or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Which RTM to get - Page 2

post #31 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by tch View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by levy1 View Post
 

I just bought a 10 ft tigershark with the same cap sidewall. I wonder how it will ski compared to the traditional Volkls.

Hmmmm..... you're the one holding them, but my memory of skiing the Tigershark was that it was a sandwich ski, not a cap ski.  Is the "cap" merely cosmetic?

 

Whatever, I skied the Tigershark 10's and they were awesome carvers.  I was testing skis and the grip and strength far surpassed other skis I tried at the time time.  I wanted to buy them, but eventually decided I could not afford the controversy with my significant other.

Bought them from Mogsie and he could not have skied them twice from the way they looked. No vertical sidewall, looks just like a cap to me and it has me a little scared because I love and want the Volkl feel. So far, no one has been able to tell me how they ski compared to the RTMs or any other Volkl. Have you skied both?

post #32 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by levy1 View Post
 

Bought them from Mogsie and he could not have skied them twice from the way they looked. No vertical sidewall, looks just like a cap to me and it has me a little scared because I love and want the Volkl feel. So far, no one has been able to tell me how they ski compared to the RTMs or any other Volkl. Have you skied both?

 

You could say that the Tigershark  are cap skis I guess but they sure don't ski like ones!!! It is because of the Dual XTD Transmission  construction : For me, this combination makes the edge hold of these skis even tuffer than most skis with sidewalls. I tested it on genuine -30°Celcius refrozen overnight icy slopes here in Quebec!!!

 

3D-02_c285ab_01.jpg

 

 

 

http://www.volkl.com/skis/technology/construction/ski-contructions.html

post #33 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by bestivo View Post
 

About me:

 

I ski mostly at Mammoth (West cost US)

I ski more often on groomers (70-80%) because of the people I usually ski with

I ski around 30 days / season

I'm between advanced and expert level

I'm 6'1" 165lb (skinny)

 

 

I've skied for 30 years and grew up skiing the 'old style' with quick, short turns. Only in the last few years I started carving

 

 

I have a pair of Volkl AC30 and have been skiing on them for the last few years. I really like them on everything but powder. I want to get something like the AC30s but with more floatation.

 

I was looking at the RTM 81 & 86. The 86 looks like it is the better ski and it would flow better but the 81 was an all new ski for last year. Which one would be better for me?

 

I am also very tempted by the RTM 84 V-Werks. Is it worth the extra $ ?

 

 

 

My AC30s are 177 high. For my next skis should I go 181 since all the RTMs are rockered or should I go with 176 ?

 

 

Thank you !

There is no rtm 86...

I'm 215 pounds and I skied the rtm 81 in 176 cm and I had no problem most of the time except when I pushed it harder, I felt like I could use the 181 cm... If you choose this ski, go with 176 cm... It has amazing edge hold! The only downside, for me , is the lack of some camber, I prefer...also, the edges are so punchy that it was felt when skiing hard bumps...

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by neonleonbst View Post

The rtm 81 is actually a steel topsheet which is actually a softer metal than the titanium used in the rtm 84. So it has a deeper flex to it and will be a pretty fun playful ski that will accept more skiing styles in more conditions than the 84 which is stiffer and just wants to stomp through eveything. Rtm 81 a better ski imho but try them out for yourself and see what's best for your personal skiing style. If you get fatigued at the end of the day or do any bumps at all save yourself and go 81.

It is not the topsheet that is made of steel but the spring that are hidden inside the reinforcement over the edges, each side of the bindings...

post #34 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by levy1 View Post
 

Bought them from Mogsie and he could not have skied them twice from the way they looked. No vertical sidewall, looks just like a cap to me and it has me a little scared because I love and want the Volkl feel. So far, no one has been able to tell me how they ski compared to the RTMs or any other Volkl. Have you skied both?

I thought I answered your question pretty well.  Did you read it?

 

Ski on!

 

Rick G

post #35 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickg View Post
 

I bought a pair of the RTM 81's last season to replace.....AC30's!

 

I have found the 81's to be a better all around ski than the 30 and I loved the 30!  But it was stiff and demanding.  The new 81 is still stiff, but no as much and coupled with the early rise is really easy to set on edge for a carve or to do short radius turns.  Bumps are way easier than the 30's which required more effort and energy from you to ski them well.  The 81 likes to be finessed with more subtle inputs, which is kind of a departure for Volkl.

 

As for length, I went with the 171 and had 170's with the 30's.  These skis are my designated all mountain eastern (more like Mid West) ski and for the smaller areas I ski (less than a 1000 verticle) this length seems perfect for my 5'9" 190 LB frame.  If I was using this ski in New England or out west where there are longer and steeper runs, I would probably have gone with the 177's.

 

Hope this helps.  Good luck!

 

Rick G

It does not have an early rise but a full all mountain rocker... the skiing and the feeling is different...

post #36 of 42

With the RTM 81s, the 176 length felt perfect for me at ~145 lbs.  A longer ski, if anything, I'd have enjoyed (for fast cruising emphasis; whereas the 176 was more versatile, and for bumps). 

 

Mogsie, gotta try a pair of your skis sometime! :)

post #37 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski otter View Post
 

With the RTM 81s, the 176 length felt perfect for me at ~145 lbs.  A longer ski, if anything, I'd have enjoyed (for fast cruising emphasis; whereas the 176 was more versatile, and for bumps). 

 

Mogsie, gotta try a pair of your skis sometime! :)

Lets see...for you...

http://www.epicski.com/t/124259/dynastar-speed-cross-178cm

At your weight, at that lenght, you should feel like I do with the speed course ti ( same ski + titanal) in 183 cm... Amazing ski on-piste , in bumps ( hard or soft), and I can even go in trees with them...Their only limitation is when it as snowed a lot ( more than a feet) they just lack flotation...

Do we have a deal? :-)

post #38 of 42
Thread Starter 

Thank you ALL for the replies!

 

 

I demoed both Volkl RTM 81 and RTM 84 at Mammoth last weekend. I couldn't get my size (176) so i tried RTM 84 171 & 181 and RTM 81 181

 

 

I was comparing the RTM 84 181 and RTM 81 181 since they're the same size (even though it's 5cm longer than my optimal length). The RMT 81 is an awesome ski, perfect for groomers. It was turning a little quicker and easier than the 84 but not by much. I could turn both skis quickly even though they were both a bit long. The 84 was a little better off piste and through slush. I felt a little more stable on the 84s, like I can go without any problems through anything. The 84s are definitely advanced skis. Twice I leaned back for a sec and I could feel the back of the skis dig deeper in the snow. The 81s were more forgiving, they're more of an intermediate/advanced ski.

 

 

 

At the end of the day I ended up buying a pair of RTM 84s. Can't wait to try them (with my correct size) tomorrow :D The RTM 81 is also an amazing ski, if you ski only groomers it's definitely a better value. I could have gotten the 81s for 200$ less but loved the 84s :) and I go off piste often, probably even more often now :D

 

 

 

Thank you again,

 

 

Ivo

post #39 of 42

I'd like to piggyback on this thread...

 

I'm 5'9" 155 lbs. Approaching advanced and primarily ski in New England. I spend most of my time on trail but really enjoy trees and am starting to enjoy bumps more as well. I'm really trying to decide between the RTM 80 and RTM 81 @ 166 and 171. I expect my skill level to continue to increase as I plan on skiing much more going forward than I have in the past and want a ski that will be a good fit now and down the road. In the past I've skied mid 160s but am wondering whether I should size up to the 171 due to rocker and my aspiration of refining my technique. I'd like a ski that can handle a little bit of powder without nosediving but could see myself picking up a pair of wider skis in the future for deep days. 

 

Alternatively, are there any non-Volkls that would be good to consider given my profile?

 

Thanks in advance.

post #40 of 42

I own 2 pair of Volkl's.  The RTM 75 and RTM 84.  Both are the 14/15 models.  Last year I bought the 13/14 model of the RTM 84, but a person accidentally raked his snowboard across the back of one of my ski's and split it open.  Since it was under warranty, Volkl replaced them with a new pair of the current season's model. The biggest difference I noticed was that they fixed the lack of torsional rigidity that last years model seemed to have.  I'm 5' 6",  205.  The 84's are 171 cm and the 75's are 173 cm.  I live in the midwest and ski the hard pack.  Both skis hold very well on ice.  The 84, being a fully rockered rigid ski, can be easy to overpower in a larger radius turn.  I've adoped a more upright, less aggressive stance when trying to carve on the hard pack, and the edges bite in quite nicely and slice.  Otherwise, I was washing out the tails on some of my turns.  Granted, that could be more my fault as a technique issue rather than the ski's fault.  Both skis are incredibly playful at lower speeds and will do whatever you ask of them.  At higher speeds the 84 is rock solid and separates itself from the 75, providing far more stability.  It's hard to explain because it does well at low speed, but becomes a completely different animal at higher speeds, almost like it wakes up when I start skiing faster.  Also brought my 84's out west with me a month ago.  It bit deeply into the softer snow and was much easier to carve on.  It did well off piste on the one powder day we had.  It also blasted right through the crud and piles of soft snow people left behind on the groomers.  Hope the info helps.

 

Cheers.                   

post #41 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by checksix68 View Post
 

I own 2 pair of Volkl's.  The RTM 75 and RTM 84.  Both are the 14/15 models.  Last year I bought the 13/14 model of the RTM 84, but a person accidentally raked his snowboard across the back of one of my ski's and split it open.  Since it was under warranty, Volkl replaced them with a new pair of the current season's model. The biggest difference I noticed was that they fixed the lack of torsional rigidity that last years model seemed to have.  I'm 5' 6",  205.  The 84's are 171 cm and the 75's are 173 cm.  I live in the midwest and ski the hard pack.  Both skis hold very well on ice.  The 84, being a fully rockered rigid ski, can be easy to overpower in a larger radius turn.  I've adoped a more upright, less aggressive stance when trying to carve on the hard pack, and the edges bite in quite nicely and slice.  Otherwise, I was washing out the tails on some of my turns.  Granted, that could be more my fault as a technique issue rather than the ski's fault.  Both skis are incredibly playful at lower speeds and will do whatever you ask of them.  At higher speeds the 84 is rock solid and separates itself from the 75, providing far more stability.  It's hard to explain because it does well at low speed, but becomes a completely different animal at higher speeds, almost like it wakes up when I start skiing faster.  Also brought my 84's out west with me a month ago.  It bit deeply into the softer snow and was much easier to carve on.  It did well off piste on the one powder day we had.  It also blasted right through the crud and piles of soft snow people left behind on the groomers.  Hope the info helps.

 

Cheers.                   

I'm guessing that (maybe) if they were nice at slow speed but not at higher speed, it is because at your weight, you should go to the longer lenght... I've owned the rtm 81 in 176 and weighted 210 at the time :(... They had plenty plenty plenty ( did I say plenty?) of edge grip but at higer speed, I always felt that I should have bought the 181 cm...

post #42 of 42

I went from the RTM 77 to the 81 this year and the only thing they have in common other than the manufacture is both have steel in them and rocker profile.  Otherwise, completely different ski.  If you are an experienced-advanced skier or expert, then the 81 or 84 should only be considered. The 77 could not handle any speed above cruising and I've been told by 7+ different shop owners the 80 is simply a slightly stiffer version of the 77 with additional 3 on the waist.

 

That said, Volkl has rewrote the RTM series for 2016: http://skiblog.powder7.com/fast-forward-2016-volkl-skis/

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion