New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Atomic M11 Trons

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
I bent my R11s in the trees and I am thinking of getting the new M11 Trons and new bindings for my warranty swap.

What do you think?

I might have to pay alittle money but for a new model who cares.
post #2 of 24
From what my buddy say's about his M2Trons. I think you'll like the M11's. I don't know much about the M11's. The only place my friend didn't like his M2Trons was on Ovation at Killington about a week and a half ago. Ovation was real firm. He said that was the only time he wished he would have had a thinner ski. He was in a bump clinic with 22 other guy's. He realy enjoyed the M2's in all other conditions.
post #3 of 24
I'm not sure what the waist is on the M11's. You may be better off to stay with the known ski and wait until all the reviews are in on the 05 Atomics.
post #4 of 24
Are the M2 11's supposed to be better than the R 11, or are they just different? Also, how does the tron 11 compare in flex (forgiveness) to the R11?
post #5 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by debner:
Are the M2 11's supposed to be better than the R 11, or are they just different? Also, how does the tron 11 compare in flex (forgiveness) to the R11?
I have no idea but I guess I will be the guinea pig of the board and get them anyway.

As soon as I get them and ski on them I will take some pics and post a review.
post #6 of 24
m11 is direct replacement for r11, same lay up. the metron series is basically short, fat, sl type sidecuts. the way midfats will all be in a few years. salomon jumped in with it's scrambler for next year but it's a much lower performance level. atomics whole ride(metron)line is this way 'cept for the new ex that totally rocks!!
post #7 of 24
Metron M11 is the correct name.

This is one of the All Condition models, and works quite well everywhere, but does require technique adaptations occasionally.

Just wondering why the bent skis are being warrantied? Just skiing along and they bent?
post #8 of 24
Thread Starter 
I was in the trees and had the ski go through the bumps but not come out quite right.

The guys at Atomic just said to send it back since it is a new ski.

Most ski manufacturers will replace a bent ski as long as it is under warranty.
post #9 of 24
I guess I'm a bit more of an @$$hole. I will warranty a ski if the damage is a manufacturer's defect, not skier error. I use the analogy of a motorvehicle. If someone decides to race their Audi Allroad in the Baja 1000, is the manufacturer responsible for replacing it afterwards? The car is capable of driving the route without sustaining any damage, but care must be taken. The same thing with the R:11 ski. It can ski well in bumps, but it is not a bump ski. If the pilot drills a ski into a mogul or wall, who really should take the blame? The full core of the R:11 is metal, and metal bends if the forces are just right.
post #10 of 24
Thread Starter 
I think your analogy is not appropriate for skiing.

I'm sorry but I beleive that a $1000 all mountain ski should be able to handle some bumps. I take better care of my skis then anyone I know and if my decision to take a narrow bump line instead of hitting a tree was the wrong decision so be it.

Since Atomic has no issue with me swapping them out then neither do I.

If you wish to buy a new pair of skis to replace ones that are less then a year old then that is your decision.
post #11 of 24
Scalce:

How many skis have you bent now??????

How are you bending them? Where are they bending? (is it the same place?)
post #12 of 24
Thread Starter 
I bent a Volkl 4 Star tail from a bad fall when the ski jacked up in the air at Okemo.

My wife bent her Volkl Carver Motion 20/20s twice once in the tip at Treblant and once in the tail at Sunday River both in normal skiing conditions.

I bent my Atomic R11s last year at Cannon slightly in the tail when my ACL blew out but were replaced because the stupid glue on the pulser caps all came off anyway.

This pair of R11s were slighlty bent on the front from some ugly bumps in the trees at Bretton Woods last Saturday.

I think I need to stop buying skis that use alot of metal in them.

I don't know if I have bad luck or what but we don't ski any harder then other people I know and it is not user error as I am not sure how I could intentionally bend a ski and we only recently started venturing into trees and steeper bumps.

I guess weighing 180 may contribute to this and my wife is not a feather weight and the 20/20s were pretty soft.
post #13 of 24
I hope the shops you go to and the equipment reps aren't reading this. You just admitted that you've bent 3 pairs of skis! I've been skiing for almost 40 years (6'1", 185) and I've never damaged a pair of skis. I used to take my 207 slaloms in tight bumps, off (small) cliffs, in the trees, etc. I raced in college, so I know I ski as hard as the next guy. My only equipment problem was with the plastic bindings Salomon used to sell (747's?) I broke 3 heelpieces, but I know lots of people that had that same issue. I now ski on BetaRide 11.20s and have done bumps & trees here in the east, chutes at Snowbird, and haven't come close to damaging them. Maybe it's not the skis....
post #14 of 24
Scalce, don't worry I'm with you. I have bent two Volkl's. Both have been from a fall. The first one, a G30, was after I landed a jump and then crashed. Friends say the ski popped off flew up into the air and came down on it's tip. The recent one, AX3, I was skiing on one of Okemo's groomed run's and fell at a high rate of speed. Hairybones picked up the ski and brought it down to me. We skied another run, then I noticed the tip was slightly bent.
Both skis had less then 23 day's on them.

It's not like we try to bend skis.
post #15 of 24
Thread Starter 
Thanks Max

I'm not sure why warranty is a dirty word here.

I know the Atomic warranty people by their names and they don't have an issue with me getting new skis.

How do some of you think I bend skis?

By user error?

I actually dance around the mountain on my tails and jump up and down in the bumps sideways.

Is that the wrong way to ski?

:
post #16 of 24
Scalce, I am sure that nobody thinks that you intentionally bent the skis. And you presumably spent a lot of money on them knowing that warranty is included and part of the price. And you are obviously an above average skier.
But how far does warranty coverage go? Let's just say that you run straight into a wall (by accident) or a tree and they bend or break. Or you run them over with your car or truck. Well? If they are brand new, will Atomic replace them? After all, the ski is not made to be slammed head-on into a solid, static object.

Of course, life is never just black or white and there are individual circumstances for everything.

Well, these are just my 2 cents and I'm happy for you that you did not encounter any problems with Atomic.

P.S. If I were in your position, I'm sure that I would feel entitled to receive another ski, believing that I did nothing wrong; or bitter if I would not be getting anything - basic human nature; it's easy to comment from the sidelines.

P.P.S. Cannot comment on your original question, but it seems to be a good idea to stay away from Volants
post #17 of 24
Thread Starter 
If I dropped my skis down my stairs I would probably not use the warranty as it was not done skiing.

Instead of BetaRacers analogy here is one:

You buy a new 2004 Nissan Murano and you have a warranty. You take good care of it, wash it, and get oil changes but one day you are driving slightly above the speed limit on a dark backroad and hit a pothole that is unavoidable. It damages your suspension which is under warranty but you could have avoided the damage by driving under the speed limit and maybe your reaction time would have been better. Foglights could help. [img]smile.gif[/img] The Murano is kind of an SUV but more geared to paved roads so it can go on backroads but it is not 100% made to take the abuse.

So do you utilize the warranty or pay for it yourself because you could have potentially avoided the situation and it was your fault for hitting the pothole so hard.

This is how I perceive ski warranties.

An all mountain ski is not made for the bumps or trees but should be able to handle them.

If the product is damaged by normal use even if it could or should have been avoided then why not utilize the warranty and great customer service.

I didn't lie to Atomic and they are cool with it.
post #18 of 24
Pretty good analogy! And I just read the response from culoir8 on your other thread. He got a replacement from Rossignol even after coliding with a tree (even the bark was still on the ski). Obviously the tree's fault
So the conclusion stays that ski manufacturers provide exceptional warranty and customer service. Better than I would have expected.
post #19 of 24
The Murano analogy is somewhat flawed, only because of responsibility. I had a suspension break under the same circumstance, but my insurance covered the repair, not the vehicle manufacturer. Here in BC, at the time, there was only a public sector insurance corporation which oversaw all motorvehicle issues, including roads. Because the pothole was on a road under the governance of ICBC, they were resposnible for not maintaining the roads, and then had to repair the damage.

If the Murano's suspension broke as a result improper materials on the car, then it is the car maker's blame. If the pothole was so large that any car would be damaged, then it is the highway's maintanance company's fault.
post #20 of 24
Thread Starter 
Details

Details

post #21 of 24
Drive (or get towed) into any dealership after driving into one of Boston's numerous sinkholes and you'll be laughed at if you expect the damage to be covered under warranty. Some stealerships won't honor a warranty if you use a generic air filter from Jiffy Lube, different oil than the factory recommends, or have a turbo timer, much less replace a damaged A-arm or bent rim because you can't swerve. So that's a bunk analogy if you ask me.

On the Atomic issue: I think it's a judgement call for the rep to make. If the ski bent under normal conditions (which it sounds like happened to you) then I think it should be replaced for free. If it bent when it flew off your car at 80mph on I93, it's your own fault and you should foot the bill to replace them.

I don't know where you're buying your skis around here, but $1G for a set of R11s sounds a bit pricey to me. I got mine last summer for $400 brand new. Try eBay next time and you'll save a ton. I've got my eye on some brand new REXs for under $360.

Looking forward to your review of the new planks...
post #22 of 24
Thread Starter 
I just called Atomic and they should be going out today.

I think I paid around $800-900 last Feb for the prerelease 03/04 R11s with CR:412s.

Now with the upgrade I am at the mercy of the retail cost so I will pay the ski shop the cost difference.

The Atomic rep gave me prices at $800 for just the ski and $299 for the Neox 412s.

We'll see what I have to pay but I like having new stuff so it's OK.

Hopefully my lock fits through the new binding.
post #23 of 24
Quote:
Originally posted by Scalce:
I just called Atomic and they should be going out today.

I think I paid around $800-900 last Feb for the prerelease 03/04 R11s with CR:412s.

Now with the upgrade I am at the mercy of the retail cost so I will pay the ski shop the cost difference.

The Atomic rep gave me prices at $800 for just the ski and $299 for the Neox 412s.

We'll see what I have to pay but I like having new stuff so it's OK.

Hopefully my lock fits through the new binding.
post #24 of 24
Quote:
Originally posted by Gotama:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Scalce:
I just called Atomic and they should be going out today.

I think I paid around $800-900 last Feb for the prerelease 03/04 R11s with CR:412s.

Now with the upgrade I am at the mercy of the retail cost so I will pay the ski shop the cost difference.

The Atomic rep gave me prices at $800 for just the ski and $299 for the Neox 412s.

We'll see what I have to pay but I like having new stuff so it's OK.

Hopefully my lock fits through the new binding.
</font>[/quote]Sorry about the mis-post!!
I think you scored w/ the upgrade for difference in price you mentioned.

I skied today on my new SX10's today at Loon. The Neox 412's clik in w/ a loud snap and are excellent, much more solid than the r 412 I had on my SL9's last year.
Now I can't wait to hear your review of the TRONs.

Good luck!!!
Gotama
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion