IM88, Stormrider, 8800, Volkl...

Welcome to EpicSki!

I own the 8800 and it's a super ski for Western conditions. If I lived in the Rockies, it'd be my everyday ski. The Mantra fits the same bill. While both of these skis do reasonable well on western hardpack, neither of these skis are very good for the east where icy conditions are the norm.

If I was looking for a one ski quiver for east and west, I'b be considering the 8000 (which I also own), Nordica's Top Fuel, K2's recon, Head's im77, and Fischer's AMC 79. All of these skis will be better in hard snow conditions, but also have the width to do resasonably well in soft snow and crud.

sounds like you need two skis. i'd go 8000 for the east and 8800 for the west or good powder days in the east i have the 8000 and the 8800 predicesor with an AT binder. the 8000 is the everyday ski and the inspired big is the big powder day/touring ski. if i had to pick just one, i would definitely go with the 8000 with half your days in the east. the 8800 is simply not an everyday ski for the east. i have actually haven't seen it sold in any shops in the east (i am sure some shops do sell them, but the 8000 is in any shop that sells dynastar).

I have the 8800 and like it a lot, it is a good one-ski quivver for the west. Wouldn't want to be skiing it on ice every day though. It's good on western hard-pack cruising at high speed (28m radius in the 188cm) but wouldn't be good on boilerplate groomers (luckily I rarely see those conditions).

Heard good things about the IM88 as well, vertical sidewalls, decent turn radius. Not sure what is comparable from Volkl, AC4/AX4 whatever the G4 replacement is? Mantra would be a bit thicker all around and not that fun in the east I guess.

I have the 8800's and 724 Pro and I would pick the 724 Pro if I skied back east at all.

I'll be on the Im88 in a 186cm this year, as my primary all around, do everything ski on the east coast, and I rarely go out west. They'll get Look P18 bindings with a little lift. I'm 6'1", 180 lb. They're the ski I'll grab for any average day on the mountain, and if I had to own only one pair of skis, they would be it.

Bs"D

Highway Star:
Did you actually ski the im88? If so, did you get to try it on Eastern ice? If so, does it really carve and have ice worthy capability like it is touted to have?
Either way, even if yes to all of the above, it cannot be a good choice for your everyday Eastern Ski. I want to hear the answers to the above because I am considering it for my "anything still relatively soft" Western ski. But, you must realize that even if it does have that versatility, it is still far from the right width and flex for your use - even with its sandwich construction.
Don't get caught up in the wide board craze and follow it where it doesn't belong. Of course, you should follow the crowd going West, and then by all means... :-)

I own 201cm stockli asteroids, and 192cm 1st gen stormriders. Both are big heavy wood core metal laminate ski, medium stiff, but their stiffness is overcome by their weight. They are both massively stable at speed through rough snow....the stormrider is 110% a race stock GS ski, 3 sheets of ti (two in the topsheet, basicly super-g construction). Stockli makes very serious skis. I considered getting the 186 stockli dp/ss, but I came across the 186 IM88....basicly the same ski, but with more sidecut, a little narrower, a little lighter and softer flexing - should be considerably more versitile.

I would describe them as twins separated at birth....one is quite serious and beefy, while the other is almost as serious and beefy, but a little more well rounded.

No, I have not skied it. I've seen it in a store and got to fondle and flex it. I've read the reviews available and talked to a few people who have skied it. Where am I going to get to demo one around here anyway? I ask for 180+ cm skis at demo days and reps look at me funny.

So why am I buying it. First of all, I like wood core metal laminate construction skis over all other constructions. This is the construction most race stock skis use. This is what stockli uses, and I love stocklis. I have not skied many heads, but I did take out their race stock GS board last year and thought it was quite nice. On the width, I am for the most part not skiing on or buying anything under a 80mm waist. My carving style is typically high angle GS, and on the typical groomed trail with piles of snow, narrow skis don't work for me. The one exception is my stormriders, but they have a 1-1/4" lift, and 65mm stand height. My carving ski this year is going to be a 175cm atomic metron M:ex - 19m cut, 84mm waist. I have no slalom type skis in my quiver. So anyway, the width on the IM88 is perfect for me for all around, plenty of width to carve on, not too wide to be bad on ice, still good for quick pivot turns on steeps, and a bit of float in pow, but I won't ususally ski them in deep pow. I ski bumps on my 201 asteriods, so I will cretainly be able to ski bumps with these. I hope they make short pivot turns on the steeps nicely, and the sidecut doesn't hang them up. I'll be experimenting with lift, I'll be mounting them with Look p18's, and will try them flat mounted, and with up to ~20mm of lift, to find the sweet spot between carving power/turnyness and stablity.

The M88 (it's M88 not im88) is a great choice for an eastern fat ski. I've skied it on eastern firm snow and it skis beautifully, smooth round carved turns are as easy as rolling the ski over and standing on it. The important thing here is that it's a soft snow condition ski, it handles hardpack well but thats not what it was made for. Stay in the woods and you'll love it. We get soft snow in the east (Stowe and Jay Peak get as much or more natural snow than most Colorado areas) why does everyone think it's just ice? Look around, explore the mountains don't just follow the crowds down the groomed runs.

Bs"D
I'm sure you guys mean well, and are good guys, but I am amazed at the "half" knowledge, but eagerness to advise, on the part of some "skiers" on this forum.
In this case, Highway Star makes definative statements and comparisons on the im88, but has never actually skied it. Hey, he held it in his hand. ?
Whiteroom "corrects and teaches" us the, woops, wrong name.
[Quote from Head's Website:
"A ski specially designed for use in ungroomed conditions. ...With Twintip Technology, the i.M 88 is now cutting an even more impressive figure in the backcountry. Despite its extremely wide footprint, the Monster i.M 88 also performs impressively on hard pack..."]
I know that the topskin graphics are confusing.
But, personally, I sure hope they are anyway both right about the performance. There are many reviews concurring.
Highway Star, I certainly share your "taste" for "Beef" "Sandwich", and thank you Whiteroom for the report.

I think my analysis of the ski is sound, enough to put my $$$ into a pair. It is highly unlikely that I will get to demo a pair in that size, so that's all I have to go on. Just because you think a 90mm ski is "wide", doesn't mean I can't ski it all around in the east, and carve the crap out of it too. Guess how wide my powder skis are at the waist? 115mm, biatch.

peter keelty, of tsfs gave the monster 88 the ski of the year. He's a 200 lb expert and went with the 175. But then all of his test cards were on 177's according to his website. I bought a ahem 184 mantra without demoing but last year was a crappy snow year in the PNW.

HS.....

How old are you? Your general tone can be very condescending. Which makes it hard for anyone to take you too seriously. Plus, you have quite the overlapping quiver for someone who lives in boston.

I'm 27. I ski about 50 days a year in the northeast, but live and work in the Boston area. I don't take you guys seriously either, it's refered "gapicski" for a reason.

Oh, and I have lots of long, wide, heavy skis, because I like to ski on long wide heavy skis.

So if you don't take us seriously then why are you here? To put us down and act like you're better than the rest of us?

To the folks that aren't testosterone charged nobis wannabees this site is very useful.

Likewise, tgrforums are also very useful. (for me, the Backcountry AT/Randonee info is very useful. Plus the TR's are fun to read.)

I just think you come off as a big knowitall, which makes most of us not take you too seriously. and I wouldn't be surprised if the folks at tgr think the same.

And fwiw, I am an educator and can't afford a quiver of fat skis so I do the best I can with the little I have. (two pairs, K2 axis modxpro and Volkl mantra) And I enjoy every minute I am on skis. I am level one avy trained. Ski as much as I can. And learned to ski from age five, racing in New England. My next step is in becoming a member of the Mt. Hood ski patrol.

If that makes me a gaper then so be it. I'll be gaping at the top of an untouched, just bombed bowl at sunrise while you're still waiting in line for the first chair.

When you brag about how you have this ski and that and others are losers, wannabees, or gapers for wanting shorter skis or different ones you just hurt yourself.

Back to the thread....

A 200 pound expert floats perfectly on the 17- IM88. So why would you need a 186 in the tight trees of the east coast, especially with a GS sidecut?

Might as well add some gas to this fire...

You gotta be kidding me - comparing the i.M88 to any Stockli? The i.M88 is a wet noodle compared to Stocklis so if you really think you need a big burly ski then you're in the wrong neighborhood.

The Im88 is not as stiff as the compareable 186 SS/DP. However, stiffness alone is overated, I don't like extra stiff skis. Hell, volkls are typically stiffer than stocklis, and I think they suck. I don't need any more big stiff burly skis, I already have way too many. The IM88 is a good comprimise.

I haven't skier or really examined the XL. I have skied the 3rd gen stormrider in a 184, and have the first gen in 192. The 192 is the correct all around size for me as far as flex goes. The 184 I skied was way, way too soft. My friend bought the 194, and loves it for all around east west - he weighs 190 lb, and is an advanced skier, level ~8. 194 is not a long ski at that width, especially if it's got some flex, and has a light binding on it.

Stocklis are meant to be skied long. Look at the sizing on the XL. 164, 174, 184, 194. You need the 184 at least, for sure.

I hesitated jumping into this originally because the skis you're comparing shouldn't really be grouped together. But you're asking about a ski that I own and have some time on so I'll give you my thoughts.

I have the 2005 Stormrider XL in 174cm. It's a kick ass ski and a "kick your ass" ski. You have to be pretty serious about your skiing to jump on this ski. It is not going to take you for a laid back cruise. When they say it is a GS racing ski with fatter dimensions they speak the truth.

I live out west now, but grew up skiing in the northeast. Of course skis have changed quite a bit over my 30 years of skiing, but for me this is how a 3 ski quiver now falls out:
1. Carver/Groomer skis: 65mm-70mm waist with a ~14m sidecut
2. All-terrain skis: 75mm-80mm waist with ~18m sidecut
3. Big mountain skis: 85mm-90mm waist with ~22m sidecut

This places the Stormrider XL firmly in the All-terrain group and the Head i.M88 as more of a Big Mountain ski, but it is "turnier" with a 19m radius. I wouldn't use these 2 skis in the same types of situations. For me it's not an either or - I would want both to round out a quiver. So you're going to have to ask yourself what kind of skiing you really do if it comes down to these 2 skis. I have not ridden the i.M88, but it's flex and width would more likely make it a more forgiving ski than the Stormrider. Also note that this year's Stormrider XL is slightly different than last years - they removed the 3rd layer of Ti that was in the middle of the ski and also made it a full wood core. I hand flexed both versions in identical lengths at the shop and couldn't really tell any difference. Oh yeah - the 2006 version also changed the tail, it's no longer as "tapered" in as the 2005, thus the tail will feel a tad longer when on edge.

The i.M77 is quite a bit stiffer than than the i.M88 and is very comparable to the Stormrider XL in flex (the tail of the Head may even be a bit stiffer). The i.M77 is a cap construction ski though and caps are usually a bit more forgiving with easier turn initiation.

Anyhow, if you can wait it out you're going to get much better info on all of these skis in a few weeks because many of us will have done some demo days here in the west. I'd say in about 3-4 weeks you'll see some good info comparing a lot of these rides.

Where are you getting this information on the stormrider construction? Having a third sheet of Ti in the middle of a ski (splitting the core) for the whole length is a very unorthidox, typically only seen in speed event skis, DH/SG. I know for a fact that volkl made some DH skis like this in the 90's. However, I have never heard of any stocklis using this. My 1st gen ('99-'00, ie, OLD) stormriders have 3 sheets, but two of them are in the top layer, only separated by by a sheet of fiberglass.

Oh, nevermind, I looked it up (the '04/05). It's just a 3rd sheet under the binding area. They are also ISO core, which is basicly a machined acrylic + glass/carbon fiber composite core, no wood. This is an awesome core, I skied the 3rd gens (orange) with this core and they have a great lively feel. If the '05/'06 is back to two sheets of ti and a wood core, it's probably pretty similar to the 2nd gen's which I think were basicly that construction.

Lets review:

'99-'00 Stormrider. Grey/black. Wood core, 3 sheets of ti. Some had an ISO core. I own this ski in 192. Sold in 204, 198, 192, 186, etc. Massive amount of camber, not much sidecut (mine are around 28m). 73mm waist, 105mm tip.

'00-'01 Stormrider II. Blue/yellow. Wood, 2 sheets ti. I have little info.

'01-'02 Stormrider. Orange/black. ISO, two sheets Ti. 174/184/194. I demoed this in 2001, 184, too soft, but great feel. 73mm waist, 109mm tip.

'02-'03 Stormrider Fry. Same as last year. My friend bought the 194 on closeout last year and put p12's on them, LOVES them for all around.

'03-'05 Stormrider XL. ISO, 2-1/2 sheets Ti, 75mm waist, 174/184/194. More beefy than previous Fry.

'05-'06. Stormrider XL. Wood, 2 sheets Ti. 75mm waist, 174/184/194.

Ledge - again, if they are making it up to the 194 still, and you weigh 180 lb, you need to look at the 184 or 194. A strong skier cankill it with 194 in bumps and packed snow trees, but they are a bit much if you do that all the time. If you're only in bumps and trees 10-20% of the time, and you are only an advanced and not spectacularly strong skier, the 194 is still a decent choice - you will still be able to work it in trees and bumps, and you wil benifit from the stablitly at speed in gs turns and in crappy snow - they are goddamn rockets. They will still swing around fine on steeps. My friend was bombing the back bowls at vail at like 55-60 mph and loved them, but could still handle them in the trees and bumps, and the shallow sidecut kept them from being hooky on the steeps.

Consider the 184 if you don't ski all that fast (rarely above 40 mph), and always are in bumps and trees.

I would not consider the 174 at all at you size.

Looking @ your definitions
If? 3. Big mountain skis: 85mm-90mm waist with ~22m sidecut

What catagory do ski's with 95+mm waist with 29m+ sidecut fall into?

I know many of the epic members are already hip to this--but if you really want the best advice and long term info on skis and ski purchases (especially now when ski testing isn't possible)--you really should subscribe to Peter Keelty's realskiers.com website.

Actually the best address to plug in is www.ts2003.com (which the realskier address routes you to)--he's the guru and the non-compromised testing and advice is first class, and I think indispensible! especially regarding the three models you've put forth-peter skied allthree personally and can really give you advice on lengths, etc. Most important for the Stormrider which will be hard to find in a demo.

Liam

Yeah, that's funny, I missed that.

I'd like to share my breakdown of ski catagories, for the 180-200lb expert:

1. Gaper crap: 65-70mm waist, 10-15m radius, sub 170cm length
2. Useless short turn carver: 68-78mm waist, 12-18m radius, sub 175cm length
3. Carving skis: 78-85mm waist, 18m-22m radius, 175-185cm length
3a. Carving skis: 70-78mm waist, 22m+ radius, 185-195cm length
4. Freeskiing skis: 80-100mm waist, 20m+ radius, 180-205cm length
5. Powder skis: 100mm+ waist, 30m+ radius, 180cm+ length

And metrons fall in where?

And what about something like Line Elizabeth with dimensions of 139/110/137. That is one hell of sidecut, but for sure a "powder" only ride. IMO.http://www.getboards.com/snow/twinti...elizabeth.html

Your catergorys are flawed.

172cm B5s would be the perfect ski for you, yes i am biased cause i own them after demoing some of the skis above.

These category are ridiculous.
Where did most of GS or cross skis fall ?
How comes a '80-100mm waist, 20m+ radius, 180-205cm(!) length' ski is not a powder ski ?
How comes a '78-85mm waist, 18m-22m radius, 175-185cm length ski' is a carving ski ?
And so on...
Looks like a serious case of penis envy to me...
Is this yourdaily commuter ?