or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › doesn't anyone make a SL type of bump ski?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

doesn't anyone make a SL type of bump ski?

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
OK, so I'm 44 and still like to bang troughs. Although I only get out maybe 10 times a year, I can still get it done (as far as I know). I'm about 6' and 185lbs, and have been skiing for 30+ years. My current equipment consists of Nordica NR980s and a K2 slalom ski - 8.3's (sidecut) in 200's. All are about 10 or 11 years old (I think).

I ski mostly in Vermont (Killington is my favorite but Stowe, Mad River and Stratton are great too). I ski about 1/2 the day in the moguls with other runs consisting of pretty fast cruising (where pretty fast is a relative term used by a guy who has to go to work tomorrow). I never had problems turning my skis quick enough, and Killington's Outer Limits and Devils Fiddle work great for me.

I've only just tried "shaped" skis, trying 178cm Skicross 10's, 184 Bandit X's and 176cm Rossi B1's (this was at Stratton's First Run Ski Shop). The Dynastars were the best, hands down - but the B1's seemed to turn as well in the moguls.

I have considered getting 170cm Atomic SL 9.12's and use them for all mountain, I've also looked at the Beta Ride and Beta Carve (both 11's) and the Volkl 5 Star's. At the end of the day, I'm confused. I want a ski that I can ski fast with, but that can be equally adept when I want to make short, slashing quick turns in the fall line. All of this talk of back woods, off-piste, etc., is foreign to me...I live to have my knes hit my chin, stop and rest, then do it again. Going fast is secondary and just fills time until the lifts close.

I should aso say that in the old days I skied a mogul-only ski (Head Yahoo's, Yahoo II's, Olin Mark IV's, etc) but they sucked on ice and slalom skis seemed to turn as quick, were way stiffer and held the scratchy stuff way better.

This probably will open a can of worms, but: recommendations, please?

post #2 of 12
I know just the ski for you. Well, it will be a choice among a few models some current and some older.

Rossignol 9S Deviator
Rossignol T-Power Viper S
Rossignol T-Power Viper S Twin Deck

All of those skis have the same shape 103-65-93. The first two are older models and the last one is this season's model that i am guessing is virtually the same ski as the predecessors. I owned the Viper S in a 160 the first season it came out. It is still the best ski that i have ever had in the bumps. All of those skis will have exceptional edgehold - not as great as some other slalom skis that are available these days, but deffinitly above average.

You will be able to rip those skis all over the hill. Enjoy them, deffinitly try to demo them to see what length you like the best. I'd go with the 160 or 167.


post #3 of 12
That Dynastar is great. And Hulluva named the other excellent ones. If you care what Peter Keelty has to say, here is his review of the Viper S:

"This is our favorite Rossi carving ski. The first widely distributed recreational slalom, the Viper S is a true classic in the 4S vein. Great edge hold, smooth, powerful, quick, light, great rebound energy; the Viper is a great hard snow arc-meister and a perfect tool for carving skills."
post #4 of 12
I used to ski mostly bumps and all mtn with 201cm Rossi 9S (slalom race). I now ski the same terrain with 157cm slalom race. With the wide tips, I have changed my style in the bumps, but this has made it even more fun and easier on my back (I am age 42, 170 lbs and growing). The wide shovels make the ski versatile for off road and fast medium radius on the groomers.

Slaloms will get a bit longer so I recommend 164 to 170 range. Don't be tempted to go longer thinking it will be more versatile. Determine if you really want a slalom (eg 9S) or a Viper / 9.12 type of ski. If you prefered the old race skis, you may prefer the new ones too. Note about demo: It may take a few days to transition from 200cm to 165cm. Don't expect to "dial in" with a couple of demo runs. Good luck!
post #5 of 12
I bump on 167 cm rossi 9s. The 2002 model. Makes every kind of bump turn you could possibly want, although it took some time playing around to get used to it.
post #6 of 12
Test drive the Head iSL. I ski bumps and groomed, always fast. I am the same size and age as you and have 170cm iSl. Maybe not quite as quick as other SLs but not twitching either. Will do any shape turn including ripping GS and still rock in the bumps. Ideal for the fast go anywhere skier.
post #7 of 12
Originally posted by HeluvaSkier:
I know just the ski for you. Well, it will be a choice among a few models some current and some older.

Rossignol 9S Deviator
I ride these in a race-stock 160cm, and I'm really impressed with people that ski them in the bumps... I can't do it. They don't want to skid, so scrubbing off speed is really tough, and squaring the ski to the bumps is really hard. With theirn stiffness, if you can't slide them square fast enough your shins take a beating.

I find myself carving through the first few bumps and then carrying way too much speed... Bumps are much much easier on my Ultrawave MFs... roughly equivalent to the older Bandit XX.

I would think something longer, straighter and softer than a slalom will keep you happy in the bumps, and still rip on groomed... Bandit X or RPM 17, X-scream Series, Skicross 9/10, etc...
post #8 of 12
you can probably get by in the bumps on an SL ski but if you're a zipperline skier, as it seems you are, you may not enjoy them very much. why not just get a newschool bump ski? many of the newer designs feature *some* sidecut, which makes these skis more versatile out of the bumps.

i ski the salomon 1080 moguls as my everyday ski...bumps, powder, steeps, trees, terrain park, etc. no, they're not like carving skis on the groomers but i get by.
post #9 of 12
Thread Starter 
Thanks to all for the input...too many choices, so little time to try 'em all out!

I guess I'm warming to the idea of skiing a Skicross 9/10 type ski as I did have a good experience with the 10's in bumps (they were 178s).

I just asked this question in the "ski equipment" forum - but is the new (2002/2003) 10 just a new graphic version of the 01/02 SkiCross 66? The side cuts match as do the ski description.

The 66's are really cheap right now (new)...making this a more attractive idea to me.

Thanks again
post #10 of 12
I had some confusion also about getting a ski that would handle bumps among other applications. I own the Skicross 66 in a 192. This was the first ski I bought in almost a decade away from skiing. Being a 192cm ski, it WAS NOT the ski for what I wanted to use it for. Great for mach 10 groomers, but not in tight places. I joined TSFS and emailed PK with a few questions. The following is what he replied with (I highly reccomend joining his site...it helped me narrow down my choices)

"192 is REALLY long for a shaped ski. To put it into perspective, World
athletes are using 185's for GS and slalom skis as short as 152
(although a
new reg goes into effect next year limiting slaloms to 165 or longer).

Compounding the quickness problem, those are "cross" skis, which are
slightly wider GAS footprints (large turn radius) with a lot of beef.
were designed for the rigors of skier cross competition, in which 6
guys at
a time charge down a frozen course which is kind of a blend og GS
hummocks, jumps and troughs. You can see it at the X games...

In other words, those are pretty beefy skis for bumps and tree skiing.
the length, and they are among the most difficult of skis to navigate
tight spaces."

Anyhow, PK gave me several reccomendations on skis...FYI, I ended up buying a pair of 183 K2 Enemies which for me have been an awsome ski in the bumps, crud, and hold well enough for me on the groomers (I don't like groomers much). I'm 5-10 215 and like to spend most of the time in the moguls...I figure my time at 36 is getting limited. Thought you might want a little background on the 66's...money well spent subscribing to his site.
post #11 of 12
there always seems to be K2 mamba and power mambas on ebay for around $150. the text of the ad says something like "this is a bump ski, not an all mountain ski-you'll be disappointed outside of the bumps"
post #12 of 12
Thread Starter 
Thanks guys...still waiting to pull the trigger on something. The more I think of it, the more I want a bump ski first, a grommer later.

192 Skicross!! I guess they're Mach 10's! Reminds me of my college buddies 210cm Atomic something-or-others, which we affectionately called the "red-sleds". They were fast as all get out but boy was he lost in moguls!
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 › doesn't anyone make a SL type of bump ski?