or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Playful East Coast Carving Ski for a Lightweight?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Playful East Coast Carving Ski for a Lightweight? - Page 2

post #31 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossi Smash View Post
 

What is the tune on your Rossi e83? Still factory?

 

Get a good .75/3 tune from someone who knows what they are doing and you'll be surprised. I weigh a lot more than you and they rail just fine on firm NE snowpack.

 

E83 is on factory at 1* base and 1* side i believe. Will a 1/3 work too? how much of a difference does that extra 1/4 make? sorry kinda new to this as you can tell...

post #32 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by jL19 View Post
 

 

E83 is on factory at 1* base and 1* side i believe. Will a 1/3 work too? how much of a difference does that extra 1/4 make? sorry kinda new to this as you can tell...

 

I doubt most people can tell the difference between a .75 base edge and a 1 degree base edge.  That's basically how far you have to tip the ski before the metal edge contacts the snow.  0.25 degrees isn't a whole lot.  The less base bevel you have, the less you have to tip to reach the snow and the quicker the skis will "hook up" at the top of a turn -- but that's assuming that you can cleanly initiate a turn on serious hardpack in the first place.

 

The difference between a 1 and 3 degree side edge is night and day.

post #33 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by jL19 View Post
 

 

E83 is on factory at 1* base and 1* side i believe. Will a 1/3 work too? how much of a difference does that extra 1/4 make? sorry kinda new to this as you can tell...

 

Yes, a 1/3 will make a tremendous difference on firm snow.

 

Be prepared to grin!  :D

post #34 of 45
Don't mean to hijack this thread but...

I picked up some Progressor 900's for a pretty good price this off-season. Now I'm certainly no expert but a solid advancing intermediate. I'm 6'2", 195 and got the Progressors in 175 which is shorter than what I'd normally ski but I figured with not much rocker the 175 would ski longer.

I'm done with the all-mountain skis right now and picked up the Progressor's as my dedicated front-side carver and some Bushwackers for bumps 'n trees and also casual groomer cruising. Have some Prohpet 98's that I skied last year for anything deep (east coast).

Am I going to be okay with the Progressor 900's or should have I went stiffer and sized up in length too? I'm really not looking to avoid chopped up and bumps at all-cost with these Progressors.

Thanks.
post #35 of 45

I have had quite a few days this season on the Head Rallys from the Supershape series, it is in the middle of the 4 ski series at an advertised 76mm underfoot. Be it the Magnum (71mm underfoot) or the Rally, I would suggest starting with either of these two skis, they are great finesse skis that react fantastic for a lighter skier. Read my  Long Term Test: 2014 Head Supershape Rally for some addition thoughts on this fantastic ski and on why it is a great value .. Philpug's 2014 Steals & Deals Winners 

post #36 of 45

I'd start with a .75 base and 3 side also.  Base bevel increases over time all on its own and you can always increase the base bevel if you don't like how it skis but it takes a fresh grind if you want it decreased.

 

I know women that have Fischer SC (cheater skis) that use them as their groomer ripper skis and love them.  They are a little stiffer than an All Mtn ski but if you ask anyone that skis them, usually they can't get past the grin on their face to even notice their SC's are stiffer.  I've had people tell me, after getting off a set of SC's, that its like driving a sports car and their All Mtn. skis are their daily driver. lol

post #37 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by hespeler View Post

Don't mean to hijack this thread but...

I picked up some Progressor 900's for a pretty good price this off-season. Now I'm certainly no expert but a solid advancing intermediate. I'm 6'2", 195 and got the Progressors in 175 which is shorter than what I'd normally ski but I figured with not much rocker the 175 would ski longer.

I'm done with the all-mountain skis right now and picked up the Progressor's as my dedicated front-side carver and some Bushwackers for bumps 'n trees and also casual groomer cruising. Have some Prohpet 98's that I skied last year for anything deep (east coast).

Am I going to be okay with the Progressor 900's or should have I went stiffer and sized up in length too? I'm really not looking to avoid chopped up and bumps at all-cost with these Progressors.

Thanks.

 

That is a good ski choice for your skiing level and 175 is sort of the average size for that class of ski. Dedicated frontside skis tend to be sized a bit shorter than more all-mountainish skis.

 

SJ

post #38 of 45

I have both a Progressor C1000 and an older Race SC in the quiver and have skied the Head Supershape and Magnum as well as the Rossi CX80 which is the predecessor to the Pursuit. 

 

I've always found the Fischers have much more "pop" coming out of turns than the Heads .. which are much more damp.  Not sure about the Pursuits, but the CX80 was more like the Heads than the Fischers. The Progressors have that blended radius sidecut, at 13m on the short end they're a bit tighter on the carve if you drive the tips .. a bit more slalom than GS .. but are also quite capable of longer arcs at speed.

 

The 900s have the 13-17m sidecut, while the 800s have 12-15m.  Consider the 800's if you are a short turn fan!  At your weight either one would be fine.  

 

I'm 5'10" and 180 and ski 'em at either 170 or 175.  You could drop down a length and look at the 165 or 170.  Longer will give you a bit more stability at speed.

post #39 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldEasternSkier View Post
 

I have both a Progressor C1000 and an older Race SC in the quiver and have skied the Head Supershape and Magnum as well as the Rossi CX80 which is the predecessor to the Pursuit. 

 

I've always found the Fischers have much more "pop" coming out of turns than the Heads .. which are much more damp.  Not sure about the Pursuits, but the CX80 was more like the Heads than the Fischers. The Progressors have that blended radius sidecut, at 13m on the short end they're a bit tighter on the carve if you drive the tips .. a bit more slalom than GS .. but are also quite capable of longer arcs at speed.

 

The 900s have the 13-17m sidecut, while the 800s have 12-15m.  Consider the 800's if you are a short turn fan!  At your weight either one would be fine.  

 

I'm 5'10" and 180 and ski 'em at either 170 or 175.  You could drop down a length and look at the 165 or 170.  Longer will give you a bit more stability at speed.

 Hey thanks OldEasternSkier and everyone who has contributed to this discussion. I've settled on the P900s in 165cm. They we're at a great price too. Thanks again!

BTW was it not the Avenger series that preceded the Pursuit?

post #40 of 45

Did you happen to get them on theclymb? I saw they had a deal for less than 500 w/bindings but they were all sold out by the time I looked. (a couple hours tops)

post #41 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by jL19 View Post
 

Hi Epicski!

I'm looking for a short turning, playful, lively, carving ski with great edge hold and stability at speed. I'd say I'm a solid advanced skier. I ski all around the northeast, Gore, WF, Stowe, Stratton, Jiminy etc and i'll ski any trail. I'm in NJ, so I also frequent local areas around here and in the poconos. Hardpack and icy conditions are ever-present so the ski needs to have east-coast-worthy edge hold. 

 

I currently ski the Rossignol E83 and Volkl Kendo. The E83 is a great, turny, playful, carving ski but on the hardpack, the grip just goes. The Kendo has all the grip in the world, but trying to do short, snappy turns with it is physically impossible for me (i weigh 130lbs). So is there a ski oriented around frontside carving with lots of liveliness like the E83 but with Kendo-esque edge hold and stability at speed? (I have the kendo because I'm also a speed hound/mountain charger, and I've paid the physical price (injury) for it)

 

I've been looking at the Rossignol Pursuit 16 and Fischer Progressor 900. Please if you can guide me in the right direction, I greatly appreciate the help.

 

Thanks again!

 

 

Hi,

I haven't skied the P16, heard good things though.  The P900 is a very nice ski; stay away from Fischer's that have 2 sheets of metal at .8mm thick, they are stout. The 2 sheets of metal at .5mm thick (the P900) is a good flex for you.  It is one of my favorite carvers.

 

Also, the Head Rally! Softer than the P900, more energy, lacking in the top end of the P900, but likely better at slower speeds, due to softer flex.  More of an everyman's ski I think, but a good skier will get more out of the P900, it has more to offer at the top end.

 

What else?  Kastle MX78 if you can swing the cost.  168cm will blow you away; it has the biggest performance envelope of any ski I have seen.  Intermediates have purchased it and loved it, and it will satisfy the most hard-charging expert.  

 

The new Blizzard S800 may be worth a look, but might be a stretch, as it is quite a stiff ski.  

 

Stockli CX is another incredible ski!  Pricey, but crazy energy and fun! 

post #42 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

 

 

Also, the Head Rally! Softer than the P900, more energy, lacking in the top end of the P900, but likely better at slower speeds, due to softer flex.  More of an everyman's ski I think, but a good skier will get more out of the P900, it has more to offer at the top end.

 

 

 

Bit of a poach on....

 

Dawg would you replace my 2008 170 isupershape (non kers) with the rally, isupershape speed or another model?

 

Thoughts?

post #43 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by jL19 View Post
 

BTW was it not the Avenger series that preceded the Pursuit?

 

Very well could have been ... It's been a few years since I did a rental/demo of the CX80 and didn't like 'em enough to warrant following Rossi's frontside line.

 

Although I'm not a fan of Fischer's all-mountain stix and think the Watea line-up is getting long in the tooth, Fischer's frontside carvers have always been my favorites.  The 900's will make a nice complement to your quiver .. particularly when the "Eastern Hardpack" is bright and shiny :)

post #44 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by hrstrat57 View Post
 

 

Bit of a poach on....

 

Dawg would you replace my 2008 170 isupershape (non kers) with the rally, isupershape speed or another model?

 

Thoughts?

 

Good questions. The Rally is the obvious choice flex-wise, very similar.  The Titan for me skis a touch stiffer. The Speed is more of a GS race carver: the most specific of the group, and also the best on firm snow at speed. The Rally/Titan are more out of the groomer/frontside mold of the old Magnum.  If it were me, as a groomer ripper, I would get the Speed in a 170; longer TR, but as good as any full-on carver I can think of.  I had one of these in 180cm and it was impossible to outrun. 

post #45 of 45

Hello,  I recently purchase a pair of Ski Logik Front Burners, 178cm. I am 5'11", 180lbs, aggressive intermediate / advanced skier. Before I mount bindings; any input on these skis as a competent East Coast "one quiver ski"??? I would prefer to purchase otherwise and sell these if there is a superior set up. Also; any input on bindings? Marker Griffon? I also purchased a pair of Salomon CS Pro Falcons boots. Thanks in advance. Scott

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 › Playful East Coast Carving Ski for a Lightweight?