard Bushwacker , which , while wide - 88 at the waist - gets high marks for frontside skiing from a number of skiers who have skied on it .

post #8 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by csr_jr View Post

What about Dynastar Sultan/Legend 80 or 85's?

 

I see some on sale here for $485 shipped....reviews are good, there is just not any contrast to the race style skis I'm used to. Thoughts on the Sultan?


Sultans are great skis for what you describe. 

 

Just keep in mind that there are other schools of thought about whether you (or anyone) truly needs rocker for east coast skiing.  Considering that you're already fairly comfortable on relatively narrower-waisted and traditional-cambered skis, I can't personally think of anything much that rocker or early rise is going to buy you. 

 

I don't even remotely agree with Bushwacker that the Head SS Magnum is a "superstiff" ski.  I used it for two full seasons at Jackson Hole in almost exactly the kind of conditions you described and I think it's a very easy-going ski if you want it to be.  But I'm a rep for Head and my opinion is suspect.

 

Back to the Dynastars...  if you ski well, those Sultans would work great for you.  If you don't ski so well, then rocker or early rise will help you by being less precise and less demanding.  (Come to think of it, for all I know the Sultans may have some early rise, so you get the best of all worlds.)

 

post #9 of 16

Agree with Bob on the Head SS.  It's a very supple ski that rewards good technique.  I would not call it stiff by any means.  It would be a great east coast ski for the right skier.  If you are all about woods it would not be the best of choices.  This ski likes to carve.  It's not a bump ski but I personally would enjoy this ski in the bumps.

 

I am trying to zero in on a ski for the east and my focus is woods.  Blizzard Bushwacker is right up at the top of the list.  I am not interested in Dynastar.

 

More on where you ski and exactly what type of terrain you will be skiing would help.

 

 

 

post #10 of 16

What about the Head Supershape Titan? ...and speaking of which, at 135-140lbs am i too light for them?

post #11 of 16
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post

Agree with Bob on the Head SS.  It's a very supple ski that rewards good technique.  I would not call it stiff by any means.  It would be a great east coast ski for the right skier.  If you are all about woods it would not be the best of choices.  This ski likes to carve.  It's not a bump ski but I personally would enjoy this ski in the bumps.

 

I am trying to zero in on a ski for the east and my focus is woods.  Blizzard Bushwacker is right up at the top of the list.  I am not interested in Dynastar.

 

More on where you ski and exactly what type of terrain you will be skiing would help.

 

 

 


Thanks to Bob and Paul on the Head insights. I read Bob's review/posts on the Magnum and hence my interest. Titan is another suggestion also. I have 100% of my entire skiing experience on race skis, so maybe time to branch out a bit. Was thinking of the Head Magnum in 170, then thought maybe go with a real deeper snow ski, now back again. Sultans sound good, I like the Dynastar feel...

 

What are the thoughts about the Titan? I saw it in SKI magazine's latest swag issue...

 

post #12 of 16

There are some great suggestions in this thread....

post #13 of 16
Thread Starter 
i bought the dynastar sultans... 172cm... maybe a bit short, but hopefully fun for trees and fooling around. $399 new shipped from ASO on eBay -- figured i can't go wrong. first chance to try rocker....
post #14 of 16

FWIW, I'm 5' 7" and 180lbs.  I  demoed a 2009 Head iM 78 last spring at Alpine Meadows in a 171cm length.  The snow

was frozen corn in the early AM. and corn from 10 - 12. I left at 12.  I was quite impressed with the iM 78 in all these snow

conditions, it turned very quick when asked and did not do to bad in medium speed GS turns.  Given my height and weight

I would have prefered a 177cm and therefore did not by this demo pair.  All around a great ski.

post #15 of 16


Quote:

Originally Posted by neonorchid View Post

What about the Head Supershape Titan? ...and speaking of which, at 135-140lbs am i too light for them?


No you aren't. I'm only 140 pounds too and have skied on these for 2 seasons now, BC and back here in NZ right now.

As above like the SS Magnums they aren't super stiff skis, really just a wider version. They have a nice even flex right through the front and very whippy tails to complement the tight radius. They perform a bit like toned down SL race skis but are obviously more pliable but being carvers reward tipping style skiing rather than pivoting like the newer riser shapes can encourage. If you ski on your edges and like turns you will love them in all frontside and not crazy deep snow conditions.

post #16 of 16

The Supershape Magnum is far from an overly stiff ski. IMO it would make a great ski for the type of skiing you plan on doing. Why would you possibly want a super wide rockered design when you're going to be skiing mostly on the front side in New England? I've had a season pass for the last dozen years or so in Vermont, and I certainly wouldn't want something like that for my everyday ski. Maybe if you ski a lot in the woods at Stowe or Jay Peak, then maybe it might not be a bad idea to have one in the quiver. But as an only ski everyday ski, you'll be much happier with the Magnums.

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 › Blizzard VS Head for EC All Mtn Ski