or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › K2 AMP Rictor 90 vs. Atomic Crimson 86 vs. Salomon Enduro 850?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

K2 AMP Rictor 90 vs. Atomic Crimson 86 vs. Salomon Enduro 850?

post #1 of 8
Thread Starter 

Hi all,

 

First post. Signed up because it looks like you all really know what you're talking about. Seriously.

 

I live east coast. 5' 10". 140lb. Advanced skier. Ski most of the time at Hunter BUT am expecting to do a lot up in VT this year now my son is at college there and also planning to hit Whiteface for various reasons.

 

I let my old pair of Atomic Metron 11s go in the swap sale this year because I was ready to upgrade. Last year I bought a pair of Nodica Speed Machine 170cm in the swap sale. Super narrow - 67mm - but are good for exposed conditions and plenty fun on icy conditions. SO now I need to replace the Metrons and I feel capable of a good step-up.

 

Last Jan, went out to Mammoth and used demo gear. Fell head over heels in love with the K2 Sideshow at 174cm. (90mm width.) They made me a better skier and I was thrilled with what I could accomplish on them. Expected to buy this year but they've switched to the K2 Amp Rictor 90. 

 

I got to demo some skis at Hunter over the past week - one on demo day from the various brands on the piste, one direct from the store - but it's only confused me. All of them were in longer length than I would like and the conditions were very different over the two days: one had a foot of fresh powder, the other was pretty much all groomed. I took out a pair of 177 K2 Amp Rictor 90s early on powder day and probably wasn't ready for the adjustment in skis and conditions. Plus, there was no groomers to try them on. The store doesn't have an AMP Rictor 90 to demo, and on groomer day, there wasn't much between the Enduro 850s and the Atomic Crimson; both charged down the hill super fast and with plenty control. If I was only going to ski groomers, I'd probably go for one of those. But I do want my new skis to push me a little harder, as the Sideshow did out west, and I expect to see more powder and mixed conditions both in VT and with future trips out west. 

 

Any one want to talk me out of the Amp Rictor 90? Or should I just stop over-thinking and go for it while it's still in stock at my length (170)?

 

Thanks

 

Tony

post #2 of 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leagle Alien View Post
 

. . . . Fell head over heels in love with the K2 Sideshow at 174cm. (90mm width.) They made me a better skier and I was thrilled with what I could accomplish on them. Expected to buy this year but they've switched to the K2 Amp Rictor 90.

 

Any one want to talk me out of the Amp Rictor 90? Or should I just stop over-thinking and go for it while it's still in stock at my length (170)?

 

Thanks

 

Tony

 

Hi Tony.  Welcome to Epic.  I'd be happy to give you some encouragement to pull the trigger and avoid overthinking it.  Otherwise you'll keep thinking about those K2s you rode last year. . .

 

So you could give the store at this link a call and see if they still have the 174s (on sale to boot), or go with the latest and greatest, the Rictor 90.

 

I have not ridden either ski, so I can't give you any first-party data, but last weekend I was skiing with a K2 Ambassador and he was on a pair of Sideshows, which he gushed over.  We did some ski-talk and in his opinion, the Sideshow was the "most underrated ski K2 ever produced" and also the "worst marketed."  And his take is that the Rictor 90 is a better version (more torsional stiffness, lower, improved rocker profile).  Phil also gave it a similarly positive review here.

 

So there you have it . . . that's all I know.  The favorite ski of a K2 guy who can ride (and talk up) any K2 he wants.  And he is a super strong skier.  Definitely a ski that I want to check out in the ~90 class.

post #3 of 8
I rented the 2013 amp rictor last march and loved them so much I bought them new at evo for $400 approx. I had to get the new solomon moldable boots and new poles too. No more rentals for me. Can't wait to ski spring break.
post #4 of 8

I have skied all three. 

 

I can break them down 1-2-3 in a number of categories.

 

Power:

1. Crimson

2. Enduro

3. Rictor

 

Finesse:

1. Rictor

2. Crimson

3. Enduro

 

Grip:

1. Enduro

2. Cromson

3. Rictor

 

Playfulness:

1. Rictor

2. Crimson

3. Enduro

 

Nimbleness:

1. Rictor

2. Crimson

3. Enduro

 

Now, since you have a hard snow ski already, the grip and power categories are less important. Since you are a lighter guy the Crimson and Rictor 90 and since you can get the Rictor 90 flat, it can be set up that much lighter and it is a more playful ski plus you have like the attributes of this and the Sideshow..I say you have struck oil, stop drilling and get them. FWIW, they do run a but long, the 170 is more like a 173, the 177 more like a 180. For your size, the 170 would be my suggestion. 

post #5 of 8
Thread Starter 

Thanks everyone for the feedback and especially Phil for the clear breakdown which clearly favors the Rictor. I actually bought them yesterday (Saturday). (And yes, at 170.) I'm really glad to know you're all backing up that instinct. It's really hard when you can't get to demo quite what you want to or not in the conditions you're used to, and it's easy to be led off piste (metaphorically) by skis that might be ideal for that actual moment you're demoing but aren't what you're looking for long trm. I'm thrilled to have the K2s… the bindings are being installed and I'll be picking them up and skiing on them Christmas Day. Will report back as I get used to them.

 

Tony    

post #6 of 8

I too am considering the Rictor xt90s (but also the 82s). I'm a high-intermediate to low-advanced skier generally skiing New England hard-pack with some occasional trips to powder. 5'6" 160# 59 year old, replacing 2001-vintage Fischer 102 ICE skis. Demo'd the 90s in 170 cm and 82s in 177cm (all the demo group had available yesterday) and liked both. I'm leaning toward the 82s for, what I would expect to be better ice performance. Anything else I should consider?

 

Thanks.

post #7 of 8
Thread Starter 

Hi David,

 

Well, if it helps, I'm happy to report that I've had a couple of days now on my 90s and I am totally in love with them. I was at Mt Ellen in Vermont yesterday and conditions were far from ideal, with some fair exposed patches. The ability of the skis to turn on a dime and keep me off the rocks was amazing. Their speed and grip on the cruisers was equally impressive. And they carve so easily I feel like I'm hardly working that aspect of it. That said, they're not for beginners, that's for sure; you have to stay very much on top of them as they're extremely keen to explore the mountain!

 

I think that the choice of 82 vs. 90 is going to be largely down to how much powder you expect to see. I did feel the need for a wider ski, but I could see you being happy with the 82 if you expect to be mainly on icy conditions. Probably my biggest recommendation would be to stick with the 170cm length. The difference between using the Rictor 90 at 170cm and the pair I demoed (a 90 at 177cm) was considerable; I could control the former in a way I struggled with the latter.

 

Good luck,

 

Tony

post #8 of 8

Thanks for the information. I committed this afternoon and bought the 82s. Will pick them up tomorrow (didn't have my boots with me and they have to be adjusted) and hope to ski them within the week.

 

Thanks again!

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 › K2 AMP Rictor 90 vs. Atomic Crimson 86 vs. Salomon Enduro 850?