EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Atomic M:EX yeah or nay?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Atomic M:EX yeah or nay? - Page 3

post #61 of 76

M:EX sizing - who are the 185's for?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratify
In all of these discussions, I'm seeing some LARGE skiers debating on ski length - and albeit, I'm used to a LOT of ski. However, at no point did I think that this was too much ski at all (in a 185). As a matter of fact, it feels like the perfect length (as evidenced by the ski's stability at speed). I'll even go as far as to say that the Atomic sizing chart may be a little bit too restrictive (kinda like when your local ski shop sets your bindings to 4 to avoid being sued when you don't release). I think a 175 might not be enough ski for me (in terms of sacrificing stability and float). Certainly you guys who are pushing 250 - 260 pounds should entertain the thought of 185s. (If you're not big enough to handle the longest board, then who is? ... or why would Atomic even make a ski that large?).
This is exactly what I'm wondering...If you follow Atomic's sizing chart, who are they making the M:EX 185's for? I've settled on purchasing the M:EX and need to pick a size. Proabaly can't go too wrong, but I'd like to try to get it right. Demo'ing both isn't an option and I'd like to buy now while the price is right (~$350). So, here's my question: at 38 yr old, 6' 4", 220 lbs, advanced skiier used to 205cm straights--should I go for the 175's or 185's? The sizing chart puts me clearly at 175's but I'm wondering why they make 185's if everyone should follow it. Any thoughts?

Thanks. This forum has been a lot of help.

- Lou
post #62 of 76
Lou: I'm 6'1", 205 lbs and I have the 175 cm's. They're perfect for my size.

If I was you, I'd lean strongly towards the 185's. You would rock on those skis. They're made for a guy your size, and will return massive power if you bring it.

At $350, don't hesitate! Next year's M:EX's are identical (except for name and graphics), but you'll pay twice the price.
post #63 of 76
Thread Starter 
I am 6' 190lbs. I have skied the 175 and 185. I did not like the 175 in shin high western snow. The 185s were much more top my liking. Having said this, prefer the Volkl AX4. They are one year older, stiffer, charge the bowls better, and you can mount your choice of bindings.
post #64 of 76
I know we had this discussion elsewhere, but wouldn't a 180 be nice.
post #65 of 76
I'm 6'1", 175-180 lb, and demoed the M:EX when they first came out in the spring of '04. I skied it with the old heavier neox binding.

I was on the 185. The rep looked at me sideways when I asked to take them out. I thought it was funny that they didn't have anything bigger to demo...lol. Anyway, I thought they skied great, though I only got to ski groomers with them. Yes they are heavy. I like how they rail GS carves though sluff like my 185 xtra hots or better, but they felt like they had more pop and torsional stiffness. Very solid ski.

Now that they can be had cheap online, I'm thinking about picking up a pair and throwing some 614 race bindings I have on them, should at least be lighter than the neox setup, but atomics never have and never will be light skis.

Kevin
post #66 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star
Now that they can be had cheap online, I'm thinking about picking up a pair and throwing some 614 race bindings I have on them, should at least be lighter than the neox setup, but atomics never have and never will be light skis.

Kevin
I know you loved the 185's. But, before making a final decision, have you considered trying the 175's?

Like you, I love a solid, confidence-inspiring ski. I'm 6'1" 200 lbs, and found that the 175's brought all the beef I needed, yet were plenty nimble with fabulous float.
post #67 of 76
Good to see you hangin' around, again, Capt'n! It must be near to snowin'!
post #68 of 76
Hi Steve: Yup. It's getting close, and the pulse is quickening.

I can't maintain interest during the summer due to fascination with sea kayaking (a thrilling yet sublime sport - any skier would love it). However, as soon as the temperature drops a bit, I'm here!
post #69 of 76
I've been researching "one-quiver" skis for the past month and based on this forum and some of the magazine reviews from last year, decided to take the plunge for the M:ex. Kept looking on ebay for a sale, but it seems like mostly 175cm and 185cm were available. Based on Atomic's Metron scale, I was looking for the 165cm version (175 lbs, expert, medium to long turns). Ended up at backcountry.com for about $350 for the skis and $130 for the bindings. Seems like a great deal. I did get the 81mm brake, but after a gentle bend around the 84mm waist they mounted fine. Now, we just need snow...
post #70 of 76

A little more please...

Quote:
Originally Posted by denski
I love the M:EX which I picked up this year. I'm 200 pounds and an advanced skier. I bought them in a 165 with a bit of hesitation regarding the length. Frankly, I couldn't be happier. They are very stable for me at that length. Maybe I could have gone longer, but I feel the 165 is very versatile for me, and remarkably stable for that length.
I folllowed the Atomic sizing chart and ordered the 155's with a lot of hesitation. I'm coming back to the slopes after many years away. I bought these as a second pair of skis because of the great deal and reviews I read on them.

I'm 5 ' 9" ...176 pounds and planned on using these once I get my sea/ski legs back. :

Can you tell me what kinds of runs you have been doing and your impressions of the M:ex on each?

Thanks
post #71 of 76
I am 6'6" wt 220+ with all the holiday food. I p/u a pair of 185 m:ex's and today was my first day on them. At first I was a little dissapointed because they felt like they wanted to slide out from under me on the groomers. I tried a few different techniques and then said screw it and charged the groomers hard with massive edge angles and it would hold some then wash out, no falls it was easy to recover (pretty forgiving ski). I knew today was going to warm up and snow turn to garbage and mash potatos. The ski starting improving quickly once the groom tracks were gone and temps climbed. The ski is in incredible on garbage and varied snow. It floated well and was stable through the mash potatos. I liked the ski cranked up to speed in the mash potatos I even skied an extra couple of hours since I was having so much fun. The base bevel looks pretty high on these skis and the factory tune feels sharp but looks like crap and has some burrs and excessive rough striations. I will probably tune the side edge before going out again. Overall seemed to be a good buy since they are so cheap and the worse the snow the better it skied. Hopefully I can get it to at least hold on the groomers better in future with better tune.
post #72 of 76
Give your tune a close look. I've NEVER had these skis wash out on me, even on ultra-hard-pack. They're bomber on the groomed and hold like an ice skate.

In crud, the edges aren't an issue, which is why you likely enjoyed the ski there. Run the edges over a stone and let us know what you feel.
post #73 of 76
They come from the factory with excessive base bevel, about 2 to 2.5 degrees. Great in soft snow, but get them set to a true 1 degree base bevel if you want to ski mixed ice with them. 3 degree side.
post #74 of 76

Size

I am 5' 10'' @ 190 lbs, intermediate skier looking for an all around ski. I can get M:EX for cheap so I am thinking should I go for 175 or 165 and is this really an overkill for an intermediate skier?
post #75 of 76

atomicM:EX yeah or nay?

I have read all the post on these skis and have to tell you they really rock,I got them for sking out west on trips but used them back here at HUNTER MTN a couple of days and loved them.My everyday ski is a VOKLL 6 STAR in a 168cm and sure there not as quick edge to edge and will carve as well but they really work great on the hardpack and funky conditions .They are fast due to the stability based on the platform and for me a blast to ride ,fun fun fun. These are 175cms and I had concerns on the length,thinking 165cm but made the right choice, I'm 5'8" and 205lbs and can ski! These are for experts who can make them work.The one ski quiver indeed ! the metron B-5 also is excellent for that as well.

The best part is I only paid $299.00 (2005 model,minor graphic change and arms) and you can get them from NATHEN at atomic skiers outlet .com at 1-887-478-7547 if you hurry(free shipping)wide brake bindings as well($119.00)
.TELL HIM THE POWDERKID TOLD YOU!
post #76 of 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by ibilenjkij
I am 5' 10'' @ 190 lbs, intermediate skier looking for an all around ski. I can get M:EX for cheap so I am thinking should I go for 175 or 165 and is this really an overkill for an intermediate skier?
Maybe. While the M:EX is different than its 10:EX / R:EX predecessor, it still is alot of ski.

4-5 years ago, the 10:EX was very popular as one of the rare "big mountain" skis that was versatile enough to ski in all conditions within the resort. Great stability and edge grip for a "wide" ski on hard conditions but required a good bit of effort in tight spots, etc. SKIING rated it top ski for the freeride superhero category.

Today, there are a number of wider, more versatile yet more forgiving skis that don't give up much to the EX in crud or hardpack. For that reason, I've retired my 191 10:EX and will buy something like the Mantra, 8800, etc.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Atomic M:EX yeah or nay?