or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Atomic Vantage 95 C

post #1 of 4
Thread Starter 

Anyone ski the Atomic Vantage 95 C or the Atomic Vantage 90 CTI?  I'm looking to replace my Head Rock N Roll 95, (I have wider skis but want to have a frontside ski for non-powder days).  I've tested the Salomon Q series and hated them.  I weight 150 lbs and am 5'-9" high advanced skier.


Edited by mmpotash - 12/22/15 at 5:57pm
post #2 of 4

I've skied the 90CTi and think its a great ski.  If I needed a ~90mm ski to replace my beloved Steadfasts this would be it.  It has a  bit more rocker in the tip than the Steadfast, holds an edge well on hardpack and is just plain fun to ski.  I couldn't ski it in powder because there wasn't any but I did ski it in the trees and it was solid.  I work in a ski shop and the owner had no interest in having these, until we demoed them at Big Sky.  We now have some.  It's a ski I recommend on a regular basis.  I'm your weight but 2" shorter and an advanced skier.

post #3 of 4
Last season due to some health issues, I skied the light Cham 97 HM with no metal. With better health & more strength, i have gone to the Vantage 90 CTI w/metal. Considering the snow conditions in Vermont, it is just perfect as an everyday driver. You are 20 lbs lighter than me, so the 95c should be OK but I believe that the real benefits of the new Vantage series are that it has some metal and is still light & playful.
post #4 of 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcyclist View Post
 

I've skied the 90CTi and think its a great ski.  If I needed a ~90mm ski to replace my beloved Steadfasts this would be it.advanced skier.

I think you rode the Bushwacker a few years back too. Can you recall how they felt compared to the 90CTi?? or even the Steadfast?? From what I can remember the Steadfast was a little stiffer than the Bushwacker so how would all 3 stack up against each other?? I'm 5'8" 150lbs West coast Advanced skier..

 

Thanks.

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