or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › (LONG) I need new skis! Plus a partial review of Volkl AC4, Rossi B3, K2 Outlaw)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

(LONG) I need new skis! Plus a partial review of Volkl AC4, Rossi B3, K2 Outlaw)

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
Hey foks,

Great forum you have here. I've been reading through the different threads for the last couple of days and really like the knowledgeable and helpful attitudes I see here, so I hope you guys can help me out a little.

This is gonna be a long post -want to give you all pertinent info to help me make the best choices. Hope you're quick readers 'cuz I can be a real windbag sometimes.

First and foremost, money is really tight for me right now. I shouldn't even be thinking of buying new skis, but it's one of those things. I just can't go on another year like I have been. So, I need to buy one ski that will do 90% of everything I want to do for the next couple of years 'til I can afford to add to the quiver.

I'm 5'8", 170 lbs and a very aggressive skier, comfortable at mach speed on groomers and in the past a big fan of bumps (have had people hoot & holler when going for it under the chairs and even had one fella track me down to offer a compliment). I've been making do with '91 vintage Dynastar Vertical Assault Extremes at 195cm and Marker M48 bindings. They are a great bump ski and have a slalom sidecut making them very turnable yet at 195cm are relatively stable at high speeds on hard snow (I remember wishing I'd gone with 205s for more stability at speed). They hold edge really well on hardpack and ice, do okay in slush and corn (maybe a tad stiff, they tend to wash out in these conditions), and are great in packed soft snow. With concentration I can make them carve. When new they were very lively, quick edge to edge with plenty of pop with a stiff center section, medium shovel and medium-stiff tail. This is the kind of ski I like for on-piste action.

The big downside (other than that they're old and worn out and flourescent pink) is they suck in powder or any form of deeper snow. I remember being really frustrated during one epic powder day at Stevens Pass when the temp was in the single digits and the powder in the back bowls was bottomless. I tried to ski it but turning, even in that super light pow, was a lot of freakin' work and as soon as things leveled out a bit I sunk to a stop and had to walk out. They don't sink nearly as much in our typical "cascade concrete" but turning is still far too much work.

That's gotta change. As much as I still like bump skiing and blasting down the marked trails I really want to take my skiing to the next level and be able to handle deep snow and off-piste forays. I want to be able to journey into Crystal's back country and not sink out of sight. I also want to be able to tackle the sliced up pow and crud with ease since there's usually a lot of that to be found a day or two after a good dump. I don't think a wide powder ski is called for. When we do get dumps it's usually wet & heavy and I still want to be able to handle bumps and groomers and make tight turns on them. On the rare occasions when we do get really light, fluffy powder I'll need skis that can make do but I don't expect them to perform like a true powder ski would. Whatever I end up with will be a vast improvement over the old Dynastars. A couple years down the road I'll add some powder skis to the quiver, probably the Mantras from everything I'm reading here.

All that said, I skied Crystal Mountain yesterday and demo'd 3 pairs of skis. The conditions were amazing for the Cascades, very light snow and lots of it for this early in the year. 30" of new in the last week and temps that never broke the 25 degree mark in the middle of the day. Unfortunately I had to wait 'til Sunday to go so most of the in-bounds snow was well-tracked and packed though I did manage to find a few small stashes of powder in the trees between runs. Conditions ranged from well packed powder on the groomers to still soft but skied over powder on the higher runs to soft bumps to good sized moguls with ice in the trenches down low on the mountain to those couple of small, low-angle powder stashes I mentioned.

Skis demo'd and my impressions:

Volkl AC4 - 184 cm
Loved them. I blasted through the moguls on them almost effortlessly, making quick turn after quick turn like a freestyle mogul skier. They are very lively, turn on a dime when the tips are pressured just a little and have lots of pop yet plenty stable at high speeds and capable of making sweeping GS carves just by laying them on edge. If all I wanted was a pair of skis to replace the old Dynastars, this would be them. Unfortunately they fell down in the deep powder. While a quantum leap beyond the old sticks as far as flotation goes, they were still sinking more than I would like due to the narrower waists. The snow was much lighter than we typically see around here, so maybe they'd be okay in heavier snow, yet I still want a little better floatation and am willing to trade a bit of turnability for it.

Unfortunately, I stayed on these skis too long I liked them so much and was getting tired by the time I traded them in.

Rossignol B3 - 176 CM
Who would think only 8cm would make that much of a difference? Or maybe it's just that these are a much softer ski, or that I was beginning to get a little tired or maybe it's all those elements combined. In any case, they felt way too short. Too squirrelly and did not inspire any confidence on steep, soft snow. I kept feeling like I was going to fall over the front of them every time I committed to the fall line. I did a hugely impressive faceplant, coming out of both bindings and ending up stretched out horizontal, face down Super Man style when I came off a groomed run into deep powder at full speed. There was a bit of a dip at the edge of the groomed track that contributed to this, but I feel I might have pulled it out on a longer ski. They were fine in the bumps though not as lively as the AC4s and at slower speeds I could carve really, really tight turns with them. At high speeds they were too skittish. After only about three runs I traded them in. Maybe I would've liked them a lot better in the 184 length but the shop's pair were out already when I picked them up.

K2 Apache Outlaw - 181cm
By the time I got on these skis I was pretty tired out. Lots of runs under my belt already, 5 hours of solid skiing with only a short break for snacks so the thighs were burning pretty good and it's early in the season yet and I'm not in peak shape (2nd time up this year). These skis are tanks. Heavy is how I would describe them. I was able to turn them in the bumps okay but had to kick the heels up pretty hard to do it and they felt very stable/damp at high speeds on smooth soft snow. They plowed right through the tracked up soft snow and small soft bumps but as soon as the surface got hard and choppy or uneven they started to bounce a little. They felt "hard", I don't know how else to describe them, they didn't absorb the small bumps and irregularities on hard snow like the AC4s or B3s did at higher speeds. They feel soft when you flex them in the shop, but they didn't ski soft as someone else said in another thread. They held edge okay on ice and were very easy to make nice GS carving turns with at high speeds. Tight slalom turns were more work but doable by getting my weight forward and pressuring the fronts. The big thing I REALLY liked about them was how they handled powder. I've never experienced anything like that before and it was great. Spectacular. Almost orgasmic. I mean, wow! I can only imagine what a ski like the Mantra or Gotama must feel like. Must be like flying...

I'm actually considering going with the Outlaw simply because it's a better ski in deeper snow. I can make it turn in the bumps and it's fine at speed in softer snow. I just worry about having to deal with it when the snow's hard and the only soft stuff is the ice shavings. Maybe I'll just bring out the old Dynastars on those days. That and they're so heavy I know I'd tire out quicker on them.

Based on all that, I'm thinking I want a ski with a waist width in the upper 80 mm range or into the very low 90s. Gotta have a decently tight turn radius and some liveliness to it like the AC4s yet still be stable at speed. Stability may come from the fact I like a longer ski than most recommendations.(?) Looking through the magazine reviews and a product info sheet from REI has got me eyeballing the Volkl Karma (it might be the wider AC4 I'm craving?), the Salomon 1080 Gun, Head Mojo 90, Elan M777, and the Rossi Scratch BC in addition to the K2 Outlaw. Reviews of the Gun and my handling it at REI last week lead me to believe it may be too limp for my tastes but REI has a large number of Pocket Rockets left over from last year at discount prices.

I can demo the Gun and would like to try the Outlaw again with fresh legs. No one has the Karma, Mojo90, Elan M777, or Scratch BC for demo that I've been able to find. The Karma is just about sold out around here. The main REI store had one pair in the 166 length left. I really don't want to plunk down the coin it's going to take without riding a ski first unless everyone says "do it, you won't regret it." One salesman at a high end sports store in Seattle (not REI) said if I liked the AC4 then the Karma is the way to go and I should buy them quick before they're all gone. He didn't say that to make a sale, his store's already all out of them. If I buy from REI I can take 'em back if I hate 'em, but I'd also hate to think I bought one pair of skis without being able to try the competition that I might like better. The Scratch BC is also highly rated in the magazines (can you trust 'em at all for a general indication?) as a great "do it all" ski and is supposedly stiffer than last year's model. It's sure plenty wide, maybe too wide for what I'm looking for, or maybe I could moderate the width by stepping down a bit in length.

If you made it this far, thanks for reading all this. Comments? Suggestions? Help???
post #2 of 26
Try to demo the Karma, at 87mm under foot it should be a good ski for float, it has a wood core. It should ski more like the AC4 than the other two. It will be a little different because it is a twin tip, but IMO in a good way. Unfortunately I have not skied this years karma. I has been billed as a more "do everything ski", than in years past. I own both the 184 AC4s and a pair of 185 Pocket Rockets. I'm going to sell the AC4s, I have more fun on the PRs.

post #3 of 26

Bargain hunting!

Just thought I'd chip in. I'm the bargain hunter, so just to dazzle you with some bargains from Ebay (I'm not affiliated with anyone, well except my ladyfriend..):

http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-VOLANT-MACHETE-SIN-185-cm-Freestyle-SKIS_W0QQitemZ8734001866QQcategoryZ16062QQrdZ1QQcm dZViewItem

These Machetes have a following here on Epic. More (better price even):

http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-VOLANT-MACHETE-SIN-185-cm-Freestyle-SKIS_W0QQitemZ8733946368QQcategoryZ16062QQrdZ1QQcm dZViewItem

These Atomics could be good:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ATOMIC-BetaRide-REX-R-EX-184cm-Alpine-SKIS-Used-3-Days_W0QQitemZ8733346163QQcategoryZ21243QQrdZ1QQcm dZViewItem

Finally, if you get a chance demo the Dynastar 8800, the ski everybody raves about!

Good luck and happy hunting.
post #4 of 26
Hi K.S.

I'm a little surprised at the lengths your considering. At 170 Lbs you should be in the 170-175cm range, even for high speed big mountain skiing. I was on 210cm straight skis many years ago and used a 191cm Volkl G30 four years ago. I now use a 181cm Dynastar Intuitive 74.

I'm much happier on the shorter lengths, I weight 210 Lbs. The shorter ski should help in the trees and bumps as you described. You should have no problem floating on a 170cm that is wider than 79mm at the waist, IMO.


post #5 of 26
Originally Posted by Willb
I mean, wow! I can only imagine what a ski like the Mantra or Gotama must feel like. Must be like flying...
It was buried, but you did answer your own question. You want a wider ski with enough stiffness to stand up to the conditions and power input. Your past skis are Volkls and you like them. The other Mantra owners in Colorado are really stoked on the Mantra, and my experience has been nothing but positive. You won't believe the difference. You would normally want a 177, but I am reading about speed and straighter lines that could point to a 184. Based on your experience on a 184 AC4, I guess that might be your length in Mantra.
post #6 of 26
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the replies guys. I was beginning to wonder if my novella had scared people off. Should've broken that post down a bit, or seriously edited it. Anyway, some further input and questions for y'all:

jlong1974 - What kind of skier are you and what kind of conditions and terrain do you ski most? I definitely intend to demo the Gun, which is the same ski as the Pocket Rocket.

As to the length thing - I keep getting that. All the experts say I should be on a shorter ski. I've qot questions about that and will start another thread in the appropriate forum to discuss the issue.

Klimski - thanks for the links. I wish there was a wider variety of demo skis available around here but only two of the three areas within reasonable driving distance from me have demo skis and their selection overlaps quite a bit. I'm having a real hard time with the idea of putting down hundreds of dollars for skis I haven't experienced. At least if I buy from REI and don't like them I can take them back.

Cirquerider - your reviews of the Mantra have been really cool. I've seen the pics you posted and read about your experiences on them. Please realize, you are a far more experienced backcountry skier than I. Eventually I expect to bump into you somewhere off the beaten track and by then I'll probably be on the Mantras (or maybe Gotamas) as well. Up until this point 95% of my skiing has been done on-piste and while I want a ski that will allow me to start exploring the wonderful world of powder and off-piste skiing I'm not yet ready to give up the fun I have skiing with my friends (who are all intermediate level) on the front-side marked runs. I still want to be able to ski bumps and while I talked about skiing fast, I also like to make lots of slalom type turns. That's why I really liked my old Dynastars (never skied a Volkl until I demo'd the AC4s last weekend) as they were based on a slalom ski sidecut with a more forgiving flex pattern and is probably why I liked the AC4s so much. I just feel the Mantra would not be the best ski for me at this time as it would limit my enjoyment of the bumps and my ability to make quick, tight turns on groomers. If I'm wrong about that, please feel free to say so, but from what I've been reading, they're more of an off-piste ski that does well on groomers if you're not trying to make a lot of tight, linked turns or ski the bumps. I do intend to demo the Mantra as it's available at Crystal Mt. but I don't expect it to be my first choice for an all-mountain ski that's good on-piste and reasonably competent off.

Here's a pic that might help you understand the type of terrain and conditions that are typical here in Washington:


The important thing to note is at the bottom of the picture (directly below where this pic was taken). That's one of the highest and steepest runs on the mountain. Notice how skied out it is, it's all bumps. While the snow was relatively powdery for the Cascades, it had been over a week since any significant snowfall and everything on the mountain that could be easily skied had been. It's often warmer and the snow heavier than it was that day, so getting to ski real powder is a rare thing at our small, crowded ski areas. The typical conditions (heavy, skied out snow) and the type of skiing I like (bumps, slalom turns, AND high speed GS style) are the main reasons I don't think the Mantra would be my best choice for my "one ski quiver" at this time. Heck, the AC4s floated way better than my old Dynastars, maybe I should just buy 'em and shaddup.

Man, I wish I lived in Colorado. Or Utah. Or Wyoming. Or Montana. Or anywhere that saw regular dumps of real powder.
post #7 of 26
Basically, you're asking an impossible question - no ski can a) handle bumps really well, b) be wide enough to float in deep pow, and c) be powerful enough for west coast sludge and crud. Something has to come off that wish list.

Few suggestions for 2 outa 3: If you especially value want crud busting, Elan 777's, which reviewers here and elsewhere like - if they're anything like a scaled up 666, which I've skied, should be smooth, quick and tough, but not ideal in bumps; If you especially value pow, Legend 8800's, which rock in pow, surprisingly strong in bumps as long as you stay in the front seat and throw them around, not quick and just OK in wet crud; or if you especially value bumps and quickness, Salomon Scrambler Customs, which are Foils without the twin tip, slightly different flex. Haven't skied them, but reports are that they're a great all-around backside/touring ski that can carve when needed, great in bumps, quicker and more backbone than PR's or old 1080's, both of which I have skied. But probably still too soft for west coast crud.

So why not buy two lightly used or last season skis that cover everything? Probably same price as one pair of 06 lastest and greatest. 777's and 8800's are exactly same as last year's, y'know, and with the $400 you save, you can buy a pair of 04 or 05 72-76 middies that take care of periods between dumps. For those of us who aren't independently wealthy and/or have spouses who don't get the primal urge for boards, that's the way to build a quiver...
post #8 of 26
Thread Starter 
Eminently practical suggestions, beyond, thanks!

You're right in that expecting one ski to shine at everything is impossible. Frankly, I'm willing to trade a little bump performance for more deep snow and crud performance. I'm not as young as I used to be and skiing the bumps like a madman really takes it out of you.

Your idea of buying one of last year's skis to save some cash is a good one. One of the reasons I really want to demo the Gun as it's the same as the last year's Pocket Rocket which I can still find new in the wrapper at discount prices.

The Salomon Scrambler Customs were recommended as a ski I should try by the demo shop I was at, so will give them a look too. If they have a little stiffer flex than the PR/Gun/Foil, that would be a very good thing IMO. The Legend 8800s sound good also but that 27 meter turn radius in the 188 length is kinda scary... I've also read some good reviews of the Dynastar Big Trouble which is a little fatter, a little softer, and has a tighter turn radius. The Fischer Atua also gets good reviews. The Elan M777 from last year sounds like that might be a great way to go though, to save some money...

Thanks, and if anyone who has actually skied the Karma would like to chime in with whether it's worth pursuing, please do!
post #9 of 26
I owned Karmas last year. Excellent all around, carve well through most of the turn (till the upswept tail), great in moderate pow, relatively high speed limit, OK in large soft bumps. But not quick edge to edge, a touch soft in the tip and wide to be a one quiver ski, I think. If you demo them, try the 177's; the 184's are slower but not more stable.

Legend 8800's are less agile than Karmas, but more stable in crud and heavy pow, will turn more easily than you assume cuz they're more traditional design, meant to be steered, bent, thrown around, etc., rather than just you're-a-slave-to-the-radius. So 27 m won't feel like it might in an Atomic design.
post #10 of 26
You might try the Apache Recon, too. It might be a nice compromise for you...
post #11 of 26
The 777 is a bit more ski than the ones you tried: it is a superb Crystal/Baker ski, and cuts through anything, with a sturdy, fairly heavy, damp, and powerful feel. You could pretty much run a super-G on these in 184. Heavier and more powerful skiers tend to really like it. The iM88 Monster from Head is not a ski to overlook: I keep going back to it as a do-it-all Northwest ski, as it is smooth, EXTREMELY stable (moreso than the Outlaw), easy to ski, and very powerful, even on groomed snow. Similiar to the 777 (a little lighter in weight) but with a smaller turn radius (19m in 175, vs. the 777's 21.4m in 176cm) and as a result, it seems quicker (more versatile in varying turn radiuses). I like both!

Are you ever down at Bachelor? If so, you should contact me, as I can set you up with demos in these and some others. Our Elan rep's main hill is Crystal, and I am sure he can get you set up with some 777's for a demo up there. Let me know if I can help.
post #12 of 26
After skiing with a guy on the Volkl Karma today, I have to agree, this ski could really do bumps, and has the width for pow, and mass for crud. No apparent problem in hard conditions. Since he posts here, I suggested he do a review.
post #13 of 26

Review of Volkl Karma as an All Mountain Ski

Hey Folks,

I’ve seen a lot of questions about the Volkl Karma so I thought I’d share my impressions after spending the last two days on them in week old Sierra powder bumps on black diamond runs, fresh corduroy and intermediate groomed runs w/alternating hard patches and slough piles. Since most park skiers already know about its excellent reputation in that specialty I’ll concentrate on its value as an all mountain ski.

About me: I’m a 55 year old male, 5’ 10” and 175 lbs, staying in shape w/the use of a cross country ski machine, mountain biking, kayaking and skiing. I get at least an hour of aerobic activity in every day. I’ve been skiing for 30 years and feel comfortable in bumps, powder, trees, black diamond runs and taking small bits of air. I’ve skied all the major brands of skis, bought the first Elan Ergos when they came out and my current quiver consists of the Volkl Supersport 6 Star in 175cm, Volkl Explosive in 190cm and I just added the Volkl Karma in 177cm. I’ve spent just a little time in the park and can ski the vertical half pipe but I’m not boosting out of it yet. I’m just learning how to ski fakey and barely beginning to be comfortable skiing backwards at speed.

Cirquerider was kind enough to send me the Volkl manual which tells us that the 177cm Karmas works best for “all mountain/powder” with the centerline of the boot set at 770mm from the tail of the ski. It also says that the “jib/park” position should have the centerline of the boot set at 810mm from the tail of the ski. Therefore, I installed a pair of Tyrolia Railflex ll LD 12 bindings which have a wonderful feature whereby you can easily move the binding 3cm forward or backward while on the hill. I have the bindings mounted so that when they are in the rearmost position the centerline on my boot is 770mm from the tail of the ski in what Volkl calls the all mountain mount position. Whenever I want I can move the binding, using just a screw driver, forward by 3cm and therefore be just 1cm short of what Volkl calls the jib mount position. Obviously, through the use of these bindings, I’m trying to get the most flexibility out of the ski to enhance its performance in both powder as well as the park.

For the last two days I skied the Karma in the all mountain position and was surprised at how well it functioned on the runs described above. The biggest surprise to me was the fact that it ripped as a bump ski. We had early season coverage so all the hard bump runs had major rocks and obstacles as well as large skier generated bumps w/deep troughs. Granted the snow was easy to set an edge in but I was still impressed by how quickly the ski came around. The 87mm waist gave it a very stable feeling and I was never in doubt about my ability to ski the fall line yet still maintain speed control. I was also surprised at the stability the ski possessed at high speed on groomed runs. It is a much softer ski that the Volkl 6 Star, Explosive or Mantra but if it has a speed limit I don’t know if I have the ability or willingness to find it. I didn’t have it on icy conditions and I’m guessing that is where I might find it wanting in stability. I also didn’t get to use it in powder but there have been numerous posts about how well this ski as well as most twin tip park skis work as powder boards so I would be surprised if it didn’t shine there as well. The bottom line is that you could ignore its intended use as a park ‘n pipe ski, use it as a one ski quiver and be one very happy camper. When I learn more about how it handles icy conditions I will do a follow up post.


post #14 of 26
Thread Starter 
Thanks again for all the replies!

dawgcatching, I may be in touch with you. I'll probably be at Crystal next weekend and at Stevens on the 24th.

Stevens has Head skis available for demo but not sure which models. I'll be calling them tomorrow and keeping my fingers crossed that they have both the im88 and Mojo 90 available as those two look like they will be top contenders.

No one has the Karmas around here. I've searched high and low for them with no luck. Given everything I've read about them though and the fact they're a Volkl, I'm sure I'd like them. There is an auction on Ebay right now for a pair of last year's model in the 185 length. According to the seller they've never been used and came with Marker bindings so have holes in them for those bindings. Not sure if I will bid on them or not, so far there's only one other bidder and the price is still quite low. I'm considering Atomic Neox 412 or 614, Fischer X14 or X17, Tyrolia Mojo 15, and Salomon S912 TI bindings though so there may be incompatibilities with the holes drilled in them too.

So, on my list of potential skis still to try, more or less in order of how sure I am that they'd suit me are:

Volkl Karma
Head Mojo 90
Head Monster im88
Elan M777
Fischer Kehua
Salomon Scrambler Custom
Salomon Gun/Pocket Rocket
Scott Santiago Mission
Dynastar Big Trouble

If I come across a "can't refuse" deal on the Volkl, Heads, or Elan then the decision will probably get made for me.
post #15 of 26
Willb, I would give the Outlaws another try when you have fresh legs. Sounds like you're a good skier, but the 174 Outlaw would seem to be better choice for a Crystal Mtn ski. I'm 6'1" 205 and a 181 is really just about right for me. I wouldn't even consider the 188.
post #16 of 26
I am a similiar skier and I weigh in at 215, need to lose some I know but I am 5 ft. 9.5 In. and i skied 205-210 all my life. i now ski the AC4, i am sure like you I could ski the 184 fine, but here is the deal, I ski the 170 in the 06 model AC4 and have had no problem in the deep, steep, trees, in fact I thought I died and went to heaven the first couple times in the trees. I have never seen a ski this good for 90% of the stuff out there. Do youself a favor and at least try the 170 or if you must the 177 but no need for you size, I know, I can't believe it either, I just feel stupid on 170s but trust me, it is worth the try, the rule the slopes at any speed and are the best ever in the trees. I never go over the handlebars and have skied them in up to 2 foot of deep and heavy also, skied the tram at big sky and what a bomb, it was great. The one downside, they DO NOT handle the boilerplate like they claim but every other condition I have tried is just fine, they plow right through the crud and turn on a dime almost by themselves.

Good luck, but trust me, try shorter before you buy.
post #17 of 26
Took my AC4s 177cm for a first ever training run down a chopped up SG course. They were very stable speedwise at both cornering and going straight. Possibly not the right choice for speed but spot on for a first
time SG race course experience
post #18 of 26
Originally Posted by Willb
So, on my list of potential skis still to try, more or less in order of how sure I am that they'd suit me are:

........... Scott Santiago Mission.............
Hi from England.

I am looking at Scott Santiago Missions, too, and have been offered a great deal. The skis would be complete with Scott S8 bindings - which I don't know. I had a binding fail to heel release last season - wound up with a ruptured Achilles tendon - so bindings are very much in my radar. Are the Scott S8s OK?
post #19 of 26
Problem now solved - I've been advised the S8s are the same as Salamon 810s
post #20 of 26
Thread Starter 
Been quite awhile since I've visited these forums. Spent a lot of days on snow last year and just hadn't thought about visiting here over the summer. Surprised to see this topic is still alive.

So, just to let everyone know who didn't see my other topic about it, I went with the Mojo 90s. Demo'd them on an icy boilerplate day along with the Karmas and a couple other skis and just loved the Mojos. Figured any wide ski that could handle those conditions would be a lot of fun and I haven't been disappointed. These skis really do everything well. They are lively, very turny, and have enough backbone to power through crud and chop and remain stable at high speeds. The only thing I found I didn't really like them in was waist deep or deeper blower. The phenomenal season we had last winter gave me a few days in deep, soft snow and I found the waist a tad narrow and the sidecut a bit much for maximum enjoyment in really deep, soft snow, though they still worked really well. I rented some Gotamas on a couple powder days and fell in love with them, so will be adding them to the quiver this year.
post #21 of 26
Willb - could you please tell me the length you went with and the binding you chose? I'm about the same height and weight and am considering the Mojo 90 for this season.

post #22 of 26
Thread Starter 
Alberto - I went with the 186s and set them up with Salomon S912tis.
post #23 of 26
Thanks for your help!
post #24 of 26
Did you mount the bindings on the mark? I have the Mojo90's and have them mounted on the mark, but had the same experience as you with them in pow. I've heard from others that the Mojo's work better for all mtn & pow when mounted about 2cm back. I am considering having mine remounted back.
post #25 of 26
Thread Starter 
Wizard - yes, they're mounted on the mark and I've heard the same thing. I might try having them remounted and see what happens. Or, I might just buy a pair of Gotamas and use them on deep days...
post #26 of 26
I'm 39.
Just boosted up to the 39 days a year range, skiing mostly in Tahoe, but also hitting JH, Colo, and Utah.

I'm 5'11" and fluctuate between 175 and 190, though last season I settled at approx 185.

I went hog wild and bought 5 pairs of skis, since I hadn't had new equipment since I'd last purchased those coolant yellow Rossi 7S's (the stock model similar to the ones Alberto Tomba won the gold on).

I purchased a pair of the Volkl Karmas after demoing them a few days at Northstar in Tahoe. Once I got them detuned, I found them to be stable and quite versatile. I skied them 3 days at Breckinridge at the end of March and loved them up in the windblown bowls (sorry, I never remember run names, just tend to try out the whole mountain and stay where there's less people and fresher snow, but I think it was off of Peak 8 or 9...whichever one goes up to the album 13,000 foot mark).

I would go with the mantra (the saying, not the ski, although I do have a pair of those and they are pretty sweet) that my friend always uses: if you've been on a particular brand for a long time and are happy with it, go with it first. For example, since I had been a long time Rossi user, that was the first ski I gravitated toward when I started demoing two seasons ago. But since I hadn't been on new equipment in close to 15 years, I branched out and started reading about others and asking shop techs for suggestions.

Seems like you're a Volkl guy, so that would be the most logical choice to go with first.

Just my 2 cents...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › (LONG) I need new skis! Plus a partial review of Volkl AC4, Rossi B3, K2 Outlaw)