EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › More Tahoe demos: Blizzard Dakota, Samba, Gunsmoke; Dynastar Cham 107; Head Rev 105
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

More Tahoe demos: Blizzard Dakota, Samba, Gunsmoke; Dynastar Cham 107; Head Rev 105

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 

First, I would like to echo the others in thanking everyone responsible for setting up the demo opportunities. It turned out to be a great day for demoing, as there were many types of snow condition and terrain across the mountain.

 

About me: I don't demo a lot, so I'm not the best at picking out every little nuance. I have, though, skied and demoed a lot more skis this year than ever. I have been a shameless Blizzard fan since last season; I've really really liked everything I have skied, including Philpug's Bonafide and Bushwacker last May. My daily ski is a 177 Crush, and I also have a 184 DPS 112 hybrid, but I've skied it only 4 days (quite happily, however). I'm 5'9" and 140lb.

 

1. Blizzard Dakota (177). This is the ski I really wanted to try, and I wasn't disappointed. It is the new women's version of the Cochise, very slightly modified but not much. I skied it for several runs on Tuesday at Mt Rose, and found it to be comfortable in any type of soft snow, trees, moguls, etc. It lost some personality on groomers, however -- although I didn't spend much time figuring it out, so I can't say for sure. I think it would be best making big wide fast turns when on firmer snow, which I wasn't doing.

 

The best test, though, came courtesy of the Blizzard reps, who let me use it for the day at Squaw on Thursday (thanks!). It was so perfect I don't know how to describe it except to say I didn't even think about the ski all day, really, it was just an extension of my legs. Mostly we skied soft and deep snow in trees and chutes, not super tight but definitely not much wide open. I had little trouble with balance or quickness, they just skied. Whether untracked or not, didn't matter. No tip dive, no backseat, easy in moguls.

 

Friday, however, showed me that it is not made for conservative skiing. Unfortunately I woke up with a mildly gimpy knee, and felt the need to be much more cautious. After a few not-so-enjoyable runs on the Dakota, I switched back to the Crush, which proved to be a less demanding ski. 

 

2. Blizzard Samba (173). This is the women's Bonafide, and if I'm not mistaken, this one has been softened up a bit. NIMBLE! I think "quick little bugger" were my words. Yet, when taken into the chutes, in some fairly steep and deep terrain, they stood up amazingly well. No tip dive, no instability, maybe a little too quick on the turns, but I could fix that with more time to adjust. I could picture replacing my Crushes with this as a daily driver.

 

3. Blizzard Gunsmoke (186). I was intrigued by this ski, really enjoyed it in open areas, whether groomed or not, but then I took it into trees, where it was too long for me. Especially on the last run of the day. Would like to try a shorter version. 

 

4. Dynastar Cham 107 (184) (I think that was the length -- Philpug and I had traded skis during a run). I didn't spend too much time on this ski, but I found it easy on both groomed and in moguls and trees. I had trouble in the chutes, though, in very deep untracked. We had just been in a virtual minefield of rocks, where I crunched the demo (very sorry, Mr Kind Dynastar Rep), so I backed off and skied too carefully after that, and the tail wouldn't let me. I kept getting backseat and couldn't get out easily. I would like to try this one again, when I could get forward and ski with a little more confidence. I felt like the length was fine for me.

 

5. Head Rev 105 (181). I had skied a couple of 2013 Heads early in the year and was impressed, as I was with this ski. I only took it on one run, but it was smooooth! Handled everything with ease, although I didn't take into snow more than 6" deep. It also has some pretty conservative graphics, maybe a counterpoint for those who don't like bulls and glitter and scary clowns.

 

So yeah, I liked all the skis, except the one that punished operator error. :-) Also, I really wanted to get on some Nordicas, but I had bad timing at their tent.  For whatever reason, I still am most comfortable with the feel of the Blizzards, both unisex and not. I will probably purchase a Dakota at some point.  I want to support the companies who are making serious skis in long lengths for women, and will bring something bigger than a 163 to a consumer demo -- thank you Blizzard and Nordica. I don't really believe "women's" skis are necessary, to tell the truth, but as long as the companies are making "women's" skis, they should cover the gamut.

