or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Line sick day 95- East coast everyday
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Line sick day 95- East coast everyday

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 
I would like to hear if people think the Line Sick day 95 would be good as an everyday ski for me on the east coast. I'm 5'8" and 160lbs. 50 y/o and an expert skier. Skiing all around New England about 12 days a year. All over the mountain except the park. I'm in Bumps and trees. Is 95mm underfoot too wide for everyday? Will it hold an edge on the hard/ice?
post #2 of 16

Depends on what you're willing to accept for hard snow performance.  I wouldn't run it through gates, or expect it to carve on edge early season or in the middle of a snow drought.  But it'll be a great ski for storm chasing, most days mid-season onward, and particularly spring bumps at the end of the season.

 

If you're ok with that trade off, and I totally would be, then the answer to your question is yes, it'll be fine.  If you can't live without that hard snow performance, then I'd look elsewhere.

post #3 of 16
Buddy of mine is your size and skier profile and loves his.
post #4 of 16
Thread Starter 
Thanks st bear. I guess I need to decide the trade off. Is there another ski or two that you feel might better fit my needs, based on what I mentioned, more so than the sick day 95 or do you think it's spot on?
post #5 of 16
Thread Starter 
Cool- thanks Dino. Was hoping to hear some of that. He's on the hard pack?
post #6 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtfisch View Post

Thanks st bear. I guess I need to decide the trade off. Is there another ski or two that you feel might better fit my needs, based on what I mentioned, more so than the sick day 95 or do you think it's spot on?

 

I can't really speak to specific recommendations.  Throwing out names without reference doesn't help much, and it probably has more to do with what's available on sale anyway.

 

My comment was more about the idea of a soft snow oriented ski being an everyday ski for the East Coast.  I don't think it's a big deal at all, that's what I run, because I'm more than willing to sacrifice groomer performance for better performance off piste.  All it has to do is get me back to the lift, and that's good enough for me.  You specifically mentioned bumps and trees, so I have a feeling you would be similar.

post #7 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtfisch View Post

Cool- thanks Dino. Was hoping to hear some of that. He's on the hard pack?

He's on a variety of surfaces - skis in the West but this year in CA it was spring-lilke conditions most of the year, and he liked 'em fine.  Not a former racer or anything, but a competent advanced/expert skier with 40+ years on skis.  Sounds like they'll be good all around.  My impression is that if you're looking for ice skates, then you wouldn't be considering this ski as a compromise anyway.  

post #8 of 16
Thread Starter 

I agree- and I am similar when the trees and bumps presents itself. Sometimes here, depending on which mountain, you are limited to all day groomers. Thanks again.

post #9 of 16

Your desires and skiing may vary from mine, but I'd wonder about the loss of hard-snow performance.  You say 12 +/- days a year, which suggests to me that you go when you can, not when conditions are optimal.  If it were me, I'd go for something with more hard-snow ability and some soft snow ability.  Rossi E88 comes to mind, as does Blizzard Bushwhacker or Brahma (depending on how aggressive you are).  I have the Head Rock & Roll 95 for softer/deeper days....but my one-ski choice would be narrower and with more hard-snow ability.

post #10 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtfisch View Post
 

I agree- and I am similar when the trees and bumps presents itself. Sometimes here, depending on which mountain, you are limited to all day groomers. Thanks again.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tch View Post
 

Your desires and skiing may vary from mine, but I'd wonder about the loss of hard-snow performance.  You say 12 +/- days a year, which suggests to me that you go when you can, not when conditions are optimal.  If it were me, I'd go for something with more hard-snow ability and some soft snow ability.  Rossi E88 comes to mind, as does Blizzard Bushwhacker or Brahma (depending on how aggressive you are).  I have the Head Rock & Roll 95 for softer/deeper days....but my one-ski choice would be narrower and with more hard-snow ability.

 

Kind of applies to both, but like I said before, it depends on what you care about.  Even on days when the trees are off limits and the bumps are hard, I'll ski just groomers because I have to, but I really don't mind if I'm skidding my turns, instead of carving them.  It's just not what I'm into.  Since that's the case, if I had to choose only one type of ski, which I do, I wouldn't want to go skinnier and give up the performance in the better conditions.  Just my thoughts.

post #11 of 16
I demoed this ski at Steamboat last year. I had been on Bonafides the previous day. It was a hard snow morning when I got on them. I did not like them at all. It was very disappointing after reading all the stellar reviews. To be honest I didn't give them much of a chance as i skied back down and swapped out with the Bonafides again.

I'm sure softer day would have been different.

It was surprising as I liked the other Line skis I've be on. I own P90s and I loved SFBs albeit I skied those with some new snow. I think there are a lot of better options for the east coast like bear said.

I skied the E98 at copper last year on early morning hard snow and they were great.
Edited by WC68 - 8/19/14 at 5:41am
post #12 of 16
Thread Starter 
TCH- you mention the Bushwacker and the Brahma. Those keep being brought up to me as good choices. Here's a question regarding these two . . . .
The way I understand it- the difference between the two is the metal in the Brahma. I am not too big a guy (5'8 and 160lbs). I do ski somewhat agressively but definitely not the most agressive guy on the hill - those days have long passed me by. I'm not a speed demon. Will the Brahma be too stiff for me or will the Brahma be better for me due to the slightly better edge hold it might provide? Thoughts from all are appreciated.
post #13 of 16

I will be honest: I've never skied the Brahma.  But I skied the BW and found it to be a bit light and not so grippy and damp in the hard stuff as I wanted.  Your preference may vary.  For reference, I'm 58, 5'7", 170, muscular/stocky, and skied the 173.  From reports, the BW is more like the Sick Day in that folks like it in the softer stuff and bumps, but not so much in the hard.  The Brahma was supposed to add some beef and grip w/o unduly altering the rest of the performance.  

 

 For me, an eastern ski must be able to handle the hardpack that develops with inclement weather and traffic.  Others may have different views and/or different experiences.

post #14 of 16
Thread Starter 
I appreciate it TCH. Your in my size range . . .what do you ski now and are you happy with it?
post #15 of 16

gtfisch, for the time being, I've settled on a two-ski solution.  I have a pair of Dynastar CrossTi skis in 172 (74mm underfoot) that I ski on hard days and smaller mountains.  And I have the Head Rock & Roll (95mm) that I ski on soft/fresh/crud days and more when I'm on bigger mountains (planning to take them out west this winter).  I'm not positive I like the solution (although I like the skis -- esp. the Heads); sometimes I am paralyzed and take both pairs cuz I'm not sure.  One pair of skis somewhere in the middle (like the E88 or Brahma for me) might alleviate the decision-making issue.  

post #16 of 16
That, @tch, is a sensible ec quiver.
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 › Line sick day 95- East coast everyday