EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Ski Reviews: a bunch of 2007 Midfat (76-88mm waist) skis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski Reviews: a bunch of 2007 Midfat (76-88mm waist) skis - Page 2

post #31 of 52
Thread Starter 
Bump: new skis reviewed (Stockli and K2) added to 1st post.
post #32 of 52
Dawg,

Great reviews!

How does the Stryker compare to both the Rcon and the Crossfire ? How does it compare to the Rossi B2?( I can get a pair of B2 real cheap) How is the ski in bumps,and in fast,firm conditions?It sound like the Stryker maybe a great Eastern ski.

Thanks for your help?

CJ
post #33 of 52
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjinc
Dawg,

Great reviews!

How does the Stryker compare to both the Rcon and the Crossfire ? How does it compare to the Rossi B2?( I can get a pair of B2 real cheap) How is the ski in bumps,and in fast,firm conditions?It sound like the Stryker maybe a great Eastern ski.

Thanks for your help?

CJ
The Stryker felt less damp and more stable than the Recon, but that could have been the snow conditions. The snow wasn't demanding at all-very smooth, so it was hard to get a feel for the ski. I have never been a big B2 fan: really damp, too much so for my taste. But, it works for some people. I would personally choose something a bit narrower for Eastern skiing, but maybe that is just me.
post #34 of 52

Great Review

I found this site a week ago while looking for information on the volkl karma and the 03 atomic stomp, and I just want to say how great it is to read a truly thorough and unbiased review of what skis are out there. Thanks a lot, and this is honestly better than any review that is found in Ski, Powder, or Freeskier
post #35 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by CRDalmata
I found this site a week ago while looking for information on the volkl karma and the 03 atomic stomp, and I just want to say how great it is to read a truly thorough and unbiased review of what skis are out there. Thanks a lot, and this is honestly better than any review that is found in Ski, Powder, or Freeskier
Alright - we got 'em fooled.
post #36 of 52

Ski Reviews: a bunch of 2007 Midfat (76-88mm waist) skis

[quote=dawgcatching]2007 Ski Reviews: Midfat 76-88mm waist



-Nordica Top Fuel 170cm: unchanged for 2007, 78mm underfoot, same construction as Jet Fuel.

Pretty much what I said about the Jet Fuel applies here. Very stiff, very powerful, quite demanding, and a tough ski to get a handle on in rough snow. Rewarding and a lot of fun on smoother snow. Probably a better choice for the hard-snow skier looking for that one ski quiver that can go out west with them. I noticed very little reduction in float between the 84 and 78, so you could do well with either footprint. quote]

I demoed a 2007, 178cm Top Fuel this past weekend at Killington, Vt. My stats: 6', 225lbs, Type III - Level 8/9, 50+ days/year Enjoy steep groomers, soft bumps, powder in trees, chutes & bowls when on "big" hill !!! Conditions: groomed in the AM rapidly changing to Eastern Hard Pack.

Probably because of my size = weight, I did not find the ski to be as demanding as mentioned above. While not as responsive as my 177cm Volkl AC4's, I found the ski very predictable and easy to drive when executing medium and long radius turns. I agree with "very powerful" but I would restate that as VERY stable at speed - very high speed. My first run was down Outer Limits - first one down from opening chair. As no one was on the trail ahead of me, I let them rip and the best description would be to compare the ride to that of an 1100 Kawasaki I used to own - at 70 mph it felt like I was going 40.

Acceptible when conditions became icy but NOT an ice ski. I did not have any new snow, crud, bumps or tree runs to try but feel they would handle new snow and crud very well. As I did not find them especially quick turning, they may be more to handle in the trees and bumps. Also their stiffness may be an added minus in the bumps.

Overall, for the conditions/trials I was on, a ski I would consider buying.
post #37 of 52
Dawg will you please stop writing ski reviews! I'm just getting out ofa financial hole. Your excellent write ups have me thinking about yet another new ski. I'm a weak man Dwag Your reviews are like telling a junkie about an Opium High. Stop now by the way how much would those Head im 82's be?
post #38 of 52

What a Great Review

Has anyone compared the Metron B5's and the New 2007 Volkl AC4??
Again great review!!!
post #39 of 52
Skied the AC4 (2007) today as well as the Metron B5. Both skis were great fun, but for an all mountain ski I preferred the B5.
post #40 of 52
I own a pair of Strykers (167) & just for a comparison skied the Recons for a day .
IMO the Strykers are a softer ski than the Recons , which I found were kinda brutish by comparison
I enjoy skiing the Strykers , but , found myself wanting a more tighter turning groomer ski . Not having a lot of $$$$ I have bought a pair of Dynastar OMECARVE 10's in a 165 length . I will be taking these as well to Thredbo with me in August - yep I'm an Aussie .
post #41 of 52

good column...Check out Fischer's Hot Heat and Cold heat

... I think these are just GS Skis with two or three centimeters added down the middle. How Cool ! Sandwich/sidewall with mega-torsion-stiff , with a what? 19 ?? meter radius. Most fats seem to only have a 29 ?? meter turn. What's an m82? That's really boring when half the skiing is, lets face it, on groomers.
post #42 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by g-force View Post
Most fats seem to only have a 29 ?? meter turn. What's an m82? That's really boring when half the skiing is, lets face it, on groomers.
Turns are for the timid.

And saying "boring" and "groomers" in the same sentence is redundant.


(Cue someone to critique me... and then Jer to join the fray. I threw the bomb, and I'm leaving.)
post #43 of 52
Cheers for the reviews dude, you're about my size (although a stronger skier, i'd be around a 6 or 7) so they're really helpful.

How much grip did the Elan M777 have on harder snow? I ski Ruapehu NZ a lot and the snow is generally rather hard in the morning, slushy in the afternoon... I was looking at carvers but I'm beginning to think about the idea of something a bit fatter for the thick stuff...

edit: Oh, and I agree with ya alpinedad, but we can't all get offpiste every day so might as well make groomers as fun as we can
post #44 of 52
Absolutely, and I was really just having fun.

Regardless, for me, fun on groomers has less to do with turn radius than it does with edge grip. Neither my 200cm GS skis nor my 186 Fischer Big Stix 84s have a short turn radius, but they're my favorite skis on groomers. I only really use turnier skis when I'm planning to spend the day going slower and practicing turns.
post #45 of 52
Alpine, do you really want the stats on an 82? 17.7 @ 172mm ski. I think most mids high 70s' through mid-80's are still in the 17-20m radius. My 78's are actually 14.6m, I always thought groomers were for making turns.. so much fun carving. Why go straight? (off-piste is more fun)
post #46 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
My 78's are actually 14.6m, I always thought groomers were for making turns.. so much fun carving. Why go straight? (off-piste is more fun)
I hope Dawg has a pair of the 78s mounted up for demo this season. I need to give those a whirl.
post #47 of 52
I bought the last pair of 171's but he expects more in. Should be rockin ride for sure. Those and the Mojo90's or PE's should be a good combo. Just need a good pow ski.
post #48 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
I bought the last pair of 171's but he expects more in. Should be rockin ride for sure. Those and the Mojo90's or PE's should be a good combo. Just need a good pow ski.
The Mojo's aren't a powder ski?
post #49 of 52
Aaah, Max... you're late to this game. There's a whole other thread on it. In a nutshell, no, the Mojos aren't a powder ski, they're crud-busters.

Finndog -- look at the Sierrasnowboard.com deals, and do it quickly. A pair of 179 Maid'en AK (108mm waist) for $199 shipped would round out a fantastic Western three-ski-quiver.
post #50 of 52
Whoa! On my way to check out! Thanks! I dont' check the site on weekends.

MAx, the mojo's are Ok (not great) in the pow (over a foot plus)but it's reall not a pow ski. Too much shape (Sidecut) is part of the problem. They are great in the trees with moderate pow and leftover and do well on sooft groomed. Read my review on them (if you value my opinion )


EDIT: Missed them! Crap....
post #51 of 52
Too bad the AKs are long gone.
post #52 of 52
thanks fior thinking of me! lets see What surfaces over the next coupl eof months. I would still love a pair of gots in 183.
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 › Ski Reviews: a bunch of 2007 Midfat (76-88mm waist) skis