or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › atomic sx:9 / c:9 compare/contrast?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

atomic sx:9 / c:9 compare/contrast?

post #1 of 8
Thread Starter 
A friend who's buying his first pair of skis has narrowed his choice to Atomic SX:9 or C:9. He's a fairly new skier in his second season of skiing at age 42, 5'10, 185 lbs. Skiing in Minnesota primarily -- local hills nr. Mpls, Lutsen, maybe U.P. Michigan. He's excited about skiing and wants to work at his skills, but for now is not real aggressive; he's looking for a carving ski he can advance with.

After demos at a local hill, he narrowed it down to these two. The C:9 was out of stock at the shop he wants to deal with, so he bought the SX:9 (in 170cm length). But he's having second thoughts and having the dealer check if the distributor can deliver a C:9 instead of the SX:9.

From what I've read it seems like the C:9 and SX:9 should be fairly similar (if not indistinguishable), except for the graphics. Anyone skied both or have a lot of knowledge re Atomics, want to compare / contrast?

Thanks for any input.
post #2 of 8
Although it's just hearsay, I've heard that the SX9 is the same as the GS9. They have the same dimensions as I've read in numerous places. Take it for what it's worth.
post #3 of 8
Thread Starter 
bump ...
post #4 of 8
According to Atomics website the C9 has a 17m radius in a 180 length and the SX9 are a 16m in a 180.

I would say that they do not have the same dimensions or at least not the same turning radius.

The constuction of the skis and materials are different so I would not say that these two skis are indistinguishable.

I haven't skied on the C9s so I can't give specifics.
post #5 of 8
The C9 will be a far more forgiving ski , probably the better choice for learning.
post #6 of 8
Hi , I can speak from personel experience. I bought a pair of Beta carV 9.18, the exact same ski, the year before they changed the nomenclature to C:9 but it is THE same ski as the Carv 9:18. I bought it when I was making the switch from skarved turn as a lower intermediate to trying to learn to really carve turns and it was an excellent learning tool. I'm 5'10" (~176 cm tall) and I weigh around 170 lbs and I went for the 170 length. Now I am an aggressive skier who teaches at our local hill and I still use the 9.18 because it works well at moderate speeds, unlike som race and expert skis so its good for teaching but when I go out and rip I am not overpowering this ski. Ski tests by esperts have said its an easy ski but that it has no speed limit the recreational skier is going to hit and I would tend to agree. I have tried Atomic's GS:9, SX:11, and R:EX and I love them all but I still ski the 9.18 becaue I haven't had the cash to get anything better, but it doesn't bother me because after I ski these "expert" skis and I get back on my own sticks, I always expect them to feel wussy by comparison but they don't. My vote for a learning skier is to get the C:9, it'll be easy to grow on, and he can keep skiing it well into lower advanced skiing without it holding him back, whereas a full bore skicross ski like the SX:9 may make lower level learning a bit more difficult since to really get those skis to do what they are supposed to do, you have to carry a little speed into the fall zone. My $0.02, anyone else please refute if you don't agree but that is my experience.
post #7 of 8
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the info above. Sounds like experienced skiers who skied both agree the C:9 is a better choice. But my friend couldn't get the C:9 after all, so he's going with the SX:9. When he demoed, his favorite ski of all was the new Rossi Bode One. So I figure if he likes that, he ought to like the SX:9, and whatever the distinctions between the C:9 and SX:9, he'll just get used to the SX.
post #8 of 8
Thread Starter 
The newbies speaks. Here's what my friend had to say after 2 days on his new SX:9's:

The skis were great, and we had a variety of conditions to test them on from powder to ice and crud. They were also like greased lightening -- I had no idea about the speed I was missing. The hardest part was I feel like I'm just breaking them in, or rather, they are breaking me in. There were a couple of occasions on some of the steeper blues where I'd lock into a turn, and it was almost like being on rails. I felt like I was starting something, but didn't have the experience or technique to finish the manuever. Having said all this, I'm sold on these things.
So, he's "hooked", and I hope will grow into the SX:9's. Thanks for the info and opinions above, though.
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 › atomic sx:9 / c:9 compare/contrast?