or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2014-2015 Stockli Laser AX
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2014-2015 Stockli Laser AX - Page 2

post #31 of 56

Sounds Great. For me the prize is almost the only thing that holds me back, so I want to be more sure than normal that this ski would suit my needs. I'm not in a position to demo them, so I need to buy them untried.

post #32 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ventende View Post
 

Thanks for sharing!

 

I see that your review was posted last season, but as far as I know the AX 2015/16 is the same product? At least thats what I've heard in shops. I'm considering this ski as a pair number two. I already have the Atomic SX:9 Supercross, so I'm looking for something less stiff so that I can enjoy longer days on piste. The Atomic carvers are great fun but after a couple of hours I'm totally beat. My legs are hurting! Somebody mentioned the Laser AX as a super allrounder that was less wild to handle compared to race carvers but still scoring high on fun factor. I've talked to some sales people that says the AX was the best allrounder they demoed in 2014, but I don't know if that's just sales talk or autentic response. Still, I've read some pretty nice reviews here and there as well. I've actually never read or heard anything really negative about the Stockli AX.

 

I'm an intermediate+ skier wanting to further my turn skills. I ride mostly on groomed slopes. I skied a lot growing up then made a "comeback" about 7 years ago. Would you say the AX is hard to handle or is it difficult to make'em carv? Perhaps it's not the greatest of questions but I'm afraid they will be so much harder to carve than my Atomic carvers. I've seen some inspiring video clips of people skiing allmountain skis pretty agile, with both short and long carved turns. I'm not quite at that level yet, but need as ski to grow with. At the same time I want to be able to ski those long 8-9 hours days with my friends without having to take 30 minutes breaks every hour cause my legs are totally exhausted from handling those race carvers.

 

The suggested AX ski length for my height was 175 cm in the shop. My carvers are 170 cm. The sales person said that I would need those 175 cm in order to get a stable ride in high speeds (I love speed) and he told me that it wouldn't be any problems at all making short turns even if the ski is 5 cm longer than my Atomics.

 

 

Age: 42

Gender: Male

Height: 180 cm (5.9 foot according to the calculator)

Weight: Approx. 93 kg (205 ibs according to the calculator)

 

So, what do you say - should I get them?

 

 

 

 

 

I will admit that some skis are less tiring than others to ski, but if your legs are getting fried to the point of being "totally beat", then it's not the ski -- it's you.  I don't know if there's a fitness issue that can be addressed, or a technique issue that can be worked on, or perhaps a boot setup issue (i.e, if your boots aren't setup properly for your body type, then it's your muscles, not your skeleton, that's holding you up, and that's going to destroy your legs, and fast)...  Or some combination of the above?

 

Basically, new skis aren't going to magically give you more endurance.

post #33 of 56

I hear you. Well, I've been lifting weights for many years so I'm used to putting power into everything I do. I've heard my skiing is quite "agile" in lack of better words. I ski quite low with my torso and I'm quite low in general. I know I have a lot of ground to cover as far as technical skiing goes, so I might have alot to win adjusting that. The thing is however that my Atomics are by far the ski pair that drains me from power the fastest. I've rented a fair share of "softer skis" and they make me substantially less fatigued. I don't get tired in my legs with less racing oriented ski profiles. 

post #34 of 56

I will demo the Stockli Laser AX in 167 and the head iSupershape Rally in 163.  The skis I eventually select will be used for teaching Levels 5-7 and for use as a versatile harder snow ski to compliment the Kastle FX94 in 166 that I already have. I'm confused. In one of the various threads here about the AX, some people say it's easy, some say it's not easy, one or two said that the Rally is what the AX should have been. When people have negative reactions - about from obvious individual preferences - what are they missing about the AX?  What in particular should I be looking for, sensitive to, when I demo each of these skis?  The Rally being 163 and the AX being 167, there may be a difference of experience caused by length variation. What do you all think? Help me out, please. 

post #35 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ventende View Post

Thanks for sharing!

I see that your review was posted last season, but as far as I know the AX 2015/16 is the same product? At least thats what I've heard in shops. I'm considering this ski as a pair number two. I already have the Atomic SX:9 Supercross, so I'm looking for something less stiff so that I can enjoy longer days on piste. The Atomic carvers are great fun but after a couple of hours I'm totally beat. My legs are hurting! Somebody mentioned the Laser AX as a super allrounder that was less wild to handle compared to race carvers but still scoring high on fun factor. I've talked to some sales people that says the AX was the best allrounder they demoed in 2014, but I don't know if that's just sales talk or autentic response. Still, I've read some pretty nice reviews here and there as well. I've actually never read or heard anything really negative about the Stockli AX.

I'm an intermediate+ skier wanting to further my turn skills. I ride mostly on groomed slopes. I skied a lot growing up then made a "comeback" about 7 years ago. Would you say the AX is hard to handle or is it difficult to make'em carv? Perhaps it's not the greatest of questions but I'm afraid they will be so much harder to carve than my Atomic carvers. I've seen some inspiring video clips of people skiing allmountain skis pretty agile, with both short and long carved turns. I'm not quite at that level yet, but need as ski to grow with. At the same time I want to be able to ski those long 8-9 hours days with my friends without having to take 30 minutes breaks every hour cause my legs are totally exhausted from handling those race carvers.

The suggested AX ski length for my height was 175 cm in the shop. My carvers are 170 cm. The sales person said that I would need those 175 cm in order to get a stable ride in high speeds (I love speed) and he told me that it wouldn't be any problems at all making short turns even if the ski is 5 cm longer than my Atomics.


Age: 42
Gender: Male
Height: 180 cm (5.9 foot according to the calculator)
Weight: Approx. 93 kg (205 ibs according to the calculator)

So, what do you say - should I get them?


I own this ski, and ski it every day every where. It is decidedly not a ski for those who cannot ride the center of a high-performance ski. In fact, it will "reward" such skiing with an uncomfortable, demanding ride.

If the Atomic is "too much," I think the AX will be even more demanding for you. The ski is really about balancing well along the ski and being able to guide the ski through the turn.

That said, it's so much fun it must be illegal. tongue.gif
post #36 of 56

Hi,

 

Thanks for your input on this. It makes things even less clear I'm afraid cause since I've posted this I've talked to even more people that have first hand experience with this ski (even the 2015/16 model now) plus the pair I already have. They all say the AX is less demanding than my SX:9 Atomics - or any other carver I was considering. The stores tell me to match it with VIST bindings on Speedcom plate for optimal performance. I wanna add that I have rented quite stiff carvers with very firm response mechanisms before, I consider them fun and somewhat tiring but not as much as the 9'ers I have. With less demanding I don't mean easier to turn, or easier in any technical manner. I'm referring to the ski characteristics. The SX:9 is quite "fragile" and tend to act jumpy when speed picks up. The AX are described as more stable, both in speed and in transition between groomed pist and light powder for instance. With the Atomics I feel I need to really be agile and work them actively in order to ski them as they would like to be treated, but so many of my friends say they have bought a second pair of allmountain skis for those long days in the hills, cause those skis are easier to ride in varied speeds and terrain. Their not like a sports car constantly screaming for gas.    

 

Hm, I guess I just have to buy them to find out as I'm not in a position to demo the AX. But overall everyone I've spoken to about this ski does not classify it as a ski for the very ambitious or professional skier: When I e-mailed VIST for binding questions they shared their opinion on the AX and thought its a good allrounder for intermediate skiers that wanted something stable and fun. Do you really think they are that demanding? I mean, how demanding can an allmountain ski with these specifications be? Ok, so I'm not Aksel Lund Svindal but I'm not Bambi on ice either.  :p   


Edited by ventende - 11/6/15 at 10:48am
post #37 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ventende View Post
 

Hi,

 

Thanks for your input on this. It makes things even less clear I'm afraid cause since I've posted this I've talked to even more people that have first hand experience with this ski (even the 2015/16 model now) plus the pair I already have. They all say the AX is less demanding than my SX:9 Atomics - or any other carver I was considering. The stores tell me to match it with VIST bindings on Speedcom plate for optimal performance. I wanna add that I have rented quite stiff carvers with very firm response mechanisms before, I consider them fun and somewhat tiring but not as much as the 9'ers I have. With less demanding I don't mean easier to turn, or easier in any technical manner. I'm referring to the ski characteristics. The SX:9 is quite "fragile" and tend to act jumpy when speed picks up. The AX are described as more stable, both in speed and in transition between groomed pist and light powder for instance. With the Atomics I feel I need to really be agile and work them actively in order to ski them as they would like to be treated, but so many of my friends say they have bought a second pair of allmountain skis for those long days in the hills, cause those skis are easier to ride in varied speeds and terrain. Their not like a sports car constantly screaming for gas.    

 

Hm, I guess I just have to buy them to find out as I'm not in a position to demo the AX. But overall everyone I've spoken to about this ski does not classify it as a ski for the very ambitious or professional skier: When I e-mailed VIST for binding questions they shared their opinion on the AX and thought its a good allrounder for intermediate skiers that wanted something stable and fun. Do you really think they are that demanding? I mean, how demanding can an allmountain ski with these specifications be? Ok, so I'm not Aksel Lund Svindal but I'm not Bambi on ice either.  :p   

 

The AX is fairly mellow, yet high performance.  The Laser SX is another beast entirely.   Maybe whomever you spoke to had them confused? Easy to do.  Just flexing the AX shows it isn't some burly bruising ride. 

 

Scott

post #38 of 56

I don't think you are following me Scott. When I'm describing the skis I already have I'm referring to the Atomic SX:9 and not Stockli Laser SX. In terms of Stockli I'm talking about the Laser AX only. That is the model that my local stores have and I've been talking to people that's been skiing that model since it was launched. The 2015/16 model is the same as the 2014/15 model. It was such a big hit for Stockli that they stuck with the winning concept. From what I've been told from the importer of Stockli the best combo for his ski is the Speedcom plate system with the VIST  VSP412 binding.

 

As mentioned they all describe the AX as a great allmountain ski (and allmountain is Stocklis classification too) with good stability and the ability to tackle the transition between groomed pist and other less groomed conditions with ease. Everyone that I've talked to has said it's a great second pair if I already have a "mad carver" and want something that's not as tiring to ride as my SX:9. It's like the AX can be skied with less punch and power yet still offer some fun, whilst my other pair constantly wants to be charged or else it's just not gonna respond very well. The SX.9 are not very stable in high speed either of course, as they are not constructed to be. The response I get is that the AX is more capable of being stable in high speed situations, don't you agree? I'm talking about the 175 cm length here. I'm 180 cm or 5.9 foot according to the calculator.

 

Ref:

http://www.stoeckli.ch/int-en/stockli-markenwelten/ski/product-line/laser-ax


Edited by ventende - 11/8/15 at 1:05pm
post #39 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ventende View Post
 

Hi,

 

Thanks for your input on this. It makes things even less clear I'm afraid cause since I've posted this I've talked to even more people that have first hand experience with this ski (even the 2015/16 model now) plus the pair I already have. They all say the AX is less demanding than my SX:9 Atomics - or any other carver I was considering. The stores tell me to match it with VIST bindings on Speedcom plate for optimal performance. I wanna add that I have rented quite stiff carvers with very firm response mechanisms before, I consider them fun and somewhat tiring but not as much as the 9'ers I have. With less demanding I don't mean easier to turn, or easier in any technical manner. I'm referring to the ski characteristics. The SX:9 is quite "fragile" and tend to act jumpy when speed picks up. The AX are described as more stable, both in speed and in transition between groomed pist and light powder for instance. With the Atomics I feel I need to really be agile and work them actively in order to ski them as they would like to be treated, but so many of my friends say they have bought a second pair of allmountain skis for those long days in the hills, cause those skis are easier to ride in varied speeds and terrain. Their not like a sports car constantly screaming for gas.    

 

Hm, I guess I just have to buy them to find out as I'm not in a position to demo the AX. But overall everyone I've spoken to about this ski does not classify it as a ski for the very ambitious or professional skier: When I e-mailed VIST for binding questions they shared their opinion on the AX and thought its a good allrounder for intermediate skiers that wanted something stable and fun. Do you really think they are that demanding? I mean, how demanding can an allmountain ski with these specifications be? Ok, so I'm not Aksel Lund Svindal but I'm not Bambi on ice either.  :p   


Let me try, again.

 

Yes, the AX is an All Mountain ski. My mountain is Copper Mountain here in Colorado, and I have skied the ski in virtually every condition possible, from chunky to velvet. It performs extremely well in all conditions, provided you are balanced on the skis and have the skills to stay reasonably centered. If you get off-center, you can still ski them (perhaps this is the "more forgiving" to which you refer), but they drop off in performance and let you know that you're not centered (rather like a hybrid blade in golf, for example). They are not full-out race (as Scott notes), but they have many of the characteristics of a full-out race ski, and can hold (for example) far better than most skis of this width.

 

I would also not recommend them for a blue/red skier, but many skiers like to purchase above their skill levels...

 

I have skied this at a (tracked by GPS) 40mph will complete stability, so I would be comfortable saying they are reasonably stable at all recreational speeds.

post #40 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
 


Let me try, again.

 

Yes, the AX is an All Mountain ski. My mountain is Copper Mountain here in Colorado, and I have skied the ski in virtually every condition possible, from chunky to velvet. It performs extremely well in all conditions, provided you are balanced on the skis and have the skills to stay reasonably centered. If you get off-center, you can still ski them (perhaps this is the "more forgiving" to which you refer), but they drop off in performance and let you know that you're not centered (rather like a hybrid blade in golf, for example). They are not full-out race (as Scott notes), but they have many of the characteristics of a full-out race ski, and can hold (for example) far better than most skis of this width.

 

I would also not recommend them for a blue/red skier, but many skiers like to purchase above their skill levels...

 

I have skied this at a (tracked by GPS) 40mph will complete stability, so I would be comfortable saying they are reasonably stable at all recreational speeds.


What was your take on that ski vs. the Scale Delta that I loved?  Can't remember if you skied it at Copper that day or not; was thinking you got a few runs on it as well.

post #41 of 56

Two remarks:

 

(1) Perhaps that balance point on the AX had something to do with delta, ramp, or fore/aft binding position.

 

(2) From what I've read about the Stockli Scale Delta, I'd like to see a review of that ski and the other Scale skis.

post #42 of 56
I did it, I pulled the trigger. The question I have is about length. I'm 6'1" 185. I've heard from some they ski long, others have said they ski short.

I want to be able to open it up on these skis but part of my motivation for getting them is skiing bumps. I have 2015 Mantras in 184 that I enjoy in the bumps but there are times that length gets pushed around. So I'm trying to balance stability/carving and bumps/playfulness.

I also race and train on Stokli GS >23 185 and Atomic Redster SL 165.

I'm getting conflicting advice on 175 vs. 183.

Thoughts?
post #43 of 56

I'd think that you'll be happy on the 175's. I've never encountered someone complaining about Stockil's being nervous or skiing short, I've owned several and 183 IME is a very long Stockli (I'm 6'0), and in any case while it'd be great if they made a 179, is still fine if your aim is bumps. If you wanted a slightly more forgiving GS, for really motoring in the wide open spaces, then 183. 

post #44 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

I'd think that you'll be happy on the 175's. I've never encountered someone complaining about Stockil's being nervous or skiing short, I've owned several and 183 IME is a very long Stockli (I'm 6'0), and in any case while it'd be great if they made a 179, is still fine if your aim is bumps. If you wanted a slightly more forgiving GS, for really motoring in the wide open spaces, then 183. 
Thanks...I was able to get ahold of the rep who corroborated what you're saying, as did a local shop manager who skied them last year.

It makes sense, at my weight I probably shouldn't be skiing the longest ski in anything Stockli.
post #45 of 56
Thread Starter 

Quote:

Originally Posted by oboe View Post
 

Two remarks:

 

(1) Perhaps that balance point on the AX had something to do with delta, ramp, or fore/aft binding position.

 

(2) From what I've read about the Stockli Scale Delta, I'd like to see a review of that ski and the other Scale skis.


Well, since I know I'm set up solidly in balance (and I'm skiing them with Look Pivots which have virtually no delta), I don't think that's it. I'm surprised at the general belief that these are somehow "forgiving" skis. While they aren't full-up race skis, certainly, they are certainly more sensitive to skill and balance than many more typical skis. I enjoy full-on race skis, but prefer a broader performance window for the requirements I have to ski with my guests whenever I am scheduled as opposed to choosing my days based on conditions and other preferences.

 

If you like the feel of a traditional wood-core race ski and would like that in a somewhat wider and more versatile form factor, this is an excellent choice.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post
 


What was your take on that ski vs. the Scale Delta that I loved?  Can't remember if you skied it at Copper that day or not; was thinking you got a few runs on it as well.

