EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Volkl Bridge on the East Coast
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Volkl Bridge on the East Coast

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 

Hi, folks.  I've been skiing the Fischer Watea 85 for the past three seasons.  Loved the ski, and have spent lots of time in the woods and in the bumps.  I only snowboard in the park.  I ski/ride 20 to 25 days a year.  That being said, this will probably be the Watea's last season.  

 

I've been reading up on the Volkl Bridge and was wondering if it might be something that'd work for me.  I've read that they have fairly decent edge hold for a rocker-ed twin-tip and that they're pretty good in the bumps.

 

I'm 6 foot at 200 pounds, use Lange RX 130 boots and have been skiing since 1967.  I ski Western Mass and VT, usually at Okemo with a yearly trip to Stowe.  I live for moguls but love the woods, too.  I'm looking for the opinion someone who's skied the Bridge here, back east.  Thanks!

post #2 of 21
Thread Starter 

I meant Fischer Watea 84, at 184cm.  I imagine I'd try the Bridge at 187cm.

post #3 of 21

i alternate the Bridge and the Kendo as my everyday ski.  I should probably get rid of one of these pairs, but I just can't do it.  I like them both very much.  I have only skied the Kendo's twice, but have skied the Bridge's all last season as my everyday ski.  I skied 10 times last year.  I am 5'10" 175# and am on 170 and 171's respectively.  

post #4 of 21
Thread Starter 

Thanks.  Last year was tough.  It sounds like the Bridge worked on the man-made hard pack.  Is that true.  How was it in the bumps and off piste? What's your binding set up?

post #5 of 21

I own a pair of Volkl Bridges.  I can't say enough good things about the skis.  I am such a fan of the bridge.  They will catch you by surprise how good of a hard snow carver the ski is. I love how playful the ski, and I love how much pop or snap the ski has from turn to turn.  The ski will chatter at times on hard turns on hardpack due to the absence of metal and b/c its made to be playful.  The ski is still stable due to its carbon reinforcement.  Its good in the trees, bumps, and ungroomed due its rocker.  The rocker also allows you to turn quickly even though the ski is 95 mm underfoot.  Its a low profile rocker and not a dramatic one which works great for eastern skiing.  I also have to agree with thekid326 about the kendo.  My dad owns a pair, and he loves that ski.  Its very different than the bridge.  The kendo until this year was a completely camber ski.  It's quite the hard snow ripper, but stil wide enough underfoot to ski some ungroomed, crud, and chopped snow.  I hope this helps and good luck. 

post #6 of 21
Thread Starter 

Thanks, PA Skier.  My concern is moving from 84 to 95 in width.

post #7 of 21

I did not ski the Bridge in the east, but I'm an eastern skier.  I've been skiing eastern hard-snow carvers for a long time, and when I went to Utah, I ended up with the Bridge.  Great in fluff and shallow fresh-to-crud, and amazingly good on hardpack.  They wouldn't be a hard-snow ski of choice for me b/c of the lack of dampness PASkier mentions, but as for width, I never noticed significant difference -- even coming off 78mm carvers.

post #8 of 21
Thread Starter 

Cool.  Thanks.  I suppose I should consider getting a second ski for ice...

post #9 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by thekidd326 View Post

i alternate the Bridge and the Kendo as my everyday ski.  I should probably get rid of one of these pairs, but I just can't do it.  I like them both very much.  I have only skied the Kendo's twice, but have skied the Bridge's all last season as my everyday ski.  I skied 10 times last year.  I am 5'10" 175# and am on 170 and 171's respectively.  

 

Do you ski the rockered volkl bridge in a 171 at that height and weight?

 

Just seems a bit small for someone of your height/weight. It is personal preference, of course- but in terms of stability a 179 rockered ski seems to be what you'd look for at 175lbs.

 

obviously, this isn't the case if the bridge is not rockered

post #10 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAYbyrd33 View Post

 

Do you ski the rockered volkl bridge in a 171 at that height and weight?

 

Just seems a bit small for someone of your height/weight. It is personal preference, of course- but in terms of stability a 179 rockered ski seems to be what you'd look for at 175lbs.

 

obviously, this isn't the case if the bridge is not rockered

You didn't address this to me, but I skied the unrockered (2011) Bridge at 171 and I'm 175 with clothes.  I was fine with it, but add rocker and some desires for more of an all-mountain ski and I would have definitely gone up to 179.

post #11 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by tch View Post

You didn't address this to me, but I skied the unrockered (2011) Bridge at 171 and I'm 175 with clothes.  I was fine with it, but add rocker and some desires for more of an all-mountain ski and I would have definitely gone up to 179.

Yeah, that's what I would expect... I bought the rockered 179's without trying them because I had a good deal in front of me. I'd skiied the unrockered 171's and figured the 179's would be the length to go with for the newer model (and yes, I'm aware that it'll be a different ski).

 

Looking forward to getting out on them... Peobus, when I do ski them I'll come on here and let you know what I think.

post #12 of 21
Thread Starter 

Thanks!  I'd appreciate the feedback.  Now....where's my snow!?!

post #13 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAYbyrd33 View Post

 

Do you ski the rockered volkl bridge in a 171 at that height and weight?

 

Just seems a bit small for someone of your height/weight. It is personal preference, of course- but in terms of stability a 179 rockered ski seems to be what you'd look for at 175lbs.

 

obviously, this isn't the case if the bridge is not rockered

Yes I do and I probably should have up sized.  Not bad for bumps and trees, though.  The rocker is very subtle.  They call it ELP.  extended low profile rocker, i think is how it is marketed.  Very enjoyable IMO.

post #14 of 21

Jay, you are going to enjoy them.  Best of all, you got a good deal!

post #15 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by thekidd326 View Post

Jay, you are going to enjoy them.  Best of all, you got a good deal!

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thekidd326 View Post

Yes I do and I probably should have up sized.  Not bad for bumps and trees, though.  The rocker is very subtle.  They call it ELP.  extended low profile rocker, i think is how it is marketed.  Very enjoyable IMO.

 

 

Good to hear, man... I'm excited to get out on them! (hopefully sooner rather than later)

post #16 of 21

I ski the rockered Bridges in 179 and love em.  I ski Jay Peak 2-3 times a week and they are my only ski.  They do carve quite well for their shape and rocker but I'm starting to wish I had something like a Kendo or similar for this time of year when conditions are pretty "firm". 

Awesome skis that I'm suprised don't get alot of attention.  WAY more versitile then the Mantra for our terrain.

post #17 of 21
Thread Starter 

Been doing a bunch of research.  In addition to the Volkl Bridge, I've been looking at the Blizzard Bushwacker and Bonafides, and the Head Rock n Roll.  I like the reviews of the Bushwacker, as they're considered quick edge to edge helping them work in EC bumps and trees, but I fear a 180cm ski will be short for me a 200#s.  The Bona's edge hold might be better for EC groomers and I could get them in a length suited to my size.  I've also read good things about the Head RnR in terms of edge hold and quickness.

 

My only complaint about my Watea 84s is that they seem to get unstable at speed.  For me they're fine in the bumps, but could be wider in the woods.  I'd kind of like a twin-tip for switch landings which is why I started investigating the Volkl Bridge.

 

With two kids in college I will not ski out west any time soon, so any ski needs to be EC specific.  Anyone with experience back east on the aforementioned skis?

 

Thanks!

post #18 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by peobus View Post

Been doing a bunch of research.  In addition to the Volkl Bridge, I've been looking at the Blizzard Bushwacker and Bonafides, and the Head Rock n Roll.  I like the reviews of the Bushwacker, as they're considered quick edge to edge helping them work in EC bumps and trees, but I fear a 180cm ski will be short for me a 200#s.  The Bona's edge hold might be better for EC groomers and I could get them in a length suited to my size.  I've also read good things about the Head RnR in terms of edge hold and quickness.

 

My only complaint about my Watea 84s is that they seem to get unstable at speed.  For me they're fine in the bumps, but could be wider in the woods.  I'd kind of like a twin-tip for switch landings which is why I started investigating the Volkl Bridge.

 

With two kids in college I will not ski out west any time soon, so any ski needs to be EC specific.  Anyone with experience back east on the aforementioned skis?

 

Thanks!

Anybody compare Volkl Bridges to the Blizzard Bonefide and Bushwacker or the Head Rock n Roll?

post #19 of 21

I have the 2011 bridge, same ski as this years. It carves, it floats, it's quick and it's fun. Floats better than skis much larger and lays and edge on hard packed. I can't imagine a better all mountain ski.

 

Only complaint not a lot of ptex base so don't smash rocks.

post #20 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by peobus View Post

Anybody compare Volkl Bridges to the Blizzard Bonefide and Bushwacker or the Head Rock n Roll?

 

My go to ski is the Head Rock n Roll, used to ski on Head Monster 78  and much prefer the Rock n Roll on pretty well everything but ice.  I've demoed the Volkl Bridge and while snow conditions were fairly average at the time and I found I much preferred the precision and quickness of the Head vs the Volkl. Admittedly I only had a few runs on the Bridge mainly on groomed blue/black trails and the softening hardpack was probably not ideal conditions for it.

 

The Rock n Roll has very minimal rocker despite what the name might suggest but I still found it easier to initiate tight turns in crud than on the monsters. If your skiing will be more east coast than west coast as you mentioned I'd suggest the Rock n Roll could be a better option.

 

Additionally the Head ski can be found heavily marked down I suspect in no  small part to the graphics.

post #21 of 21
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mauricem View Post

 

My go to ski is the Head Rock n Roll, used to ski on Head Monster 78  and much prefer the Rock n Roll on pretty well everything but ice.  I've demoed the Volkl Bridge and while snow conditions were fairly average at the time and I found I much preferred the precision and quickness of the Head vs the Volkl. Admittedly I only had a few runs on the Bridge mainly on groomed blue/black trails and the softening hardpack was probably not ideal conditions for it.

 

The Rock n Roll has very minimal rocker despite what the name might suggest but I still found it easier to initiate tight turns in crud than on the monsters. If your skiing will be more east coast than west coast as you mentioned I'd suggest the Rock n Roll could be a better option.

 

Additionally the Head ski can be found heavily marked down I suspect in no  small part to the graphics.

Great advice.  I'm a school teacher now, so trips out west are no longer an option.  I'll be skiing here on the East Coast, Okemo, Stratton, etc.  I haven't skied a Head product since my old Standards.  

 

On the Rock n Roll graphics, you'd think there would be mark downs on last year's model, but I'm having trouble finding any.  I'll need the 187, so it'll be tough.  I've got a pair of Mojo 15 bindings all ready to go.

 

On the Motorhead discussion, I used work in the recording industry, have met and worked with Lemmy.  Great band and interesting fellow musician.

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 › Volkl Bridge on the East Coast