or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Advice on new skis

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
I am looking to buy new ski's for the upcoming season. I am 6'0'' 185 pounds and am a 6/7 skier hoping to be a 7/8 by the end of the season. I ski any groomed slope and I am improving off piste.

Since I live in MD I do not have the luxury of a demoing ski's. I ski mostly out west now (Utah and Montana), but learned on the east coast hard pack/ice. I have narrowed my choices down to the following:

Atomic M:10 171's (04/05) with the 05/06 Neox binding (since it's lighter). I have chosen this ski for it's all around performance, but also with the hope I encounter 2 feet of fresh.

Volkl Supersport 5 star 168's. I have chosen this ski also for it's all around performance, but have also read it is doable in light powder.

Please any feedback for those sking on the above boards would be most appreciated and any other recommendations would be very welcomed as well.

Jim
post #2 of 28
migibs, welcome to EpicSki! Be sure to stick around, search a bit, and hang out!

I like the M:10 for you a lot. You'll find the width very nice in soft snow, and it will perform surprisingly well on hardpack. The 5* is, in my opinion, not as much fun in the soft because it's narrower and tends to get thrown around. This is relative, however. The 5* is a great ski, but just not as good for the overall requirements that you have than the M:10.
post #3 of 28
More advice on new skis needed...for my husband. He hasn't skied much in recent years due to two torn ACL's and a shoulder dislocation. Two of those injuries were on the first day out in the season, so needless to say it's tough getting him back on the slopes. But last year I got him out two days, and he demo'd several skis over the course of those days -- K2 Apache Recon (he hated), Rossi B2 (so-so) and K2 Public Enemy (which the ski shop tech convinced him to try). He liked, not loved, the PE. He doesn't like the graphics or the fact that they are twin tips. My husband is out of shape, in his fifties, and after all these injuries, not very aggressive when it comes to skiing. He has almost no time in on shaped skis, most of his skiing was when we were first married (and I guess we were still in the honeymoon phase and he was trying to please me). So, he is more used to straight skis. He tends to be in the backseat a bit, stick to groomers, and prefers (obviously) green and blue runs. I was thinking maybe the K2 Omni 5500 last year, but was wondering what other ski might be worth trying this year, given that he liked the PE's at least a little. He usually enjoys himself once I get him out the door or I would give up on him entirely.
post #4 of 28
I agree with SSH, I think the M10 would be a great choice, particularly for out West. I'm not a big fan of the Volkl's, if you're looking at something in the cross category, I'd look at the Fischer RX's or the Head XRC's.
post #5 of 28
Sibhusky, your husband might want to stick with something in the K2 line, although the PE doesn't seem to fit his profile. K2's tend to be pretty mellow, a little too mellow for my liking, but for someone that's looking for a smooth ride without any surprizes, that may be the way to go.
post #6 of 28
The M:10 is still a very good east coast ski too.
post #7 of 28
I ski the NE too. Last year, I skied the M9 back to back with the 6-star. I liked the M9 much better. I bought the M10 in a 171 for this season.

Good luck.
post #8 of 28
sibhusky, I agree with your assessment on the Omni. He may also like a Nordica SUV 12 or an Atomic M:9. However, given where he is, he's really going to have to demo them. I suspect that his habits and lack of interest in changing will mean that he'll need to find a pair that "click" for him. A few years ago, I would have suggest the Volkl G3 which became the AX3, but I think they may have changed it... It was a nice transition ski for those coming from straight skis.
post #9 of 28
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the great info. Looks like I will be going with the M10 in 171's. What is the difference between the M9's and M10's? I have read they are the same ski except the M9 is lighter and a little more flex, but skimag.com gives them different dimensions/reviews.


M9: 117-64-95
M10: 122-74-108

Is this true?
post #10 of 28
My experience has only been with the B5 and M11, which both share the same dimensions of 127-76-114. The M10 and M9 are 122-74-108. While the B5 and M11 share the same shape, there is a noticeable difference in the way they ski, at least in my opinion. From what I have heard, there is a similar difference between the M10 and M9. Once again, only going from what I hear, most people prefer the M10 over the M9. Don't like to comment on skis that I haven't had a chance to try, but Peter Keelty over at realskiers.com does a through review of all these skis, and he indicates that the M10 was his perference also, and I tend to trust his judgement. I think that going on what you've told us that you would be very happy with the M10. There are also some excellent deals to be had on last seasons leftover models, too. Good Luck.
post #11 of 28
sibhusky,

don't forget about these: elan S08, atomic sl 9 head ic160, Dynastar 08 or maybe 09

It's supposed to be really easy right? Check www.skipressworld.com for reviews. They do a very good job.
post #12 of 28
migibs, I think you'll like the 10 more. It's got a broader performance range--especially at the high side.
post #13 of 28
Thanks for the pointers, I am taking notes.
post #14 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
sibhusky,

don't forget about these: elan S08, atomic sl 9 head ic160, Dynastar 08 or maybe 09

It's supposed to be really easy right? Check www.skipressworld.com for reviews. They do a very good job.
I have tried the Elan S08 and S12. The S12 is good, if a bit turny when trying to go straight through small bumps, but the S08 is just too wimpy.
post #15 of 28
The S12 is a great ski. A little less lively than the RX8, but a really unusual feel, too. Nice...
post #16 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by migibs
Thanks for the great info. Looks like I will be going with the M10 in 171's. What is the difference between the M9's and M10's? I have read they are the same ski except the M9 is lighter and a little more flex, but skimag.com gives them different dimensions/reviews.


M9: 117-64-95
M10: 122-74-108

Is this true?
No. Both are the same dimensions. The dimensions do vary with the size of teh ski though. They are closer (if not dead on) with teh m:10 dimensions ou posted.
post #17 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
I have tried the Elan S08 and S12. The S12 is good, if a bit turny when trying to go straight through small bumps, but the S08 is just too wimpy.
I think it is unlikely that the S12 is appropriate for sibhusky's husband -- two torn ACL, out of shape, 50's, not aggresive, no shape experience, backseat and sticks to greens and blues.

The S12 has WAY too much power, and if the RX-8 is comparable, then ditto for that too.

I'm thinking VERY forgiving, VERY easy to use. FWIW, I tried both the S08 and S12. I'd never suggest the S12 for a non-agressive straight stick skier. It is REALLY easy to ride the S08 on an arc -- just tip and go. But maybe riding the arc is not what is desired.....

In which case, I suggeset Rossi B2 would be a fine choice.

No surprises. Very forgiving of skidding, yet somewhat capable of carving -- it won't through you from the backseat like the S12 will... (As will RX-8
I'd imagine.) It's probably a way more comfortable ride for the guy than the super-carvers being suggested, and probably a decent "first" shape.
post #18 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
I have tried the Elan S08 and S12. The S12 is good, if a bit turny when trying to go straight through small bumps, but the S08 is just too wimpy.
The S10 is livelier than the S08 and less stiff than the S12...as imagined. A softer shovel than the S12...
post #19 of 28
You're thinking 168 on the 5* and 171 on the m-10 - the m-10 has a lot more running surface than the 5* and should probably be skied shorter than the 5* - the 164 m-10 proably provides more float then the 168 5* - if you ski fast you may enjoy the longer length at 171 but as a level 6 skier you may want to demo a 164. There is substantial perforamnce differences between the different lengths on the m-10 . I've been told that as the length gets shorter Atomic also softens the ski by some 7% or so.
post #20 of 28
Hmmm, having said all that I checked sibhusky's locale: northern rockies.

I'd add Elan M10, (Now 555) to the list.

When Elan was at the hill the M10 was actually the easiest of the bunch to ski. The 662, (now 666) was better, but took some attention.
post #21 of 28
Sibhusky - I'm kind of small 5'7" 150 lbs (54 yo) and tend to carry my weight low and sometimes get back on my skis - while I ski on m-10s - - if your husband can handle the graphics I've demoed some of the k2 T-Nine series (womens skis) he might find the tru luv or one luv might work well for him. There both about 70mm mid fats not for rippin but very smooth and comfortable at low speeds and with the forward mountings and soft tail very forgiving if you get back on them. Just a thought.
post #22 of 28
Thread Starter 
I said above I am going with the M10, but now I am not sure what length would be best for me. I am not an overly aggressive skier, but can if I need to. I don't mind speed, but I'm usually not out to "rip" every run. Again with my stats 6'0 185 (likely to be down to 175-180 for skiing weight) I'm right in the middle of the Metron Index. With not having any chances of demoing can anyone provide insight to what might be more suitable 164 or 171?
post #23 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
Hmmm, having said all that I checked sibhusky's locale: northern rockies.

I'd add Elan M10, (Now 555) to the list.

When Elan was at the hill the M10 was actually the easiest of the bunch to ski. The 662, (now 666) was better, but took some attention.
I demo'd the 666's, hated them. I was told I would love them, but in moguls with them I was a disaster. Took one run and practically threw them at the guy. Went back to my beloved XP's.

The new skis are for the hubby of course, so will make a note of it, as he NEVER does bumps.
post #24 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky
I demo'd the 666's, hated them. I was told I would love them, but in moguls with them I was a disaster. Took one run and practically threw them at the guy. Went back to my beloved XP's.

The new skis are for the hubby of course, so will make a note of it, as he NEVER does bumps.
IMO, the 662 was a great ski FOR ME.

It's not for your hubby, but the Elan M10 has very nice manners.
post #25 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by migibs
I said above I am going with the M10, but now I am not sure what length would be best for me. I am not an overly aggressive skier, but can if I need to. I don't mind speed, but I'm usually not out to "rip" every run. Again with my stats 6'0 185 (likely to be down to 175-180 for skiing weight) I'm right in the middle of the Metron Index. With not having any chances of demoing can anyone provide insight to what might be more suitable 164 or 171?
Go down if you are a bit more on the less-aggressive side. Go up for faster speeds and more aggressive technique.
post #26 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
I think it is unlikely that the S12 is appropriate for sibhusky's husband -- two torn ACL, out of shape, 50's, not aggresive, no shape experience, backseat and sticks to greens and blues.

The S12 has WAY too much power, and if the RX-8 is comparable, then ditto for that too.

I'm thinking VERY forgiving, VERY easy to use. FWIW, I tried both the S08 and S12. I'd never suggest the S12 for a non-agressive straight stick skier. It is REALLY easy to ride the S08 on an arc -- just tip and go. But maybe riding the arc is not what is desired.....

In which case, I suggeset Rossi B2 would be a fine choice.

No surprises. Very forgiving of skidding, yet somewhat capable of carving -- it won't through you from the backseat like the S12 will... (As will RX-8
I'd imagine.) It's probably a way more comfortable ride for the guy than the super-carvers being suggested, and probably a decent "first" shape.
Yes. I was thinking of the original poster when I wrote that. Still, I wouldn't take the S08 for Sibhusky's husband; It just can't deliver the goods when asked, and still will get him railed when he could otherwise skid.

Maybe something from Solomon, perhaps a crossmax 10?
post #27 of 28
Can't say about the Salomon, never skied it. I did ski a crossmax 9 once, but it was WAY too soft.

I just reread that the Rossi B2 was only so-so. There is still hope.

How about the Volkl EXP?
post #28 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydog
Sibhusky - I'm kind of small 5'7" 150 lbs (54 yo) and tend to carry my weight low and sometimes get back on my skis - while I ski on m-10s - - if your husband can handle the graphics I've demoed some of the k2 T-Nine series (womens skis) he might find the tru luv or one luv might work well for him. There both about 70mm mid fats not for rippin but very smooth and comfortable at low speeds and with the forward mountings and soft tail very forgiving if you get back on them. Just a thought.
I can't handle the graphics. For sure my husband can't.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews