New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Stability vs. Weight

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
I'm a taller (6'1"), lighter (160 Lbs) skier and don't have cannon quads. Can anyone recommend a stable midfat that is also relatively light? I demoed the Atomic RX11 last year and loved the stability but found them pretty heavy. Is there a versatile midfat out there that will let me plow through off-piste crud/powder at high speed without weighing me down in the bumps.

Basically asking for the perfect ski I know ... any thoughts regarding general weight/stability trends of the major ski companies out there would be greatly appreciated.

Who makes light but strong skis?
post #2 of 20
Hello-

I'm 6'0", 185.

I've never heard of the Atomic RX11, but I'm assuming you meant the SX:11? or the R: 11? There is quite a weight difference in both skis.

Anyway, any atomic ski you buy with an atomic binding on it will weigh a lot...those bindings (although nice) are just clunky.

You have a few options:
The Atomic R:9 is not a system ski, so you could mount a relatively light binding on it (s912ti)and it might feel a little lighter. But consider that the bindings are connected to you feet, you really shouldn't notice that weight too much because they are close to where you're applying force.

The next option is to go with something that has a foam core. Most of the new salomon skis have the spaceframe technology and a "hybrid" core, rather, it is a mix of wood and foam. They seem to be relatively light, but pricey.

You could always try and go with a bit of a shorter ski that is slightly stiffer (like the sx: 11 in a 170) which would suit you well and feel stable. A lot of today's skis are becoming more and more stable (even some of the lighter ones) but nothing will ever compare to the stability of a SOLID wood cored beefy ski. You just have to find the happy medium.

Regards,
Kyle
post #3 of 20
I'm skiing on The new R11 puls in a 170 . With the plate and Atomic binding it is a heavy ski. Walking from my home to the lift the ski does feel heavy. Once on the snow I don't notice the wieght at all. They are some of the most responsive skis I have ever had. Quick and with a great feel for the snow. In the 170 they proform pretty good in the bumps and still vary stable at speed. No ski is a do all ski so each has it's good points and bad. By The way, I do believe That The Atomics are a foam core ski.
post #4 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by Utah49:
By The way, I do believe That The Atomics are a foam core ski.
you are probably right [img]smile.gif[/img]
post #5 of 20
You're way wrong. Atomic Skis are not foam core. Depending on the model, they either have a titanium, carbon fiber, or densolite core.

Another misconception is that Atomic bindings are heavy. Weigh a competitor's binding of the same level and intended use. Very similar. Atomic's Device binding is actually the lightest binding on the market.
post #6 of 20
Agree with Beta, I weighed several bindings in a shop last spring and the Atomics weighed about the same as the Looks and Salomons. If you went with a Ti binding though you would probably save some weight.

The swing weight of the ski is probably more noticeable when skiing in bumps. The Salomon spaceframe skis are supposed to be pretty light in the tip and tail giving you a lower swingweight. A ski like the Hot or Xtra Hot with a Ti binding should be a pretty light setup.
post #7 of 20
Lazy

I am the same weight and 6'2''. I ski mainly off piste and prefer skis with a waist of around 85mm.

My main concern is not the weight of the ski (most of the time you are standing on them anyway) but how easy it is to flex the ski. unfortunately, there is a trade-off between flex and stability. most midfats are too stiff for my liking/weight(Voelkl G4, Atomic, etc). One of the best stable skis with a good flex I ever skied were the Volants and they were heavy! they had a soft flex but were torsionally stiff due to the steel cap.

I heard that the Head iM 85/Mojo are not so stiff? I would be very interested to hear other suggestions as I will be demoing this season.
post #8 of 20
I forgot to add the Voelkl twintip V-pro which is a softer version of the G4 and supposedly very good for off piste.

Also worth noting is that most brands supply their longest length (188/190) in a stiffer/hardcore version than the other lengths. although I am comfortable skiing the longer lenghts I often go one size smaller for the softer flex.

best way to find out is to demo.
Happy Skiing!
post #9 of 20
You'll want to look at the Volkl AX3 flat in 168cm, that could be very thing your looking for. Then put the Atomic binding on it.
post #10 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by crashhelmet:

I heard that the Head iM 85/Mojo are not so stiff? I would be very interested to hear other suggestions as I will be demoing this season.
hmmmm....not so sure that's correct. reading it's reviews they say that it "kicks the crap out of you when you make a mistake"....telling me that they're perhaps fairly stiff.

