or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Atomic 10.EX - I think I am in love...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Atomic 10.EX - I think I am in love...

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
Ski Make: Atomic
Ski Model: 10.EX
Ski Length: 184
Snow Conditions Used In: Hard pack, some loose man-made snow
Number of Days Used: 2
Your Ability: 7 (ski schools usually put me in 8)
How Many Years Have You Been Skiing: 3
Avg. Days per Year Skiing: 20
Other Skis You Like:
Your Height/Weight: 6/200
Comments:

What else is new - another raving review on 10.EX. I picked up this ski as a second pair to my 3 year old Bandit X pirmarily for off-piste skiing out West or on occasional powder day in the East. Having spend two days on them this w/e at SugarLoaf - see report in Meeting forum, I see no reason to go back to Bandits other than late season rock skiing. On the steep (nothings like out West, but top part of the Loaf is actully fairly steep), high speed turns on groomers, even on some bumps these skis were a blast. I even played with some 360s excersises that Pierre eh! described a little while ago - got to love that raised tail.

I can hardly wait to use them in a proper setting. Now, how do I convince my wife that a trip out to Utah in March is something that should be in our family's budget.
post #2 of 10
Eug,
It sounds like the 10EX's were a blast.
Any opinions of length for a 150-160lb guy?
There are some in some shops up in NH...of various lengths.... IMO, were the 184s *JUST* right for you...or do you think YOU could have gone longer?
post #3 of 10
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by eug:
...I even played with some 360s excersises that Pierre eh! described a little while ago - got to love that raised tail...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've now seen two people comment on the ample tail turn-up of 10ex's, but I must own a mutant pair because the tail turn-up on mine is the smallest of any ski I have ever owned - annoyingly small.

What's the story? I bought my pair of last-year's 184's early in the fall - did they change the tail turn-up this season or what?

Tom / PM
post #4 of 10
Thread Starter 
PM:
I do not own "real" twin tip so I can't compare. 10Ex's is probably not turned up as much as others but certainly more than the tail on my 3 year old Bandits. It was enough for me to attempt skiing backwards and do a few "donuts".

HSWK:
I am 6' so I went for 184 model, that is the formula that I used. For me I would not go longer, there is no need - with 84 mm under foot there should be enough float and high speed stability is not an issue. But I did get through a couple of bump runs very nicely, so I am happy with the length that I picked.
post #5 of 10
Another 10.EX believer.

One of few times the SKIING Buying Guide issue was spot on - #1 in Long Turns/Stability, Short Turns, Powder, & Crud. I knew something must be right when it topped all 4 rankings.

I went with the 191 after the usual 184 / 191 mental debate. I'm 6'2, 185lbs and a level 8/9 skier. I haven't regretted the 191 purchase although I probably would have been happy with the 184 too. My prior ski was a 195 X-Scream Series; the new 10.EX's still feel "shorter" than those.

You may want to consider getting the Atomic bindings. The Variozone feature lets you slide the bindings over the ski length by a range of 20 mm (?). I can "shorten" my 191's for tight spots by simply sliding the bindings forward a notch.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ March 05, 2002 06:19 PM: Message edited 1 time, by bigharvey ]</font>
post #6 of 10
bought a pair of pocket rockets this year, but feel that at 6"5 and 195 the 185cm are a little on the short side when speed is high and the going gets tought....so my eyes are on apair of 198 10ex.....
love the rockets in very light pow in BC, but as soon as the turf gets a little heavy, I feel I need to lean backward not to do front flips...any tips or comments?
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bigharvey:
Another 10.EX believer.

One of few times the SKIING Buying Guide issue was spot on - #1 in Long Turns/Stability, Short Turns, Powder, & Crud. I knew something must be right when it topped all 4 rankings.

I went with the 191 after the usual 184 / 191 mental debate. I'm 6'2, 185lbs and a level 8/9 skier. I haven't regretted the 191 purchase although I probably would have been happy with the 184 too. My prior ski was a 195 X-Scream Series; the new 10.EX's still feel "shorter" than those.

You may want to consider getting the Atomic bindings. The Variozone feature lets you slide the bindings over the ski length by a range of 20 mm (?). I can "shorten" my 191's for tight spots by simply sliding the bindings forward a notch.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
post #7 of 10
I might be reluctant to go 198. 191 seems plenty long for me. Going longer for deep snow situations begs an entirely different debate...Should you get a pure powder ski (i.e. 106 mm waist like the Powder Ride, etc.)?

For my skiing (resort skiing with heavy emphasis on bowls, chutes, etc.), the 10.EX-type ski is great and I don't wish for anything longer than 191.
post #8 of 10
So big Harvey...you are saying the 10EX in 191 is the all mauntain ski for me....
have not really tried the Salomons anywhere else than off the groomers....so I will give them a shot if I can find a rental here in Europe...


<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bigharvey:
I might be reluctant to go 198. 191 seems plenty long for me. Going longer for deep snow situations begs an entirely different debate...Should you get a pure powder ski (i.e. 106 mm waist like the Powder Ride, etc.)?

For my skiing (resort skiing with heavy emphasis on bowls, chutes, etc.), the 10.EX-type ski is great and I don't wish for anything longer than 191.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
post #9 of 10
Thread Starter 
Try both 191 and 198 and see which one you like best. I personally would stay with shorter length everything else being equal. Why drag around more ski than I need to. I am 6" and 184 is plenty for me, but you could be skiing bigger than I do. I you ski trees and tight runs a lot go shorter if you spend most of your time in wide open bowls go longer.
post #10 of 10
thanks for your input guys...
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by eug:
Try both 191 and 198 and see which one you like best. I personally would stay with shorter length everything else being equal. Why drag around more ski than I need to. I am 6" and 184 is plenty for me, but you could be skiing bigger than I do. I you ski trees and tight runs a lot go shorter if you spend most of your time in wide open bowls go longer.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
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 › Atomic 10.EX - I think I am in love...