or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › It's the skis (Equipe 10 vs SX11 vs SX10 vs Kästle SG)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

It's the skis (Equipe 10 vs SX11 vs SX10 vs Kästle SG)

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
Ok I finally understand the incredible disbelief I encountered when I claimed not to have really noticed much need for speed control. It's the skis people are using!

I recently got to demo a few skis at Blue Mountain Resort in Ontario http://www.bluemountain.ca/ (the one with the interactive trail map). I had gone there to try out some SLIIs, but discovered they only rent salomon HP skis and the Demo hut which didn't have the SLIIs didn't open 'till 11. I rented an Equipe 10 SC (165 cm was what they had) for the day and demoed an SX10 (165 or 170 I think) while waiting for the SX11 (they only had a 160) to come back.

I noticed that at a reasonbley fast speed the Equipe was definately nervous and hard to keep going straight. This was on fairly good terrain with maybe 6 inch bumps here and there which I completely ignored. I also noticed that it required me to get low, be smooth and store energy in my legs rather than overpower the ski at the end of the turns. It's grip on glare ice was not impressive (instead of moguls they had some stove-sized piles of snow seperated by glare ice).

At that same speed the SX10s just fell apart. Their edge grip was arthritic at best. They just gave up. It's a wonder intermediates can ski at all on these poor excusses for skis. I brought the SX10s back early and stayed on the Equipes until the SX11s were in.

Curious I pushed the Equipes a little bit more. At about half the speed I start to get excited on while on my trusty SGs the Equipes gave up the ghost. It was to the point that I decided to turn now and kill some speed because If I waited any longer they would not provide much turning power at all. For those of you who know this would occur on Calamity lane by the time it met back up with apple orchard. Also on little devil by the time it met back up with avalanche. I have in the past figured 11'ed all these runs on my SGs only stopping near the bottom.

The SX11s were a little too short for the choppy conditions at speed, but I felt that a 170 cm ski would have been ok. They had good edge grip.
Gota go now.
post #2 of 25
Ghost :I read your review re the SX10 and frankly have a differant expeience . But hey ---that's what makes this forum great, freedom of opinion . After doing detailed research and demos on several brands Both my buddy and I just bought them and really put them to their paces the last three days . I'm 6'1"" 195lbs and in good athletic shape

We TESTED them on the steeps,and on groomers, on ICE, on boilerplate , on crud and cut -up snow . We did short swing turns on steep twisty trails and let them rip on GS courses . They are incredibly STABLE at WARP speed ! And when you put them on edge they hold . No bouncing around or slippage

We skied them VERY hard and VERY fast 6-7 hrs a day AND DID NOT FIND THEIR SPEED LIMIT !! But more importantly they don't toast you after running fast and hard all day long! In short they are the Best ride among the several demoed and as a result they ended up in our quiver.



.
post #3 of 25
Comparing the Kaestle (I don't have the umlaut key) SG to and current ski is going give some weird results. Just from that statement, I'm going to have to assume that the new skis weren't skied they way they should be skied. I may be way off, but that's what I came up with.
post #4 of 25
OK, I’ll bite. I’ve demo’d both skis that you are talking about on more than one occasion and wouldn’t classify either of those ski’s as intermediate level or unstable with no edge grip. Can an intermediate ski either? Of course. Can an expert skier ski either? Definitely and should have no problem with edge control even if it required a little finesse. Just to comment on a couple of your quotes:

“noticed that at a reasonbley fast speed the Equipe was definately nervous and hard to keep going straight.”

The Equipe 10 SC is a slalom ski. You don’t ski them straight. How about charging down the fall line and laying them over to leave trench like railroad tracks. Trust me, they will handle it. They want to carve….carve…..carve…. Are there stiffer slalom ski’s with more stability? Definitely but the SC’s can hold their own. The only thing that I didn’t like about them was lack of pop in the tails.


“At that same speed the SX10s just fell apart. Their edge grip was arthritic at best. They just gave up. It's a wonder intermediates can ski at all on these poor excusses for skis. I brought the SX10s back early and stayed on the Equipes until the SX11s were in.”

The SX:10’s are another ski for skiers who like to ski hard in big arcs or quick fall line turns. I used a pair of these in a Master’s race in a 180 and had no problem holding their edges on ice. Oh, and I have skied the SX:11 in a 170. I don’t see a big difference between the two.
post #5 of 25
Thread Starter 
Warp daddy,
Fascinating.
I'm intrigued. Where did you try them out? What hill(s) were you on? How long were the skis? What else did you try out? I weigh about 170 and found that although the 170 cm SX10s initially felt like they would be more stable than the 165 Equipe 10 SCs, the Equipes could actually hold it together at a bit higher speeds and were third place after the 160 cm SX11s and the Equipe 10s when it came to grip and ability to turn at speed.
post #6 of 25
Thread Starter 
Nikonfme,
Yes, I know the Equipes are slalom skis, and they work well up to what must be slalom racing speeds. I left quite a few double trenches on the hill. I expected the nervousnes at higher speeds, having already tried Elan SX and Fussion 12, Rossi 9S and 9X Oversize and Fischer RX8s. I'm demonstrating skis to find a quick lively slalom ski that gives up as little as possible in the high speed stability department, but still delivers the goods.

My previous experience with older straighter slalom skis (Think Dynastar racing slalom skis) was that slalom skis are good for slalom and slower recreational skiing and not stable at higher speeds, but I had been assured my many on this and other forms the the "modern" shaped skis were stable at speed even in a short-length slalom-based 1-step-below race ski.

I have also read that the only way to go down a "steep" groomed run is to make a lot of turns to control your speed. I now see after trying out the SX10, that I too need to make a few speed control turns with these skis, even on runs that do not seem that steep to me. This appreciation is not something that would have occurred to me had I continued skiing on my old SGs. Maybe it's obvious, and I see it now, but I sometimes have trouble seeing the obvious: the speeds people are having trouble with on steep groomed runs are speeds that are troubling on 170 cm shaped skis, SX10s, and GS skis, speeds which would not trouble an experienced skier on a nice long pair of Kästle SG skis (on an uncrowded hill).

I also read a post by an intermediate skier on another form who had tried an advanced ski (I don't remember which one) and an "intermediate" ski (Head 140 I think). and found it very frustrating. I have to concur in part that it is much easier to ski fast and make fast, make quick turns, be in control on ice, etc. with the more advanced skis. Let me put it this way. If I were racing myself down the hill on a double black diamond, I would win by a large margin on the SX11, the Equipe would smoke the SX10, because the same skier on the same hills on the same day has more stability at speed, and more grip on the (IMO) better skis (for that purpose). It's the ski, not the skier that would determine the winner of this race, and the margins involved would be great. If I have trouble keeping up with me on an SX10, it's no wonder an intermediate skier has trouble "keeping up" with the equipment he's directed to.
post #7 of 25
Ghost : My buddy and I each had the 170 's on an 1400 'vert in the Adirondacks and on a 1200' vert in CNYand at a gnarly little 650' vert in th adirondacks that has a "rep" as a mini Mad River Glen with nasty ungroomed and bumped up steeps

We'll also run them @Tremblant , and several in NH @1500-2000 vert

Demoed Elan S12/10, Head 1100"Chip" ski , Fischer RX8, Rossi 9S, and Volkyl 5 star
post #8 of 25
One must also take into account the fact that demo tunes are usually not the best. I demoed K2 hellfire's and the edge grip on ice was just awful, the edges were in pretty sad shape. These same skis received a very good review from Peter Keelty and were considered suitable for ice. I have no doubt that a properly tuned hellfire is a much better ski than I experienced that day.
post #9 of 25
Thread Starter 
Good point Chris. Looking at Warp daddy's list of demos I have to conclude that it must of been the tune on the SX10s I had, because I would put the Elan S12, and RX8s I tested ahead of the S10s in the maximum grip department, but he found the sx10s better.

Another reason I have to get my own skis and tune them myself.
post #10 of 25
SC? are you talking about the silver/gray with red and blue markings with pilot bindings (street racer?)
If so they are I think the "performance" SL and not a race SL even though they sometimes call it that.

. All three of the skis you talked about would not compare at high speeds to a SG or SuperG ski. Totally different animal.

DC
post #11 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dchan
SC? are you talking about the silver/gray with red and blue markings with pilot bindings (street racer?)
If so they are I think the "performance" SL and not a race SL even though they sometimes call it that.

. All three of the skis you talked about would not compare at high speeds to a SG or SuperG ski. Totally different animal.

DC
I demoed the Equipe 10 SC Pilot, not the Streetracer 10 Pilot. It did seem rather flexible for a "race" ski. I think the Equipe has a lot more sidecut. Maybe the Streetracer 10 would have fared better at higher speeds. Anybody: .

I agree totally with your point about these skis not being compareable to the stability and confidence-inspiring rock-solid feel of a Super-G ski, even at the speeds that can be easily reached on many groomed runs in southern Ontario. The SX11 makes a far better attempt at it than the Equipe though, and the SX10 may have suffered from a poor tune, so I will refrain from edge grip diagnoses, but I still think it is pretty far behind the 11 in terms of stability at speed.
post #12 of 25
"I'm demonstrating skis to find a quick lively slalom ski that gives up as little as possible in the high speed stability department, but still delivers the goods."

not to flame but you sound like the guy that shows up at demos and wants "the fastest ski you have, but it has to work in the bumps"

imagine walking into a car dealer and asking "i need something that will carry 12 people, be nimble in the corners at speed and easy to park downtown"
post #13 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by waxman
"
imagine walking into a car dealer and asking "i need something that will carry 12 people, be nimble in the corners at speed and easy to park downtown"
I want one of those too! Well actually, I don't mind parking a larger car, but I want the handling AND the capacity. I'm still waiting for the six-passenger camaro. My Caprice keeps reminding me it's not a Corvette.
post #14 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris719
One must also take into account the fact that demo tunes are usually not the best.
While I generally agree with the theory that one should demo, demo, demo, the possible (probable?) variation in tuning must be taken into account. Remember that demo skis are prepared and maintained "en mass", many times by people who are only part-time reps, however well motivated. They may lack the time, tools and or skills and knowledge to prepare skis correctly.

I have demoed great skis that were really bad, and mediocre skis that seemed reasonably good - all because of the tune.

The best way to judge a demo, in my opinion, is to read/listen to all the reviews of the ski that you can from all sources, read the manufacturer's material, demo (bracketing the correct lengths), and then factor all that data together. It is an art, not a science.
post #15 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betaracer
Comparing the Kaestle (I don't have the umlaut key) SG to and current ski is going give some weird results. Just from that statement, I'm going to have to assume that the new skis weren't skied they way they should be skied. I may be way off, but that's what I came up with.
I'd be inclined to agree with you on this one. Some lessons might do the trick...
post #16 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
d by glare ice).

At that same speed the SX10s just fell apart. Their edge grip was arthritic at best. They just gave up. It's a wonder intermediates can ski at all on these poor excusses for skis. I brought the SX10s back early and stayed on the Equipes until the SX11s were in.
A friend of mine just got a pair of those in 180. We went out mid week and skied the entire mountain, crud, powder and many runs on corduroy at terminal velocity for our clothes. We both thought they were great. Much nicer turns than my R11's and just about as stable. Hard to imagine we are talking about the same ski. My friend is a world class athlete and one of Thomas Grandi's neighbors.
post #17 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
At that same speed the SX10s just fell apart. Their edge grip was arthritic at best. They just gave up. It's a wonder intermediates can ski at all on these poor excusses for skis.
Confirming what others said, it's gotta be your tune. I picked up a pair of SX10 about a month ago, and got about 10 days on them. Their edge grip on ice is phenomenal. They do short turns well, but their forte is high speed big arcs. Step on the gas, lock edge, and hang on to your toupee while they accelerate down and away. Totally opposite of your experience.
post #18 of 25
I have to repeat the experience I had already posted in some other thread.

(i) The GS:11 and SX:9 from 2 years ago as rental/demo versions were apparently worse skis than standard models.

(ii) this year´s GS:11m and SX:11m in the Czech Atomic Test Center were almost tragical skis with no grip
the friends of mine who run the Center warned me - I tried - had to confirm - I was like a complete idiot on the hill (believe me, normally I am not - jokes etc. allowed:... )
the tune was NOT an issue
The SX:10 was fairly good (not phenomenal) and definitely better than the GS:11m
The C:9 was a perfect ski, similar to SX:10 and definitely better than the higher models
I don´t have an explanation for the tragic behavior of the skis mentioned :

Equipe 10 SC has identical dimensions with the Streetracer 10 but the skis are not the same
Otoh, the 10 SC is not a real SL (Equipe 10 3V is with the LAB model as race stock and standard 3V, then there is also the old 3V and detuned 8 3V).

Btw, comparisons using a SG ski are weird. How can you compare the Salli 125-66-104 to some SG with about 35 m radius? Well, you can, but what do you expect to find out?
post #19 of 25
Hasn’t anyone else noticed that we’re comparing race stock (Super G) skis to production models? Of course the edge grip and confidence at speed is better on the SuperGs. It doesn’t matter how well those all mountain/skier cross skis were tuned, they are not ever going to compare to a race stock ski in those areas. That’s just the tradeoff you make for a little versatility.
post #20 of 25
So you are saying that a 2004/5 C:9 has better grip than an SX:11?
post #21 of 25
Thread Starter 
To be fair, I'm comparing the edge grip of the SX11 and Equipe 10 SC to the SX10. I mention the SG only because most of my previous experience is on the SG, which has a sidecut turn radius of about 50m, but a rather soft tip so it can be forced into a tighter turn ...cue Monty Python music... er well super tight turns may require breaking loose the tails, er well actually it has a soft tip compared to it's tail.

I just found a Ski Magasine review. It seems the Equipe is 121-66-102 and Streetracer is 108-65-98 and has metal topsheet that stiffens it. I'm going skiing tomorrow. Should I try the Streetracer? I can't find any SL11s nearby to demo.
post #22 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris719
So you are saying that a 2004/5 C:9 has better grip than an SX:11?
No, I´m not.
I´m just saying how I and lots of others found the particular skis I demoed.
I´m also saying that I don´t know why it was so.
post #23 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
Nikonfme,
having already tried Elan SX and Fussion 12, Rossi 9S and 9X Oversize and Fischer RX8s. I'm demonstrating skis to find a quick lively slalom ski that gives up as little as possible in the high speed stability department, but still delivers the goods.
Ghost,

How did you think the Elan SX and Fischer Rx8 performed in the stability department at high speeds? IMO, they are both stable and lively (the Rx8 being more lively) and I'm surprised if you didn't stop with one of these skis finding that they fit the bill. Of course, I don't know what other "goods" you want them to deliver. It's hard to believe that you thought either of these skis were "nervous" at high speeds. Unless you are trying to travel at Super G speeds.
post #24 of 25
Thread Starter 
The Fischer RX8s were the third ski I tried. I started with Oversize 9X, then the 9S, then the RX8s. Every ski beat out the one before it, so I was hoping to continue the trend. Unfortunately for me the Elans didn't. They certainly felt stable enough in terms of vibration and they did feel heavier and solider and more composed than the fischers. The fischers felt lighter and quicker but still smoother than the Rossis. They (edit: the fishers) were the first lively ski I've been on that still felt comfortable at a decent speed. The only thing I didn't like about the Elans was that they were trying too hard to turn over every bump at speed; the RX8s had this tendancy too, but not so much. The RX8s seemed to fit the bill, but I'm thinking the SL11s might have better ice bite, and I want to know how far out of it's territory I can push the SL11s before I make a decision, and I still have to try the 6*s.

Edit: the hill where I tried the Elan, Mount St. Louis Moonstone, did not have any runs as steep as those at Blue Mountain Ont.

The "goods" I'm looking for are super quick rapid fire turns in tight places, super grip on ice, and good action springing back and forth doing a series of turns. If they also let me go straight when I want to without putting up a fight and rail GS and larger turns so much the better. I know I have to compromise, but I'm just finding the right compromise for me. The RX8 is currently sitting at the top of my list, but I haven't tried a racing slalom ski yet.
post #25 of 25
Ghost,


Thanks for the detailed description of your experiences on these skis. What you say about the Elan SX and Rx8 fit with my experience too. I liked the Elans better than the Rx8 b/c the latter just had too much "feel" for me. But, I think, it's that feel and liveliness that attracks so many to the Rx8. It certainly is a fun ski.

One other ski that may be worth trying (though I haven't been on it myself) is the new 2006 Elan Ripstick. It is more of a GS ski I think, but I hear it can rip out short turns without too much struggle.
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 › It's the skis (Equipe 10 vs SX11 vs SX10 vs Kästle SG)