Salomon hots or x-hots have my vote.
post #11 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by BetaRacer:
You're way wrong. Atomic Skis are not foam core. Depending on the model, they either have a titanium, carbon fiber, or densolite core.

Another misconception is that Atomic bindings are heavy. Weigh a competitor's binding of the same level and intended use. Very similar. Atomic's Device binding is actually the lightest binding on the market.
It's funny because magazines list most if not all Atomics as having a foam core.

Don't they all have some foam but then the Beta lobes have the titanium or carbon fiber in them?

What is the core of the R11?

I should call Atomic and ask them.
post #12 of 20
I called Atomic.

All of their skis have a foam core and the bars are made of titanium or something else depending on the year.

The mens' skis usually have some form of carbon under the foot area to stiffen up the flex as opposed to the women's skis that do not have the carbon to soften the flex.

So I guess I was right for once.

[img]smile.gif[/img]

They are still heavy as hell though but I like that when hitting crud.
post #13 of 20
I don't know who you talked to, but there is no foam in the core of Atomic skis. Except in some junior models. The material is Densolite. It is an acrylic material which is machined the same as wood, and placed in the ski during material lay-up. The models which use Powerchannels have the Densolite manufactured around the rods, and then placed in the ski.

Foam is typically injected into a hollow shell. This is not the case with Atomic's adult or higher end junior skis.
post #14 of 20
Perhaps foam core was a poor choice of words. Perhaps a better choice would have been a synthetic milled core as opposed to a wood core ski. There are those out there that think a wood core ski is the only way to go. the ski core is just one part of what goes into making a modren ski. IMHO the most importent part of a ski is the engineering and design. It really does not matter to me what the core is as long as the ski is built well and proforms. The r11 may feel a bit on the heavy side. However dispite the few extra ozs the over all proformance is nothing short of fantastic.
post #15 of 20
I mostly agree with betaracer. The core is the principal load bearing structure of the ski. In the case of Atomic, it is the power channels. The foam around, and I did say foam, is just a filler. Densolite, the acrylic material, is just a kind of foam (I guess foam is a bad word). Foam can be injected or milled. Rossignol has been milling acrylic foam since the eighties. There is nothing wrong with foam. My Rossi 7S, after 150 days on the slope, is still holding up the retaining wall in back yard, with full camber.
Oops, we were talking about weight. If you are carving, like Utah49 is, weight only helps to keep the ski on the snow. As Keelty put it, "swing weight" is a skidding term. The heaviest ski in my collection is 157cm Atomic with 412 binding. I think it is the plate, which is awesome.
post #16 of 20
last comment, I have made phone calls to many manufacturers, and never got the right answer. It is better to go to barking bears. But don't take stock in my comments.
post #17 of 20
Goode makes a ski that reminds me of those light plastic beer mugs. You pick either up and about sling it over your shoulder.

The Fischer FX 8.6 is a relatively light ski.
post #18 of 20
Quote:
If you are carving, like Utah49 is, weight only helps to keep the ski on the snow. As Keelty put it, "swing weight" is a skidding term.
Swing weight could be a skidding term when referred to in the sense of general skiing technique, and it's not really applicable to carving, but it could be applicable to bump skiing. I was thinking about it more in the sense of swing weight in the air or when unweighted. One thing I noticed about my PR's is they love to get air off soft bumps and are very easy to swivel around or turn in the air. Is seems like the the PR/1080 Spaceframe skis were designed as all mountain/freestyle carving skis that would be light in the air for tricks etc, and it makes sense that they would swivel or turn easily around bumps. I'm not really an avid bump skier, but it seems to me that bump skiers spend some time both swivelling and carving. Seems like i've read that bump skis sidecuts are straighter so maybe there's not as much carving involved depending on the type of bumps you're in. The type I generally ski are softer and more spread out where you can carve the troughs and pop off the tops. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

[ December 07, 2003, 09:43 AM: Message edited by: Westcat ]
post #19 of 20
Westcat, I agree, I replaced the 614s on my slaloms with 412s and found it better in the bumps. The 412 looks just as solid as the 614s, if you don't need the din.
post #20 of 20
Quote:
Originally posted by Rusty Guy:
Goode makes a ski that reminds me of those light plastic beer mugs. You pick either up and about sling it over your shoulder.

Goode does make a very light ski. I have yet to get on them but I am looking forward to. They are NOT as light as the original Goodes (thank God) but willbe more stable.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion