or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

new Atomic 9.16 slalom

post #1 of 8
Thread Starter 
Has anyone got any information on the new (2002-2003) Atomic slalom ski? The current 9.16 design is about 2 years old and the length and shape of skis in this category have been changing pretty rapidly. Will the new version still be '16'? (dimensions?) In what lengths will it be available? Lighter?

post #2 of 8
Don't know, but,

It probably won't be called "9.16" as the 16 defines the turning radius and any new design will be less than 16m. I would guess that atomic replaces the 9.16 with a stiffer 9.12. I heard that they were designing something like this for the public.

BetaRacer? do you know?
post #3 of 8
Thread Starter 
Okay, here is what I have been able to uncover so far regarding Atomic's new slalom skis (in New Hampshire):

"I skied both of next years slaloms yesterday and I liked the world cup ski much better than the replacement for the 9.12 which is called the SL 9 (111-65-96). The world cup ski is called the sl 11 (107-63-95). The skis are available for purchase now but we have to order them which takes a day or so. They look great and I'm not sure about length at this point. they are kind of greenish

Prices are:

Sl 11 list $895 Our price $649 comes in 150-157-164-171;

SL 9 list $695 Our price $529"

This was sent to me from: Jeff Proctor
post #4 of 8
Looks like it is only a bit shorter and deeper that the current 9.16. Here is a brand new 2002 9.16 at half the price. http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI...tem=1800763519
post #5 of 8
Hmmm looks like the 9.12 has less sidecut. Does that necessarily mean it has a larger turn radius?
post #6 of 8
Thread Starter 
As the moment of purchasing the new skis approaches, I will appreciate your thoughts, 'cause I'm afraid I may be barking up the wrong tree... I skied the Atomic 9.12s 6 or 7 days and didn't especially enjoy them, at least not as much as the 9.16s. The 9.16s handled speed and ice better and were smoother on frozen corduroy - a thrill and joy! I would have purchased the 9.16s in 170cm, but the new skis are out (the SL9 replacing the 9.12 and the SL11 replacing the 9.16). The problem is the length: the SL11 comes in 150, 157, 164, 171. Since I will use this ski for fast hardpack New England skiing, I don't want to go too short, but still want to stay in the realm of a slalom ski... At 6', 18o lbs would the 171cm model likely be too long? Would I be subverting the design of these skis? Thanks for the benefit of your experiences!
post #7 of 8
I am a little larger than you 6' 2" 185 and a would go for the 164 as long as you are not racing.
post #8 of 8
Thread Starter 
Thanks, Biker. I agree. Deep down I have known that it was time for me to abbandon slalom skis for my recreational skiing... I'm going to demo the 164, but GS skis at a shorter length (i.e. 174 or 175 cm) might be the best solution for me: serious hold on ice, stable at speed, and still able to pop off short fall line turns when desired.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews