or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › X-Screams? Nah, we're outta that flavor.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

X-Screams? Nah, we're outta that flavor.

post #1 of 40
Thread Starter 
A very successful ski a couple years ago, and for a couple seasons.
Just wondering if any of you who got 'em "back then" will be on them this year.
post #2 of 40
Yep, i have the 2000 - 2001 model had them in 1999 - 2000 but they broke [img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img] . Anyhow i will be one them for one more season at least because i have so much $$ tied up in race skis that i cant afford to replace the Screams just yet. If i do replace them ill probly end up being on the Crossmax 10 or the Atomic SX:11... something along those lines though. But honestly the Xscreams that i have only have about 20 days on them since i got them in the 2000 - 2001 season. Ive been on my race skis mostly so the Xscreams look and ski brand new. They dont even have a scrath in the bases. They still ski like a hero though (but not like a hero on ice). My next freeride ski im hoping will have a little more pop in it than the xscream. Granted the rebound isnt bad, but after skiing my slalom skis for a few runs the screams feel dead.



ps. how long does everyone think Salomon will continue to make the Xscream? As far as i know it is the longest running ski to remain in a manufacturers line up for so long... im certain i will be corrected on that one, but in my time, its the one thats been around the longest.
post #3 of 40
I've got over 100 days on my Xscreams that I picked up from a ski swap 2 seasons ago. IMHO, it's still a great ski and still holds it's own when comparing it against the latest skis out now. I've demo'ed some of the latest offerings, and I still keep coming back to my XS's. There's always a ski that does 1 or 2 things better than the XS's but none that have the overall versatility. I think that's pretty amazing when you consider that it's the same model that was launched way back in '98?

I'll be skiing my XS's this season for sure. It's like a comfortable pair of shoes that always feel just right.

But having said that, I'm a gear freak. I'm always anxious to check out the latest gear. I love to demo new skis when I can. Maybe one day I'll find that magical pair skis that do it ALL! Then I can retire my XS's to my wife or kids

[ September 18, 2002, 09:14 PM: Message edited by: wizard ]
post #4 of 40
my personal opinion of the Screams is that they totally blow. I have them in 187cm 2000 model year. They were shot in a matter of a month in Aspen. Their construction sucks compared to a Fischer, Volkl, or Stokli (sp?). They were great right out of the box, but after a short while they lost their pop. I probably have about 60 days on them and they are going up for sale at $125 with the salomon 900 bindings? Any takers? I wish I could have had the wonderful experiences that you have had with them. I'll probably never buy another pair of Salomon skis again.
Right now I am on a pair of Fischer aricarbon RC4 GS skis from 2001 and they rule, completely unstoppable on the hard stuff, managable in everything else. They are not nearly as smooth through crud as the new salomons.
post #5 of 40
I bought a pair of 195's last year after demoing many of the year's top skis. I have posted at length about them (last season).

I should put another 30 days or so on them this year. I'm glad to see that they are still in the lineup this year, which means I may be able to find a set next year if they are worn out, but hopefully they won't be.

I find them to be a super versitile ski. When they're sharp, I can carve ice all day long. They're soft enough to bend into a shorter radius carve. The side cut is shallow enough for long carves. They're long enough to handle 60 mph with ease. They have enough area and flex to float decently in powder. They don't have an integrated binding (I run a race stock binding at 13). They're of moderate weight.

I'm very happy with them.

post #6 of 40

I try not to say too much about ski characteristics because they're so subjective, but the X-Screams are an absolutely amazing ski because they're so versatile. They perform well on a number of distinctly different levels for many different abilities. I found the biggest objection to them came from individualists who felt there were just too many of them out there. Myself, I'm somewhat of an individualist as well, but when it comes to skiing I've learned not to put form before function.

Yeah, they do loose their snap (just like every ski) but as the snap wanes in a truely classic ski, an even nicer feeling takes place as you transition over into the subtle nuances of what the stick is really all about. 30 days is just a month - 1/4 of a ski season - how anyone can expect to learn the true heart of a ski in just a month is beyond me... let alone expect to learn about a ski in only one or two runs to formulate a ski magazine review???

Xscreams may not have been some peoples cup-of-tea, but don't think everyone else bought into them just because of _HYPE_
post #7 of 40
On my second pair. 195's Fabulous ski. I keep trying out new skis as they come out but nothing beats them yet. I tried the Pocket Rockets; great ski, not as versitle and in changing snow conditions, that's important. But I'll surely try them again, maybe 'cause they look so cool. I have a pair of Supermountains, sure, better float, but not as fun.. The Screams have a really poppy tail. Great ski for soft snow, for ice I use Volkls. This year I'll try the Axis xp (I'm liking yellow skis) but I'll ski the Screamers..it's largely a matter of taste; I prefer the Salomon feel over Atomics, for instance; I like to work the ski rather than "ride" it, I like short fall line turns, prefer lively over damp, turney over what the mags call"rock solid". The Screams do all that. They have soft tips, you can feel them arc and spring in powder. It's fashionable now to do mostly GS turns (Giant Speed) at my hill, and people critisized the Scream for not being stable enough at high speed. But if you get them up on edge and carving, they'll hold fine short of racing. Where they really shine is up high, where it's tight and steep and you're just as likely to find windbake as powder maybe in the same turn..is it snowing yet?
post #8 of 40
X-Scream Series?

a gaper ski.

but then again, most of us are gapers.

I loved mine and sometimes wish I had them instead of my Axis X. But that is just plain antsiness.

The number of people who can TRULY "overpower" an X-Scream Series is VERY small.

The number of people who don't like the FEEL of the X-Scream Series is pretty large, especially among fast/hard skiers. Many people who ski with an aggressive, dynamic, athletic technique (lots of body motion, aggressive forward drive) find the X-Scream Series "noodly" (to use a ridiculous pejorative). In truth, the ski wants a different kind of input than the super-athletic/dynamic technique uses. They require subtle but firm input.

Skiers who are light on their feet usually like the X-Scream Series, if they like the Salomon "feel."

Skiers who push their skis harder than necessary will not like the X-Scream Series. Unlike the Stockli Stormrider, it doesn't want to be muscled and in fact can rebel against overpowerful inputs.
post #9 of 40

It's a new season, but I still get to argue with Gonzo about X-scream's and the stormrider.

I personally found the 184 Stormrider and 185 X-Crossmax I skied last year to be very "insufficient" for my weight and strength. The 180 Atomic 11.20 (my second choice), Volkl G3 184 were more in the ballpark with the 195 X-screams, very comfortable for me. The 190 Atomic, 188 K2 Axis X Pro were a step up in stiffness/power needed, I could push them around better with stiffer boots. I would have liked to ski the 194 stormrider, as that might have fit me better.

After many years in stiff Technica's with long stiff skis, my change to Flexons's (with a WC tongue though), and the X-screams was a revelation. A setup that I could do virually everything on, all day long, that wouldn't beat me up. I find the length and construction allow the ski to be "soft", but in no way is that limiting. In fact, the ski easily handles some pretty crazy stuff.

I raced in high school, but I've always been a freeskier first. I'm 24 now, 6'1", 190 lb. I ski 3 days a week, Wachusett (MA) weekdays, Cannon (nh) on the weekend. Oh, I have Salomon race stock 11-17 bindings on the X-screams, set at 13. I keep a quiver of skis.

post #10 of 40
Did you guys see skiing mags "Finesse/ Power" ratios in the gear review? Much more interesting than the usual verbal B.S. Explains a lot about what Inside Tracks(rip) used to say about French (Sallie,Dynastar,Rossi) feel as opposed to Austrian/German(Volkl, Atomic,etc.) But how do they come up with screwy numbers like 48.9% finesse vs 51.1% power..

P.S. Kev; Flexon's + Screamers? right on. Sweet. Gape on we shall.

[ September 26, 2002, 10:13 PM: Message edited by: Rubob ]
post #11 of 40
Originally posted by Red Sled:

It's a new season, but I still get to argue with Gonzo about X-scream's and the stormrider.

Yes, you sure do. What's funny is how you've changed your tune since we last "argued" (I'd prefer to call it education, with you as the student) -- now you are re-neging on your prior claims. Convenient memory, or change of heart? Which was it?

More chest-beating?

Perhaps a little humility?

Or is your manliness still tied to your ability to "push around" a ski?

[img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img] [img]tongue.gif[/img]
post #12 of 40
I ski on xscream 9's. 177's. A bit softer than the series. I like a soft ski. I am on my second pair. I'm 5'8" and 180. I push the ski pretty hard and when I want it, I can get a lot of speed out of them. They move nicely through the bumps, carve well...pretty much do everything I ask. I put 20 to 40 days in a year. going on my third season with them. My first pair lasted about a season, took a nasty core shot.
post #13 of 40
I had a pair of Screams for a week in 99, and loved them. Could never afford a pair though, even when on sale, they were too pricey. But I recently bought some Stockli Easy Riders, and these things feel like the screams, with more precision and bounce!
post #14 of 40
Gonz, the [img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img] smiley really seems to fit in your signature, for some reason.
post #15 of 40
I think gonzo is still ticked that I found his 184 stormrider 'wimpy'. After all the reports on this site about it being beefy, I was very, very underwelmed. Again, similar to a 185 crossmax. I have yet to ski the 194, I'm sure its great.

After owning 205 Volkl P10 RS supers and 203 cm P10 sl's when I weighed 165 lbs, I learned the hard way how to tell if a ski is too stiff for me. Those were the sizes the experts recommended - HAHAHAHAHAAHAHA. I've known they were too long for about 6 years.

I can make it down the hill pretty well on them, but they don't help things 95% of the time. For that other 5%, I'm thinking about picking up a pair of DH/SG boards.

By the same token, I can tell if I am overwhelming or overskiing a ski. It's pretty easy to tell.

My X-screams are 'just right'. They have handled 60+ mph and big, hard carves on ice, but they are still soft, short, and light *enough* for me to ski bumps, trees and make semi-carved short turns with ease.

I don't have anything to prove by skiing a longer ski, I actually own 3 pairs under 180 cm. It's just that the extra length works for me when freeskiing.

post #16 of 40
Bought the X-Scream Series in 99 - broke them in 2000.
Had them replaced with the 2001 Series - broke them in 2001.

Went to Atomics and haven't looked back.

The Series was a good ski for a lot of different styles and terrains. It did everything well, but (in my opinion) did nothing VERY well.

[ September 30, 2002, 09:21 AM: Message edited by: Gill ]
post #17 of 40
Originally posted by Red Sled:
I think gonzo is still ticked that I found his 184 stormrider 'wimpy'. After all the reports on this site about it being beefy, I was very, very underwelmed. Again, similar to a 185 crossmax. I have yet to ski the 194, I'm sure its great. /// Kevin
Heh heh heh.

It wasn't "my" Stormrider we were discussing. I don't own a pair. Wouldn't want a pair. Don't plan on buying a pair.

As long as your ego continues to be connected to (1) your opinion on a ski, and (2) your desire to say that a given ski is not as burly as everyone says, you will continue to be of little use in these fora.

hey, Emperor Red Sled... why do you ski naked?

[img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img] : [img]redface.gif[/img]
post #18 of 40
Originally posted by Cheap seats:
Gonz, the [img]graemlins/evilgrin.gif[/img] smiley really seems to fit in your signature, for some reason.
I was wondering why not many others use it.

Maybe now people might see me as I am, rather than as some ignorant, arrogant complainer who sees himself as superior.

post #19 of 40
I am marginally concerned with the durablity of the ski given all the reports of failure. However, I haven't broken a ski in a non rock impact situation since I was 12. I jump quite a bit, with some fairly icy landings. I fact, last year I came down just a hair short on a very steep 40+ foot tabletop last year, basicly 15+ foot drop to hard *dead flat* at the end of the table. Hard enough to put a minor crack in my heel bone, it was sore for a couple weeks. Skis are fine.

If they last for 60 days, and lose their pop that's fine. I'm not a ski bum and I have more than one pair of skis. They'd be retired as rock skis.

I certainly don't think they're the best built skis around. Their feel and construction are 'good', not excellent. I wish I could get a race stock board with the same general physical characteristics (length, sidecut, dampness, weight, flex pattern). Atomics have a signifigantly better feel, as do my race stock volkls gs boards.

I don't think the 195 X-screams are particularly beefy. Any expert over 160 lb could handle them with ease, but I think I'm right around the prefered weight area.

Gonzo's funny, isn't he?

post #20 of 40
My first pair of skis were XScreams, I loved them. They're great for small, light people, but once you grow out of them, you can't use them anymore. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]
post #21 of 40
I would agree with gonzostike on this one. X-screams are way to soft/weak to ski hard and fast. The banditXX is a much better "allround" ski. Thats just my 2cents. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img] Trees are my friend
post #22 of 40
As others have mentioned, its a great ski if you're a lightweight. I'm 140 lbs soaking wet, and have yet to overpower or reach the speed limit on my Xscreams. And you're talking about someone who likes to ski fast! The soft tips are what gives the XS their versatility.
post #23 of 40

I think most people are missing the point on sizing. I'm 180-190 lb and ski the longest size, 195. I would overpower/overski any shorter length. I've been on the 185 crossmax 10, and they were not enough ski (I also dislike the feel of the pilor binding). Salomon's run soft, they've always run soft. Oh, and far as performance 'feel' goes, I thought the crossmaxes were very similar to my x-screams.

post #24 of 40
It is interesting to observe the evolution of EpicSki opinion of the Screams. For those of you that have been around here for a while, you know what I mean. Three years ago, there were literally dozens of posts about the total domination/incredible versatility greatness of this ski. It seemed to be THE ski for this community.*

Now, it is a "Gaper Ski." My, how times change.

My $.02.

* generalization used; no offense intended
post #25 of 40

Actually, about 3 years ago, when they first came out, I thought the were a gaper ski! Every "advanced-intermediate" yuppie and their mother was on them, hacking their way down the hill. I didn't ski them until last year and then it was only by chance.

I don't care if I'm on a 'gaper' ski....I don't ski like a gaper.

post #26 of 40
Red Sled, I don't know what you have been smoking, but the Crossmax 10 and the X-Scream Series don't feel alike or ski alike. The Crossmax 10 is much less forgiving than than the Scream Series and if you get back on the tail of the 10 you will go for a ride. You must have been on an odd pair.

60mph on Screams. Were you getting towed behind a car? Or maybe you have access to Les Arcs.
post #27 of 40
Oh boy....

Do you have any concept of how fast 60 mph is.....because it really isn't all that fast. Its 88 feet per second, or about 14 ski lengths per second. Almost every day I ski I hit 60 mph, or come fairly close....what's the big deal? I do sub 2 minute tram runs at Cannon (BTW), and have managed to make it down before it moves (get off red, get on yellow at the bottom).

Well, I wonder why the Crossmax skis a bit different...? Duh, it's got an entirely different binding system. I personally don't like the Pilot system. Crossmax also has slightly more sidecut. Otherwise, they have very similar flex and contruction - leading me to say they are similar.

post #28 of 40
Red Sled... do you turn? And 60 is pretty fast - in our GS courses here in the east we hit around 55, and that feels pretty fast. Have you ever been clocked? Sometimes we get clocked for fun (at the bottom of the head wall or a little farther down) at some of the places we race and the fastest we ever go is around 50 - 55. But then again we know how to turn. If youre expecting an Xscream to hold on snow going 60mph its not going to happen. They werent built for that; Nor was the Rossi Bandit XX, or the Salomon CrossMax 10, or the Volkl Vertigo G3. If youre not skiing ont he groomed get a fat ski that will hold up to that kinda speed, and if your doing it on the groomers get yourself a GS ski. The tips on an Xscream will be flapping all over if they hit that speed. I opened mine up on Regulator Johnson at Snowbird and at Snowbasin on the womens downhill, and they dont like to go that fast for very long. If you are in fact hitting 60... which i doubt (people that say they go that fast free skiing are usually only going around 35mph) but if you are in fact hitiing 60 w/o turning dont hit anyone.
post #29 of 40
I turn plenty, thank you very much. I like all kinds.

"people that say they go that fast free skiing are usually only going around 35mph"

That's funny - I usually hit jumps going around that speed(yawn).

I ski on the east coast, and in fact, I have been in my fair share of GS courses on the east coast. Also, Cannon seems to usually have the snow consistancy of your average GS course.

You guys just can't stand that an expert skier likes X-screams, huh?

post #30 of 40
Refer to the second post in this discussion... I have owned 2 pairs, yes i like them, yes im an expert, yes i can over power them at speed. Are they bad, not at all. Could most of the expert skiers on this forum school you... most likely. I'm also wondering how you know how fast youre going. When were you clocked before a table top? This speed issue has been discussed before on the forum. I hope youre not using one of those pocket GPS devices cuz they are about as accurate as your statements thus far... But if you are skiing at 60mph on Xscreams with good form and technique i would love to see it... and you must be one really strong guy.
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 › X-Screams? Nah, we're outta that flavor.