New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Help Pick A New Ski

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 

Hi guys! So I am looking for a new ski to replace my 06/07 K2 Public Enemies which I feel is too short for me as I've gotten heavier (ha!) and better. I also feel that the PE's are not incredibly well-suited to the terrain and the conditions that I ski. 

 

Height 5' 9", weight about 190lbs, intermediate-advanced Type II skier. I can do blacks, but prefer non-mogully ones. Most of my time is spent on blues, with some blacks, and also some groomer time with friends who are not as advanced. I do not do park skiing. I do venture into the trees and soft snow at times, and some bowl skiing.

 

I'm local to Vancouver, so I tend to ski Whistler a fair amount, and Cypress Mountain as well - West Coast variable conditions, though I tend to avoid days that are icy or not so good. I love skiing powder when I can, but I am not going to bank on being able to go when it snows all that much. I average between 5-10 days a season depending on how free I get during winter, and hopefully this year the number of times I can go skiing will go up after January. 

 

My local shop has a few skis from last season on sale, and I like to give them my business if I can, so unless it's an absolute screaming deal I'll probably keep it local. Student budget as well.

 

Right now, these are the 2 skis recommended to me by the shop that they have left from last season.

 

Atomic Access 171cm $300

 

Fischer Watea 88 168 cm $400

 

I'm leaning towards the Wateas, and the shop recommendation seems that way as well, due to the narrower waist vs. the Access. However, a friend of mine recommends getting wider rather than narrower, and thinks the Access is the better buy. Both are early rocker tip. 

 

Any suggestions, guys? Thanks in advance!

post #2 of 10

I tried the Access this past season not expecting much, but I ended up being pleasantly surprised.  I found it to be a surprisingly fun, mild-mannered, and very easy-skiing ski.  Also, one of the shop guys on this site has recommended it as one of his "Steals and Deals" for the last 2 years in a row.  I think your friend is right, and you'll appreciate the slightly wider width at Whistler.  Plus, they're cheaper!

I will say the neon green burned my retinas, though!

 

It's been a few years since I tried a Watea, so I would think it's construction has changed a bit since then.  Well, I'm sure the one I skied didn't have rocker at all, for one thing.  That said, I didn't care for it much then, but take that with a grain 'o salt given the the amount of time that's passed.

 

So, of your 2 choices, I say the Atomic Access.

 

Given that you're 190lbs, I would definitely go with at least the next longer length, though...if that's an option. 

post #3 of 10

I bought the access last season, am a lower intermediate skier, and really struggled choosing between lengths 171 and 181.  I'm 145lbs and shorter than you.  From all the advice I got on this ski, I'd say the 171 is too short for you.  Of course I could be wrong ;)  Oh by the way, I went with the 181.

post #4 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by roastpuff View Post

Hi guys! So I am looking for a new ski to replace my 06/07 K2 Public Enemies which I feel is too short for me as I've gotten heavier (ha!) and better. I also feel that the PE's are not incredibly well-suited to the terrain and the conditions that I ski. 

 

Height 5' 9", weight about 190lbs, intermediate-advanced Type II skier. I can do blacks, but prefer non-mogully ones. Most of my time is spent on blues, with some blacks, and also some groomer time with friends who are not as advanced. I do not do park skiing. I do venture into the trees and soft snow at times, and some bowl skiing.

 

I'm local to Vancouver, so I tend to ski Whistler a fair amount, and Cypress Mountain as well - West Coast variable conditions, though I tend to avoid days that are icy or not so good. I love skiing powder when I can, but I am not going to bank on being able to go when it snows all that much. I average between 5-10 days a season depending on how free I get during winter, and hopefully this year the number of times I can go skiing will go up after January. 

 

My local shop has a few skis from last season on sale, and I like to give them my business if I can, so unless it's an absolute screaming deal I'll probably keep it local. Student budget as well.

 

Right now, these are the 2 skis recommended to me by the shop that they have left from last season.

 

Atomic Access 171cm $300

 

Fischer Watea 88 168 cm $400

 

I'm leaning towards the Wateas, and the shop recommendation seems that way as well, due to the narrower waist vs. the Access. However, a friend of mine recommends getting wider rather than narrower, and thinks the Access is the better buy. Both are early rocker tip. 

 

Any suggestions, guys? Thanks in advance!


These are all too short for you, you should be on at least the next size up.

post #5 of 10
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecimmortal View Post


These are all too short for you, you should be on at least the next size up.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyUtah View Post

I bought the access last season, am a lower intermediate skier, and really struggled choosing between lengths 171 and 181.  I'm 145lbs and shorter than you.  From all the advice I got on this ski, I'd say the 171 is too short for you.  Of course I could be wrong ;)  Oh by the way, I went with the 181.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skierish View Post

I tried the Access this past season not expecting much, but I ended up being pleasantly surprised.  I found it to be a surprisingly fun, mild-mannered, and very easy-skiing ski.  Also, one of the shop guys on this site has recommended it as one of his "Steals and Deals" for the last 2 years in a row.  I think your friend is right, and you'll appreciate the slightly wider width at Whistler.  Plus, they're cheaper!

I will say the neon green burned my retinas, though!

 

It's been a few years since I tried a Watea, so I would think it's construction has changed a bit since then.  Well, I'm sure the one I skied didn't have rocker at all, for one thing.  That said, I didn't care for it much then, but take that with a grain 'o salt given the the amount of time that's passed.

 

So, of your 2 choices, I say the Atomic Access.

 

Given that you're 190lbs, I would definitely go with at least the next longer length, though...if that's an option. 

 

Considering that I'm currently skiing on 159cm PE's, these are a good size upgrade for me, heh. 

 

What size would you guys recommend? Remember that I'm not that aggressive of a skier to begin with... 

 

175+ ?

 

Also, I just saw Sierra Jim's sale go on for the Nordica's... Any recommendations? I am thinking Nordica Enforcer, Steadfast or Hell and Back? 

post #6 of 10

Steadfast, especially given that you're not a mogul person but like to move from groomers to some soft snow. It'll beat your current two choices like a gong. Enforcer is a bit more serious/demanding of a ski, not really aimed at groomers. Helen Bach, as SJ likes to call it, is also a very nice ski for your level but prolly more oriented toward sidebounds and soft snow than you'd need. 170 would work fine if you plan to just ski and enjoy; if you plan lessons/more sidebounds, the 178 will be a better fit for your size. 

post #7 of 10

Now that you've thrown 3 additional possibilities into the mix, I agree with Beyond ^^^^^.

The Steadfast is the way to go.  Hell, for a measly 300 bucks, I'm 1/2-tempted to get a pair myself...and I don't even need 'em!

 

It looks like SJ only has the 178 and 186 in the Steadfast at that price, though.  That's probably just as well, since the 178 is a better fit for your size anyway.

post #8 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by roastpuff View Post

 

 

 

Considering that I'm currently skiing on 159cm PE's, these are a good size upgrade for me, heh. 

 

What size would you guys recommend? Remember that I'm not that aggressive of a skier to begin with... 

 

175+ ?

 

Also, I just saw Sierra Jim's sale go on for the Nordica's... Any recommendations? I am thinking Nordica Enforcer, Steadfast or Hell and Back? 


Just because your on a childs ski right now does not mean you need to take baby steps in upsizing. you don't have to be an "aggresive" skier to get the most out of a ski that is appropriate for your size.

post #9 of 10
Thread Starter 
I ordered the Enforcer in 178 before I saw what you guys recommended. Should I get them to switch it? To be honest I don't mind that the Enforcer is a bit harder to ski or fatter, maybe it will lead to me to try to do more? Reading the reviews it seems that they are still good on groomers and variable conditions all over the mountain. The metal content also makes them better for charging through crud?
post #10 of 10

I haven't skied those particular skis, but as I understand it, they are probably the burliest and hardest charging of the choices you listed.  They will likely reward an aggressive skier, and you say you're not.  If you want a 98-wide ski, I would've gone with the friendlier skiing Hell & Back.

 

In fact, considering that you appear to have decided on a little extra width, my recommendations of the skis you've cited are now...in order:

 

1st - Hell & Back

2nd - Steadfast (narrower but I think still a good choice for you)

3rd - Access

 

Your length choice is good...upper 170's to low 180's.

 

If you can get them to change your order, great; whether you want to is up to you, of course.  I just think you'll be a happier camper with one of those listed above...based on what you've told us.

Hope it works out regardless!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion