or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Advice on 98mm Waist Options... Or Others.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Advice on 98mm Waist Options... Or Others.

post #1 of 39
Thread Starter 

First time poster.  I apologize in advance for the wall of text.  I just want to make sure I pass along enough information.  

I'm getting back into skiing after a number of years off.  Looking at getting new skis or at least narrowing down my options for demos.

 

Where in the world are you skiing? 

   West coast.  Mainly Tahoe.

 

What kinds of terrain do you prefer (groomed runs, moguls, race course, park'n'pipe, trees, steeps, backcountry/sidecountry)

   Mostly groomed and steeps but looking for something that will not cause me fits in moguls and tight trees.  Like to venture off more into the soft stuff, but to be honest, most of the time I don't get much access to it.  Most of what I do find is pretty cut up by the time I get there, but I want something that will handle crud, with enough float if I'm lucky enough to find virgin pow.        

 

How many days a year do you ski?

   Probably about 10 right now.  Looking to get up more though.  Call it 10-20.

 

How advanced are you as a skier?

   Advanced/Expert.  7/8 I'd guess.  Skied a lot in my teens/20's but just picked it up again this year after a significant layoff.  It came back much faster than I expected but still room for improvement.  On groomers and steeps I tend to be pretty agressive/fast.  45-50 mph cruising GS turns, but like to be able to mix it up with tighter SL turns as well.  I can ski bumps but not very well.  I'd like a ski forgiving enough to allow me to get better.

 

What's your height and weight? 

   6'0" no shoes.  175lbs full gear.

 

What I'm looking for:

   An all-mountain, do everything in all conditions ski.  Not asking too much am I?  Realistically right now, I'm probably 90% groomers, 10% everything else, but I want to work toward 50% groomed, 50% everything else.  I'd like to spend more time in soft stuff, but if I'm realistic, I probably won't see that even 10% of the time.  I'm thinking a 98mm waist is probably the best balance between front and back side but I've never skied anything wider than an 84.  Nervous about going wider than 98 and not sure that there's much benefit anyway.

 

Ski's I've tried this year:

   K2 Rictor - 174:  Demoed this ski for 3 days at the end of 2012 at Whistler.  Generally good conditions.  Some icy spots on top but mostly groomed.  Soft stuff was pretty tracked up and <12".  Fun, quick ski on the groomers.  Felt sloppy at speed.  Edge hold on hard stuff wan't fantastic, but that could have been a tuning issue.  Bumps were a disaster.  Didn't float well but I didn't expect it to.  

   Volkl RTM 84 - 176:  Demoed this for 3 days at the end of January at Northstar.  Generally hard conditions.  No new snow for at least a couple of weeks prior.  This ski RAILED on the groomers.  No speed limit whatsoever.  Edge grip was phenomenal.  Bumps were again a disaster but I really didn't expect this ski to do that.  Nothing really soft to be had.

 

Research I've done: (since the RTM 84 demo)

   98mm Waist

   Blizzard Bonafide - 180:  A lot of hype.  Sounds like a fantastic ski for groomers, crud and pow.  Concerned about being able to work it in the bumps and trees.

   Blizzard Kabookie - 180:  Bone w/o the metal.  The softer flex compared to Bones appeals to me as a lighter skier.  Should be more responsive in bumps and trees.  Concerned about railing groomers and edge hold on steeps.

  Line Prophet 98 - 179:  Understand this skis short.  Concerned that the 179 will be too turny for the groomers and doesn't handle crud at speed.  Expect it to be good for bumps and trees and hold up well on groomers.  However, at this length, speed could be an issue.

  Line Prophet 98 - 186:  I believer that for me, this will be a better length for this ski.  Should hold up at speed.  Still forgiving enough for bumps and trees.  Would like to know how the flex on this compares to the Kabookie.  Concerned about how it will handle crud, but the metal should help.  At least if I'm not straightlining it.

  Armada TST - 183:  At 102 waist starting to get a little wide.  Like the radius and flex.  Concerned again about cop at speed.  Not sure about how it will hold at speed on groomers.

  Rossi E98 - 180:  Worried that this is just too much ski for me.  Sounds like a solid technical ski that will allow you to do pretty much anything.  I just don't think my technique is good enough yet.

  Volkl Manta - 177:  Stiff!!!!  Long radius.  I don't think I want to work that hard.

 

  Sub 98mm (88-95)

      These are some other options, but I'm concerned about taking them into the soft stuff if I get the chance.

      Nordica Steadfast - 178

      Salomon Rocker 2 90 - 177

      Elan Amphobio 88XTi - 178

      Rossignol E88 - 178

      Volkl Bridge - 179

      Line Prophet 90 - 179

      Blizzard Bushwhacker - 180

 

Net - Net

   I've pretty much narrowed down my selection to P98 or Kabookie.  I guess my main question is what is the difference in flex between the two?  Bottom line is that I need to demo both (good luck to me on finding a Kabookie to demo).  Any other reccomendations?

post #2 of 39

Welcome to EpicSki.  I think you should add the Nordica Hell & Back to your list of possibilities, as well as the Nordica Soul Rider.  Neither ski has metal which makes them light.  The Soul Rider is a twin tip but their flex characteristics are similar.  I ski the Nordica Steadfast, narrower version of the H&B and it is a great ski.  I chose the Steadfast over the Prophet 90 and Bushwacker because I thought it was lighter and quicker than either of those.

post #3 of 39
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the reccomendations.  You seem to be a Nordica apostle.  :)

 

After tweaking on some numbers, it looks like both the Hell & Back in a 177 and the Soul Rider in the 185 could be viable options.  Any experience on the Kabookie or possibly the Armada TST?

post #4 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickO661 View Post

Thanks for the reccomendations.  You seem to be a Nordica apostle.  :)

 

They make some great skis, but I think they've been overshadowed by the Blizzard bulls.


Edited by mtcyclist - 3/15/13 at 9:57am
post #5 of 39

Nordies are great skis. I've heard good things about the Soul Rider in particular from folks who don't even own Nordies. 

post #6 of 39

If you really want to be 50/50 on terrain two skis I would look at and I really like are the DPS 99 and the La Spotive Lo5..  But both are soft snow skis that will carve on groomed runs and better used 70/30 or 60/40 imo.  You can ski either pretty long and really have fun with them though.

post #7 of 39

I'm 52, 175, 6-1 and I have a very similar story to yours except that I started to ski again 12 years ago after a long hiatus but then stopped again until last season (about 10 years off). I demo'd and then bought P98s in 179cm this season. I guess I ski 60 groomed/40 ungroomed. The P98 doesn't ski short for me. I like to throw in short, quick turns at will and it does that great. The 179cm handles speed well in long turns for me, too. I guess I could ski the 186cm if I wanted to just go straight at speed more. I'm with you on the Mantra, I skied it in 177cm and it was a beast--too much work for me. I haven't skied the Kabookie, so I can't compare to the P98 for you. I mostly ski at Mammoth, if that matters.

post #8 of 39

I have the RTM 84, I think its pretty decent in the bumps, although I don't spend all day in them.   Try the Kendo? 

post #9 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdiddy View Post

I have the RTM 84, I think its pretty decent in the bumps,

 

I demoed the RTM 84 a few weeks ago and took into the bumps and I thought it was fine.  The rocker makes it pretty easy to steer in the bumps.

post #10 of 39
Thread Starter 

That's unfortunate because it means the disaster is my skiing ability.  lol

post #11 of 39
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the input.  The DPS 999 looks like a real contender.  While the numbers seem to define it as a bit on the skinnier side for a ski of this waist, the rocker seems to make up for it in the soft.  I'd probably look more toward the hybrid rather than the pure since from the reviews I've read, it seems just a bit more forgiving.  As for La Sportiva, this is the first time I've ever heard of them.  It looks like both the 999 Hybrid and the Lo5 are both wood/carbon/fiberglass construction, but I'm not at all familiar with the company or their products. So, it looks like I need to do more research.

post #12 of 39

Both are boutique skis IMO and well worth searching out any of the reviews on them.

 

In soft groomed conditons the Lo5 will rip right along with any of them.  There is also a new Lo5 called the Mega Lo5 which is a more in area ski of the same flavor.

 

Out of the area?  Or on soft snow, chopped or just junk.  Both are exceptional I think.  Even with lwt BC boots and tech bindings  

 

But I wouldn't want either for ripping around at 40+mph. 

post #13 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcyclist View Post

 

I demoed the RTM 84 a few weeks ago and took into the bumps and I thought it was fine.  The rocker makes it pretty easy to steer in the bumps.

+1.  I demo'd the RTM 84 last week and thought that it was fine in the bumps and decent off piste.  And I agree that it rails the groomers.

 

Not sure I understand the question in this thread.  Why wouldn't you just buy the RTM 84s?  You demo'd them and loved them in the terrain that you ski 90% of the time.  Even if you get to your aspiration of 50/50, you'd still have a ski that is optimized for what you are doing more than 50% of the time and is actually pretty compliant in the bumps and off piste - especially for a ski that is so solid and damp on the groomed.  And if you really want help in the bumps, going to something 98 underfoot is probably not going to help in most cases - and you'll generally get less performance on the groomers than you experienced with the RTM 84s.

 

On paper, the P98 or the Kabookie makes some sense for a Tahoe all-arounder.  But from your self-description, it sounds like a more front side oriented ski, with off piste capability fits your reality better than the reverse.

 

If you really want something with some width that will be better in the bumps, you want to focus on a ski with a more forgiving flex pattern - you would sacrifice some groomer performance however.  A couple of suggestions that I've liked: the Ski (the white one 175) is an amazing bump ski at 90 under foot - a complete hoot to ride - and if this ski doesn't improve your bump skiing, nothing sort of a dedicated bump ski will; the Nordica Soul Rider, a bit wider at 97, is also a blast in bumps, natural features and anything else you want to spring off.  And both of those are surprisingly solid on edge and reasonably stable at speed.  But nothing close to the caddy-like feel of the RTM 84.

 

Based on what you said, I think that you found your ski in the  RTM 84.  I didn't expect to be that impressed, but I was - for a ski without camber, it has surprising energy out of the turn and it doesn't wash out at all when you push it.  And it is reasonably compliant off piste and offers a decent platform to land off rollers, bumps and the like.  I have no idea how or why it works, but Volkl seems to have this shape dialed. 

 

My over-riding impression of the RTM 84 is that it was like a Lexus - smooth, stable, refined, high performing, high quality, but really easy to drive.  I get why some folks around here have criticized the lack of camber for a ski like this, and in the category I personally liked better the excitement factor of the Nordica Fire Arrow 84 ETD, but I don't think that is a problem if you buy into the shape and Volkl's approach here.  The RTM 84 is a good ski, a worthy choice for many skiers.  Not that it matters, but I liked it, enjoyed skiing on it, and would gladly ski it again.  My immediate reaction was that the RTM 84 is the perfect ski for the advanced (or formerly advanced) skier who might either be dialing it back a bit, or is only getting in a week or two at a western resort - but once there will likely ski groomers fast and will expect and need performance and stability without huge technical demands.  Mostly hitting up the groomers at high speed, but venturing around a bit off the track.  A week in Sun Valley here, a week in Vail there. A little family skiing, a couple of hours opening it up while the kids are in lessons.  But it also struck me as a ski with a solid top end - the more I pushed it the more fun it was to ride.  It felt like a ski that should appeal - and has - to a broad range of skiers.  Does any of that sound kind of familiar?

 

If you are really convinced that you want a ~98, I'd ride a few and reach your own conclusions.  You'll probably like some of them, and a ~98 might open up more terrain for you over time, but it is a different tool than the two skis you demo'd this year - a different feel with different strengths and compromises.  The P98 is probably a good middle of the road choice and a solid baseline for comparison.

 

Good luck and welcome back.

post #14 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewyM View Post

+1.  I demo'd the RTM 84 last week and thought that it was fine in the bumps and decent off piste.  And I agree that it rails the groomers.

 

Not sure I understand the question in this thread.  Why wouldn't you just buy the RTM 84s?  You demo'd them and loved them in the terrain that you ski 90% of the time.  Even if you get to your aspiration of 50/50, you'd still have a ski that is optimized for what you are doing more than 50% of the time and is actually pretty compliant in the bumps and off piste - especially for a ski that is so solid and damp on the groomed.  And if you really want help in the bumps, going to something 98 underfoot is probably not going to help in most cases - and you'll generally get less performance on the groomers than you experienced with the RTM 84s.

 

On paper, the P98 or the Kabookie makes some sense for a Tahoe all-arounder.  But from your self-description, it sounds like a more front side oriented ski, with off piste capability fits your reality better than the reverse.

 

If you really want something with some width that will be better in the bumps, you want to focus on a ski with a more forgiving flex pattern - you would sacrifice some groomer performance however.  A couple of suggestions that I've liked: the Ski (the white one 175) is an amazing bump ski at 90 under foot - a complete hoot to ride - and if this ski doesn't improve your bump skiing, nothing sort of a dedicated bump ski will; the Nordica Soul Rider, a bit wider at 97, is also a blast in bumps, natural features and anything else you want to spring off.  And both of those are surprisingly solid on edge and reasonably stable at speed.  But nothing close to the caddy-like feel of the RTM 84.

 

Based on what you said, I think that you found your ski in the  RTM 84.  I didn't expect to be that impressed, but I was - for a ski without camber, it has surprising energy out of the turn and it doesn't wash out at all when you push it.  And it is reasonably compliant off piste and offers a decent platform to land off rollers, bumps and the like.  I have no idea how or why it works, but Volkl seems to have this shape dialed. 

 

My over-riding impression of the RTM 84 is that it was like a Lexus - smooth, stable, refined, high performing, high quality, but really easy to drive.  I get why some folks around here have criticized the lack of camber for a ski like this, and in the category I personally liked better the excitement factor of the Nordica Fire Arrow 84 ETD, but I don't think that is a problem if you buy into the shape and Volkl's approach here.  The RTM 84 is a good ski, a worthy choice for many skiers.  Not that it matters, but I liked it, enjoyed skiing on it, and would gladly ski it again.  My immediate reaction was that the RTM 84 is the perfect ski for the advanced (or formerly advanced) skier who might either be dialing it back a bit, or is only getting in a week or two at a western resort - but once there will likely ski groomers fast and will expect and need performance and stability without huge technical demands.  Mostly hitting up the groomers at high speed, but venturing around a bit off the track.  A week in Sun Valley here, a week in Vail there. A little family skiing, a couple of hours opening it up while the kids are in lessons.  But it also struck me as a ski with a solid top end - the more I pushed it the more fun it was to ride.  It felt like a ski that should appeal - and has - to a broad range of skiers.  Does any of that sound kind of familiar?

 

If you are really convinced that you want a ~98, I'd ride a few and reach your own conclusions.  You'll probably like some of them, and a ~98 might open up more terrain for you over time, but it is a different tool than the two skis you demo'd this year - a different feel with different strengths and compromises.  The P98 is probably a good middle of the road choice and a solid baseline for comparison.

 

Good luck and welcome back.

It's also for the people who just had a blast skiing it and then got a screaming deal on it!  :) 

post #15 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewyM View Post

+1.  I demo'd the RTM 84 last week and thought that it was fine in the bumps and decent off piste.  And I agree that it rails the groomers.

 

Not sure I understand the question in this thread.  Why wouldn't you just buy the RTM 84s?  You demo'd them and loved them in the terrain that you ski 90% of the time.  Even if you get to your aspiration of 50/50, you'd still have a ski that is optimized for what you are doing more than 50% of the time and is actually pretty compliant in the bumps and off piste - especially for a ski that is so solid and damp on the groomed.  And if you really want help in the bumps, going to something 98 underfoot is probably not going to help in most cases - and you'll generally get less performance on the groomers than you experienced with the RTM 84s.

 

On paper, the P98 or the Kabookie makes some sense for a Tahoe all-arounder.  But from your self-description, it sounds like a more front side oriented ski, with off piste capability fits your reality better than the reverse.

 

If you really want something with some width that will be better in the bumps, you want to focus on a ski with a more forgiving flex pattern - you would sacrifice some groomer performance however.  A couple of suggestions that I've liked: the Ski (the white one 175) is an amazing bump ski at 90 under foot - a complete hoot to ride - and if this ski doesn't improve your bump skiing, nothing sort of a dedicated bump ski will; the Nordica Soul Rider, a bit wider at 97, is also a blast in bumps, natural features and anything else you want to spring off.  And both of those are surprisingly solid on edge and reasonably stable at speed.  But nothing close to the caddy-like feel of the RTM 84.

 

Based on what you said, I think that you found your ski in the  RTM 84.  I didn't expect to be that impressed, but I was - for a ski without camber, it has surprising energy out of the turn and it doesn't wash out at all when you push it.  And it is reasonably compliant off piste and offers a decent platform to land off rollers, bumps and the like.  I have no idea how or why it works, but Volkl seems to have this shape dialed. 

 

My over-riding impression of the RTM 84 is that it was like a Lexus - smooth, stable, refined, high performing, high quality, but really easy to drive.  I get why some folks around here have criticized the lack of camber for a ski like this, and in the category I personally liked better the excitement factor of the Nordica Fire Arrow 84 ETD, but I don't think that is a problem if you buy into the shape and Volkl's approach here.  The RTM 84 is a good ski, a worthy choice for many skiers.  Not that it matters, but I liked it, enjoyed skiing on it, and would gladly ski it again.  My immediate reaction was that the RTM 84 is the perfect ski for the advanced (or formerly advanced) skier who might either be dialing it back a bit, or is only getting in a week or two at a western resort - but once there will likely ski groomers fast and will expect and need performance and stability without huge technical demands.  Mostly hitting up the groomers at high speed, but venturing around a bit off the track.  A week in Sun Valley here, a week in Vail there. A little family skiing, a couple of hours opening it up while the kids are in lessons.  But it also struck me as a ski with a solid top end - the more I pushed it the more fun it was to ride.  It felt like a ski that should appeal - and has - to a broad range of skiers.  Does any of that sound kind of familiar?

 

If you are really convinced that you want a ~98, I'd ride a few and reach your own conclusions.  You'll probably like some of them, and a ~98 might open up more terrain for you over time, but it is a different tool than the two skis you demo'd this year - a different feel with different strengths and compromises.  The P98 is probably a good middle of the road choice and a solid baseline for comparison.

 

Good luck and welcome back.

Great comments!  Thanks.  I haven't ruled out the RTM 84, I would just like to compare it to something wider since I haven't ever skied on anything with that profile.  P98's are definitely one of the top contenders, probably in a 186.  As are the 177 Hell and Back, 185 Soul Rider, 180 Kabookie and the 192 TST.  While I have mostly skied frontside as I've been getting back into it, I'm looking for something that will be able to handle conditions as I venture more and more off-piste.

post #16 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickO661 View Post

Great comments!  Thanks.  I haven't ruled out the RTM 84, I would just like to compare it to something wider since I haven't ever skied on anything with that profile.  P98's are definitely one of the top contenders, probably in a 186.  As are the 177 Hell and Back, 185 Soul Rider, 180 Kabookie and the 192 TST.  While I have mostly skied frontside as I've been getting back into it, I'm looking for something that will be able to handle conditions as I venture more and more off-piste.

Glad that was helpful.  One other bit of advice - I think that some of your assumptions re appropriate ski length merit "testing."  We are basically the same size (I am 5'11", 185), so my experience might be relevant here.  At 6', 175# you are kind of on the edge between the biggest size and the next click down in most of the all mountain skis.  But your self description, mostly groomers, not so strong in tight spaces (bumps being the tell) doesn't suggest that sizing up is the right answer.

 

You rode the RTM 84 in 176 and that was right - which I would have expected.  At roughly the same size, I liked it at that length also.  And you are considering the Kabookie in 180 - again probably the right length, I love the Bonafide in 180 - and wouldn't want it short or longer.  The Hell in 177 is apples to apples.

 

In the P98 the analog length is 179; in the Soul Rider the analog length is 177.  Unless it is based on actual demo experience, I don't understand the assumption to size either of those up - especially given your self-description and concerns about bumps.

 

Like any ski with some rocker, the P98 skis a bit short - but not massively shorter than the Blizzard or the Volkl.  Same thing with the SR.  People love to say "blah, blah. . . x skis short. . . "  But that only matters if it performs poorly at that length, relative to your size, relative to your style.

 

As for the Lines, I don't think that the Prophet series (or the Influence series for that matter) needs to be sized up.  At roughly your size, with more of an off piste bias, I was perfectly happy on a P100 at 179 for a number of years and the Influence 105 was great at 179.  The Eric Pollard skis, on the other hand (Bacon, Opus, and the new Sick Days) ski really short and light.  Totally different story.  And that's not just my opinion, I spent some time talking with the Line guys at a demo day last weekend - that is their perspective as well (more in the context of "size up from your size in the Prophet/Influence for the Sick Days).  Also, the assumption that the P98 is some soft flexing noodle is way off.  It is a nice even flexing ski - and it is more compliant, on a relative basis, than skis that get discussed here a lot (Mantra, E98, Bonafide).  But the P98 is still a ski with metal and sidewall under foot.  It maybe falls more middle of the road, but it isn't a super-duper softie.  Part of the story is that it is a well-considered shape - the whole package - that just skis really well for a lot of people.  It will be plenty of ski at 179 - and very likely too much ski at 186 (especially given your concerns about the bumps).  Demo and decide, but I wouldn't just assume you need to size this one up.  Based on what you have said, I'd bet that you'd like 179 better (if you were riding it all mountain and being honest with yourself).  If the rationale for sizing to 186 is more stability on groomers or more float in powder, you are picking the wrong ski for either.  If you go with a ~98 you are just sacrificing some groomer performance at the margin for off piste/all around capability (but not full-on powder ski float).  How much sacrifice?  Everyone needs to judge that for him/herself.

 

Similarly, I don't think that you need a 185 in the Soul Rider.  Based on my demo experience, I think that is a false assumption.  I rode the 177 and it was perfectly stable for me - and really fun.  It isn't supposed to be a groomer zoomer, but part of why it was cool is that it was surprisingly solid for a snappy, playful, quick 177 length ski.  Sizing up for groomer stability would seem to defeat the purpose of a really fun ski.  A buddy of mine who is our size rides the 177 - he is a great skier and kills it on that length.  Fwiw, I think that 185 is the length for bigger guys - or the guys doing the reviews at Blistergear who take it backwards off 20 footers.

 

And the TST in 192?  Unless it is your dedicated powder ski, based on what you've said about your style and needs, that seems nuts.

 

There is a lot of information out there - some of it good - but be careful how you apply it.  And consider your sources and the context for that information - myself included.  I've only jumped into this thread, because (a) I've been on most of the skis in question and (b) you seemed to be on the right track with your demo days - but are now heading down a path that at least to me seems optimized more toward an idealized ski routine than your reality (and doing so on what appears to be on a basis derived more from what you've read than what you've actually experienced).  You could buy a 186 in the P98 and would probably ski it fine on the groomers - but it won't likely be as much fun as the 179 would be most of the time and it certainly won't make you a better bump skier.  And if the point is groomer stability - you should get the RTM 84 at the length you enjoyed, and give them a shot in some softer conditions and bumps.  Based on what you've said, I think that there is a good chance you'll like the Volkl best of all.  But demo and decide and let us know where you land.

 

Have fun.

post #17 of 39
Thread Starter 

Well, LewyM, you pretty much hit the nail on the head.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LewyM View Post

...If the rationale for sizing to 186 is more stability on groomers or more float in powder, you are picking the wrong ski for either.  If you go with a ~98 you are just sacrificing some groomer performance at the margin for off piste/all around capability (but not full-on powder ski float).  How much sacrifice?  Everyone needs to judge that for him/herself.

 

I keep bouncing back and forth on the length decision, but my rationale for going longer was pretty much as you suggested.  At the longer lengths I would get more surface area for powder performance.  In addition, the longer lengths give me a longer radius radius for cruising.  But as you also said, how much do I sacrifice for that?  Longer length and radius can only hurt performance in the bumps and trees.  Only a demo of both would truly tell.

 

Similarly, I don't think that you need a 185 in the Soul Rider.  Based on my demo experience, I think that is a false assumption.  I rode the 177 and it was perfectly stable for me - and really fun.  It isn't supposed to be a groomer zoomer, but part of why it was cool is that it was surprisingly solid for a snappy, playful, quick 177 length ski.  Sizing up for groomer stability would seem to defeat the purpose of a really fun ski.  A buddy of mine who is our size rides the 177 - he is a great skier and kills it on that length.  Fwiw, I think that 185 is the length for bigger guys - or the guys doing the reviews at Blistergear who take it backwards off 20 footers.

 

I get what you're saying here; going longer kind of defeats the purpose of the ski, but with a radius of 16.5 at 177, I was concerned it might feel too turny.  My gut tells me the Hell and Back is more my style anyway, but I'll keep this in the list for comparison purposes.

 

And the TST in 192?  Unless it is your dedicated powder ski, based on what you've said about your style and needs, that seems nuts.

 

Ya.  This was kind of an afterthought this morning after reading a couple of reviews.  The more I look at it, the more "nuts" seems appropriate.

 

.. but are now heading down a path that at least to me seems optimized more toward an idealized ski routine than your reality 

 

Optimized toward an idealized ski routine?  Probably.  Groomers, bumps and trees will always be available.  Finding the soft stuff, not so much, but when it's available, I want to have a ski that was built to handle it.  It's unfortunate I never got the chance to try the RTM 84 in anything soft but I'm not dead yet so that's still a possibility.

 

(and doing so on what appears to be on a basis derived more from what you've read than what you've actually experienced). 

 

Absolutley.  Research, data and subjective reviews are all I have to develop my demo list.  Experience will be the final deciding factor though.

 

After reading through this and thinking through my responses, the idea of removing length as a variable (at least on my first pass) is probably a really good idea.  If the demo on a certain model doesn't feel right at that length, I can try something longer, but at least it would make it more of an apples to apples comparison.

 

Thank you again for the thoughtful input.

post #18 of 39

If you liked the RTM but wanted something a little more versatile i would definitely demo the Kendo. It absolutely rails on groomers and for me was better in bumps and crud than the RTM. The RTM may be a little more accessible than the Kendo, but i feel the Kendo is a better ski and can generally be had for less $$$ than the RTM. At your height/ weight the 177 would be ideal. I would definitely add that to your demo list. Also if you willing to part with the $$$ I would also look towards the kastle mx/ fx line as well as the stockli 95 or 100 if you can find them for demo, I have not personally been on any of those but people seem to rave about them.

post #19 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastcoastdad View Post

If you liked the RTM but wanted something a little more versatile i would definitely demo the Kendo. It absolutely rails on groomers and for me was better in bumps and crud than the RTM. The RTM may be a little more accessible than the Kendo, but i feel the Kendo is a better ski and can generally be had for less $$$ than the RTM. At your height/ weight the 177 would be ideal. I would definitely add that to your demo list. Also if you willing to part with the $$$ I would also look towards the kastle mx/ fx line as well as the stockli 95 or 100 if you can find them for demo, I have not personally been on any of those but people seem to rave about them.

I got the RTM 84 with bindings and poles for $300 :)    score!   They are demos, but the bases are excellent.  

post #20 of 39

If you're still looking: Rossi e98 is your ski.

 

Profile-wise I'm your doppelganger.  Here's why you need to try it (you'll buy it):

 

No other ski on that list handles 25+mph sweepers better than the e98.  It isn't hard to turn slow or break away into shorter turns AT ALL, but put it on edge and it rails.  Plus, it's damp - which is a HUGE positive when dealing with west coast cut up mank and day-old junk AND when you're railing down a groomer.  I have not skied a better spring/corn/crud/junk ski.  Confidence on a damp ski with great edge grip skyrockets all over the mountain.

 

So unless you're living on hard snow (where ironically it is rated highest for 98mm skis) or spending all your time in tight chutes there isn't a better all-mountain ski for a GS-turner who needs a one-ski quiver.  It works *everywhere*.

 

Let me repeat: it is not a terribly stiff thing that requires brute strength or perfect technique.  I'm a fast, lazy, 6'1"/185lb, 42yo with solid fundamental skills from years on mountain in my 20s, but who only skis 10-12 days a year now and it's a perfect ski for me.  The only addition to my quiver would be a dedicated pow ski (I'd add the Rossi Soul or Super 7 for that), but I've skied the e98 in everything from dust on crust to 30" of heavy sierra fresh and it just blasts right over and through.  It's a perfect CA/OR/WA ski.

post #21 of 39

Rick, you're kind of a candidate for the Head REV 85 pro or Blizzard Brahma. IMHO of course.

post #22 of 39

Makakio,

 

Did you mount your E98s on the recommended line, or behind?  I'm almost the same size as you (inch taller, 5lbs heavier) and have to get mine mounted. I've heard some people say on the line is fine, some say -1cm.  Any story to share on your situation?

post #23 of 39

Gunner... if you're skiing the 180, which it sounds like you should be, the recommended mount is fine. It's not something to overthink.

post #24 of 39

Yep, 180.  Am totally used to pressuring tips anyways, so recommended is probably the best bet.  Thanks!

post #25 of 39

Based on your criteria, out of everything you listed my hands down first choice would be the Prophet 98 in a 186 and my second choice would be the TST in a 183.  I really think the Prophet 98 is best in class but I think it gets ignored/overlooked because it and the Prophet series has been around for so long.

 

I might get tarred and feathered for saying this but I was thoroughly underwhelmed by all Blizzard skis and all of the Rossi Experience models.  Over rated.   Wouldn't ski them even if they were free.

 

Skis that you didn't list but think you should consider would include the Line Sick Day 95 in a 179, Rossi Sin 7 in a 188 (feels more 180'ish), and the Nordica Hell & Back in a 177.

post #26 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by rug wheelie View Post
 

Based on your criteria, out of everything you listed my hands down first choice would be the Prophet 98 in a 186 and my second choice would be the TST in a 183.  I really think the Prophet 98 is best in class but I think it gets ignored/overlooked because it and the Prophet series has been around for so long.

 

I might get tarred and feathered for saying this but I was thoroughly underwhelmed by all Blizzard skis and all of the Rossi Experience models.  Over rated.   Wouldn't ski them even if they were free.

 

Skis that you didn't list but think you should consider would include the Line Sick Day 95 in a 179, Rossi Sin 7 in a 188 (feels more 180'ish), and the Nordica Hell & Back in a 177.

 

Everything that you and the OP seem to like suggests a softer, non-metal laminent ski ( the Prophet being a nice exception) and I agree with your suggestions. The E-98 wouldn't be on my list for the OP at all even if it's one of my  personal favorite 98's. We always have to remember to take our own preferences out of the equation when the questions asked tell us pretty clearly that they're not looking for the same thing. :)

post #27 of 39

The OP was looking for recommendations, suggestions, and opinions based on some detailed criteria so I gave him my recommendations, suggestions, and opinion.  He already seems to be keen on demoing which is my favorite bit of advice to dish so I didn't mention it.   FYI - Rossi is redesigning the Experience series for 14-15.

post #28 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by rug wheelie View Post
 

The OP was looking for recommendations, suggestions, and opinions based on some detailed criteria so I gave him my recommendations, suggestions, and opinion.  He already seems to be keen on demoing which is my favorite bit of advice to dish so I didn't mention it.   FYI - Rossi is redesigning the Experience series for 14-15.

 

I think we're agreeing 120%. Someone above was suggesting the E-98.. I was using your post to confirm that it wouldn't be a good choice given what he's said he wants. Apologies if that was confusing. Interesting about the redesign for the E's... do tell. (sorry for the potential  highjack!)

post #29 of 39

Hearing primarily construction.  Lighter and snappier but still torsionally stiff.  That's all I got.  No beta if the shape is changing.  My guess is they are going to do to the E Series what they did to the S series and don't interpret that literally while you ponder the awesome possibilities.

post #30 of 39

Hopefully we'll have some to play with by February.

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 › Advice on 98mm Waist Options... Or Others.