New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

mid-fat question

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 
I've read many of the reviews on this site and they're very helpful. I'll keep this brief...
I'm looking for something shorter and chubbier than my original 184cm BanditX. I'm 34yo, 150lbs, 5'11", live in Ontario but ski 80% of my dozen runs a year in the west. I'd consider myself advanced and will ski anything, but am no racer. However, something of a cheat-ski may be in order to have more fun in crud and heavy powder, but still be used as my everyday ski.
I skied 178 G4s in deep pow last year and liked them (solid/fast), but they may be too much ski (not so manoeverable in the tight stuff).
Question: Since finding mid-fat demos are tough around here, would 168cm G4s or R:ex sound like a reasonable fit? (I may be able to get last year's models). Would the drop in 10cm make a significant difference in the ski experience. I'd also consider something closer to a 75mm waist like the 724 Pro.

Any input is appreciated!

[ January 15, 2004, 10:12 AM: Message edited by: Adam A ]
post #2 of 29
I am on a 168cm R:ex (5'8", 125 lbs, all western skiing). I like them very much, but I have found that they are a fairly demanding ski- they require you to be much more centered and attentive to technique than my old Volants. For me, this was good- it made me work harder on my technique and balance, and I think that I am a less sloppy skier this season as a result, but if you only ski a dozen days a year, you might want to consider something a bit more forgiving. I have heard very good things about the Volant Machete Sin (I was trying to find one last season to demo but never did). Similar dimensions to the R:ex, but softer and with a bigger sweet spot. A lot of people love the K2 Axis XP pro, too, and the post just next to this one says great things about the Salomon xtra hot.

[ January 15, 2004, 06:52 AM: Message edited by: dp ]
post #3 of 29
Like dp said the Rex would be too much ski. If you didn't like the G4 Then stay away from the rex. In a wider mid fat ski. Two skis come to mind. The Rossi B2. It is not a ski that Ipersonally liked but I can see why so many skiers do Like this ski. Another would be the Head MI 75 or is That 76? This has gotten raves from from a lot of skiers. Now if you want a Powder ski that is forgiving and a blast in the deep Then look for The Volant Chubb.
post #4 of 29
NOT the Head 75 - that's NOT a ski that meets your stated wishes, as it does NOT turn quick and short. However, the B2 sounds like your ski in 170 cm.
post #5 of 29
I am also from Ontario and ski on a mid-fat ski, Atomic 10:20 (2001), love them very much. I have skied POW, hard-packed, spring skiing etc.

My recommendations are:
1) Atomic R10 or R11 (very stiff)
2) Head M70i
3) Rossi B1
4) Salomon Hot

At 155lbs I would recommend 160-170. I am 215lbs and I would ski either 170 or 180 and I am fairly agressive skier.

Good luck.
post #6 of 29
Oboe,
I have the Head im75 chip and I have no problems at all making short quick turns with it. Is it as quick as my Atomic SL9's? No. Is it as quick as my Volkl T50's? No. For a ski that is 74mm under foot, it is quick for me.
post #7 of 29
I agree with oboe, and respectfully disagree with calma's list. I disagree with calma's list because (1) it is too varied, with skis of contrasting types and feels; (2) it contains skis that are too stiff and racy for your desires.

The Bandit B2 is your ticket, I think. Try it. Don't pick a large size... whatever is Rossi's length around 170cm.
post #8 of 29
Here’s a quick answer to 2 of your questions, and then a longer response...

Answer #1: I myself just went from a 188cm K2 Mod-X to a 176cm Elan Mantis 662 for my off-piste skiing, and I definitely noticed a difference do to the shorter length. Its much easier to stay centered over the shorter ski. I now see myself improving again, where as I felt like my longer Mod-X were holding me back. As a result of this, bumps are now starting to seem bigger and steep slopes seem flatter.

Answer #2: I like Oboe’s & Gonzo's suggestion of a Rossi B2 in a 170cm for you.



While I’m not an advanced skier like yourself, I am an upper intermediate skier who recently demoed several mid-fat skis, and my opinions may be of value to you.

I’m 5'10" and 180#, 41 years old, ski black diamonds Oregon & Washington comfortably (but that doesn't need my technique is good...), and an occasional double black. My bumps and powder skiing need some work. I carve (not skid) my turns just fine on any groomed run.

I was recently looking for a new pair of skis, too. I decided for a 75mm waist to give me decent float in soft snow without losing edge to edge quickness for skiing bumps I wanted a moderate flex ski because I didn’t want a stiff ski for skiing bumps and some occasional powder. I also wanted a ski that lend itself to shorter radius turns to help with skiing trees, as I didn’t want to work too hard to do repeated shorter radius turns. And finally, it would be nice if these new skis were stable for bombing an occasional groomer and had good edge grip for when the top of steep slopes get icy.

I demoed 6 different skis on 3 different days (I demoed a couple of skis twice), and here’s a summary of what I found...


K2 Axis XP, 115-78-105, demoed in 174cm. Demoed these two different days when fresh snow was falling from the skis. Both days had 8 to 12 inches of fresh powder to be skied and I hated the XPs in it - they felt "planky". They’re stiff, and even at 174cm they tended towards long radius turns. Their 78mm waist felt slow going from edge to edge. Not what I’d call a "cheat ski".


Salomon Scream 10 Xtra Hot Pilot, 116-82-108, demoed in 175cm. Seems like for an off-piste ski, the 82mm waiste would make a lot of sense. But for me, it didn’t. I’m more likely to be skiing bumps than fresh powder because other people get to the fresh stuff while I’m stuck at work. Finally, what fresh powder I get to ski is usually only 10 to 12 inches deep, and a 75mm wide ski is just fine for that.

Demoed the Xtra Hots on snow 2 or 3 days old, and found them to be cumbersome in bumps, and noticeably slower than 75mm skis edge to edge on groomed slopes. They preferred longer radius turns and they were very stable when bombing groomed runs. So I decided that this ski didn’t make a lot of sense for me.


Salomon Scream 10 Hot Pilot, 110-75-100, demoed in 175cm in 2 or 3 day old snow. Okay in bumps, very stable, very forgiving (I really tested these and they kept forgiving my mistakes), great edge hold. I liked everything about this ski except that it preferred longer radius turns over shorter turns. Similar in stiffness to the Xtra Hot.


Salomon Scream 8 Pilot, 110-75-100, demoed in 175cm, once in 2 or 3 day old snow, and once on a day that had 10 to 12 inches of fresh powder. I loved these skis in the bumps, as I really felt that they were my ticket to improving my bump skiing. Unfortunately, that was the only place I liked them. They tended towards long radius turns in fresh powder, so I thought it was too much work to do shorter radius turns. (This really tells you where my powder skiing is, LOL!!!) Of all the skis I demoed, these were the only ones where I had no problems finding an upper speed limit on groomed snow, and I tried everything to try to ski faster on them. They’re softer flexing than the Hot and Xtra Hot Pilots.


Volkl 724 Pro, 115-77-104, demoed in 170cm on a day that had 10 to 12 inches of fresh snow. Would have liked to have tried the 177cms, but that is one very popular ski. Stopped by the Volkl tent several times looking for the 177cms, but they were always being demoed by someone else.

In a 170cm, they were surprisingly stable. I could ski these in powder, but they felt a bit stiff. They tended towards a moderate radius turn, but maybe that’s because I couldn’t bend them very well... hmmm... they were a bit stiff. The 724 Pros are a nice ski that I really liked, but I felt like I was a couple of years away from really being able to enjoy a ski like this. I need to improve some more, first.


Rossi B2, 113-76-103, demoed in a 176cm on a day that had 10 to 12 inches of fresh snow. I took immediate liking to these skis as I was tempted to buy a pair the day of the demo (the shop offered something like 15% off if you bought on demo day). They were what I was looking for. They were easy to do short radius turns in soft snow and still pretty stable for bombing groomed runs. However, I wanted to try these in harder snow before buying.

I missed my chance to demo the Elan Mantis 662 (116-76-102), so I sent the Elan rep an email message asking him to compare the 662 with the Rossi B2. Without telling him what I was looking for, he replied that he felt that the Rossi B2 was a little bit stiffer, a little lighter, and little faster edge to edge than the 662. However, he also said that the 662 has been edge grip and that the 662 is more stable.

I tried to find a shop in Oregon or Washington where I could demo the 662, but couldn’t. So I bought them on a leap of faith (LOL!) in a 176cm. I bought a light weight binding for them. I can’t tell you the difference between the B2 and the 662 in terms of weight, stiffness, edge to edge quickness, or stability. I’d have to ski them on the same day to be able to tell any difference. Like the B2s, the 662s are very friendly for short turns and in soft snow. Also, the first thing I noticed about my 662s in harder snow is the edge grip - very tenacious. I’ve also skied my 662s very fast on groomed runs (at faster speeds than I tested the B2s), so they’re a very fun all mountain ski for me.

Dave

[ January 16, 2004, 09:36 AM: Message edited by: Dave86 ]
post #9 of 29
Another possible ski that would answer your concerns is Dynastar's Intuitiv 74. Excellent "cheat" ski for powder and groomers. Dimensions: 113-74-99. I've skied this ski on groomed and chopped powder. Very stable, yet quick enough for tight turning. Not a ton of energy but lively enough for lots of fun. I'd suggest a length of 175 if you like to turn 'em quickly. If your forte is more GS in nature, go a bit longer with a 182.
post #10 of 29
I was just going to recommend the Intuitive 74 myself. This is my favorite mid-fat ski. It can make any turn you have the ability to make, has a fair amount of pop, and great edge grip. The only differnce is that I'd recommend it in a 167cm for someone your size. I think it's a tendency for folks to ski more ski than they truley need. That said, a 174 would be more versatile in soft snow. And...you can pick this ski up fairly inexpensively on ebay pretty much any time you want.

ps. I have a friend that's about 6'3" 190lbs and he skis a 174 and loves it.
post #11 of 29
I'm on the 724 Pro in a 177. I am 205lbs and 5'11".

This ski is an animal. It rips, eats crud, holds on ice and is powerful. If you can ski this is a leader in the mid fat.
post #12 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by Adam A:
I'm looking for something shorter and chubbier than my original 184cm BanditX.
It interesting to me that you don't comment about your relationship with your bandits other than their physical dimensions. It doesn't seem like you really liked them all that much, and perhaps that means you wanted other qualities in your skis. Can you talk about what else you liked and didn't like about the bandits so we can figure out whether a similar handling ski like the B2, would be your "cup of tea"? The skis you did mention had better grip, and more stability than your Bandit, I wonder if that is one of your priorities? If you have to chose between short turns and stability, float, and crud busting, which would you chose?

Once we have a better understanding of how you got along with your Bandits aside from them being a bit long, I think it will be easier to target your Western skis of choice.
post #13 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by nikonfme:
Oboe,
I have the Head im75 chip and I have no problems at all making short quick turns with it. Is it as quick as my Atomic SL9's? No. Is it as quick as my Volkl T50's? No. For a ski that is 74mm under foot, it is quick for me.
Relative to my Bandit XX's, which are 74 mm under foot, the Head iM75 Chip is not quick or easy in short turns. However, on very crisp snow,they're the best ice skates I've ever been on, and I enjoyed them very much, even though they're more ponderous than my XX's.
post #14 of 29
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the response, folks.

It interesting to me that you don't comment about your relationship with your bandits other than their physical dimensions -rvwink

I got the old BanditXs at the beginning of the freeride hype. They are 99-67-86mm (i think) - pretty skimpy by today's standards. They are a good cruising ski and pretty forgiving in bumps. They can hold a carve reasonably well too and rarely get chattery.

However, I'd like something with a bit more beef and some sidecut (but not necessarily tons). I'd like to be able to crank a more modern parallel carve and enjoy the groomed when that's the only stuff available. I had fun on some old 165cm Atomic Fat Boys. On the flats, I had to dust off my old carving skills to get a quality turn out of them.

I'd say that my priorities are crud-busting and med/long radius turns. I'd like to feel some more energy out of my turns. Short turns would be nice to survive the steeps and if the ski can get me though trees in powder without too much drama, then all the better.

I don't think I could go wrong with many models on the market, so long as I don't get something too long and overpowering. At this point, I'm pretty much limited to what shops around here have to offer (the B2 is here, but can't find the G4/R:ex types anymore).

Cheers.

[ January 19, 2004, 01:52 PM: Message edited by: Adam A ]
post #15 of 29
I would go fatter than the other recommendations. If you really do 80% out west, you'll find that modern mid-fats at 80mm+ give up very very little in hard snow performance to narrower skis.

I was on 168cm G4s last year, and they held on ice near as well as my race stock slaloms, and carved hip to ground turns no problem even at lower speeds. With the exception of 3 days in whistler, I skied them only in the northeast. I'm now on an R.ex 177cm, and find it a little softer but also a little too delicate... never quite sure if the edge will hold compared the the G4 which was rock solid.

If I were you, I'd look at the Volkl V-pro, Elan Mantis 777, Dynastar Intuitiv BIG/Inspired/LBF, Fischer Big Stix 84 (not sure how the new 8.6 compares in terms of stiffness, but the 84 was pretty forgiving). I wouldn't go any narrower than the B2 (78mm waist)... there's also a company called Odyssey (odysseyskis.com) that does skis in the right size range and builds them to a custom flex at a very reasonable price.
post #16 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by Adam A:
I've read many of the reviews on this site and they're very helpful. I'll keep this brief...
I'm looking for something shorter and chubbier than my original 184cm BanditX. I'm 34yo, 150lbs, 5'11", live in Ontario but ski 80% of my dozen runs a year in the west. I'd consider myself advanced and will ski anything, but am no racer. However, something of a cheat-ski may be in order to have more fun in crud and heavy powder, but still be used as my everyday ski.
I skied 178 G4s in deep pow last year and liked them (solid/fast), but they may be too much ski (not so manoeverable in the tight stuff).
Question: Since finding mid-fat demos are tough around here, would 168cm G4s or R:ex sound like a reasonable fit? (I may be able to get last year's models). Would the drop in 10cm make a significant difference in the ski experience. I'd also consider something closer to a 75mm waist like the 724 Pro.

Any input is appreciated!
post #17 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by mpatmas:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Adam A:
I've read many of the reviews on this site and they're very helpful. I'll keep this brief...
I'm looking for something shorter and chubbier than my original 184cm BanditX. I'm 34yo, 150lbs, 5'11", live in Ontario but ski 80% of my dozen runs a year in the west. I'd consider myself advanced and will ski anything, but am no racer. However, something of a cheat-ski may be in order to have more fun in crud and heavy powder, but still be used as my everyday ski.
I skied 178 G4s in deep pow last year and liked them (solid/fast), but they may be too much ski (not so manoeverable in the tight stuff).
Question: Since finding mid-fat demos are tough around here, would 168cm G4s or R:ex sound like a reasonable fit? (I may be able to get last year's models). Would the drop in 10cm make a significant difference in the ski experience. I'd also consider something closer to a 75mm waist like the 724 Pro.

Any input is appreciated!
</font>[/quote]There are many skis that will serve you well. However, if you have the opportunity to demo the Elan Mantis 662, you would be wise to do so. That ski just missed ski of the year. It placed among the best of the best in the mid-fat category in virtually every ski test this year. I have been blown away by how versatile and solid the ski feels. It's a lot like my previous Volkl Vertigo G-30, but much livelier. I ski most of the time in deep, variable and difficult conditions and the 662 is my weapon of choice.
post #18 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by mpatmas:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by mpatmas:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Adam A:
I've read many of the reviews on this site and they're very helpful. I'll keep this brief...
I'm looking for something shorter and chubbier than my original 184cm BanditX. I'm 34yo, 150lbs, 5'11", live in Ontario but ski 80% of my dozen runs a year in the west. I'd consider myself advanced and will ski anything, but am no racer. However, something of a cheat-ski may be in order to have more fun in crud and heavy powder, but still be used as my everyday ski.
I skied 178 G4s in deep pow last year and liked them (solid/fast), but they may be too much ski (not so manoeverable in the tight stuff).
Question: Since finding mid-fat demos are tough around here, would 168cm G4s or R:ex sound like a reasonable fit? (I may be able to get last year's models). Would the drop in 10cm make a significant difference in the ski experience. I'd also consider something closer to a 75mm waist like the 724 Pro.

Any input is appreciated!
</font>[/quote]There are many skis that will serve you well. However, if you have the opportunity to demo the Elan Mantis 662, you would be wise to do so. That ski just missed ski of the year. It placed among the best of the best in the mid-fat category in virtually every ski test this year. I have been blown away by how versatile and solid the ski feels. It's a lot like my previous Volkl Vertigo G-30, but much livelier. I ski most of the time in deep, variable and difficult conditions and the 662 is my weapon of choice.</font>[/quote]incidentally, i also have the Elan Mantis 777, it too is a wonderful ski but it's a tank compared to the 662. i'll take the 662 anytime.
post #19 of 29
[quote]Originally posted by Adam A:
However, I'd like something with a bit more beef and some sidecut (but not necessarily tons). I'd like to be able to crank a more modern parallel carve and enjoy the groomed when that's the only stuff available. I'd say that my priorities are crud-busting and med/long radius turns. I'd like to feel some more energy out of my turns. Short turns would be nice to survive the steeps and if the ski can get me though trees in powder without too much drama, then all the better.

Based on what you have written above, my guess is that two skis will best give you what you need. The Head iM 75, and the Elan Mantis 662.

I realize that most on this forum prefer to buy new. But I have just bought a used pair of XP 80s, (iC 180) and the economics were extremely favorable. If saving money appeals to you as well, here is a link to a pair of iM 75s which appear to be in excellent shape. The asking price is $350.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3655142108&category=16 062
post #20 of 29
Quote:
Originally posted by flip:
I would go fatter than the other recommendations. If you really do 80% out west, you'll find that modern mid-fats at 80mm+ give up very very little in hard snow performance to narrower skis.

If I were you, I'd look at the Volkl V-pro, Elan Mantis 777, Dynastar Intuitiv BIG/Inspired/LBF, Fischer Big Stix 84 (not sure how the new 8.6 compares in terms of stiffness, but the 84 was pretty forgiving). I wouldn't go any narrower than the B2 (78mm waist)... there's also a company called Odyssey (odysseyskis.com) that does skis in the right size range and builds them to a custom flex at a very reasonable price.
I totally agree with flip here. Wider is better. Last year at Whistler I demoed the BIG, LBF and Mantis 777. The BIG was good in the crud and hardpack that was available that day. LBF wasn't as beefy or stable but nice and quick. 777 is a really nice ski. I skied the 176 and didn't like it because it seemed too small, light and not as stable as I wanted, I'm over 200lbs. It turned really quickly though. The 184 was more stable and still really quick turning. I really liked it a lot and was tempted to buy the demo.
I'm surprised to hear about the Odysseys from someone in NH. They are made here in Washington on Camano Island. I got some for my son and he loves them. 177cm, 112 81 104 is the only size for the e-max. However Paul will make them with a flex determined by your weight and skill. They are light and quick. Tail is a little stiffer than tip making for good hold on hard snow. I've skied them too and like them quite a lot. One friend who is quite an aggresive skier thinks they aren't stable enough in the toughest conditions (but his main skis are Head IM 85s and they are really stiff, heavy and SUPER stable). My son, at 5'11" 190 is also aggresive and thinks they are the greatest. Another friend who is about 6'4" really likes them for everything. You can't beat the price for new skis either.
post #21 of 29
Remember, the Bandit X was never at the top of the list for crud-busting...

[ February 08, 2004, 12:32 PM: Message edited by: HaveSkisWillClimb ]
post #22 of 29
This thread had pretty much grown cold between 1/20/03 and 2/7/04, but seems to have been revived. I don't know if Adam is still reading but I would add my support to the opinions regarding the Dynastar intuitiv74. I find it very stable for crud, has good float in softer snow (not talking bottomless powder here) and is an excellent "cheater ski" in that it still has reasonable edge hold on hard snow along with a light,almost dance-like, feel which makes easily allows for short turns. I think this ski would definitely fit the bill. That's no tot say that it is the only ski that would be right. There are lots of great skis these days and almost every manufacturer seeems to carry enough skis in their line to satisfy most needs. Yes, people will have individual preferences, but truth be told, I think anyone could find a ski in most any line with which they could be reasonably happy.
post #23 of 29
Oh yes, lets not forget length. I am 169lbs, 5'6" and ski the int74 at 167. This is plenty long for me. There is no reason to over do it with the length. You would prob. go somewhat longer than I but prob. shorter than you think you need.

Richard
post #24 of 29
I echo the commment on the ski length. I am 6'3" and, er, ah 210 lbs. (with allowances for a 5% margin of error). Until a few weeks ago, I was skiing on k2 15's at 193 cms. Regarding my ski level, I will let Arcmeister answer that question.

Arcmeister let me use his 174 K2 Axis XP's and I bought a pair the next day. That length is plenty for me.

Rob
post #25 of 29
Thread is old but would love a reply on this topic as I am going to pull the trigger within a week or 2.

I am leaning to the Dynastar Intuitive 74 but have no idea what length to go with. I am very aggressive skier but tall and thin. 6'4" 175. I have been skiing an old Xscream in a 195. My concern is loosing float in powder at a shorter length. Not that I get to ski a ton of powder in VT, accept the trees which is typically chop but still real fun. Have not been west in 3 years, ughh.

Is a 193 too long? Sounds like it.
I would be concerned going shorter than the 188 at my height.
post #26 of 29
Brent,
Demo the new Dynastar Legend series (replacing the Intuitiv line). I would also demo in a couple of lengths - with the construction of skis these days 180 is considered a long board (unless you're doing big mountain/back country powder skiing).
Personally, I have really enjoyed the K2 XP. I have found it to be quick turning, to have a very good edge on ice and good float off piste. I've read opposite opinions here as well. Just shows that you should test out skis for yourself if you can. I've got a few pounds on you and you've got a couple of inches on me - if I were to ski out west more I would probably prefer the 181 length, but as I ski more in the east, I chose the 174cm (after demoing both lengths).
Good luck.
post #27 of 29
Don't be afraid to go short. I'm not a super-short freak or anything, but the 188 would be much too long for you. Ask around in the good shops in your area - I bet they recommend you try the 175 first.
post #28 of 29
i ski killington all the time and just got the head monsteriM75 and LOVE them. i am 5'6 and 120 lbs,got the 163
post #29 of 29
had crossmax pilot 8 -170 which i liked most of the time
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews