New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Big mountain ski

post #1 of 16
5/12/12 at 8:59am
Thread Starter 
Anyone. Care to compare the nordica soul rider to the blizzard bonfide. Tons of great comments on th bone.
Which ski will glide better in deeper snow and be stable in crud. Current ski is 170 mantra... No rocker. Worried about no metal being stable in crud. But also maybe no metal is quicker in trees and bumps. I realize either ski would be a great choice. I only get west for one or two trips. If I lived in the west the hell dorado would rock. Black is back. I am aggressive fall line, technical rather than power. 6'0". 175. Yea Phil its still me.
Thank you.
Reply
post #2 of 16
5/12/12 at 9:39am

A ski does not need metal to be stable in crud, it just needs to be built right.

Reply
post #3 of 16
5/12/12 at 1:21pm
Bone has metal. FYI.
Squaw Valley Insider

Find the cure for ordinary - Squaw Valley

» Get the latest news and updates at the Squaw Valley sponsor page.
Reply
post #4 of 16
5/12/12 at 1:35pm
The Soul Rider also has two ti layers according to Nordica. 797fd0b7-c96c-6799.jpg 2013's look cool as well!
Reply
post #5 of 16
5/12/12 at 2:27pm
Thread Starter 
Right you are. Thinking bone is more stable than soul. If the bone is almost as quick then bone has it. If soul is relatively as stable in chop as the bone but much quicker
Er than its the soul wins. What say you.
A Tomba
Reply
post #6 of 16
5/13/12 at 6:53am
Thread Starter 
Where did you find the citation that the sr has ti layers? Can you speculate on how this changes things from 2012 with carbon?
Reply
post #7 of 16
5/13/12 at 7:01am
It's listed on Nordicas 2012 specifications - look at their web site. That is where I read SR has two layers of ti. 2013 is the same. How it skis? Do not know. I'll tell you soon though.
Reply
post #8 of 16
5/13/12 at 9:20pm

Metal isn't necessary.  This past season I bought a pair of Nordica Steadfasts after trying the Bushwackers and Line Prophet 90s.  The Steadfast doesn't have a metal layer and as far I am concerned it was quicker and more reliable that either of the others in all conditions including powder up to about 16-18", trees, bumps, crud and groomers.  The graphics on the Steadfast are terminally boring but graphics are way behind performance when I decide to buy a ski.


Edited by mtcyclist - 5/14/12 at 7:04am
Reply
post #9 of 16
5/14/12 at 7:06am

^^^^^ This. There are some famously stable, beefy big mountain skis out there with no metal (go ride a Kastle BMX 108 or Moment Belafonte or Head Supermojo 103 and report back), and some meh one's with. Reasons, far as I know: 1) Stiffness is determined by the cross sectional area of core + type of wood, + amount of fiberglass and/or carbon. Metal dampens things, allows similar stiffness with less cross section. But it's not the primary determinate of stiffness. 2) Design matters. You can take skis with a lot of metal, put an odd tip or tail or sidecut on it, and it can become quirky or unpredictable depending on you and your terrain. The new Cham series from Dynastar may fit this bill, and the Rossi Super 7 does for sure. A few folks (like a recent reviewer here) would say the flipcore skis from Blizzard also tend to change character depending on how you ski them, while most would prolly say just the opposite. IMO the divergence of opinion is more revealing than the actual outcome; design trumps construction.

 

Bottom line: Get the ski that works for you, don't fixate over what it's made of.  

Reply
post #10 of 16
5/16/12 at 3:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

^^^^^ This. There are some famously stable, beefy big mountain skis out there with no metal (go ride a Kastle BMX 108 or Moment Belafonte or Head Supermojo 103 and report back)

 

What the hell are you talking about?? im103 has more metal than tree in it.

Reply
post #11 of 16
5/16/12 at 3:50am
Thread Starter 

Thanks everyone. The 185 Soulrider is the choice.

Reply
post #12 of 16
5/17/12 at 2:29am
I'll pick my 177 soul riders up in a few weeks. I skied Atomic Access this year and hope the SR's are as much fun but a bit less chattery on the hard pack. Just need some snow now!
Reply
post #13 of 16
5/17/12 at 7:45am

nevermind.

Reply
post #14 of 16
5/17/12 at 12:36pm
Thread Starter 

Hey Cold:

What is your weight and height? I understand the SR's skis short. Especially with early rise tip and tail. I also believe the ski is more powder and soft snow oriented than hard and groomed.

For what it is worth.

Reply
post #15 of 16
5/18/12 at 4:30am
I'm 5.9 and 160lbs. I choose 177 based on my experiences. I'm sure they will be fun and I'm sure I'd also like the 185s. I get a great kick out of all the comments about skis on this forum. I'm yet to find a ski I can't have fun on!
Reply
post #16 of 16
6/25/12 at 12:29am
Can tell you that the 2013 Soul Riders are outstanding. Have three days on them now. Tried all conditions except pure ice and moguls. All mountain for sure. No tip chatter like the Atomic Access has at speed. Plenty of energy in short snappy turns like my Fire Arrows. Just pure fun. I am very pleased I punted on buying a set.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion