or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion ›  Mogul dilemma for freeride ski
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mogul dilemma for freeride ski

post #1 of 27
Thread Starter 
I cannot zero in on a ski that is a free ride ski with rocker tip and tail, that is good all mountain and will be good when skiing bumps 30% of the time. I almost bought the Brahma until I ran it through the bumps and that ski is just too Stiff for bumps unless your zipper lining your bump runs which at my age of 40 I don't really do anymore. I used to compete moguls and now I'm looking for a ski that is a little bit more noodle-ish and I can go at a slower speed and not zipper line them all the time( which equates to a softer ski especially tail. Problem with going to soft in the tail though is that when on groomers I won't get that pop to initiate quick radius turns on steeps . I also want a ski that is a 16-17 turning radius. I need a ski that initiates the turn quick and easy in the tip a rocker profile, but has a tail that will release and scid when I need it to. I am in an area where it's difficult to demo skis I want to demo, so I'm stating that for those of you that are gonna tell me to get out and demo skis. Wink. I have some people telling me I should look at skis that are twin tips because they're softer in the tail, skid and release in bumps when needed, but my problem with that is I don't believe any Twin twin ski is going to be a great front side Carver when needed. I don't want a ski that is over 90 mm underfoot. I'm actually leaning more towards a ski that is 75 to 85 underfoot as I'm not a fan of the fat waisted skis especially on the East Coast. I just don't get it. How much snow did we get? Especially this year? One snowstorm so far?. That's my point. I have narrowed it down to the blizzard Latigo( 78 under foot ) vs brahma 88, Same ski as the Brahma just 10 mm narrower at every point on the ski. My only concern with that ski is it still has the metal in it like the Brahma and I think it may be too Stiff. But the ski has a raving reviews and everyone I have talked to so far say that that ski is a complete sleeper and actually better than the Brahma. The other ski on my list for what I'm looking at is the bushwhacker. Which They don't make anymore,( The same exact ski has the Brahma without Metal in it) somebody told me to look at the women's black pearl, which is the bushwhacked with a women's top sheet and color . Which is the Brahma without any metal too. The Blizzard Cheyenne is even on my list which is the Lattigo in the woman's version with no metal in it. Does anybody have any other suggestions for a ski that meets the criteria I'm looking for? 16-17 M radius, initiate quick turns when needed, and has a tail I can skid and release, and is not super stiff and not too soft. Thank you to anyone that can help me with some more input
post #2 of 27

Are you on coke?;)

 

That paragraph makes my eyes bleed.  Space out your criteria clearly and in order of preference and someone might have a shot at helping but I'd suspect some will conflict.

post #3 of 27
Thread Starter 
Lol. No Coke this morning. Yet. i'm sorry I used Siri for that thread, and as I'm reading it now it is all over the place.
I'm 6 foot 170 pounds
Criteria :
1- 16-17 m turning radius, i.e., quick turn initiation on steep trails that are narrow. ( speed control)
2- good in bumps, not necessarily zipper line straight like I used to back in the day when I competed. Which then I liked a stiffer tail and stiffer ski, But now that I'm older I want to slow my speed down and have more maneuverability and the ability to roll over a bump here and there to keep my speed down and gives the ability to change lines while running through Bump run without a stiff tail shooting me and one direction or the other. Which is what I felt like the Brahma did. I absolutely loved the Brahma outside of the bumps though.
3- i'm not a real true fast extreme stability and holding a long carved turn guy. That doesn't really matter to me to much. I'm older now at 40, and just want to go out and have fun and play.

I had a knee injury 15 years ago in a bump competition. I stop skiing for over a decade and came back to all this shaped stuff. Which there in lies my struggle right now. I don't have much knowledge anymore on the new skis, the technology behind them, and how they ski with all the variables and differences in size shape and stiffness

Thanks
post #4 of 27

OK when I see that radius and versatility/pivotability criteria I start to think of the Icelantic SKNY models but I know they're not for everyone.

post #5 of 27

Whatever the Fischer watea line has morphed into these days might be good.

 

The Rossi E84 (yellow) also has a "playful" feel - I think it would fit your description quite nicely.

fun and playful, doesn't have to be straight down the hill to be fun

post #6 of 27
Thread Starter 
I skied the Rossi e84. I agree, great ski, but the tails are wide and squared off and don't skid and release easy.
post #7 of 27

If you can find a place to demo a variety of new skis, that would be your best option.  You will find quickly that some skis really don't strike your fancy and you can eliminate them from further consideration.  If you haven't really skied in 15 years, things have definitely changed.  I don't think that you can just pick a ski that best suits your needs without actually trying any.  You may come close by buying based on on-line reviews, but you will never really know.  Besides that, its fun to try a bunch of different skis, even ones that you might never have considered.

post #8 of 27

K2 Petitor 102. 

post #9 of 27

Try the Fischer Motive 86.  I just got the 95 and they are good in bumps and for me, meet at your criteria (except they are not great on boilerplate, which is when I don't ski LOL).

 

I'm 61, not terribly athletic, still like to ski bumps (and still improving).  Typically I ski with a narrower "old school" stance, the only adjustment I had to make with the 95's is get my feet slightly wider apart, probably about where they should be anyway.  

post #10 of 27

Blizzard Latigo and Brahma are too stiff. If shopping Blizzard search Bushwacker. No metal. 

 

K2 recreational skis

 

Line Supernatural LITE, a no metal, all mountain ski or the Supernatural with metal but it's stiff for bumps and you'll get bucked around.

 

I've found the wider tips of all mountain skis get in the way when mogul skiing and the fatter all mountain skis lack the quickness of a true mogul ski.

Hope that helps.

post #11 of 27

I have now skied last years Scott Black Majic 3 or 4 times.  It does have metal in it, and a more traditional flat tail.  My initial impression:  what it gives up on serious boilerplate, is returned and then some in a mogul field and it carves pretty nicely on surfaces that are not bullet proof.  My set was purchased at Skimonster.com for $449. 

 

Unfortunately, I've never even seen a blizzard latigo in my neck of the woods, much less had an opportunity to ride one, in order to give you a comparison.  Nonetheless, I skied the Black Majics in lots of slushy spring like bumps last sunday and enjoyed them immensely.  The held their own on the frozen surface before it softened later in the morning.

post #12 of 27
THE SKI by Scott. Check it out.
post #13 of 27

Kastle FX84 or FX85 HP (HP for back east ice).

 

Bushwacker, to me, does not hold edge; it slarves.  

 

I didn't know Latigo was as stiff as the Brahma; thought it was a much better bump ski, but haven't tried it myself.  

post #14 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJskier164 View Post

Try the Fischer Motive 86.  I just got the 95 and they are good in bumps and for me, meet at your criteria (except they are not great on boilerplate, which is when I don't ski LOL).

I'm 61, not terribly athletic, still like to ski bumps (and still improving).  Typically I ski with a narrower "old school" stance, the only adjustment I had to make with the 95's is get my feet slightly wider apart, probably about where they should be anyway.  

The motive 86 and 95 are very different skis. Don't assume one is just a narrower version of the other. For one thing, they have completely different tip profiles, both from the side view (rise) and the top view (taper). Personally, as a lighter person who, like the OP, found the Brahma too stiff, I would stay away from the Motive 86 as a bump ski. (Great wide carver, though.) The Latigo is better than the Brahma in bumps imho. Been on both, briefly.
post #15 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski otter View Post
 

Kastle FX84 or FX85 HP (HP for back east ice).

 

Bushwacker, to me, does not hold edge; it slarves.  

 

I didn't know Latigo was as stiff as the Brahma; thought it was a much better bump ski, but haven't tried it myself.  

Uh, I loved the bushwacker, think it was great, much preferred to Brahma, expecially for what he's after.

I have the FX84's - too stiff for what you're after.

My old atomic crimson ti's were perfect, but not made anymore.

just my take...

post #16 of 27
I used to race moguls, too, a few years before you. IMHO, what you're seeking doesn't exist...I have yet to find a ski that can do everything you want. Steep, tighter turns on ice almost demand a higher energy, stiffer ski; softer skis that would allow a little more skidding in bumps and not force straighter lines don't carve as well, though.

I have about 30lbs on you, so your mileage will vary. I typically use the Kastle MX78 here in the East; they're fantastic, versatile skis that will dig trenches in ice, but the relatively stiff tail and significantly wider shovel/tail vs waist makes swiveling turns in the bumps tough, as the shovel/tail really want to grab. I have to be super careful about the amount of edge angle I've got, or the skis will hook up, and I'm going in an unintended direction, fast. I think this is the fundamental difficulty of shaped skis in the bumps; anything that can really carve on ice wants to hook up too aggressively for lazy bump skiing unless they're detuned. Kind of defeats the purpose for carving. The Brahma fits this description for me, too, and were a close 2nd when I got the MX78s (edit: brain is getting mushy...I tried the Bushwacker and one of the Magnums back then, and the Magnum was a close 2nd. Brahma one or two years ago, I think).

I recently tried the Kastle FX95 HP, and I know they'd be fine for what you want skiing bumps, but I seriously doubt you'd be happy on them on hard pack. On soft groomers, bumps, bottomless, crud, I felt like I was cheating, but I have a feeling the early-rise tip/tail wouldn't be great for hard carving. The tails aren't stiff enough to rocket you into the next turn on ice, IMHO.

The Bushwacker didn't work for me on the East Coast when I tried them. Too soft for my weight, I think.

Good luck!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Edited by ilikebeer - 2/5/16 at 6:02pm
post #17 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post


The motive 86 and 95 are very different skis. Don't assume one is just a narrower version of the other. For one thing, they have completely different tip profiles, both from the side view (rise) and the top view (taper). Personally, as a lighter person who, like the OP, found the Brahma too stiff, I would stay away from the Motive 86 as a bump ski. (Great wide carver, though.) The Latigo is better than the Brahma in bumps imho. Been on both, briefly.

Hmmm...didn't know that, haven't skied the 86 and was going on something about them I read somewhere else.  Thanks for pointing out the difference.

post #18 of 27

I would check out the Nordica Soul Rider and/or the new Enforcer 93 which should be awesome. The Soul Rider is a very easy ski to ski in bumps at slower speeds and its very maneuverable and quick everywhere. Most of the Blizzard skis are stiff and hard to turn at slower speeds. They are known for being stable while carving GS turns even in rough snow not for being "easy" skis. 

post #19 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuchosPixels View Post
 

I would check out the Nordica Soul Rider and/or the new Enforcer 93 which should be awesome. The Soul Rider is a very easy ski to ski in bumps at slower speeds and its very maneuverable and quick everywhere. Most of the Blizzard skis are stiff and hard to turn at slower speeds. They are known for being stable while carving GS turns even in rough snow not for being "easy" skis. 

Those are both wide skis for bumps and will hinder quick transitions. I'm sure they are great for wide spaced out west open terrain skiing though.

post #20 of 27

The Salomon Q-90 should meet all of your criteria.  89mm underfoot and 17m radius @ 177cm length.  It has no metal, so very friendly in the bumps, just wide enough for all-mountain, and handles speed and carves surprisingly well.  Also, it is inexpensive and easy to find.

post #21 of 27


Hey mikeyb,

 

I just to compete in moguls between 1988 and 1998 had a knee injury as well. I think if you wanna have a good allround ski you should go for the scott black majic. This ski holds well in moguls and goes well in long turns as well. i also tested the salomon x8.0 but for me that one was a little to stiff. You can also try Hart the classic but then again it is not an allround ski like the scott black majic.

post #22 of 27
I just skied the Atomic Vantage 90 CTI yesterday at Heavenly and enjoyed them in the bumps down Gunbarrel. I skied the Brahma the past two seasons at both Heavenly and Telluride and think that the Atomic Vantage 90 CTI is better for bumps because it has a softer flex. The Brahmas were fine in soft bumps, but I found them too stiff for hard, misshapen bumps off of Gold Hill at Telluride.

For the record, I am 46 y. o., 5'8", 175 lbs. and have been skiing for over 40 years, including everyday at Telluride for a season back in the early 90s. I have skied the Brahmas in a 180cm length and the Vantage 90s in a 176cm.
post #23 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post

The motive 86 and 95 are very different skis. Don't assume one is just a narrower version of the other. For one thing, they have completely different tip profiles, both from the side view (rise) and the top view (taper). Personally, as a lighter person who, like the OP, found the Brahma too stiff, I would stay away from the Motive 86 as a bump ski. (Great wide carver, though.) The Latigo is better than the Brahma in bumps imho. Been on both, briefly.

I've owned the Motive 88 for about 3 seasons. Love it in the bumps. Not having been on either the M86 or M95, I can't say for sure how each compare, but I suspect they will work just fine in the bumps. Would be good to hear from owners of those skis.
post #24 of 27

I can vouch for the 95 being good in bumps, surprisingly good in fact, I would guess as long as you're not trying to zipperline them... that's not in my realm  LOL

post #25 of 27

Blizzard Zero G 95 might be a good choice.

post #26 of 27
Maybe a Nordica NRGY 80?
post #27 of 27

FX84 might work well - disagree with earlier poster that it's all that stiff - and while its tail is flat, it pivots very nicely in bumps (keep in mind that competitive bump skis also have flat tails). OTOH, the very best all-mountain bump skis, for folks who like to slide the rears or just drift, tend to be all wood twins. Go take a gander at Armada's website. 

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 ›  Mogul dilemma for freeride ski