or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › More about the new Atomic 10.20?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

More about the new Atomic 10.20?

post #1 of 5
Thread Starter 
Can anyone provide some more info on the Atomic 10.20s? There isn't much in the published reviews about them. Ski Mag tested them in the Women's class, which isn't very useful if trying to compare against other models. "Takes you by the hand but is never boring???" The Peter Keelty review was a bit more useful, but very short. The Atomic site talks about the technology but only a sentence or two about how they are supposed to ski.

They sound like much more of a Freerider design than last year's model. Basically a lighter, softer, livlier version of the 11.20?

What else can you tell me about them? (Besides the fact that they probably have the ugliest graphics in the Atomic line.)

post #2 of 5
G , I had both the 10.20 and the 11.20 at my disposal (actually got to ski most of this years Atomics for the later part of last season) . The 10.20 from last year would fall in between the 10.20 and the 11.20 from this year , most people wouldn't notice a difference between the 10.20's. The difference between the 11.20 and both 10.20's shows the 11.20 being alot more ski.
The 10.20 is probably the better choice for anybody that is on the lighter side , it's not a downgrade in skis just not as beefy as the 11.20.
On your other post you said you were 150 lbs and 5'8", this being the case don't go to long with either of these skis . Also you might want to check out the 9.22 , I used them most of last year and was never once dissapointed in them slow or fast they are a great ride.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ October 15, 2001 09:57 PM: Message edited 1 time, by Leeroy ]</font>
post #3 of 5
Glaw, Leeroy is correct. I skied 10.20 last year, and I'll ski the 11.20 this year (both in 180) and I'm 5'9" 220 lbs. This year's 10.20 is very similar to last years except for the topskin (texalium, an aluminum impregnated fiberglass weave vs. titanium) for a bit more snap. The 11.20 is a beefier ski with titanium tubes instead of carbon tubes. I loved the 10.20, but I love the 11.20 even more because of my weight. I think you'd probably like the 10.20 better unless you like to make eye bleeder runs most of the time and are very aggressive. Even then, I think the 10.20 would be plenty of ski for you. Hope this helps...

Sorry G, I just read your other post and thread. They both have similar performance characteristics. If you go with the 11.20, you'll have a bit more stiffness, and more rebound than the 10.20. If you're familiar with the K2 Mod X/Axis and Mod X Pro/Axis X, it's the same thing. Given our weight differences the 11.20 would perform the same way for me as the 10.20 would for you.

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ October 15, 2001 11:12 PM: Message edited 1 time, by girthman ]</font>
post #4 of 5
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the practical info. I'll try both models if I can get my hands on them.
post #5 of 5
From my post on another forum about last year's 10.20s:

I agree with the comments on the 10.20. I love this ski. I just turned to a true parabolic ski last winter, and loved every minute of it. I weigh around 135 and got the 180. Perfect length for my weight and style. I tried the 190 that a buddy was demoing in March, and it was too much ski.
The Atomics excel at everything that I've been on in the past year in VT mostly, and CO. Great hold on ice, good float in chop, awesome at speed, and not bad in powder.

They suck you into buying the Atomic binding too, but I actually played around with the fore/aft adjustment a bit and you really can feel the difference.

They're not too bad in the bumps either, for suck a stiff ski. Our March in VT last year was epic, and I was having the most fun in steep bumps with 9" of powder on top.

Great ski for a strong skier who can work the ski throughout the entire turn. If you pressure the tail upon exit, they'll actually launch you into the air towards your next turn. Did I say how sick they are at Mach 9?"

More of what I found from my ramblings last year:

"I just got the 10.20s in a 180, and I weigh 135lbs.. As I understand it, the "20" stands for the number of meters of arc the ski will carve...so length does not matter. The ski will still carve a 20m arc if you get the 170 or the 180.
I too am a very strong skier that likes to go fast. You really need to be on top of these skis all the time. If you stray, they'll bite. But I love them anyway. I find that with the length I have(180, but the 170 was recommended for me too) I need a bit of speed to properly flex the ski, but this is where all the fun begins. They have a very strong turn exit, and if you get back on them, they'll shoot you into the next turn.

They are not, however, good at going straight while not on edge. They wander and try to play games with you, so always keep'em on a slight edge. They don't have the damping at speed that my old Merlin V's did, but I've only been on these for 7 days now."

Do a search on my screen name for more Atomic 10.20 comments.


<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ October 17, 2001 09:04 PM: Message edited 1 time, by CP ]</font>
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 › More about the new Atomic 10.20?