Right on, Scott. The Scale is more of a "forgiving all-around" ski than the AX. It doesn't have quite as high a top-end and isn't quite as demanding on-edge, but certainly has a lot more high-end performance than the vast majority of skis on the market today.

post #46 of 56
Then I'm baffled, because both Scott and Phil say that the AX is an easy ski. In fact, in a private message, Phil even referred to it as a "K2 Rictor". I'll demo the AX and see if it's more than I should be on for teaching Levels 5 and 6. AND for my own pleasure when line up results in no work. AND for keeping up with those who like to ski FAST.
post #47 of 56
Thread Starter 
Let me try again.

It's not a difficult ski to ski.

However, it rewards balance and skill with a quite dramatic and notable increase in performance. They aren't a bad ski, ever. But, when skied in balance and with suitable skill, they reward with a delightful experience.

As always, everyone experiences skis differently, and the AX is no exception. However, I would not want someone used to a K2 or Rossi to think that it skis and feels similarly to those skis. It doesn't. It's definitely Swiss and definitely a traditional wood core laminate.
post #48 of 56

I have been intrigued by the Stockli Laser AX as of late and am thinking about adding it to my quiver for next season.  Chocking a bit on the price and not sure I can demo but I'm after one in 167.  I think it'd be a nice frontside ski for me.  

post #49 of 56

snowsurfgirl, having viewed your bio, it seems that you're quite the collector of skis! Following my exchange with SSH as per above, I purchased the 2017 Stockli Laser AX in 167, which is neither too much nor too little for this superannuated skier of modest skill.  SSH is right on - anyone can use the AX effectively - but when you start showing it your skill and challenging its capabilities, it really shines. That said, almost no person at intermediate to expert can go wrong buying those skis.They have a huge performance envelope. I use them almost exclusively in the East, as they handle all conditions and challenges and can give are an exciting ride that's also very comfortable. 

 

Unlike you, I have three pairs of skis - Kastle FX 94 of previous years, which is 94mm under foot and 166 cm in length [I could use longer, but those do fine for my purposes];  173 cm length of the Volkl 100EIGHT; and the Stocklis, which are my narrowest skis, and I need nothing narrower.  I have yet to ski on the Volkls - I bought them because I stole them as a loss leader at south of 50% retail including all taxes and delivery. Bought them for the western trips, but will try them here [Vermont] when I get a chance just to become familiar with them.

 

By the way - I bought the Stocklis and the Kastles from dawgcatching - a great guy with whom to do business. Before you spring for another vendor, unless you don't care about or need a break in price, check him out. Then you decide.

 

I teach [at Bolton Valley, Vermont] all levels using the Stocklis, my every day skis, for teaching  from never-ever beginners up to Level 6, and they work very well for those purposes. They also work very well for mach schnell on very hard and scratchy snow, except that I don't feel the scratchiness when using those skis. Make no mistake - I've skied on other hard snow Stocklis which are far less tolerant of low speed, short turns, and modest skill [such as mine]. The Laser AX isn't one of those, as it DOES tolerate slow speed, short turns, and modest skill - but it also tolerates very high speed on very hard snow and can use that extra level of skill, and does it very well.

 

Should you opt for the Stockli Laser AX, I'll be interested in your feed back, including your height, weight, age, experience, and honest estimate of your level of skill in the 1 through 9 scale. I've shrunk two and a half inches in height - I'm 5'8" [with swollen soles], 150 pounds, 75 years of age, have skied since 1990 with a few years off for surgeries, and on a very good day with perfect hero snow conditions and low demands, after skiing several weeks of the season, I can fake Level 8. Fake it.

 

I hope this contributes to your decision as to whether to add this highly versatile ski with a huge performance envelope to your growing collection.

post #50 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by oboe View Post

snowsurfgirl, having viewed your bio, it seems that you're quite the collector of skis! Following my exchange with SSH as per above, I purchased the 2017 Stockli Laser AX in 167, which is neither too much nor too little for this superannuated skier of modest skill.  SSH is right on - anyone can use the AX effectively - but when you start showing it your skill and challenging its capabilities, it really shines. That said, almost no person at intermediate to expert can go wrong buying those skis.They have a huge performance envelope. I use them almost exclusively in the East, as they handle all conditions and challenges and can give are an exciting ride that's also very comfortable. 

Unlike you, I have three pairs of skis - Kastle FX 94 of previous years, which is 94mm under foot and 166 cm in length ;  173 cm length of the Volkl 100EIGHT; and the Stocklis, which are my narrowest skis, and I need nothing narrower.  I have yet to ski on the Volkls - I bought them because I stole them as a loss leader at south of 50% retail including all taxes and delivery. Bought them for the western trips, but will try them here [Vermont] when I get a chance just to become familiar with them.

By the way - I bought the Stocklis and the Kastles from dawgcatching - a great guy with whom to do business. Before you spring for another vendor, unless you don't care about or need a break in price, check him out. Then you decide.

I teach [at Bolton Valley, Vermont] all levels using the Stocklis, my every day skis, for teaching  from never-ever beginners up to Level 6, and they work very well for those purposes. They also work very well for mach schnell on very hard and scratchy snow, except that I don't feel the scratchiness when using those skis. Make no mistake - I've skied on other hard snow Stocklis which are far less tolerant of low speed, short turns, and modest skill [such as mine]. The Laser AX isn't one of those, as it DOES tolerate slow speed, short turns, and modest skill - but it also tolerates very high speed on very hard snow and can use that extra level of skill, and does it very well.

Should you opt for the Stockli Laser AX, I'll be interested in your feed back, including your height, weight, age, experience, and honest estimate of your level of skill in the 1 through 9 scale. I've shrunk two and a half inches in height - I'm 5'8" [with swollen soles], 150 pounds, 75 years of age, have skied since 1990 with a few years off for surgeries, and on a very good day with perfect hero snow conditions and low demands, after skiing several weeks of the season, I can fake Level 8. Fake it.

I hope this contributes to your decision as to whether to add this highly versatile ski with a huge performance envelope to your growing collection.

Thanks for your detailed reply. I'm a 5th year skier and a 2nd year instructor. I am 5'6" 175lbs and would rate myself a level 5. I'm a timid skier who has a lot of nerve issues. I've been known to get in my head and freeze. I have several instructor colleagues who mentor me and I just finished an intense weekend of clinics with my ski school. I am a slow developer but I'm proud to say that instructor friend Ron said I'm an entirely different skier now than I was last March. I'm parallel, have a much better position and have picked up some speed.

I'm pretty stroked on the AX. I'd probably sell a couple pairs of skis and get the stocklis. I like that it can ski slow and can also open up when I want. I need to go sloooooo when teaching the first timers but often free ski with my guy or my colleagues so like a ski that I can at least try to keep up with them on smile.gif

Sounds like a great ski. Due to my weight and that I ski in the Northeast I like a ski with teeth that go slow with the kiddles but also be fine for free skiing. Sounds like they handle our eastern conditions just great.

I might downsize little and sell a couple pairs. 

I have the 100eights younger sibling and like them a lot .

I will definitely check with dawgcatching. A break in price would be dandy.

I teach mostly beginners at butternut in western Massachusetts so these would get lots of use there and at my Vermont mountains as well. I also head up to Quebec to ski every January.

The Stockli Laser AX sounds perfect for me as it's good at all speeds and great in our NE conditions.

All this helps tremendously. THANK YOU.
Edited by surfsnowgirl - 12/28/16 at 3:05pm
post #51 of 56

I'm amazed that a person who's skied for only five years has such a collection! While I'm not passing judgment on whether the Stockli Laser AX is the ski for you - if you're buying it anyway, don't go shorter than 167. Getting a deal on Stockli isn't easy. If you're a PSIA member, it's possible, but by no means a sure thing. Good luck!

 

At this point in your skiing carrier, since you have such a huge stable of skis, it wouldn't hurt to have another very easy ski for slow speeds.

 

How are conditions at Butternut?

post #52 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by oboe View Post

I'm amazed that a person who's skied for only five years has such a collection! While I'm not passing judgment on whether the Stockli Laser AX is the ski for you - if you're buying it anyway, don't go shorter than 167. Getting a deal on Stockli isn't easy. If you're a PSIA member, it's possible, but by no means a sure thing. Good luck!

At this point in your skiing carrier, since you have such a huge stable of skis, it wouldn't hurt to have another very easy ski for slow speeds.

How are conditions at Butternut?

I've become a bit of a gear head. So many types of skis out there. Kinda like the kid in the candy store concept. I'll probably settle down at some point. Maybe even sell a pair or two. All my skis are 163 and 164cm so was figuring the 167 would work.

I can ski all my skis slow but it will be cool to have a ski that's a little more "easy going".

I am a PSIA member. I will scout around. I'm not in a hurry.

Conditions at Butternut are pretty good. We had a bonafide powder day the weekend before last. We have an excellent snowmakimg and grooming team for rest of the time smile.gif

How are conditions at Bolton valley. I hope to get there one day.
post #53 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by surfsnowgirl View Post
 

I have been intrigued by the Stockli Laser AX as of late and am thinking about adding it to my quiver for next season.  Chocking a bit on the price and not sure I can demo but I'm after one in 167.  I think it'd be a nice frontside ski for me.  


Hey, surfsnowgirl!

 

Please note that the 2017 Laser AX is a different ski than the previous two seasons. It is more forgiving in the shovel, and a bit less of a rocket ship than the previous incarnation. This broadens the performance window of the ski and shifts it a bit into the lower skill levels. For me, the loss of top-end performance was a bit disappointing, but I expect the change to make the ski much more attractive for a broader range of skier.

 

The AX is available through the PSIA Pro Offers.

post #54 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by surfsnowgirl View Post
 

I have been intrigued by the Stockli Laser AX as of late and am thinking about adding it to my quiver for next season.  Chocking a bit on the price and not sure I can demo but I'm after one in 167.  I think it'd be a nice frontside ski for me.  


Hey, surfsnowgirl!

 

Please note that the 2017 Laser AX is a different ski than the previous two seasons. It is more forgiving in the shovel, and a bit less of a rocket ship than the previous incarnation. This broadens the performance window of the ski and shifts it a bit into the lower skill levels. For me, the loss of top-end performance was a bit disappointing, but I expect the change to make the ski much more attractive for a broader range of skier.

 

The AX is available through the PSIA Pro Offers.

 

Hey ssh 

 

Duly noted :).  I experienced something similar with the Volkl Kenja in that I used to own the 2015 but thought the 2016 would be better suited for my purposes as a "mid fat" ski that would also hold it's on on the hard pack.  I feel the 2016 is more user friendly and appeals to a braoder audience so perhaps this is similar to what was done to the AX.  As long as it has 'that bite' in the east coast hard pack and ice that's all I'm after.  I may not let go of my Atomic Redster XTI just yet but will likely sell my Kastle LX82's.  

 

I will check ou tthe PSIA Pro offers, thank you :)

 

Kim aka SSG

post #55 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post


Hey, surfsnowgirl!

Please note that the 2017 Laser AX is a different ski than the previous two seasons. It is more forgiving in the shovel, and a bit less of a rocket ship than the previous incarnation. This broadens the performance window of the ski and shifts it a bit into the lower skill levels. For me, the loss of top-end performance was a bit disappointing, but I expect the change to make the ski much more attractive for a broader range of skier.

The AX is available through the PSIA Pro Offers.

In my own experience, pro offers on Stocklis can evaporate, but it didn't evaporate with dawg. I agree that the Stocklis I originally demoed and the 2017 model I bought aren't the same. In that time period, I'm less than the same myself, unfortunately, so perhaps it all worked out. For snosurfgirl, who says she's a "timid" skier, it may be more than adequate. That said, for those who seek the original Stockli feel, another Laser would be a thought. The AX, for some reason, is marketed in a series that's all business, while the AX - isn't. But it's a worthy versatile frontside ski with a large range of performance. Works for me. At least, it was working for me until I contracted pneumonia. Now I just sit in the recliner taking antibiotics, dozing, and occasionally replying to posts on EpicSki.com
post #56 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by oboe View Post


In my own experience, pro offers on Stocklis can evaporate, but it didn't evaporate with dawg. I agree that the Stocklis I originally demoed and the 2017 model I bought aren't the same. In that time period, I'm less than the same myself, unfortunately, so perhaps it all worked out. For snosurfgirl, who says she's a "timid" skier, it may be more than adequate. That said, for those who seek the original Stockli feel, another Laser would be a thought. The AX, for some reason, is marketed in a series that's all business, while the AX - isn't. But it's a worthy versatile frontside ski with a large range of performance. Works for me. At least, it was working for me until I contracted pneumonia. Now I just sit in the recliner taking antibiotics, dozing, and occasionally replying to posts on EpicSki.com


I hear you. They've gotten better, though... In my experience if they say they have inventory, they'll get you the skis. Eventually.

 

I wonder about the other Lasers, too. I haven't had the chance to ski any of them, since Dawg keeps me on the wider ones when we get out to SIA... :-)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2014-2015 Stockli Laser AX