As someone who buys years old race gear annually I was wondering what everyone thought. Heard alot of positives about fischer and atomic, but are they the best?
post #1 of 123
3/23/05 at 9:04am
Originally Posted by RadRab
They are so great that he hardly skied them?!:
I'm sure the Atomics are good, but there are lots of other great SL skis also. But, there are also significant differences between them.
IMHO you first need to define your personal use, preferences, skill level, and predominant skiing conditions and terrain before you could choose the best one for you.
Originally Posted by Bob Peters
Given your nom de plume, we would sort of expect you to extol Atomics. Just out of curiousity, what other brand/model of '05 slalom skis have you actually skied on?
makwendo99, I "third" your comments on the Dynastars. I got a pair of Omeglass Speed 63's (165cm) early this season and I dearly love them. Smooth, quick, stable, responsive, not overly demanding. I don't really *race* much beyond running NASTAR-type gates so I can't say whether they have the "guts" for a serious, icy, rutted slalom course, but they're one heck of a lot of fun all over the mountain.
Originally Posted by RadRab
AtomicmanIAC: Definately, get some of your 26 pairs off your back so you can lighten up and have a sense of humor.
You obviously understood neither the significance of the "wink" icon, or the affirmation of the SL11 being a good ski which followed.
As far as your choice of words in response, I reiterate my intelligent and essential point of Neofux's need to first define his parameters (also later echoed by other intelligent repliers). And, a moron is someone who thinks that the Canadien Journal is the last word, and has 26 pairs of skis.
Neofux, whatever you do, have pity, tell the AtomicmanIAC that you bought an Atomic so he can sleep at night.
Originally Posted by RJP
Bob, I've never skied anywhere west of NewYork (disclaimer) and I've always wondered how a race orientated slalom ski fares on western terrain. I suppose that I always envision beautiful powder or soft groomed snow where the edge hold of a slalom ski isn't too important. I could be wrong, but I can't see the slalom skis being very versatile. I was looking for slalom skis for the east (kinda done looking now) but I was concerned because I applied to grad school in Salt Lake and in the back of my mind i wondered if the dedicated shorty was a useless purchase because it would see no time if i moved out west.
How often are you on your slalom/ what (if anything) is in the quiver? Any limitations you've found? Do you have to stick to certain areas because some skis "just won't go there"? I need enlightenment!
Originally Posted by roundturns
I haven't skied other race slaloms other than the 164 cm SL 11. So I don't have a frame of reference for comparison. However, the SL11 is absolutely superb on hard snow and holds an edge like nothing else I have ever experienced.
I can't imagine anybody desiring superb short turn performance on hard snow not loving this ski. You can also carve longer arcs too its very versatile.
Originally Posted by extremecarver
I did not know that 164 cm is a legal "race slalom".
I had the 06 SL11m in my Hands. Its so soft, unbelievable. 2. It's no slalom ski, radius is too big.
The 05 SL11m is no real slalom either as the GS11 is nowhere near a giant slalom ski, but follow the atomic hype, buy skis (metron B5) that were produced 10 years ago in similar dimensions and treat them as hot new religion