or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Recommendations for skis around 105 at waist, that do it all.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Recommendations for skis around 105 at waist, that do it all.

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
Trying to find recs for skis in this range...help?
Thanks!
post #2 of 22

Atomic Ritual, 103mm, tip and tail rocker plus camber.  I bought a pair after demoing them last year.  They will carve but not as well as a narrower ski.  I spent the day, today, on them skiing bumps, trees, chutes, powder, couple blue groomers to rest up after harder stuff and some other groomers to access lifts.  They're quick enough in the trees, good floatation and are good enough for me in the bumps.

post #3 of 22

I've been skiing the ON3P Vicik this season.  Really like it. 

post #4 of 22

"That do it all" :rolleyes Right. Well, anyway, besides above, the Soul 7 seems to be this season's do-all 100+ champion, judging by the number of awards it's won and the reviews here and elsewhere. For a somewhat beefier iteration, a touch wider, the Nordica Patron, I'd guess. 

post #5 of 22

Depending a little upon what you mean by "all" (poor word choice that) here are my top five of the dozen or so that I tested last year.

 

Stockli SR 107...........................Best of the stable/damp group

Nordica El Capo........................#2 of the ^^^ group

Nordica Vagabond.....................Best of the light/nimble group

Rossi Soul 7..............................#2 of the ^^^ group

Blizzard Peacemaker.................#3 of the ^^^ group (very close)

 

 

SJ

post #6 of 22
I'd add the Kastle FX 104 to Jim's list as well.
post #7 of 22

Why do you want a ~105 waisted ski? What specific conditions/uses do you have in mind for them? And why is 'all' not leading towards a ~95 or a ~122?

 

You seem to have been thinking about what they should do really well, how else would you be able to determine you need a ~105?

post #8 of 22
Take it at face value. OP had a simple, concise question. He's in Utah. A 1-0-something makes sense. If he wanted something else, or for more general recommendations, he'd have asked in that manner. smile.gif
post #9 of 22

^^^^ Agree with this, but keep in mind that you obviously know him, including his location, weight, ability, and I'd now deduce, preference for beefier skis. Many here - Cheizz and myself included - don't, unless this is a new name for a familiar poster. And face it, Epic has two stock answers for folks with comparatively few posts who use "what ski?" and "do it all" in the same breath.

 

1) Buy boots

2) Most days you won't need as wide as you think

 

The reason they're stock answers is that they're true. :eek Yes, even for (gasp) Utah. ;) 

post #10 of 22

I`m going to go off the board a little.

 

The 4frnt Turbo is the best western all-around ski.  It's old, but it's perfect.  Similar to the older Gotama in shape and feel, but with a touch of tip and tail rocker.  Burly enough to bounce off early season rocks, stiff enough to handle hardpack, wide enough to float blower pow, and damp enough to deal with next-day crud.  And they're cheap because they're all sale stock now.

 

I've got skinny SL skis and big fat pow skis, but these ALWAYS go into the truck.  No matter what else I might be skiing, I can always go back to the Turbo if I want.  No matter what the conditions are like.

post #11 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

^^^^ Agree with this, but keep in mind that you obviously know him, including his location, weight, ability, and I'd now deduce, preference for beefier skis. Many here - Cheizz and myself included - don't, unless this is a new name for a familiar poster. And face it, Epic has two stock answers for folks with comparatively few posts who use "what ski?" and "do it all" in the same breath.

1) Buy boots
2) Most days you won't need as wide as you think

The reason they're stock answers is that they're true. eek.gif  Yes, even for (gasp) Utah. wink.gif  

Lots of folks think you need a 120+ for Utah, so a 1-0-something proves your point.wink.gif
post #12 of 22

Never been to Utah (or any other North American place, for that matter). So skier ability and what you really want the ski to do well should be leading, IMO. I could suggest literally any ~105 ski and thereby answer the OP's question. That's no help, I suspect (Google '105 mm ski' and you have your list). So I need a bit more to answer the question. In my earlier post, I just tried to get some info, not judge the assumption that the OP actually needs a ~105 ski (don't know that, since I don't have the info)...

post #13 of 22
Don't forget the Volkl Gotama.

It handles the cut up snow very well. The tips don't get deflected like some other skis. Not sure that is a issue in the west but it sure is back here in the east.
post #14 of 22

Lots of SLC folks live for the days when a 120 is useful, and reduce their cognitive dissonance the other 90% of the time by telling themselves their 120 "is fine" on firm snow. And within a year, only recall the big powder days. A beefy 105 will keep them perpetually dissonant, since it won't be enough for those big days when their buddies own bragging rights with their 120's, but still won't shine in bumps or ice when their buddies are floundering. A 88 will be most realistic for most conditions most of the time, but owners will have to constantly tell themselves how only losers depend on fat skis to handle real powder. 

 

Ain't America a great country? :D 

post #15 of 22

Cochise will "do it all" but isn't playful and requires a skilled driver. A less substantial ski will not be able to handle speed nor less than ideal conditions.

Too bad you are limiting it to one ski as a two ski quiver makes more sense for Utah ie; a 115 + real powder ski and an 85/90 all mountain.

post #16 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

Lots of SLC folks live for the days when a 120 is useful, and reduce their cognitive dissonance the other 90% of the time by telling themselves their 120 "is fine" on firm snow. And within a year, only recall the big powder days. A beefy 105 will keep them perpetually dissonant, since it won't be enough for those big days when their buddies own bragging rights with their 120's, but still won't shine in bumps or ice when their buddies are floundering. A 88 will be most realistic for most conditions most of the time, but owners will have to constantly tell themselves how only losers depend on fat skis to handle real powder. 



 



Ain't America a great country? " src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif" /> 


 




Pretty much the same thought process back here. for most day's a 88mm waist is fine. My 106mm Gotama's are fine for when we get a 8-10" dump and I'm on the groomers back to the chair, But not such a great everyday ski.

One ski won't do it all.
post #17 of 22

The Soul 7 blew me away when I tested it.

post #18 of 22

If you can find a demo, you might like to try out the Praxis Freeride. It's 107 underfoot and in a medium-medium/stiff flex it would likely fit the bill. I have a pair of slightly older ones (which are slightly narrower) and really like them. They're stiff though, so if I was buying for versatility Id probably go a notch softer.

post #19 of 22

Some skis I like:

 

Kastle FX104: best edgehold in this category, nice tip flex for more aggressive skiing.  Not really a pow ski: more like a wide super high performance all-mountain ride

 

Blizzard Peacemaker: Quick, lively, playful, still relatively damp. Not as stable as some, more a Soul 7 type of ski

 

Soul 7: similar to the Peacemaker in execution, totally different feel, super quick at the tip, not quite as stable

 

Stockli Stormrider 107: minimal tip rise, damp, powerful, excellent carver

 

ON3P Vicik: very powerful big-mountain ski, pretty good carver, unique snowfeel. Really eats up junk snow

 

Head REV 105: if you want quick, easy, nimble, yet more damp than the Soul 7, check this one out. 

 

It does come down a bit to your preferences: the style of skis like the FX104 is more wide all-mountain, not soft snow. The REV105 and Soul 7 are decidedly more soft-snow oriented (lacking metal laminates, they can be overpowered on firmer stuff and groomers if you are really trying to rip arcs). 

post #20 of 22
Thread Starter 
I have a pair of Pollards, for pow, so looking for something that can carve decently and rip through trees and do steeps well.
post #21 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post
 

Lots of SLC folks live for the days when a 120 is useful, and reduce their cognitive dissonance the other 90% of the time by telling themselves their 120 "is fine" on firm snow. And within a year, only recall the big powder days. A beefy 105 will keep them perpetually dissonant, since it won't be enough for those big days when their buddies own bragging rights with their 120's, but still won't shine in bumps or ice when their buddies are floundering. A 88 will be most realistic for most conditions most of the time, but owners will have to constantly tell themselves how only losers depend on fat skis to handle real powder. 

 

Ain't America a great country? :D 


Here in Utah with our selective memories we use at least a 140.  120s?  Please.  How are you going to outrun your friends using a 120 in nine feet of fresh snow? 

 

Not to break the myth but yesterday I had 81-s in 4 inches of fresh.  Today with it dumping I brought out the 108-s (cochise) and that's as wide as it gets for me.  Same for my SLC friends.  True, you did say lots not all or most.

post #22 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

Lots of SLC folks live for the days when a 120 is useful, and reduce their cognitive dissonance the other 90% of the time by telling themselves their 120 "is fine" on firm snow. And within a year, only recall the big powder days. A beefy 105 will keep them perpetually dissonant, since it won't be enough for those big days when their buddies own bragging rights with their 120's, but still won't shine in bumps or ice when their buddies are floundering. A 88 will be most realistic for most conditions most of the time, but owners will have to constantly tell themselves how only losers depend on fat skis to handle real powder. 
This. It's too bad we don't know more about what our OP is like or what kind of skiing he intends to do, but it'd be a shame to invest in a wide ski that would be just competent but not a blast on the firm snow that we more indiscriminate skiers spend so much time on.
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 › Recommendations for skis around 105 at waist, that do it all.