or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Review: Atomic Crimson Ti
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review: Atomic Crimson Ti

post #1 of 31
Thread Starter 

Quick review of my new all-mountain skis. No one hardly talks about these on the forum, and they weren't on my radar too much either until I demoed them last year.

About me:

5ft9, 165 lbs, 43 yrs old.

Advanced skier, ski all terrain at Tahoe, with annual trip to Alta.

 

I demoed several of the skis in this range, 84-88mm, and there are a lot of great skis. I got the Crimson Ti (88mm) to be a versatile hard snow ski, to replace my old Monster 78s which had worn out. Seriously worn out, just couldn't hold an edge any  more. I demoed the Salomon Enduro 850, Rossi e88, Bushwacker, Kastle 83 and 88, Head Rev85, Fischer 88, Volkl Kendo SkiLogik Rave,. Didn't manage to get on the Nordicas or the Blizzard 8.5ti. I'd say I liked most of these skis except for the Fischer (blah) and Kendo (too planky).

 

I like a ski that has great edge hold and carving prowess, yet isn't too stiff, so I can bend it and work it in tight places. This width ski for me should provide great carving fun on hard groomers, be able to handle all types of bumps, and be ready for the surprise crud field. I found the mid 80's width to be an excellent compromise: still fun on the groomers, yet able to handle everything else. I have a bigger ski for powder days.

I wanted a ski in the 178 length that had all of these characteristics. I really loved the Salomon Enduro in the 170, but the 177 is too stiff. I also really enjoyed the Head 85 in a 170 on hard pack. I didn't get a chance to try the 177, but I think it would have felt long, and I was just not in the mood to get another set of Heads. The Kastle 88 was a bit too much ski in the 178 for my weight, and didn't produce a magical feeling for me when I tried it. I did get a pair for my wife though.

 

 I was demoing the Bushwacker in a 180 and having  a blast: fun on groomers, just great in the bumps on the hard, chalky snow that day. At the same time, this width ski should be a powerful carver that hooks up along the entire length of the ski and I was hesitant about the Bushwacker's unique feel. What else did the they have in a 85mm or so ski? Enter the Atomic. I had no expectations with this ski. First turns were on groomers: holy smokes, fantastic power and edge hold, with great rebound. This is fun. Ok, let's take them up to Headwall chair and hit Hogsback to try some bumps. Hmm, I'm flying along just as quickly as on the Bushwackers, interesting. Better go to go to the Attic on Granite and confirm they can handle really tight spaces. Again, no problem. So what do we have here? A ski that is as powerful a carver as I've tried, yet is nimble and quick.

So I decided to get the Crimsons, and I haven't been disappointed so far this season. They strike a nice balance. The "adaptive rocker" they employ seems to work well, and they have a fairly soft flex, with a lot of power underfoot. I felt they were more locked in on groomers than the Rossi e88 and Fisher 88's and right up there with the Heads and Salomon, yet again still have a nice nimbleness to them.

In fact, I like them a lot more than the other pair of skis I got for this season, the Blizzard Cochises. Comparing the two has helped me hone in on what I like in skis and how I want them to flex. While the blizzard performs great and isn't difficult to ski, it's too stiff for my tastes. I'm thinking of getting rid of them and finding a ski that flexes more like the Crimsons, or my old Gotamas, which I loved. It's about finding the balance between edge hold, stability, and a sensual flex that adapts to the terrain and provides that great feedback from the snow.

One note: I got my skis flat, but that's pretty much impossible to do as they now all come with the Salomon smarttrack binding. Flat, they have a light, almost airy feel. With the smarttrack, they feel heavier, and have more rebound energy in the tail. It's too bad you can't get it flat and put the binding of your choice on it. At least the Salomons are great bindings.

So if you're in the market for a ski in this range, I recommend giving the Crimsons a try, you might like them.

post #2 of 31

Great to see you demoed so many skis to begin with.   My friend who instructs at Sun Valley has many choices and chose the Crimson ti like you.

post #3 of 31

Have em..love em in everything except over 18" of new, then atomic automatics!

post #4 of 31
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskier View Post

Have em..love em in everything except over 18" of new, then atomic automatics!

Hey, how do they compare with the automatics? By that, I mean, as different as they are, do they have a similar feel and flex? I think they share a similar "step down sidewall" construction. I like that the crimsons are light and snappy, and still stable, and if the automatics check all those boxes, that could be a ski I'd love to try. Back to work...

post #5 of 31

Does anybody remember: what year did the Crimson get tip rocker?   I demo'ed it Xmas break 2010 and thought it was fine, although others I tried that week did better in crud.

post #6 of 31

The Atomic Ritual (103 at the waist) in 182cm is a fatter ski that to me had similar excitement, edge and flex feel to the Crimson Ti. These were my two favorite demo skis this year. I'm thinking of getting the Crimsons.  I got the Rituals, and, here in Colo., have found them fantastic in light to knee deep powder, chop, crud, crud-or chop-traced bumps (!!!), soft groomers--anything with a trace of newer snow in the past few days on or near them. I tried the Cochise, and preferred the Rituals all around, because, like you, I like the kind of edge feel the Atomics have. Man, are they great!

post #7 of 31

thanks for this review - we are similar is skiing preferences and I have demo'd' most of the same skis (with the same thoughts) so far this year and have not bought yet.  after reading your review I just reserved a pair of crimsons for this weekend to demo.  Thanks again! 

post #8 of 31
Thread Starter 
Seaotter, thanks for mentioning this about the rituals. I was worried they might be too stiff, but it sounds like they aren't. That's what I really like about the crimson, is its high level of performance but still a nice easy nimble feel. Same idea?. I'm thinking the 182 should be a good length as I like the 178 in the crimson. How short or long do they ski with the dual rocker?
post #9 of 31

The Rituals are not too stiff, have that fun, nimble turn on a dime feel, like the Crimsons. For me they'd complement the Crimsons, for snow days, no snow days respectively, even though both can be all mountain skis. 

 

I skied the Crimsons on demo bindings, I think, so to me they were slightly more stiff in some ways than the Rituals, especially in bumps. Once the powder and chop are gone, though, incl. on the bumps, I'd shift to the Crimsons. 

Both are dynamite on the frontside corduroy, but for that, to me, can't beat the Crimsons.

(At some point I may get some Kastle LX92s for bumps, etc.) 

 

This morning I just got a set of Crimsons in the mail, from Utah. Can't wait to try them out tomorrow!

post #10 of 31

I forgot, the Rituals at 182 don't feel longer than skis I have at 176, so maybe that's the rocker shortening them, not sure. Maybe that's part of why they are surprisingly so great in chop-and-powder bumps, for me. quick with edge & just enough rebound. 

Also, to clarify, the one drawback for me to the Crimsons is that they are fun in bumps because they rebound and edge so well, but they do feel slightly too stiff for me to ski bumps on them half a day, stiffer than the Rituals.

 

The Kastle LX92 was for me a better all mountain hardpack bump ski, though not as good out of the bumps. But in powder and chop bumps, the Rituals were surprisingly even better. 

post #11 of 31
Thread Starter 
Interesting ski otter, thanks. The smart track binding on the crimson does beef it up a bit. I got literally the last flat pair in the country that I could find, lightened it up a bit for sure. I find the crimsons to be great in the bumps, one of the main reasons I got them. I wish the ritual was a 106 or 108 mm to give a little more float versus my 88mm crimsons. I think the ritual really goes up against the 98 mm skis, but its right in between. Also intrigued by the new Rossi soul 7 coming out.
post #12 of 31
Thread Starter 
Goat, did you try them out?
post #13 of 31

squawbomber, your preferences were so similar to my own that I would be very interested in what skis if any you demo or choose to replace the Cochises. I wonder about the Automatics, but also the Soul 7/Super 7 as an additional ski for bigger snow days. Will probably demo at least those three this year, if the snow here in CO is good, just to see if wider would add variety or another dimension to powder days (besides my Rituals in 182). 

post #14 of 31
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski otter View Post
 

squawbomber, your preferences were so similar to my own that I would be very interested in what skis if any you demo or choose to replace the Cochises. I wonder about the Automatics, but also the Soul 7/Super 7 as an additional ski for bigger snow days. Will probably demo at least those three this year, if the snow here in CO is good, just to see if wider would add variety or another dimension to powder days (besides my Rituals in 182). 

Hi Otter,

 

well, was planning on demoing a bunch of stuff next week at Alta, but it looks like it's going to be a dry week, so i'll zipping around on the crimsons. oh well...

i'll let you know eventually, but with recent snow patterns here in Cali, could be a while. Ughh.

post #15 of 31

It's similar here in CO.

The national ski teams have been here on Rosi's Run at Copper Mountain, where I usually ski, and I've been having fun developing my waxing and edge beveling skills on my rock skis and Atomic Crimsons (edge bevel 3 degrees) with those racers as an inspiration. On the groomed conditions the racers prefer, the Crimsons hold their own with the gs skis, and almost with the super g skis (in soft Colorado packed conditions--wouldn't work, probably, on Eastern conditions). Very fast, very stable. Not powder, but still very fun. 

post #16 of 31
Thread Starter 

HI Otter,

 

Well, Utah came through pretty well. First two days were mediocre groomer skiing. So I demoed some racy skis. My favorites were the dynastar course ti. These are 72mm cheater racers, with sidecut between slalom and gs. What a blast! Very neutral feel, could relax and make long arcs or bend them and get lots of rebound. The Crimsons are pretty good on groomers but a ski like this is a whole other ballgame. Saved an otherwise lame day with crummy conditions. I tried some real slalom and gs race skis as well, but these were the most fun for me. I might get a pair.

And then...about a foot or more of powder fell. At first I was just taking it easy with my wife who is recovering from a health issue, then we went in and swapped skis. So I tried the Soul 7s and she got on the Savory 7s. I liked them. Very easy to ski, nothing weird about them. I could feel the light tips when I was bouncing through some powdery moguls and would flip the skis around. The 180 length was just right for me. I hit some harder runouts with some speed to check chatter: they're plenty stable. While solid, they do have a very light feel, almost dinky in some ways, but never bad. I'd consider getting  a pair. My problem is what happened next.

I went in to try the Super 7s. Didnt have them. So I said, give me those Rocker2s 122 in a 184. I had the time of my life on these 2 years ago and wanted to confirm if Istill liked them. Well shit... Here we go again. These completely transform me as a skier and the mountain. Now everything is hapennng in hyper speed. The float and quickness of these things is just unbelievable: I can just go full speed, yet dance like a cat and make any turn anytime. Quickest ski I've ever tried, even through bumps. So once again I have an incredible experience on these but still find myself scratching my head about them. My conclusion is no ski is too big these days, if the flex is right for you. They all work so well. So I wouldn't get the Soul 7 without trying the Supers first, as I hear they work great and are easy to ski as well.

For me, I think I now need a 4 ski quiver: Course Ti for true groomer days, Crimson for general days, Soul 7 for a little bit of powder and crud, and R2 for any real dumps. Hmm...

Take care and Happy Holidays!

post #17 of 31

wow. Thanks. Sounds like Utah was amazing. 

I ran into a couple hard-charging corduroy groomers at A basin earlier this year on, I believe, Sol Rocker2 115s. Those folks were both lighter weight, and they were really fast carving, not sliding, and raved about those skis.

So the Rocker2 122 and rocker2 115 gotta go to near the top of my list also to demo soon, Ullr permitting. I've heard the Rocker2 122 is pretty heavy weightwise, but sounds like that is a non-factor.

 

The Soul7 (106), by the way, if it's at all like my Rituals (103), is probably a super blast in up to a foot and a half of powder at least. I know they put the Ritual in with the 98mm all mt. skis, but it really doesn't fit that bunch, in my actual experience, because of it's design as well as waist. It's more like the Soul7, Head Rev 105 or Nordica Vagabond category, I would guess: designed for resort powder & carving both. 

 

But if I had a wider ski I liked (Super7 or Rocker2 122), sounds like I'd probably be switching skis at about a foot deep, with the option to switch out even earlier (or later), for variety. 

So thanks again for the great comments. 


Edited by ski otter - 12/23/13 at 3:32pm
post #18 of 31

By the way, does Atomic make a "cheater" type race ski similar to the Dynastar Course ti's? (I say this because I've liked Atomics so much over the years; and also, I sometimes ski with a young lady who is mostly on Atomic D2 gs racing skis, even recreationally; and I've been half-way considering getting a pair of Atomic women's gs old spec racing skis (r=23m), for about the same purpose as what you describe with the course ti's.)

post #19 of 31

That was one of my favorite skis when testing last year.  Made me want to become an Atomic dealer!  It has a hard to find mix of exciting groomer performance and butt-kicking ability in chunky, funky snow.   Bummer the guy across the street sells them.

Full selection of 2014 skis available right now from Dawgcatching.com.  PM for current deals and discount codes: save up to 25% on mid-season deals. 

Reply
post #20 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski otter View Post
 

By the way, does Atomic make a "cheater" type race ski similar to the Dynastar Course ti's? ... I've been half-way considering getting a pair of Atomic women's gs old spec racing skis (r=23m), for about the same purpose as what you describe with the course ti's.)

 

Not sure of your vital stats. I am 5' 7" 135lbs. Decent skier. I've tried the Course Ti and I've recently started skiing on a 23m GS ski (from sister company Rossi). Totally different beasts. The Dynastar is very versatile by comparison. It has a fairly wide range of speeds and turn shapes that it can accommodate gracefully (for a hard snow carver), and is even reasonably friendly in mild bumps. The GS ski is a lot of fun, but needs some real speed and elbow room to sing. Dial it back and you basically have a sullen teen who would rather be doing almost anything but slumming along in the moderation zone with you, dad.

post #21 of 31
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski otter View Post
 

wow. Thanks. Sounds like Utah was amazing. 

I ran into a couple hard-charging corduroy groomers at A basin earlier this year on, I believe, Sol Rocker2 115s. Those folks were both lighter weight, and they were really fast carving, not sliding, and raved about those skis.

So the Rocker2 122 and rocker2 115 gotta go to near the top of my list also to demo soon, Ullr permitting. I've heard the Rocker2 122 is pretty heavy weightwise, but sounds like that is a non-factor.

 

The Soul7 (106), by the way, if it's at all like my Rituals (103), is probably a super blast in up to a foot and a half of powder at least. I know they put the Ritual in with the 98mm all mt. skis, but it really doesn't fit that bunch, in my actual experience, because of it's design as well as waist. It's more like the Soul7, Head Rev 105 or Nordica Vagabond category, I would guess: designed for resort powder & carving both. 

 

But if I had a wider ski I liked (Super7 or Rocker2 122), sounds like I'd probably be switching skis at about a foot deep, with the option to switch out even earlier (or later), for variety. 

So thanks again for the great comments. 

well, soul 7 is a blast, but Rocker2 is a SUPER blast in any pow. They are extremely light btw, started the whole "honeycombed tip" thing. Just feels weird to grab a ski on such the extreme end of the spectrum, but every time I ski it is the best time of my life. Go figure!

Btw, for Atomic, I demoed the Redster GS ski. Very nice, turn radius in a 174 was 17m or so. very easy to ski, but I found the Dynastar more versatile and just as fun, but this just felt like a normal ski to me, while the race slalom skis I tried were too turny and too much work for my tastes.

post #22 of 31
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post
 

That was one of my favorite skis when testing last year.  Made me want to become an Atomic dealer!  It has a hard to find mix of exciting groomer performance and butt-kicking ability in chunky, funky snow.   Bummer the guy across the street sells them.

 

Cool Dawg! The course ti reminded me a bit of the Monster 78's I bought from you years back and had me questioning a bit the whole trend towards wider "everyday" skis. I love my Atomics but for true groomer zooming narrower is better, period. And no folks, your Bonafides don't perform just as well!

Peace and Merry Christmas.

post #23 of 31

I'm having a hard time moving on from the Crimson's big brother, the Savage, so I suspect the Crimson is great......and probably penalized in terms of attention/press/sales because the name and general idea has been around so long.  It is my Swiss Army Knife Ski for trips where any new snow is in the picture.  I can have fun on it in 8 inches of new first thing in the morning, and still be having fun when everything is kind of beat up at 3 PM, when I'm looking around at scenery as much as I'm skiing.

 

Squawbomber, you're right on the money about a pair of 72 mm cheater skis transforming otherwise potentially boring groomer days. I've got a pair of Blizzard Supersonics, and they are an absolute hoot!

 

But when I want to cover the most bases possible with one ski, and it doesn't look like a powder paradise weather pattern during a road trip, I always grab my Nordica Fire Arrow 80s.  Almost as good in 8 inches or less as the Savages, and almost as good on a pure groomer day as the Supersonics.  And they're ugly as sin, which just adds to the fun. 

post #24 of 31
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRPufnStf View Post
 

I'm having a hard time moving on from the Crimson's big brother, the Savage, so I suspect the Crimson is great......and probably penalized in terms of attention/press/sales because the name and general idea has been around so long.  It is my Swiss Army Knife Ski for trips where any new snow is in the picture.  I can have fun on it in 8 inches of new first thing in the morning, and still be having fun when everything is kind of beat up at 3 PM, when I'm looking around at scenery as much as I'm skiing.

 

Squawbomber, you're right on the money about a pair of 72 mm cheater skis transforming otherwise potentially boring groomer days. I've got a pair of Blizzard Supersonics, and they are an absolute hoot!

 

But when I want to cover the most bases possible with one ski, and it doesn't look like a powder paradise weather pattern during a road trip, I always grab my Nordica Fire Arrow 80s.  Almost as good in 8 inches or less as the Savages, and almost as good on a pure groomer day as the Supersonics.  And they're ugly as sin, which just adds to the fun. 

ha! i must say, my crimsons are about the ugliest skis ever, just laughable, looks like an Austrian on acid designed them back in the 80s!

post #25 of 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by squawbomber View Post

ha! i must say, my crimsons are about the ugliest skis ever, just laughable, looks like an Austrian on acid designed them back in the 80s!

I think the 2014 crimison looks descent~~
post #26 of 31
What does autonomic mean?
post #27 of 31
Automatics? Not sure what you mean? I am looking at buying this package in march, if I can find a rental shop that will sell them to me , do you know of any in the Salt Lake City area?
post #28 of 31
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski otter View Post
 

squawbomber, your preferences were so similar to my own that I would be very interested in what skis if any you demo or choose to replace the Cochises. I wonder about the Automatics, but also the Soul 7/Super 7 as an additional ski for bigger snow days. Will probably demo at least those three this year, if the snow here in CO is good, just to see if wider would add variety or another dimension to powder days (besides my Rituals in 182). 

Hi Otter, 

 

Don't know if you're still watching this thread or not, but I got to try out a bunch of skis and I can tell you my favorites. See my review: the Blizzard Gunsmoke. I tried the Soul 7, R2 108, Ritual, Automatic, Patron, Line SFB. Here's the deal: all of these skis, except the Gunsmoke, SFB and the Ritual, in my opinion, have a "weird" feel on regular snow anyway due to rocker/tip shape designs and so on. Briefly, the more I skied it, the more the Soul 7 bugged me. It "works" great, but feels like a short, carvy ski with a big powder tip attached to it (that's a bit of an exageration and will outrage many people, but you get the idea). ,It also has a tinny (or dinky) feel to it. The Patron was different, but similar in that it didn't feel like the various parts of the ski were in harmony with each other: it has a stiff, carvy mid-section, but the tips flap all over the place and aren't connected with the snow.

 

The Gunsmoke, while rockered and so on, just felt really good: minimal tip flap, whole ski engages in the turn, consistent flex, easy in bumps, I just loved it. At 114mm, I found it handled great everywhere, from nice groomers, to bump fields, quick turns in skied out trees. I was on the 186, and it wasn't too long for me, and I don't ski skis super long.

2nd favorite was the Line SFB. A lighter ski than the Gunsmoke, but, again, a nice easy feel, with consistent rocker and sidecut. Great energetic carver, believe it or not. The main thing that got me on this one was the extreme center mount: I felt the tails getting hung up in bumps and tight places, and looking down, the tip was REALLY short. And it gets bounced around a bit. I don't know how messing with the mount point would help or not, could be worth a try. Great ski, definitely worth trying. Maybe the Opus too. I didn't get to try the Blizzard Peacemaker unfortunately, but it's a fairly stiff ski. Still, should be awesome I would think, similar design to the Gunsmoke.

 

The Ritual and I didn't click: it was fine, but I didn't like the way the sidecut hooked up for some reason, it didn't really pull me across the hill, and I didn't find it floaty enough to be my wide ski. I could ski it, but with an 88mm already in the quiver, the 102 doesn't add much - it's really a 98mm type of "one ski quiver".

 

Ok, back to work. Peace and snow.

post #29 of 31

Yes, I've been hoping to hear more input on various skis, especially wide or powder ones. 

Your reactions to all these demoed skis are interesting and helpful, I appreciate your comments.  

 

I have been wanting to try the Gunsmoke, but haven't been able to yet. Both Dawgcatching and Philpug have owned the Gunsmoke 114, so I guessed it might be good.  It's slowly moved up my list to try, to third, behind the various Salomon wider ski combinations of Rocker2/Quest. Of these, I've only been able to try the Quest 105, which skied well in a foot of powder at Loveland, but felt a little blah on edge and sort of duplicated my Rituals (lacked enough float to be better, for instance). Now I'll give more attention to the Gunsmoke. 

 

My reaction to the Soul 7 was similar to your own. I enjoyed it in 180 and 188, especially 188, but found it lacked a decent-feeling edge, for me. I'd only like it in lotsa powder, and in that situation, I'd like a Super 7, Automatic or other ski more. 

 

I have been slowly demoing some of the fatter skis myself, with more difficulties than I found demoing the normal western all mountain skis that most ski shops tend to carry around Copper Mountain in CO. I've had to go farther away, thus losing the advantage of being able to ski multiple skis on the same rental day. I did luck out when a Mountaineering shop held a free demo day for their trekking skis (about half of which were alpine boot compatible), on a deep powder day (1' to 2').

So this year, I've demoed the DPS Wailer 112 RP, the Icelantic Keeper, the Rossignol Soul 7 in 180 and 188, the Squad 7, Super 7 in 180 and 188, and the Automatic in 179 and 186. 

 

 I liked most of these; but only got interested in the Super 7 in 180 and the Automatics in 186, for very different reasons: the Super 7 for its feel in real powder and the longer Automatic for its ability (for me) to make me better in powder/chop/crud bumps and similar uneven off piste slopes. 

 

The Gunsmoke, Rocker2/Quest in 115/122, and the Shiro are ones I'd like to try next, also the Line Influence 115 and the Line Sick Day 110 and 125.

But I bought a pair of 180 Super 7s for this year in the meantime, couldn't wait.  It's such an improvement in 8" plus powder over the Ritual, mainly, for me, offering greater stability at higher speeds in deeper snow, on steeper slopes. It even makes trees more enjoyable. 

 

Out of time, got to go. 


Edited by ski otter - 2/25/14 at 6:04pm
post #30 of 31

 I forgot to ask, which would you go for between the Gunsmoke and Rocker2 122 you tried earlier?  How do they compare? Seems like the Gunsmoke might be more versatile and the 122 more for pure powder. I've had a hard time finding the 122 to demo. 

 

And, I'd be interested in your reactions to the Automatic.

 

Also, the Super 7 probably has a similar "weird" carve to the Soul 7.  

 

I say "probably" because I only skied the Soul 7 in a longer length, for me, and on a day with 8 to 20" of new.  But still I could feel the "weird" edge.

The Super 7 I had a chance to ski on fresh corduroy (as well as a foot of fresh powder), and found I could hold a good "weird" edge for fast runs on the frontside; not as good, fast or fun on edge as my Crimsons or Rituals or other skis with great edge, but still pretty fast and dependable, no slip. And the "weird" edge sort of disappears up in the powder. 

The reason I got the new Super was it has a great feeling powder turn. 

 

For me the Auto carved very well as long as I didn't run it flat, kept carving. (Then it sometimes flapped out of its edge grip some, at speed.)  Pretty quickly I'd adjust to this. 

Demo days are brief, with conditions, demo shop tunes, terrain, etc. all affecting my impressions. I'm not sure why I didn't like the feel of the Auto in Powder compared to the Super 7, but I didn't. Both handled powder with stability at speed, for me.

And I'm not sure why the longer 186 version Auto skied so well (and carved so well!), for me, in varied condition bumps.

 

I thought shorter skis were better in bumps, but sometimes, especially with fatter skis and soft conditions, maybe, seems like longer can be more stable, better.  Dunno.

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 › Review: Atomic Crimson Ti