 

post #2 of 9

Wow you got out on some great skis!  

I think the Samba is going to be my new daily driver, and I'm not surprised that you like it.  

 

I'm looking forward to more time on the 2013 choices, especially the Dakota. 

 

post #3 of 9

There may be no "bad" skis, but there are skis that are a better match for certain types of skiers.  I like the reference to the Dakota kind of "disappearing" - that you didn't really need to think about it.  Your skiing really looked great on the Dakota.  In comparison, your skiing on the Cham skis never looked all that comfortable.  So it's clear to me that in the search for new skis a skier needs either:

  1. Personal demos on the skis under consideration
  2. Dependable knowledge of the skiing style of the skier writing the ski reviews (if you're basing a purchasing decision on reading reviews)

 

 

 

 

post #4 of 9
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler View Post

There may be no "bad" skis, but there are skis that are a better match for certain types of skiers.  I like the reference to the Dakota kind of "disappearing" - that you didn't really need to think about it.  Your skiing really looked great on the Dakota.  In comparison, your skiing on the Cham skis never looked all that comfortable.  ...

 

 

 

 

I still would like another shot on those Chams, as I don't think I would have been comfortable on anything at that moment, just because I was looking for rocks behind every turn. But it is also possible that it just isn't my ski, absolutely. 
 

 

post #5 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by segbrown View Post


2. Blizzard Samba (173). This is the women's Bonafide, and if I'm not mistaken, this one has been softened up a bit. NIMBLE! I think "quick little bugger" were my words. Yet, when taken into the chutes, in some fairly steep and deep terrain, they stood up amazingly well. No tip dive, no instability, maybe a little too quick on the turns, but I could fix that with more time to adjust. I could picture replacing my Crushes with this as a daily driver.

 


 

Thanks. I've been looking for a 1st hand-review of this ski. Some day I'm gonna buy something like this as my "fat" ski in a 3-ski eastern quiver. I have found a couple of the 98ers insufficiently willing and playful, but at the same time the very playful Rossi S3 (for example) was a bit too new-school and not sufficiently rewarding of solid carver-boy technique to suit me. I was thinking that a slightly softer Bonafide might be just the ticket. I'm a bit smaller than you, btw, and would probably also be looking at the 173. Maybe next spring when the closeouts come around.

post #6 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post


 

Thanks. I've been looking for a 1st hand-review of this ski. Some day I'm gonna buy something like this as my "fat" ski in a 3-ski eastern quiver. I have found a couple of the 98ers insufficiently willing and playful, but at the same time the very playful Rossi S3 (for example) was a bit too new-school and not sufficiently rewarding of solid carver-boy technique to suit me. I was thinking that a slightly softer Bonafide might be just the ticket. I'm a bit smaller than you, btw, and would probably also be looking at the 173. Maybe next spring when the closeouts come around.


 

Did you try Blizzard "the one" ?

 

 

post #7 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post


 

Thanks. I've been looking for a 1st hand-review of this ski. Some day I'm gonna buy something like this as my "fat" ski in a 3-ski eastern quiver. I have found a couple of the 98ers insufficiently willing and playful, but at the same time the very playful Rossi S3 (for example) was a bit too new-school and not sufficiently rewarding of solid carver-boy technique to suit me. I was thinking that a slightly softer Bonafide might be just the ticket. I'm a bit smaller than you, btw, and would probably also be looking at the 173. Maybe next spring when the closeouts come around.



Maybe the Kabookie. 

post #8 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trekchick View Post



Maybe the Kabookie. 



 

 

flat tails are pain in the ass for east coast tree skiing. Just ask Kevin F how fun it is when you have to back up.

post #9 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Matta View Post



 

 

flat tails are pain in the ass for east coast tree skiing. Just ask Kevin F how fun it is when you have to back up.


I like the flat tails on my bushwackers for going forwards...  But yeah, they do suck when you need to back up.

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 › More Tahoe demos: Blizzard Dakota, Samba, Gunsmoke; Dynastar Cham 107; Head Rev 105