EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Another series of ROSE REVIEWS, what a wonderful day!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Another series of ROSE REVIEWS, what a wonderful day!

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 

As is said so well in other review here...., thanks for getting the boys out to set up the tents for us! Great opportunity and great fun.

 

Me: 6ft, 170, 43,  psia level 3, no longer teach, finess skier, ski moderate speeds, like skis that bend well, can carve, drift, mix it up at my suggestion, not their own...

 

condiitons, GREAT, as has been explained in other reviews. some areas with nice hard bumps underneath, but great snow all in all.

I did a circuit on the skis, backside, mostly fresh, very little loud snow underneath, to low angle pow, to groomer carves, back to top, groomer short swing turns, to pow w/ some icey mougles hiding.

 

Base line, my MX98, 174 (3yr old, no longer made, GREAT ski). worked well in all conditions skied, as expected...

Likes: more traditional feeling skis, that like to bend and rebound, go where I want them to go, skid/drift when I want them too, and hold when I want them to. I also tend to like quiet and damp, hence my Kastlle with metal and rubber layers in the core.

 

then I skied the Cham 97, 178,frown.gif

I touched on this in another thread here in reviews, and don't want to beat the negative drum, but this wasn't my favorite ski. It reminded me of riding a mountain bike w/ too slack a head angle and  bald front tire, the front end was just pushing away. it worked OK, and I could get it to go where I wanted, but it was not precise for me in any of the conditions.

 

then, Head REV 105, 181, yahoo.gif

maybe the best over 100mm ski I can rember skiing, ever!

early rise worked well, but it was still precise and held where I wanted it. shape was fun in pow, hard pack, and was still nimble in the pow covered ice bumps. I had first tracks down the chutes on this one, and it was splendid, not calling attention to itself, just doing it's job exceptionally well!

 

then, ELAN 999, 181.biggrin.gif

short ride, but skied the chutes again, skied out by now, but this ski also was great!

did what I wanted, when I wanted. metal in it felt solid, little early rise was nice but not intusive.

maybe 90 to 95% of my MX98, but at a much lower price point (and it's available, where my mx98 isn't made anymore)

 

Head REV 90, 177

nice feeling ski, but not a head turner like the 105 for me.

I think for a 90mm waisted ski it was too shapely for my preferences. It had a shape it liked, and prefered that turn over mine.

 

Fisher HYBRID 95,

felt heavy at first, but skied well. strong but easy, heavy but w/ energy. I couldn't pin it down. I wouldn't own it, but I liked to ski it.. tough one. don't like the gimick or static weight, but good skiing ski.

 

 

it was great to meet many of you, and I enjoyed making turns w/ Phil, Noodler, Cirque, Sierra Jim, Tricia, and others.

 

cheers,

holiday

 

 

 

 


Edited by Holiday - 3/2/12 at 8:54pm
post #2 of 12

Thanks again to all the reps who showed up, and to Trekchick and Phil for organizing the demo day.  Great fun skiing with people and comparing demo notes.

 

I tried a bunch of 98's.

 

Me: age 49, weight 140, height 5-10.

 

Daily driver: K2 Apache Outlaw (92 wide underfoot).

 

I firtst tried the Fischer Big Stix 98.  The Fischer rep noted that the Big Stix line replaces the twin tip models from the Watea line.  I think the Wateas will include the flat tail (or swallow tail) models.  They did away with the powder hull (which aparantly dates from pre-rocker days; with rocker or early rise it isn't really needed.  They also apparently included a different carbon fiber construction embeded in the wood core.  Despite no metal, this ski really holds an edge, and busts through crud.  I loved this ski; it was my favorite of the bunch.  Very light, lightning quick, easily able to do tight turns or long arcing turns, absolutely the best in bumps.  I think Dawgcatching has done a review of the 2011-2012 Watea 98, and I came away with pretty much the same impressions.  Always felt in control.

 

Rossi E 98 is not a new ski, so I don't think I have much to add.  Very easy to turn, fun.  Since it tapers pretty quickly from the tip, it didn't have as much width as other skis from tip to waist, so not the best flotation.  Still a fun all around ski.

 

Bonafide.  You all know all about it.  You've either already bought it or have demoed it.  In case you haven't, my impression is that it does everything well, but didn't really excite me.  It tends to smoothe everything over, nice and silky, kind of a comfort ride. Once when I busted through some untouched powder, then busted through the crud onto a groomer, it took off an took me for a ride, much faster than I wanted to be going.  I found it a little hard to scrub speed.  Not as good on bumps as the Fischer. 

 

I also tried the Dynstar Cham 97.  I was hoping to like this ski.  It seemed to like bigger turns but it was a bit of work to do quick turns.  It floated nicely in deeper snow, but for my height and weight, not any better than the Big Stix.  Overall, I was more tired after skiing a run or two on Cham than on the other skis I demoed.  It demanded a lot of work on my part.

 

post #3 of 12

Me: Age 59, 5'11", 180

 

Everyday ski 174cm K2 Apache Recon 2007, powder ski 181cm Head Jimi 2009

 

Demos 184cm Dynastar Cham 107 9:30 - 11AM.  188cm Rossignol S7 11AM - 12:30PM.

 

I had been on the S7's before at Baldface snowcat in January, so I timed that demo to coincide with opening of the Chutes. Despite the conspicuous width and rocker the S7's were quite manageable on the chopped and groomed snow. So I understand why some Utah skiers like it as a near everyday ski. My earlier demo was the Dynastar Cham 107. This has a very wide and rockered tip but a completely conventional tail. This was completely transparent as a groomer ski, which is the objective of that tail design. This is what the Salomon BBR was supposed to accomplish, but I had trouble adjusting to that ski when I demoed it a year ago. The big tip worked well enough in the powder but the Cham 107 was certainly not at the level of the S7 as a deep snow ski.

post #4 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holiday View Post

then, Head REV 105, 181, yahoo.gif

maybe the best over 100mm ski I can rember skiing, ever!

early rise worked well, but it was still precise and held where I wanted it. shape was fun in pow, hard pack, and was still nimble in the pow covered ice bumps. I had first tracks down the chutes on this one, and it was splendid, not calling attention to itself, just doing it's job exceptionally well!

 

then, ELAN 999, 181.biggrin.gif

short ride, but skied the chutes again, skied out by now, but this ski also was great!

did what I wanted, when I wanted. metal in it felt solid, little early rise was nice but not intusive.

maybe 90 to 95% of my MX98, but at a much lower price point (and it's available, where my mx98 isn't made anymore)

 

it was great to meet many of you, and I enjoyed making turns w/ Phil, Noodler, Cirque, Sierra Jim, Tricia, and others.

 

cheers,

holiday


I skied the Rev 105 at Heavenly yesterday in pow, crud, bumps, trees, and groomers (oh, and flat traverses, lots of them; Heavenly seems like a snowboarder's nightmare).  Massive thanks to Head rep Dan for making this day possible:  the Rev 105 was fan-freeking-tastic.  It did what he said it would (I was skeptical, I admit), it had the nimble feel that it's newschool shape offered without feeling nervous, I felt at home on it in the first few turns I took on it.  It elevated my game; I would be happy to have it as a western daily driver, which surprises me to write since I prefer a skinnier everyday ski (currently the MX88 and am looking toward the Blizzard Magnum 8.0 to perhaps let me get away with an even slimmer daily).

 

So far, I haven't skied the 999/Spire, or it's bigger brother, the 1010/Olympus, but reading Holiday and Dawg's impressions of them leads me to believe I would be happy on either.

post #5 of 12

Does the Big Stix ski long or short?

post #6 of 12

I skied the Fischer Big Stix 98 (not sure of the length, approx. 180cm) demo day at Mt. Rose. Don't know if it skied long or short, but in the Mt. Rose Chutes it skied deep, as in light, thigh deep snow. I don't really like skis over 100mm wide as I prefer to slow down and sink in powder and crank lots of turns sorta like the powder figure 8 championships. I don't like the ski movie powder skiing where they get up on top of the snow and go mach I.

 

The Big Stix were fantastic. Since the Mt. Rose Chutes are very steep, I had thought about doing a warm up/acclimatization run first, but I was with "the Two Tonys" and they were anxious to hit the Chutes right away. Good call as we only got 3 or 4 runs before it was skied out. Also these Big Stix don't need no stinkXing warm up as I was in my comfort zone right away with these skis and just focused on picking my line and nailing it, which I pretty much did. They also skied great on the hard pack getting to and from the Chutes.

 

I am trying to convince my boss at the on mountain demo ski shop at Sun Peaks, where I work part time, to carry Fischer Big Stix next year. The wholesale price that the shop pays for Fischer skis will be a big factor in whether the shop carries Big Stix, but of the other two ski shops on the mountain, one carries a few Fischer race skis, but no Big Stix.

 

Kudos to Fischer for bringing back the Big Stix name. People like the name and like to say "Big Stix". I have a 6 or 7 year old Big Stix that was my powder ski (80mm wide, would make it a carver today lol) it was wide for its day but by no means the widest ski, yet lifties and people on chair lifts would frequently say "Ohhh, Big Stix!!".

 

DanoT looking for powder: Found some!

Dano looking for powder.jpeg

photo by: Tony Crocker

 

Thank you Tony and Tony. The Mt. Rose Chutes was the skiing highlight of The Gathering for me.

post #7 of 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by elduderino View Post

Does the Big Stix ski long or short?


IMO, it skis about like you'd expect.  Shorter than an flat tail ski with no rocker, of the same length, obviously, but otherwise nothing unusual on that front.  FWIW, here's my review of the Big Stix from another thread (http://www.epicski.com/t/111565/roundup-of-some-2013-skis-all-in-the-mid-to-upper-90s):

 

Fischer Big Stix 98 (186): This appears to be the replacement for the watea 98, I'm not sure what changes they made to it from the watea 98.  This is a twin tip with both tip and tail rocker, but not a huge amount.  This ski was probably the best all-around mix (at least for my tastes), from everything I skied.  I know there are a lot of people that denigrate all-mountain skis because they try to do a little of everything, and end up not being great at any one thing.  The counterpoint to that is that they can, if done right, end up being good at everything.  This ski wasn't as crisp on groomers as the nordica, lackes the stability of the elan, and wasn't quite as good in bumps as the watea.  However, it was the best mix of a little bit of everything.  The feel is fairly lively, as you would expect from a fischer, but still a decent amount of stability.  Much more-so than the watea, for example.  It's definitely a more soft-snow oriented ski, and lacks the stiffness and dampness that some might want.  Overall, I don't think this ski was the best at anything today, however it was good enough at everything that it ended up being my favorite of the day... I think.

 

post #8 of 12

^^I saw your review previously, thanks!

 

I currently ski the Watea 84, which I love, but it's beginning to get a little long in the tooth and I'm starting to look for something else for the quiver (I plan to keep the 84).

 

I skiied the Rossi S7 and liked it a bunch, but I'm not sure if 115 underfoot is really the right move for me.  I am forced to spend quite a bit of time on the groomers with wife/kids, so I'm thinking maybe something a bit more narrow.  I do like the idea of a twin tip, and given my admiration for the Wateas, the Big Stix 98 appeals to me.  I currently ski the 176 Watea (great in bumps) and would probably go longer if given the choice now.  Given that info, what size BS98 would be appropriate for my 6'0" 190lbs 39yo self?

post #9 of 12

At your size, and given that you've thought you might want to go longer than your 176 wateas, I think the 186 Big Sitx 98 would be a no-brainer.  I do felt it skied a little shorter than my current 186 watea 94's (which is to be expected give the twin tip and the slight rocker).  I'm a little bigger than you, but I wouldn't see any need to go shorter than the 186 for myself.  It was still quite nimble at that length, all going shorter would do is take away some of the stability.

post #10 of 12

I take it these aren't readily available yet?  I do see some 176's online, but I fear they might be too short.

post #11 of 12

I don't want to hijack that thread, but also curious if anyone has tried any of the wider (new) Big Stix?

post #12 of 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by elduderino View Post

I take it these aren't readily available yet?  I do see some 176's online, but I fear they might be too short.


I think you'd find the 176 too short, if I had to guess.  You could PM dawgcatching, SierraJim or Philpug (off the top of my head) and ask about availability, as they carry Fischer iirc.  They could probably tell you when they expect to get the '13's in, I have no clue if Fischer is one of the companies that sends stuff out in the spring, or waits until fall.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Another series of ROSE REVIEWS, what a wonderful day!