or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

" the Quiver "

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 

My Son overtook my MX 88s ,

SOOO   here is what I noticed about them compared to My Atomic Smoke Tis ..

   I am a moderate intermediate skier ,   The Atomic edge on Snoqualmie concrete ten times better than the MX 88s , I am not sure what people mean by ,, MX 88s edge one hard pack /ice  , My son test drove the Atomics and told me ...." this is what these Atomics are made for , I was on MY/ Now His MX 88s , I thought they Were terrible on hard pack / ice , so we traded back , He made slippy carves and I on the Atomics carved , these  two skis really don't do much the same , The atomics get wobbly if I go straight down a blue, steep blue Border line black , I have to turn and be in some sort of a carve on the Atomics , The MX 88s ....  I can go straight and they stay stable till I chicken out and turn to slow down a little .. Then I have some B94 Rossi , They are great  for mixed crud soft snow and dry powder . but they submarine and wipe me out in the Crystal mount ,spring wet powder , Soo  The meaning of the question ... I saw some guys up there wih some BIG powder planks . Like 104 mm waist [they said]   But that really isn't that much bigger than my Rossi 94 mm waist ,so Back to the meaning of the question ,       Do you think The B94s are inferior to these wide planks I see these guys on >  Or  Inferior by a WHOLE lot , Or a little inferior ,

   ,   Snoqualmie Washington hardly justifies more than a hard pack ski ,or a Middle ski like the B94 . Snoqualmie gets skied down pretty quick , Powder doesn't last long , I ski crystal 8 times a year maybe ,My issue ,, I don't care what they try to say about the Atomic smoke with the rocker tip ,, they DO NOT ski powder , I know I need more skis , More fishing rods and on and on , But Really , Do I need much more than a B94 for ? 

post #2 of 10

Having never tried the MX88, but reading so many rave reviews, I am guessing the edges need a sharpening or possibly the skis need a tune.  For myself, I find my hard pack skis need the edges refreshed every 20 days tops.

Having never rode the B94, I know the waist is certainly wide enough for boot deep powder (for my skilz) but for deeper snow, I like a ski that is 115+ under foot with much more tip rocker.  Next time your out in powder, demo some powder skis to see the difference.

post #3 of 10
MX88... Sounds like a tune issue.

Wider skis... 94 is plenty for typical summit west/central/east conditions.

That said, between the summit and Crystal, you have many demo opportunities... Sturtevant's for the summit/Alpental or Crystal, and Greenwater skis and Martin's shop up at or on the way to Crystal, so you don't really have any excuse not to try something to find out if it might work better for you. Demo fees can usually always be applied to a purchase.

You also might look into taking a Wed or Sat. clinic at Crystal... $100 for 4 hours w/video. It's a great deal and you'll have great instruction in a small group with line cutting privileges. Think about it for next season.
post #4 of 10

Well, at the risk of being undiplomatic, doubt it's "the tune." Rather, two issues. First, MX88's may not be ideal for an intermediate skier. They're often said to be forgiving, and I suppose they are relative to some high end competitors. But IME, they don't like their driver's weight back, and they are nothing special at low edge angles or while skidding the tails. While some skis like the Smoke are, in the sense that their design assumes their driver will have low angles or his/her weight may not be over the front of the ski. It's all about the target user and the target terrain. The Smoke is for beginning to intermediate skiers, and it'll feel super easy and responsive to that audience. 


The other issue is waist width. A narrower waisted ski like the Smoke will be easier to move from edge to edge, and the narrower distance between boot center and edge will concentrate more force more efficiently, rather like a high heel being capable of denting linoleum. So the MX88 has superb grip for a 88 mm ski, but may seem fairly pedestrian compared to a 77, especially Atomic, which prides itself on grip. Point being, the MX88 is not aimed at carving up ice, it's aimed at handling softer or variable snow, at higher speeds than the Smoke is optimized for. 

As far as the B94's, owned a pair once upon a time. Nice ski, somewhat outdated design, pretty narrow by today's standards. If you want to handle NW powder, I'd suggest something with early rise or rocker, at least 105 mm wide. A lot of great candidates out there.


But mostly, would strongly suggest putting the MX88's somewhere dry and cool for a season, take a bunch of lessons, and try them again in a year. You'll be amazed at how much better they've gotten...

post #5 of 10

Beyond is right on the money with the 'indian' part of the equation. Mark, I'm not a band wagon guy, but for a wider ski, you might want to try the Rossi Soul 7 assuming you're not 220lbs+ 

post #6 of 10
Originally Posted by markojp View Post

MX88... You also might look into taking a Wed or Sat. clinic at Crystal... $100 for 4 hours w/video. It's a great deal and you'll have great instruction in a small group with line cutting privileges.

I forgot about this. I need to try it next season.
post #7 of 10

Another factor that may be relevant is that the Atomics come with a system binding that puts the boot quite a bit above the ski compared to a flat mounted MX88, which would make them easier to edge on hard snow.  An 88mm waist is starting to get to the width where edging takes a little more tipping to carve and the identical knee movement on the flat mount would not produce the same result as with boot raised close to a cm.

post #8 of 10
Thread Starter 

Yep I take lessons  ,  Am getting better and understand edge angle , Weight forward etc .   Thanks for the honest eval ,' Last lesson I was in the back seat ,  I think I will have to keep taking lessons, Which seems to help quite a bit , I have turned the MX 88s up on edge ,They don't react anything like the Atomics on hard pack , I am a Intermediate , but I think the diff between the two is like night and day ,

The ski clinic sounds pretty good , I think I will have to do that next year , I also Go to the Alpine club , the instructors also help ,

post #9 of 10
post #10 of 10

I ski Alpental on a weekly basis during the  winter and generally switch to Crystal as the snow  gets wet.  This spring has been amazing.  My recent daily drivers have been a 190cm DPS 112 or 177cm Dynafit Huascaran.   But I think I have switched over to a 192cm DPS 112 RPC.  Got them a month or so ago and been very pleased in the last big storm cycle of the winter.


I was thinking about this today.  I've never really thought of a ski as playful until just recently.  I have a good size quiver. (6 current production skis) And I get to test/demo/own a lot more skis every season.


Those three pair of ski listed I would call playful.  And I now want playful...plus everything else a ski should do.

Those skis are out there now.


I'd add the Rossi Soul 7s to that list as well.   I'll own a pair soon enough.  


I have some very nice 100mm and under skis.  None of the "playful" in my book and none of them a daily driver for our area's conditions at this point.  112mm and 115mm seem to be a sweet spot for me. (6'1" and 190# and casually, aggressive old school skier)   Many of my ski partners are parcial to the 100+/-mm skis.  Much to my own surprise the 112/115mm skis have opened up an entirely different mountain (mountains) for me.  And to be honest I wasn't expecting much.


The 177cm Huascaran was an impulse purchase that literally turned on the light to what a mid wide/rockered ski could do.   Enough so I bought 3 seasons passes for next year!  No chit..seriously if you want to enjoy what we do have more..get a wider than 10omm ski under foot with some decent rocker F/B and a round tail.  For our skiing (and I've skied a lot else where) bigger is better here.  May be every where, short of ice.


likely a 167cm Huascaran being skied here...


photo courtesy of http://www.coaststeepskier.com/wphome/

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion