or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › atomic betaracecarv 9.12 length
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

atomic betaracecarv 9.12 length

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 
After skiing for may years on 10+ year old skis I finally decided to get new gear. I live on East Coast and did not get a chance to demo. After spending some time on this forum I decided that Atomic Betarace 9.12 would be a good new pair of skis for me. I got them in 160, and now thinking whether I made a mistake and went too short. I am an intermediate skier (probably level 8, skied for 20 years but very little in the past five), 33 yr old, 5'10, 165 lb. My old skis are 185 and 190.

Please, let me know what you think.

By the way, Betaracecarv 9.12's longest are 170. This made me think that they are made to be skied really short, and since I am not the tallest/heaviest/most advanced skier, I decided to go one size down. I am having second thoughts now (did not try them yet).
post #2 of 7
For your stats, the 160cm length is the right choice for that ski. Once you get a hang of the technique which you learned during the lesson you WILL take, you'll have a blast. If you haven't gotten bindings yet, go with the RACE model in your DIN range (3-10, 4-12, or 6-14). The XENTRIX model is 7.5mm higher (it is available in the same DIN ranges). If you already have the higher binding, it will work properly too.
post #3 of 7
Betaracer--do you think the extra height of the Xentric will make the 9.12 more difficult to ski?
post #4 of 7

Harder to ski? No. Yes. Maybe.

It will be easier to get the ski onto edge by going higher. You will prevent boot-out by going higher. As you go up, the center of mass goes up and things get more tippy. (Ever seen a woman walk with 7" heels?) If the terrain is smooth, then height has no bearing. As the terrain gets rougher, it will be harder to control the ski deflection as you go up. The same priciple that allows the ski to be put onto an aggressive edge easily by going up will work in reverse. The forces will be accentuated going into the skier. Carving skis have huge lifters on them, but the runs are usually baby-bum smooth.

7.5mm isn't that much, and won't make a whole lot of difference overall. By using the Race model over the Xentrix, one won't risk being disqualified if one decides to use the ski in a sanctioned race where height restrictions are enforced.
post #5 of 7
Thread Starter 

Thank you for the info. I have Race 310 bindings on the skis (that's the only Race model that the store had, and I figured that I would not need higher than 10 DIN setting in the foreseeable future).

Forgive my ignorance, are the hypercarved skis harder on one's quads than a pair of straight skis? I neglected visiting the gym, and somewhat anxious about a week long ski vacation that I am taking a week from now.
post #6 of 7

Both can be hard work. With long straight skis, it was more work to get the ski to carve, but you could slide and skid around when you got tired.

With the more dramatically shaped skis, it is much easier to carve a turn, but once the speed picks up, so do the G-forces. The extra load to the legs causes the tiredness. Ski your feet about hip width apart, and keeping your lower legs parallel, tip both your skis onto edge. No need to steer the feet at slower speeds. If you stay tall in the leg, you can rely on your skeleton to support some of the weight, and use less muscle force. As speeds increase, you will need to flex more at the end of the turn to absorb the load, and allow the ski to finish the carve.

The best way to get a picture of this is to watch a World Cup athlete ski GS. www.snowtime.com has a video archive from this season's races. Register for free, and watch how the top 3 finishers of each race ski. The same technique applies to recreational skiing, just detuned for the terrain, speed, traffic, and conditions.
post #7 of 7
BetaRacer- Thanks for the reply to my message. I ski a 9 DIN so I'll get whatever is in stock.

Had a very strange experience on a short (160) slslom ski today. I was skiing fairly fast and making medium radius turns. I fell so fast and so hard that I honestly dont know what happened. In all my years of skiing I've never hit the deck so hard/fast and have no idea what happened. It was fairly well groomed. Something deflected one of my skis. I'm fine, however, for a second I really saw stars. I think I'm going to slow down on the short skis.
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 › atomic betaracecarv 9.12 length