EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › interm: maybe metron or speedmachine?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

interm: maybe metron or speedmachine?

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 
i am getting ready to buy my first set skis. i got tired last year of renting, and feel confident that i am ready for the investment. i would rate myself as an intermediate. my buddies and i ride in michigan, at alot of the southern parks (but we are looking to head farther north this year). i would like to find a set that won't punish me for not being perfect. reading through some of the forums, i see alot of people like the metrons. looking on ebay, there was a nice set of nordica speedmachine 12's that also caught my eye. i am trying not to completely break the bank on a set. i am 5'9" at 200 lbs. i am looking in the range of 160cm to 170cm. if anyone out there could give me a little insight that would be great. thanks.
post #2 of 17
If you are looking at Metrons, a 10 in a 164 would be a good choice. I will let the Nordica guys chime in on the Speedmachines. Now the question is, what do you want the ski to do for you? Maybe neither of these skis are the best choice for you.
post #3 of 17
vetteblues10, welcome to EpicSki!

I grew up skiing Mt. Holly (but learned to ski at Nub's Nob). I'm pretty familiar with the conditions, terrain, and skiing techniques used there. That said, let us know where you ski (specifically) in terms of area, terrain, snow conditions (I know, hard, manmade!), speed, turn shape (I would guess very short radius), and anything you especially like or don't like (like bumps). Those will help us as much as anything.
post #4 of 17
BTW, the SpeedMachines and Metrons are very different skis.
post #5 of 17
Thread Starter 
thanks guys for writing back. i live in indiana so the closesst place for me is in kalamazoo (bittersweet, etc.). i would guess that i am going to spend a majority of my time there. but i know that we are going to try and get up to nubs' and boyne at least once (and a few times to mt holly). i will probably spend alot of time on manmade snow. i am looking more for caving and less on all out speed (both are nice though). not big into jumping or anything like taht, just something all around that i will be happy with for like 2 years.
post #6 of 17
If you're looking for real carvers, I'd suggest an M:10, a Fischer RX6, an Elan S:10, or that SpeedMachine 12. The Metron will be more shaped than the others, thus cut a tighter carved turn. I think you'd really enjoy them on the midwest hills, but the others are great skis, too.
post #7 of 17
Thread Starter 
alright, on ebay looks like i can get a set of new metron 9's in 164cm with Neox (din 3-10)adjustable bindings. i can get them shipped to my house for $377. Would these be a good choice and price? thanks for any help
post #8 of 17
You might want to check out the Atomic SX-9 in a 170cm length that just got posted. That ski might work for you too.

I didn't read anywhere about you needing ski boots. Do you have those? That's the first most important purchase in my opinion. Well-fitted boots make all the difference in skiing.
post #9 of 17
The Metron 9 would be an excellent choice, especially at 164. I too ski in the same general area. The Metron 9, with it's deep sidecut, would be great for the small vertical, midwestern hardpack. They're great for short turns, which really helps to stretch out the small 300 - 400 vertical ft. hills in southern michigan. And they have, as do most all Atomic skis, tremendous edge grip. Out of curiosity, where are you located in Indiana?
post #10 of 17
Thread Starter 
i am already set with boots. i picked up a pair of new lange crl 80. i went to a local shop and got fitted. i thought i might as well slurge for the comfortable boots taht are my exact size. they tried to sell me skis too but they were way to much. i live in rome city (45 min north of fort wayne), though right now i am at purdue goofing off in a computer lab.
post #11 of 17
You'd likely be happy with both skis you mentioned. Just keep in mind, the Speedmachine is more of a long turn carver while the M9 is more of a slalom-inspired midfat. The M9 will likely be more versatile for you, performing better in heavier snow as well as on the groomed.
post #12 of 17
at 200 lbs i think the nordica 12's will be a little too soft for you. in the nordica line I suggest you look at a hot rod nitrous or eliminator.
post #13 of 17
While I have not skied them, I suspect that at 200 pounds, you'd find the Metron 9s quite a bit twitchier than something like the 10 or 11. They are reasonably far down the line in terms of stiffness, torsional rigidity, etc. Maybe someone who weighs 200 or so and has skied them can comment on the specifics?

Bottom line: at 200 pounds, be cautious about buying skis too far down line from any manufacturer. In general, you need a reasonably stiff ski - and you certainly need a more torsionally rigid ski than the average sized skier. And if you are going to ski off piste at all, surface area does not hurt either...
post #14 of 17
I'd encourage you to consider the 10 instead of the 9. Not to say the 9 is bad (a number of threads here have posts from guys who prefer the 9 to just about anything else in the Metron line).

I'll echo Rusty Guy's comment on the Speedmachine 12.
post #15 of 17
ssh, What about an M11 in 162? I don't think that would be too much ski for a 200lb'er(?).
post #16 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by vetteblues10
i am getting ready to buy my first set skis. i got tired last year of renting, and feel confident that i am ready for the investment. i would rate myself as an intermediate. my buddies and i ride in michigan, at alot of the southern parks (but we are looking to head farther north this year). i would like to find a set that won't punish me for not being perfect. reading through some of the forums, i see alot of people like the metrons. looking on ebay, there was a nice set of nordica speedmachine 12's that also caught my eye. i am trying not to completely break the bank on a set. i am 5'9" at 200 lbs. i am looking in the range of 160cm to 170cm. if anyone out there could give me a little insight that would be great. thanks.
Well, I just bought 157 metron IX at the end of the season (new england) after two years on C7 atomics. Metrons are a different animal than the average ski. Handle them right and they are a thrill, try and ski them like ordinary skis and you'll be punished. With metrons you also need to be pretty precise about the right length based on the metron factors, and even then you can get the wrong ones easily. My index said 164 (5'9-180) but they were balky and heavy. The 157's were perfect and an end of the season blast down Loon Mountain's Walking Boss proved that the metron was the most fun I ever had skiing...

I'd demo before I bought if you can.
post #17 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by spyderjon
ssh, What about an M11 in 162? I don't think that would be too much ski for a 200lb'er(?).
Really depends on aggression. I think Phil would tell you that a 200lber should be on the 172 in the M:11 (right, Phil?) or the 162 in the b:5. That 172 M:11 may be a bit much for an "intermediate", depending on what that really means.

Make sure to see the FAQ for info to help us help you, vetteblues!
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 › interm: maybe metron or speedmachine?