New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Atomic Beta Ride

post #1 of 6
Thread Starter 
Atomic Beta Ride Questions

I am a male, 30 years old, 5'6"(and a half), 130 lbs, advanced skier that sticks pretty much to Big Bear in So California. I am strongly considering getting the new Atomic Beta Ride 8.20 or 9.22 and I have some questions. Last year was able to demo the Beta V 8.20 (think that was a carving ski) and I liked it, but it felt a bit soft. I want to do more "off piste" (I ski mostly groomers now) so I was thinking a freeride all mountain ski will be best. I really like Atomic's but not sure if I should go with the "ride 8.20" or the "fatter" 9.22. Also please help with a size...170 or 160? (my straight skis were 180s).

post #2 of 6
Hi meyecul,
Welcome to Epicski,

My friend demoed the 8.20 and decided it was a little too soft and not responsive enough. I think the 8.20 was geared towards an intermediate looking to grow but not really a hign end ski. I would demo the 9.22 or even the 9.18. Size would be depending on how you feel on them. Unless you are moving real fast on those groomers I would consider demoing the 160 and seeing if you like it. It will be quicker and easier to turn but you lose some stability at higher speeds. I'm sure there are some people with 1st hand knowledge of these 2 skis so keep watching this board. Again, Welcome.
post #3 of 6
The V-shape was a transition ski for someone who was getting into shaped. The wide shovel and narrow tail allowed for the new style carve initiation, but still allowed a skidded exit. A wider waist made for a more stable platform.

The BetaV series was for learning skiers, and the BetaRide 8.20 ans 9.20 were for more advanced skiers. FOr this year, only the BetaRide 8.20 Device has this shape.

As to your question of which to get at what length? BetaRide 9.22 in a 170.
post #4 of 6
Get the 9.22s, you'll love them. They have a nice sweet spot, but they also really respond when ridden hard -- I did find that they really get into their own as I roder them a bit more agressivly.

I'll have to concur w/ BR's judgement on the size, but 170 is the smallest I'd go. I guess you think a 180 would be too long, BetaRacer? The 190 I ski (190, 5'11") seems about right, although I might go a little shorter, I think 180 would be too short for me. I like the stability the exta length gives; that is, people have said the 9.22 has a speed limit, but at this length it seems plenty stable for free skiing to me.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ November 21, 2001 09:51 AM: Message edited 1 time, by Lodro ]</font>
post #5 of 6
Go with the 9.22, I skied them for 3 years and they took me from a low advanced to a full blown expert, now ski the 10.ex. Go with either length they are very stable at speed and still good short turners, it all depends on what style of skiing you prefer. I'm (5'7", 150lbs) and used the 180s. So my guess would be 170s. Good luck, you've chosen a great ski. [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #6 of 6
Note that there are two different 9.22s, the original blue, and the hyper carbon (yellow) that arrived last year. I think they are a fair bit different -- I'm skiing the HC. I'm assuming this year's 9.22 is similar to the HC.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ November 21, 2001 06:57 PM: Message edited 1 time, by Lodro ]</font>
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion