New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Xbow, Mira, TMX, or R:EX

post #1 of 8
Thread Starter 
I'm looking at all these skis as my BC and everyday ski for the east coast, mounted with freerides. Anybody have any input?
I'm 5'8 160, and on 171 1080s currently, but find them too noodly when I get them up to speed. I have Jak BC 170s for big powder dumps (when that happens), but that ski is not good all around.

So I'm used to softer skis, but would like to move to something stiffer that will allow railing groomers but still handle well offpiste at both tight turns and high speed turns in more open terrain.

Is the REX too stiff? I've heard to ski this a bit shorter than usual (168 I guess), or is the 177 OK and manageable in tight situations?

Any input on any of these skis would be great.
post #2 of 8
Don't know about the other skis, but I think the REX is an excellent choice if you only have one ski for everything on and off area. It has a smooth flex, but is just a tad on the stiff side compared to most BC skis. so go just a little shorter than you would with and alpine ski. I use it for BC and on area occasionally with no problem. If you want a softer version check out the TMX.
post #3 of 8
you should be aware that all Black Diamond skis are made by Atomic. as a result, they feel a lot like Atomics.

Black Diamond's binding mounting instructions will put you in the back seat. Be on the alert, you might want to move them forward 1cm.

the TM:EX reputedly is slightly softer in flex than the R:EX, to account for the different pressure distributions (mostly LIGHTER) with telemark technique

I ski the BD Havocs in a 173cm, I'm 5'10" and 160 lbs and ski about at Level 8 or so. They're a sturdy ski, stable and fairly stiff. Based on comparative reviews I've read from last year and this year, the Crossbow probably is closest to the TM:EX... but also look at BD's new ski, the Ethic.

The Mira is more like an Atomic R:9 (or whatever they're calling the old 9.22)
post #4 of 8
Thread Starter 
gonzostrike -
I think i recall having a conversation with you last year about being thrown in the back seat by the skis...was it not the mounting height of the fritschis also? Did you end up increasing the forward lean by removing the front plate, or just put heel lifts in your boots or something like that?

When I mounted them on exploders, I was WAY back, almost uncomfortably so. Of course I found the exploder to be too big and stiff for me anyway (it skied me, not me skiing it).
post #5 of 8
Originally Posted by gonzostrike
The Mira is more like an Atomic R:9 (or whatever they're calling the old 9.22)
I have the BD Mira, used to have the Atomic 9.22 Superlight (i.e., kind of yellowish/goldish), and now have the Atomic R:9.22. Although I too understand that the Mira is made by Atomic, the construction is far different that any Atomic beta skis. And it skis way different than the R:9.22, even accounting for the difference in waist width.
post #6 of 8
Thread Starter 
If I went REX, is the 168 more appropriate than the 177 for the east coast?
post #7 of 8
I've been on REX's in a 177 now for 3yrs. I have a telemark setup on em and love them. They are my everything ski, resort, bc, x-country. I like the stiffness especially on resort. They are light enough for touing, handle powder effortlessly and yet will hold an edge on the wacked and packed. And yes they are very easy to kick around in the trees, tight chutes etc. My next set will probably be the equivalent of the REX but probably in a 184, strictly for deeper pow conditions the extra length will be nice. Good luck in your quest.
post #8 of 8
Thread Starter 
All -

Thanks for all the input, it was most helpful. I love having forums here like epicski that allows a user to solicit input from folks who have been on the skis that I'm interested in. After much consideration, I went with the BD Crossbows in a 171...found them on sale..stoked to mount them up and go.

Now all we need is more snow here in the northeast!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home