or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Atomic SX 9 verus C9

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
Any thoughts on differences between these skis?
post #2 of 10
i believe the c series from atomic is their beginner line, while the SX is a more advanced line. The SX series combines the benefits of a GS type ski with some more all-mountain capabilities. I have a pair of the SX9s, and I love them. I can ski them real fast making long arcing turns, and have no problem with them in moguls and technical runs.
post #3 of 10
The c9 series began as the 9.18 skis. They're still a versatile allaround ski. Handy in the East and in icy conditions. But powder riders and advanced skiers probably would look for a later, wider, or more powerful model. Maybe all three.
post #4 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BumpRyder
i believe the c series from atomic is their beginner line, while the SX is a more advanced line.
Actually, this is not true. The C series is Atomic's "Carve" series and encompasses skis for all ability levels. I ski the C:11 which is the top ski in the line and is an advanced/expert level carver. It is far from a beginner ski! The C:9 is a step down and is considered and excellent ski for intermediates and advanced skiers alike. I have not skied them, however. From the information I've seen, I supect the SX:9 is a somewhat higher performance ski than the C:9, but by how much I do not know.
post #5 of 10
post #6 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walks
The C series is Atomic's "Carve" series and encompasses skis for all ability levels.
OK, now I'm curious...if the C is for "Carve" and the "SX" is for "Supercross" what is the "R" (in the R10, R11, etc.) for? I'm guessing is is for "Race" if for anything at all. I ski the R10 but strongly, very strongly, considered the SX9....
post #7 of 10
R is for "Ride" as in Freeride. All mountain skis for both on- and off-piste.
post #8 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilbur
OK, now I'm curious...if the C is for "Carve" and the "SX" is for "Supercross" what is the "R" (in the R10, R11, etc.) for? I'm guessing is is for "Race" if for anything at all. I ski the R10 but strongly, very strongly, considered the SX9....
Tell us about the R:10. There don't seem to be many of those around, mainly the R:11. Do you prefer it over the SX9?
post #9 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by gkamieneski
Tell us about the R:10. There don't seem to be many of those around, mainly the R:11. Do you prefer it over the SX9?
I thought there were quite a few R10s. Anyway, I have never skied the SX9 so I can't comment. I just liked what I had read about them. As far as the R10 I really like 'em. I am an advanced intermediate...or would classify myself as a 7/8 level if one uses that rating system. I was looking for an all around ski and I know some will say there is no such thing. I am well into middle age and really didn't want a quiver full of skis...I have one pair and am happy. I weigh 220 and ski 180 length. I ski blues and some blacks if the conditions are right. They carve well...just get on edge an feel 'em turn. They ski well in hard snow, but I have not skied in powder much over two or three inches. They handle bumps well, but I have stayed away from serious moguls. I always feel in control. I haven't skied any serious crud in them either but am not worried about it. I mostly use the variozone setting "extrem", and others have said they are a little squirrley at speed at this setting; and, that the "squirliness" goes away if you set them on "speed". I feel best when I know I can turn easiest and quickest under any conditions on any slope...and speed isn't that important to me now. When really flexing in your boots, the tails come around so easily you wouldn't believe it. Another factor for me is that I like to ski with my wife, who as lots of women are, is a little timid and is most happy on greens and blues. We almost always go down the mountain together...except last week when I uneventfullly hurled down a black with confidence while she took the "easiest way" down. One little item though, is that the ski shop tuned them to a 2 degree side edge bevel and I tried them several days and they seemed ok. But, I dropped them off and asked they be re-tuned to Atomic specs of three degrees and wonder if they will be better yet. Anyway, I feel confident on them and feel that I can push them much farther if I wanted to. I have been on and off skis since the late sixties and I can say the R10s beta puls are the best I have had. I honestly plan on skiing until I am 75 years old and maybe when I get 62 years or so I will try to get someting designed just for the senior skier, but until then I am happy. (I must admit I plan on going to the "ski swap" next fall and maybe find a bargain or some SX9's.) So, if what I said makes sense and someone can find these skis from 2004, I would recommend them. Hope this answers your question.
post #10 of 10
I bought a pair of SX:9's last year after trying the SX:11's, 5*, 6*, some K2's (cannot remember the names)...I just love them. I am big guy (6-1, 230lbs and I bought a pair of 180's. I ski mostly in Michigan but they handle all the differing conditions well. I have not had a chance to ski them in any powder to speak of. They hold an edge great in Michigan boiler plate and the ride very nice on crud. I would recommend them to any advanced skier or someone that wants to be an advanced skier.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews