or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 06' Head iM88 vs Legend 8800
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

06' Head iM88 vs Legend 8800

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 
Here are pics of several of the 2006 Mojos and Monsters. Seems like that is the iM88 on the far left side of the right picture, but, it doesn't have the intelligence graphics?

http://www.skipass.com/articles/sia_vegas/head_skis.php

Has anyone skied the new iM88 and the Dynastar Legend 8800 and able to compare them for both on piste carving and powder?
Perhaps the iM88 is better on piste than the 8800 - which is also not bad - because of its deeper sidecut (and other qualities?), but, even if it is good in powder w/ its 88cm underfoot and wide tip and tail, is it as good as the excellent 8800 in powder and crud (flex pattern etc. also come into play)?

Thanks
post #2 of 29
Dang! I Thought this was going to be a review of these two skis...whhen someone does put up a comprehensive review of these two skis-I predict it'll be one hot thread!
post #3 of 29
Thread Starter 
Bs"D

Sorry Mac. But, I'm glad to see I have concurrence on the question.
Just to give you something meanwhile, here is a quote from the very reliable Harald Harb about the iM88. As you see from my original reply to his post (pasted here below his quote), my real curiousity is in the comparison to the 8800 that I already own and like.

Harald Harb wrote:
"...I skied on the new iM88 all mountain ski from Head. This is without a doubt the biggest breakthrough ski of the year. This ski carves on groomers and it is excellent in the bumps and terrific in crud and powder. It is so easy to turn as well as forgiving; an intermediate skier can have fun on it. I have a pair now (175 length) and they are going to Big Sky, Fernie and Alaska, later in March with me."

I asked:
"I have and love the 8800s (but have not skied the 88s).
The 8800s are 117/89/110 (25r) in the 178cm that I ski. I am +-175lbs.
So, the 88s are basically the same under foot (1cm less) but really wider in the tip and tail. (I don't know the exact dimensions, but remember from reading them somewhere that they are substancially wider in the tip and tail than the 8800). The 8800s have great float in the powder, but theorectically the 88s should have even more. The 8800s are ok on the groomed and can carve, but not at all like my Head 1100 SWs.
I would imagine that the 88s are getting the reaction of good carving because of the seriously deeper sidecut than the 8800s. But, sidecut is not the whole picture of course. I imagine it must be torsionally more rigid (and perhaps also stiffer tip tip tail) than the Dynastar? - and that is pretty interesting at its measurments.
But, the flex pattern and sidecut is part of what I love about the 8800. It is excellent in crud. It is very stable on everything. It is very smooth.
Even short radius turns are no problem - although I'm sure exactly why (they are not as soft as some other French skis, and have that shallower sidecut?). Maybe its that auotdrive forebody?
Anyway, I guess everything is compensatory and there are tradeoffs. Again, anyone who has actually skied both, and both on and off piste, please fill me (US) in."
post #4 of 29
re 8800's I have bought a pair of these skis without skiing them. Based on recomendations and research. The lynch pin that sold me was last week at snowbasin, hiking above the resort, searching for corn, I ran into a skier with these skis in a 178, (he was 200 lbs 40 something years old) He had fritschi freerides mounted on them and just sliced through that corn on mt. ogden like it was soft butter. We skied together and our abilities were pretty matched. (level 8-9 He's a Mad river Glen Regular. Me a crystal mountain regular.) I weigh 20 plus pounds less than him so I surmised that the 8800 in a 178 is enough ski for me.


SOLD!!!
post #5 of 29
Thread Starter 
Bs"D
Skinosepop: Yeah, my weight and ability is the same as yours, and the 178cm is perfect for me. The 8800 is a great powder and crud ski - actually for anything soft or three dimensional - and you will not be sorry that you got them. Except...
The question here is whether the new iM88 - which seems to be a better carver on the groomed - will still be as good (or even better) off piste.
post #6 of 29
I've got a great high speed moguls and groomer ski with good sidecut. no worries.
post #7 of 29
Thread Starter 
Bs"S
Yeah, I also have the 1100 SW @ 170cm - best high speed carver I have ever been on - and am will be buying next year a good slalom ski in a 160-165 for those appropriate days/conditions/terrain.
But, I choose my powder/crud/soft snow skis (presently the 8800 @ 178cm) anywhere within almost a week of a new storm. But, all but the first day (in Europe, first two days) you have to ski a lot on piste until you find the powder.
If there was a ski that was measurably better than the 8800 on piste (lets say a real carver and hard pack worthy), while still being as good or even better in powder, then I think I could have a one ski quiver and be ready for anything anytime. Cool.
But, if the 8800 would still be better and smoother off piste, then I would be happy to keep rotating.
Actually, fat skis make balance so easy, it might be a good idea to periodically ski a narrow waisted ski just to keep your technique honest and sharp.
Still waiting for reviews of the iM88 vs 8800.
post #8 of 29
I skied with a buddy on Sunday at Killington) who had the Nobis Inspired (I think almost the exact same ski as the 8800)-I was blown away by how easily he manoevered those planks through the shark teeth bumps at K-Mart-and I couldn't touch him on the groomers either...convinced me, it's time to get fatter- and the 8800 seem to fit the bill
post #9 of 29
Thread Starter 
Bs"D
You have already read how satisfied I am with my 8800s, but I think you should still wait till we all get more feedback about the new iM88. If good is good, then better is better.
It is scary how fast skis technology is progressing - like computers. I don't really want to think that my new this year 8800s (already a great advancement) may already be obsolete, but, again, if great is great, then even better is even better.
But, first of all, maybe the new ski is not better. That's why I'm anxious to hear more feedback (I will demo it myself next year - just damm curious already, plus hard to plan a powder day for testing). Second of all, considering the above point about the speed of innovation, perhaps we don't need to jump for every improvement. Ah, but I seem to come back to: ooh, but what if that thing also really carves?
Yeah, the 8800 also impressed me on the groomed as being surprisingly ok. It is definately very smooth and stable on anything soft and uneven (like afternoon used groomers). For that I prefer it even to my great regular all around groomer carver, the 1100 SW. But, hey, on fresher groomed, not to mention hard pack, the 8800 can't touch the carving or holding power of something like the 1100 SW. So, if Head has come up with a true slicer, that still has all of the other good qualities of an 8800, I'll just have to cough up the dough, and part with the last infatuation. But, that's IF.
So I'm still waiting for the dude that has skied both on/in both.
Of course it also all depends on where you ski. If I lived at Snowbird, maybe all I would ever need/want is the 8800. If I skied mostly in the East, then even the theoretically more versatile iM88 would still not be enough for the hard pack (yeah right! freakin blue ice!) and, not to mention, the narrower terrain. There I would be on a Slalom ski. But, where I mostly ski - Europe - you get a mix of East and West. So its either rotate a three ski quiver or maybe that iM88 baby. Also, even at Snbowbird, sometimes you can get carvable hard pack there too, and ripping Regulator Johnson with the 1100 SW is a very sweet thing. But, if could have something close to that, and still be on the same board that I'd want if I find some more stash...ooh la la.
post #10 of 29
I've been skiing for 35 of my 38 years minus a few years when I was put out by a back injury. Someone said it: It's the carpenter not the tool. Your 04-05 ski will not be obsolete like an old computer becomes obsolete. Even computers nowadays, macs, are worth more and are useful far past point of purchase. If you treat it right and tune it correctly the ski could last you three or four seasons. If its part of a quiver it should last longer. Which is my goal. My hardpack, groomer, bump ski is my mod x pro. Plenty of ski for most days.
post #11 of 29
Thread Starter 
Sure pop, whatever you say. The truth is, with computers I agree totally. But, skis have had a different hold on me since I first flew on them at age six - 40 yrs ago .
I admit it. I probably need the ski equipment equivalent of AA. Thanks for trying to help, but could you please pass me just a tiny sip of iM88 review. Just one sip, really.
post #12 of 29
Thread Starter 
Bs"D

By the way, I still have the wooden skis I first used before the then great Head standard came on the scene (before your time).
They are still in the same condition, and you might be able to get a couple of years out of them, so I would be happy to send them to you. Carpenters like wood, right?
post #13 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadRab
If there was a ski that was measurably better than the 8800 on piste (lets say a real carver and hard pack worthy), while still being as good or even better in powder, then I think I could have a one ski quiver and be ready for anything anytime. Cool.
But, if the 8800 would still be better and smoother off piste, then I would be happy to keep rotating.
I agree with you, and that's what the ski manufactures all seem to be trying to address with the new technology they're putting on the market as we speak. That said. I'm convinced that while they're making great strides to produce skis that perform well in all conditions, that it'll be much more difficult to produce one that's great in every condition. There are so many differing ski characteristics that come into play with producing a ski to have great performance in a particular condition, that in my mind these characteristic conflict somewhat when being tried to be brought in to play across multiple conditions.

I havent skied the im88, but based on what I read and hear about that ski my guess is that it'll out perform the 8800 somewhat on hardpack, and in turn, will be out performed by the 8800 in softer conditions.

My advise is that if a skier is going to be a "one ski" guy, then you pick up a ski that you think is great in the conditions that you ski most, but performs at an acceptable level in other conditions. I just don't think it's possible to have the "best" in all conditions.
post #14 of 29
Thread Starter 
Bs"D
Thanks Coach. We are in agreement about the theory of the do it all great ski being a theoretical advantage, but, that it is probably just that - theoretical. Your point about the unavoidable conflict of a characteristic designed to be affective for one condition or maneuver to another characteristic desined for a different purpose echoes my words from an earlier post.
I do, however, want to clarify one point. To have one ski that truly does it all great, would seem to be impossible, as said. But, my theory/hope here was that perhaps within a smaller range of design goals it was possible to address all of the needs of that range, without excessive compromise.
If we make a short list of some basic catagories, they might include say:
Slalom Racing; GS Racing; Downhill & SG Racing; Moguls; Park and Pipe (if this is skiing); high speed long radius free skiing carving on groomed; slower speed and mixed radius; technical (small radius) powder & crud; big mountain freeride (fast large radius powder); not to mention different ability level considerations.
Now, for example, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for aother review of a new Downhill Racing ski that someone said will also be good (not even great) in the moguls. Forget it, aint happenin!
But, I could imagine that maybe there could be designed a very good powder ski, that is also a very good carver. Maybe not great in both, but better than just well in both. My theory is that the powder prowess comes from the 88cm under foot together with a wide tip and tail for floatation, and the carving ability comes from the significantly deeper sidecut due to its really wider tip and tail. Its just a bigger version of a typical carver, the biggness however helping in the powder. The seemingly needed torsional stiffness for the carving - which would take away from its soft snow manners - might be addressed by the intelligence system in effect changing from powder to piste. This would be an answer to your point. If so, then I think that it would be an advantage - even over the so called great powder ski - because there are so many of those days (the second and third after a storm) when you have to ski a lot on piste while searching for the last untracked stashes. On such days (more numerous than full 1st powder days), a ski that is at least very good at both would be a better choice than one that is even great, but only at one or the other.
I'll keep my 1100 SW for high speed hard pack biggies. I'm definately in the market for a full blown slalom in a shorter length for when I want to whip circles, or when the terrain is steep and narrow and icy.
But, in the powder catagory specifically, only if I lived at Snowbird, would the above point be less relevant, and I might just go for the best pure powder ski. Again, if the iM88 turns out to handle powder (or piste) just well , then no thanks. I'll savor the first powder day on my 8800s, and worry about whether/what to rotate to after that. But, according to Harald Harb - and I do respect his oppinion - the iM88 really may be the ticket. Of course, I want confirmation.
Again, within this narrower range I thought it might be possible. What do you think Coach?
post #15 of 29
I haven't skiied the iM88, I have a pair of 8800's (188cm). If the 88 has a deeper sidecut it will not be as good in powder/crud as the 8800. The reason is they will want to hook up and turn more often which is not desirable (by most) in crud/chop/powder. The 8800 with a longer turn radius (I think its 28m at 188) is not always forcing you to turn. This is one reason it is not so stellar for carving groomers, more effort required to get it edge to edge vs. a ski with a deeper sidecut that you can just roll back and forth as it wants to turn.
post #16 of 29
The intelligence system absorbs or dampens the ski (or is supposed to, if you buy that), but it won't change the flex. This, combined with gramboh's points regarding sidecut are the premise for why I think the 8800 will be the better of the 2 in softer snow.
post #17 of 29
Thread Starter 
Bs"D
Gramboh & Coach, thank you very much for these last comments. I think you guys are right. I suspected all along that perhaps this was the issue. I wrote above in post #3: "I would imagine that the 88s are getting the reaction of good carving because of the seriously deeper sidecut than the 8800s. But, sidecut is not the whole picture of course. I imagine it must be torsionally more rigid (and perhaps also stiffer tip tip tail) than the Dynastar? - and that is pretty interesting at its measurments.
But, the flex pattern and sidecut is part of what I love about the 8800. It is excellent in crud. It is very stable on everything. It is very smooth."
But, until you explained it very well, I wasn't really clear and wasn't sure. Thanks.
So, until a demo would prove all logic wrong, I'm going to put this one to bed - content with my 8800s and the rest of the quiver. So, my wife also thanks you. Good work he/she/its.
post #18 of 29
Thread Starter 
Bs"D
Ski nose pop: Take notice of gramboh's excellent point, and feel good with your purchase of the 8800 as a great powder and soft snow ski.
post #19 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadRab
Bs"D
Ski nose pop: Take notice of gramboh's excellent point, and feel good with your purchase of the 8800 as a great powder and soft snow ski.
post #20 of 29
Great post, very timely for me. Just got back from Silverton skiing spring corn and semi softened crud on my old G4's. I need for width under foot, but all the way to the big boys 100+.

Had a pair of 8800 set aside , but hesitated because I have not demoed yet.I skied the 8000's , great fun forgiving ski, but not wide enough. I have a demo lined up for sat at Copper, should be a powder or soft snow day. If I like them , I'll buy them.

I can't wait anymore. There will always be some new ski on the horizon. If you keep waiting, you'll never ski new boards.
post #21 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by tictoc
Had a pair of 8800 set aside , but hesitated because I have not demoed yet.I skied the 8000's , great fun forgiving ski, but not wide enough. I have a demo lined up for sat at Copper, should be a powder or soft snow day. If I like them , I'll buy them.

I can't wait anymore. There will always be some new ski on the horizon. If you keep waiting, you'll never ski new boards.
I'll be amazed if you don't like the 8800. It's very similar to the 8000 in terms of feel yet not quite as quick or as adept at short turns. I like it in all conditions except icey hardpack.

I own the 8800, the 8000, and the Fischer RX 8 (among others). I can't imagine a better 3 ski quiver.
post #22 of 29
Thread Starter 
Bs"D
Coach, your points would have been valid in general, so I didn't realize that you yourself were a 8800 user/lover.
Now that I also see that our quivers are so similar, I wanted to ask your oppinion on my contemplated slalom purchase.
I have the 8800 @ 178cm (I'm 175lbs & 5'7"); the Head 1100 SW @ 170 ; and am thinking to get a full on slalom ski @ 160-165.
So, the variable is the 8000 vs slalom. (except that the RX 8, while somewhat similar to the 1100 SW, does lean a little more toward a slalom ski, and this might be part of the answer here)
I figured that a real energetic 11M radius short slalom gives me a significantly different feel than my 1100 SW. The 1100s are amazing at stable high speed long radius carving. But, even though they have a GS-SL mixed sidecut (15.4 @ 170cm) and will make a better short radius turn than a full GS - or obviously the 8800 - they still are a lot of work in the fall line. Again, a mixture of flex factors as well as sidecut. And, again, as your earlier point about contradictory design elements.
So, for real eye rolling small circle fun - not to mention hardpack/ice that is also steep and narrow, I figured a Slalom.
So, why did you choose the 8000 for your third ride? I would have thought that this ski itself is a compromise of different design goals, and made more for someone looking for a one ski quiver. Like you said, good on the piste, but not great (ex. better than the 8800, but not as good as the RX 8 or a slalom) - and good in powder, but not great (ex. better than a slalom, but not as good as the 8800).
Or, perhaps, is this the good ski for that third-fourth day after a storm that I spoke of?
[By the way, so far my demos of many slaloms have led me to either the Volkl SC Racing or the Head iSL/iSL Chip - hard choice between the two Heads. Or, to wait to see what next years Head Supershape is all about, or if there are changes in the SL/SL Chip - besides liquid metal]
post #23 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach13
I own the 8800, the 8000, and the Fischer RX 8 (among others). I can't imagine a better 3 ski quiver.
Guess I have to get you on my Metrons, too...
post #24 of 29
I'm sorry, but any ski with a proprietary binding system gets a big....

with me.

My next ski, the 8800 will be mounted with free rides.

Tic toc, I look forward to your review.
post #25 of 29
SNP, as you wish. The Metrons prefer the Atomic bindings, but they have a plate. I love my Fischers with the Railflex, but they come flat, too, if you prefer. I guess I really don't care that much about what binding I'm skiing; they all seem to keep me in when I want and let me out when I need.
post #26 of 29
Thread Starter 
ssH, you need?!
post #27 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadRab
ssH, you need?!


I figured out a couple of weeks ago that those nice, fat shovels of the b5s won't carve on each other... Double toe eject (in front of my entire group!).
post #28 of 29
So Stoked. Went down to the ski shop to drop another 50 bucks on layaway for the 8800's and I was able to get a pair of new fritschi freerides for 20 percent off! When I was there he told me that the bindings were being put away and sale would end next weekend due to such a sucky season. Since there's no change in the fritschi freeride binding next year, those very same bindings will cost at least 100 dollars more than this year's retail.

Since retail is 325 this year, next year they'll be 425. Thank you george bush. : Luckily I got em at what, 260? Better than hesitating one more week and having to pay 430 next year for this years bindings.

I suspect that all European gear will be significantly more expensive next season.
post #29 of 29
Thread Starter 
Hey Coach, could you spare a reply brother?
Please see my #22.
Thanks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 06' Head iM88 vs Legend 8800