EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › So I bought some used skis on Ebay - base nick
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

So I bought some used skis on Ebay - base nick

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 
I really despise renting gear, mostly because it takes so much time to go through lines, and get all set up, when I could be on the snow. Not to mention the quality. I tried to get my old straight skis dialed in for the season (along with my sweet rear entry boots)... but found out my local shop would'nt touch the bindings. :

I've been on a hiatus from skiing for about 10 years. So anyways, I ended up renting some shaped skis, and 4 buckle boots during my trip to Mt. Bachelor a few weeks ago. So far, I am mildy convinced in the new technology.

Not wanting to rent gear for the rest of the season, and not wanting to drop big bucks on new shaped skis (which I barely understand). I figured I'd pick up some cheap skis this year, and upgrade to some nice boots. And next year Id get some nice boards...

I order up some cheap skis on Ebay. Atomic beta carve 9.18, 190 cm, with device 412 bindings. Total price less than $70 including shipping. Advertised as good condition and new in 02/03.

When they finally arrive, Im a bit disappointed. They look like they have been skied "over" way more than they have ever been skied "on" And the bindings looks way adjustable - from boot size 36 to 27. So Im thinking great, I just bought some old rental skis.

The edges are razor sharp and dont look damamged, But theres a noticeable nick in the base on one ski. The nick is round and about 5mm x 5mm and 2mm deep. Its towards the tip, and 4mm from the edge - but defineately in area that will be in contact with the snow.

So basically my questions are:
1) will a nick like this cause poorer preformance?
2) Should I bother getting it repaired, or just use them for a year, and move on?
3) Can anyone confirm that this was a previous rental / demo ski, based on the binding (device412) ?

I guess you get what you pay for, mostly.
Thanks in advance.
post #2 of 17
Does it say 'Centro' on the binding? If so, they are demo bindings.
It should look almost the same as this:
http://www.seisports.com/html/atomic...3.10.2004.html
If it looks like the Device 412 in Atomic's website (www.atomicsnow.com)
then they are not.

As for the nick, my opinion is that you won't notice it at all. If it bothers you, just have it taken care of when you bring the skis in for a tune. A base repair like that will cost only a few bucks. (That is unless the core is showing, in which case it should be repaired before skiing on them.)

Also, at $70, I wouldn't really care if they were demo skis or not. If they were used a lot and tuned a lot, then it just means they have a shorter life left to them, but I should think they will still last a few years if you want to keep them that long.

But those skis are awfully long, probably the longest length they came in. Unless you weigh something like 250lbs, shorter would have been better.
post #3 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulwlee
But those skis are awfully long, probably the longest length they came in. Unless you weigh something like 250lbs, shorter would have been better.
I was thinking the same thing.
post #4 of 17
Bring them to a shop and get a good tune on them, you will should bring them in to get the bindings adjusted anyway. For $70.00, ski them for a year and demo along the way.
post #5 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulwlee
But those skis are awfully long, probably the longest length they came in. Unless you weigh something like 250lbs, shorter would have been better.
Since we all love trivia on this board, my first shaped skis were Atomic 9.18's in a 200. Ugly pinklish things, I used them for much of three seasons. Bode skiing the Olympic GS on 186's convinced me to park them for good.
post #6 of 17
I've got those same ski's (160cm) with the Centro bindings. Also got em on eBay in March 03 for $160 or so and appeared in decent shape. The guy I got em from, Therasin, seems pretty reputable. I've really liked them but am learning that for my Western skiing I need something a bit fatter in the middle and perhaps a 170cm too.
(this is where Phil P. chimes in and say's "that's my boy")
Good luck, you'll be happy you got em.
post #7 of 17
Acctually the 9.18 in 190cm isn't going to be to long if the skier has some ability .
One of my ski partners at 155lbs and 5'10" skis them in 190 and loves them.
post #8 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulwlee
But those skis are awfully long, probably the longest length they came in. Unless you weigh something like 250lbs, shorter would have been better.
I'm only 185 and I ski on the exact same skis and length. I guess its because I'm 6'3" and love to go fast! Who knows though because I was recommended this length, but I have no problems with it because the skis do all the work for you.
post #9 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeroy
Acctually the 9.18 in 190cm isn't going to be to long if the skier has some ability .
One of my ski partners at 155lbs and 5'10" skis them in 190 and loves them.
Ah yes someone even lighter and shorter then me that skis them. I really do love these skis!
post #10 of 17
Coming off a 10 year hiatus from straight skis, these skis are way too long.

The base ding doesn't matter.

I wouldn't expect $70 skis to look too good.

Buy some shorter skis.
post #11 of 17
$70 including shipping is a great deal for those skis in the condition you describe.
post #12 of 17
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the replies, looks like they werent demo bindings after all. The only thing I can guess is that someone used them to teach a youngster to ski. Otherwise, I cant imagine how the top sides got so scratched.

I defiantly will be taking them in for a 'once over' before I use them. But Im glad to hear the nick is nothing serious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paulwlee
But those skis are awfully long, probably the longest length they came in. Unless you weigh something like 250lbs, shorter would have been better.
I guess they are pretty long. But when I rented a few weeks ago, the first day the shop gave me 177s. They were kinda squirly, especially when I was going straight. The next day I asked for something longer, and they said all they had was 185s. I used those, and they seemed much better.

My weight is 215, and Im exactly 6' tall, long legs-short tosro [if that matters = ) ].

I also heard that a shaped ski should probably be 10cm shorter than the straight ski length. Is there any truth to that?

Also, what happens when a ski is "too" long? Im guessing they would be hard to turn....
post #13 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by gobucks
...Also, what happens when a ski is "too" long? Im guessing they would be hard to turn....
This is one that bothers me a bit. In the old days of "straight" skis, the sidecut was so minimal that the effective turning radius of a 170 wasn't so significantly different from the same ski in a 205. However, with today's empasis on tip/waist/tail measurements, it seems to me that a 160 is going to turn significantly tighter than a 185. It strikes me as odd that the manufacturers don't alter the measurements with the various lengths of the ski to keep a more consistent turning radius throughout the range of lengths available. Perhaps someone can shed some light?

Personally, I'm still on 192's which was a significant drop from my old straight 203's. It's hard for me to imagine going significantly shorter and still being happy with the edge hold. Am I just living in the past?

AM.
post #14 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Attacking Mid
Personally, I'm still on 192's which was a significant drop from my old straight 203's. It's hard for me to imagine going significantly shorter and still being happy with the edge hold. Am I just living in the past?

AM.
AM, I think you probably are. Like you, I skied 203-205-210 back in the old days of straight skis. My new rule is, "Ski them as short as I can." The only issue is the speed limit of the ski. If I can find it during a demo day, the skis don't pass.

In today's skis, 192 is really long. I would suggest that you would have fun (and perhaps an epiphany!) on shorter skis. I know that I have. Would you have an opportunity to demo this year? If so, I'd encourage you to play with both an "all-mountain" and with an "oversize slalom" ski to see how skis have really changed.
post #15 of 17
Funny thing is there are always these old guys that like long skis because they like to ski "fast" and so on.

But when I go skiing, I'm not getting passed up by old guys on 203 straight skis. Why is that?
post #16 of 17
I'm a convert. Like many, my mantra in the 70's, 80's and 90's was "short skis suck"...and they did. I lived in Europe 88-92 and skied on 207cm Lacroix Mach SL's and 213 Elan Uniline RS. I thought the Lacroix's were the most nimble ski I'd ever been on.

Flash forward to 1998, haven't skied in 3 years and get a one-day "business" trip to Taos. Decided to demo/rent, so I didn't take my old stuff. Guys in the rental shop laughed when I asked for something in 205cm. They hooked me up with some K2 Merlins in 180-something and I hated them...for about 3 hours. Then I got it. The next year I demo-ed everything I could at Snowbird and decided to go with the Merlin VI's. I almost choked when I said OK to 193cm for a ski that I was going to own. I was ashamed to admit it to my old buddies back in VT.

Flash forward to 2002. Back in Europe on business and happen to be in Germany for the Winter Schluss-Verkauf (semi-annual sale on everything). I picked up a pair of Atomic B-Ride 11.20 with bindings for under $500 US including a padded bag to get them home (the Euro was new and was 1 Euro = $0.86). The longest length I could find was 180cm - gulp! Guess what? They're more stable than my old 213 Elan's and they rocked (comparatively) in a 60 inch 2-day dump at Snowbird in March 02.

Now I want to go short slalom shopping. The Metron B5's seem intriguing, but I'm not sure about the radical sidecut. Trying to decide between a true racing ski or the Metron line. Whatever the decision, I'll probably go under 170cm for the first time since I was 10.
post #17 of 17
It's been my experience that a good skier can make about anything work. I still occasionally see a 40-something skier making straight boards sing in some pretty technical stuff. A friend of mine is mid 40's and skied Olin Mark somethings in a 195 until last year (he's about 5'7", 150 lbs., and grew up in Vail). He could garner his share of turning heads from the chairlift as he made child's play out of large, steep bumps!

I spent a day last year with a 28ish y.o. ski patrol instructor who used 200ish cm straight Volants (talk about a boring looking ski!) We had a small group of fairly accomplished skiers including one other ski patroller, yet the guy on the old Volants was clearly setting the pace for the whole group. I kept my mouth shut most of the day and just listened when he talked.

We had Christmas this morning and plan to ski tomorrow. Santa brought my 16 y.o. some Dynastar Ski Cross 09's in a 178 length. I mounted them so they'll adjust to my slightly longer boot also, so I'll be giving those a run or two tomorrow. He's 6'4", 150 lbs. and I'm 6'2", 200 lbs., so I may find them too soft (and too short!?) I'll report back after tomorrow to see if my opinion has been changed.

AM.

12/25 update: Okay, I must admit they worked pretty darned well for me. It was hard to compare because their fresh edges made a HUGE difference on the old snow we had at Winter Park. I also must admit I felt like a hero in the bumps with good edges and the shorter length.

I was also surprised how stiff the SC09 was. I was considering an SC10 for me, but I think I could be perfectly contented with the 09.

It would be interesting to compare this ski to my old 192 Speed SX's after getting my bases ground. It was obvious that my skis are base-high from too many hand filing jobs. Either way, I could definitely be happy on those 178's.

AM.
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 › So I bought some used skis on Ebay - base nick