or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2007 Ski Testing - Advanced all-mountain/powder
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2007 Ski Testing - Advanced all-mountain/powder

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
I have just recently completed a 2007 product testing for the following ski brands: Rossignol, Head, K2, Atomic and Salomon. I was a tester for the all mountain/fat ski catagory.

From Rossignol:
There is no change with the Bandit series except for the B4 which has been replaced by the B-Squad and G-Squad (girl's B-Squad)
The B2 and B3 are still great all mountain skis, though I prefer the B3 as it is a little wider and better for more off-piste skiing.
The B-Squad is incredible. However, it is significantly stiffer than the B4, so light weight skiers may find it a little tough. It comes in two different footprints the 164cm-184cm are 100mm under foot and the 189cm & 194cm versions are 104mm underfoot.

From Head:
The Monster 88 (no change) and the new Monster 82 are great. Stiffer than their Rossignol counterparts the 88's and 82's are great at high speeds and on hardpack conditions but still wide enough for soft snow conditions. You have to be an aggressive skier to take advantage of these due to their stiffness but you will be rewarded if you do so.
The new Super Mojo is 105mm underfoot and twin tipped. It is much softer than its predicesors so big mountain riders wanting a "team" ski should get this year's (2006) now. The 2007 is a little easier to ski for the rest of us.

From Salomon:
Gun Labs are great. A softer flex and significant shape make these 188cm skis easy in turn in the deep pow. Super floatation is at hand. there will be more of these available for 2007 than this season. Other than a small graphic change they remain the same. My advice, get a pair of this season's to save a few bucks. Yes there are still some available.
All new for next year is the Salomon Sandstorm. At 101mm under foot it floats like crazy but was surprisingly stable at speeds in the crud and even on hardpack conditions.

From K2:
I only tested one ski from K2 and it was the Pontoon. This ski was inspired by Shane McConkey and has some similar characteristics to the Spatchula. With a reverse Camber the ski is to act like a water ski in the powder. It is beyond wide in the tip and somewhere around 135mm underfoot but narrows significantly in the tail. A lot of fun but I needed much more powder to truely give these skis a fair review.

From Atomic:
The Sweet Daddy and the Snoop daddy were great all mountain skis. What I liked about them was how lightweight they are yet they are very stable and have a real snappy feel to them. Though I didn't get to test it there was a new ski called the Thug. It was around 125mm underfoot and the graphic was super cool

My picks from the testing: Rossignol B3, Head Monster 88, Salomon Gun Lab (for lighter weight big mountani skier) and the Rossignol B-Squad for heavy aggressive big mountain riders.

You can still find the many these (Gun Labs, Rossi B3, Head Monster 88) 2005/2006 skis available online at http://www.glaciershop.com/glaciersh...owse&catID=182

I hope that you benefit from my post and please let me know if you have any questions.
post #2 of 22
What was your impression of the Atomics as far as stiffness goes. How do they compare with the Rossi B-Squads?

Interested to hear if you just tested the skis in powder or cut up pow/crud.

How does the Sandstorm compare to this years Gun Lab. What's the construction? Foam core?

Thanks for your post.
post #3 of 22
Thanks for the review. There are so many good choices. I wish I could have tested all the ones I wanted but I'm happy with the Bandit B3 ... very smooth, stable at high speed, easy to edge on hardpack, light-weight makes it easier on the body at the end of the day. The Free Absorber Technology really absorbs shock well, again very comfortable ski.
post #4 of 22
rweese, thanks for the reviews!

How would you compare the i.M88s to the various Atomic "Daddy" skis? My day-to-day ski is an Atomic B5 and I appreciate the feel and the railing edge hold. I'd like to get a feel for how the Heads and the more big mountain Atomics compare to each other and the B5 (for feel; I know that the other characteristics are quite different).

Thanks!
post #5 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
rweese, thanks for the reviews!

How would you compare the i.M88s to the various Atomic "Daddy" skis? My day-to-day ski is an Atomic B5 and I appreciate the feel and the railing edge hold. I'd like to get a feel for how the Heads and the more big mountain Atomics compare to each other and the B5 (for feel; I know that the other characteristics are quite different).

Thanks!
I really like the B5 for its stability however I liked the monster 88 better in the all-mountain catagory as I found that they were more stable and the Daddy's were difficult to find the sweet spot on. They skied the way they wanted to and not to a person's individual style.
post #6 of 22
Just to let you know, your prices are about $150 a pair higher than most other online shops.
post #7 of 22
Rweese, the SuperMojo 103 (this years ski) is returning next year as a non-catalog ski with updated graphics. They still make the 'Big Boy' ski for next year.
post #8 of 22
These seem awfully wide! I've found the 90mm waists on my skis to be ample for powder. I would actually like to sink into it, provided I have stability underfoot. 125mm, holy crap. Interesting to read what's coming though.
post #9 of 22
ant, I'm pretty sure i saw you making some pretty nice turns to skiers right of the Silver load lift. You were looking very relaxed on those Phat Luvs.
post #10 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lars
Just to let you know, your prices are about $150 a pair higher than most other online shops.
pssssst. I think it's Canadian $$$ at rweese's place.
post #11 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by uncle crud
pssssst. I think it's Canadian $$$ at rweese's place.
Forgot about that UC.

Right now the exchange rate is only like $1.13 though

Tramdock.com is the best deal spot right now. Blows rweese's prices away.
post #12 of 22
Better than Dawgcatching? Doubt it!
post #13 of 22
I demoed last years this weekend head iM88 and was surprised. Maybe the skis just had a really bad tune, but they did not hold an edge on any hardpack - at all. I hated them for the first couple of runs and actually fell a couple of times on piste from losing an edge at even moderate speeds.

However, they absolutely killed it on anything resembling soft snow and I grew to love these in off piste conditions by the afternoon. There's no room for laziness on this ski - you really have to stay on them. If you do they pay off.

Does this sound typical of their performance? Based on previous reviews, I really expected them to do a little better on hard pack. Obviously, with the width they aren't going to carve the most beautiful GS turns, but I was sliding all over the place.
post #14 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powderhog
Does this sound typical of their performance?
No. It sure doesn't sound like the ski I tried.
post #15 of 22
I'm betting it was a bad tune... I have 88's and have skied them 9 days this year and don't think I have ever washed out on a turn. They are phenominal on thgroomers for a ski of their girth. I'm 220 lbs on the 186's and have not had a problem..
post #16 of 22

prices

i find your msrp of 1049 on the rossi b4 ridiculous. i just bought a pair at rei where the msrp was 729 and the sale price was 400
post #17 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by duke walker
i find your msrp of 1049 on the rossi b4 ridiculous. i just bought a pair at rei where the msrp was 729 and the sale price was 400
Thats one of the reason why so many small businesses fail. They never keep up with the times.
post #18 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by duke walker
i find your msrp of 1049 on the rossi b4 ridiculous. i just bought a pair at rei where the msrp was 729 and the sale price was 400
FYI: the 1049 price is quoted in Canadian dollars. I agree with you that it is still on the high end of things after you convert it to U.S. $ but I thought that point should be clarified.
post #19 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powderhog
I demoed last years this weekend head iM88 and was surprised. Maybe the skis just had a really bad tune, but they did not hold an edge on any hardpack - at all. I hated them for the first couple of runs and actually fell a couple of times on piste from losing an edge at even moderate speeds.

However, they absolutely killed it on anything resembling soft snow and I grew to love these in off piste conditions by the afternoon. There's no room for laziness on this ski - you really have to stay on them. If you do they pay off.

Does this sound typical of their performance? Based on previous reviews, I really expected them to do a little better on hard pack. Obviously, with the width they aren't going to carve the most beautiful GS turns, but I was sliding all over the place.
Somethings wrong. These should rail like on hardpack- GS turns should be great. Lay them over and they should track rock solid like an Atomic or a Legend Pro.
post #20 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powderhog
I demoed last years this weekend head iM88 and was surprised. Maybe the skis just had a really bad tune, but they did not hold an edge on any hardpack - at all. I hated them for the first couple of runs and actually fell a couple of times on piste from losing an edge at even moderate speeds.

However, they absolutely killed it on anything resembling soft snow and I grew to love these in off piste conditions by the afternoon. There's no room for laziness on this ski - you really have to stay on them. If you do they pay off.

Does this sound typical of their performance? Based on previous reviews, I really expected them to do a little better on hard pack. Obviously, with the width they aren't going to carve the most beautiful GS turns, but I was sliding all over the place.
For an 88mm ski I think they ski pretty darn great on groomers... BUT they don't perform like a carving ski on groomers. It all depends on your expectations. I'm betting the tune was bad on the skis you tried. While the 88's didn't carve like an ice skate on hard snow and ice the held pretty well. They plain tear up slop like its hardpack. Overall I was quite impressed by the 88.

<M
post #21 of 22

Atomic Snoop Daddy

Hi Guys:

Before I got my new pair of 2007 Snoop Daddy's I tried to find some info on the web. Not much. Let me tell you about my last two weeks' experience:

I am 40 years old, former collegiate ski racer, 245 lbs, 6'1", I consider myself a level 8+ skier. I am comfortable with all in-bounds skiing.

I just got back from a two-week vacation from my desk job. I skied Squaw Valley (hiked and skied the Palisades), Kirkwood (everywhere that was open), Mt. Rose (awesome chutes!) and finally spent a week with my wife and 6-year old at the Canyons Utah.

I am a little new to big mountain off-piste sking (only 4 years), but I am hooked! Unfortunitely, skiing in NC, I need a ski that performs well on groomers, slush, and out-west crud and powder. Man, I found it!!!!

I own a pair of SL-9 in 160cm,SX-11 Supercross in 180cm, and R-EX in 184. I have skied the R-Ex for the past 2 seasons in Tahoe. I now have the distinct pleasure of owning a pair of Snoop Daddy's in 185cm!! I'm not a big fan of rap music, but I am a BIG fan of these skis!

I was having a little problem transitioning from my Supercross (SX-11) to my R-Ex's. They just wouldn't turn as well. I asked my buddy who manages a local ski shop that if I could find a ski that was as responsive as my SX-11's, but wide enough to handle the crud and powder of Tahoe, I would buy it! I found it. Holly crap! I was about to buy a pair of discontinued M-Ex's (yes I have a thing for Atomic), when a pair of the new Snoop Daddy's came available so I jumped on it!

This ski holds on ice, cruises on groomers, and performs like a champ in the WAIST DEEP POWDER I found on Red Pine Chutes at the Canyons in late March of this year (we had over 40" of snow during my trip...but now I'm braggin'). The ski is 88mm at he waist, and plenty of shovel!

Get some, and try 'em...that's all I can say.

e-mail me questions...I'll try to give you straight answers!

Jack (aka Dawgcatcher)
post #22 of 22

about your R-ex's

I noticed your comments on the r-ex's. I too have noticed that they get tossed around a bit too ecxessively for a stiffer mid fat ski. I am about 175 , 5'8" and ski pretty agressive. I got rid of them recently because I just know there is something out there that suits my needs better. I picked up a pair of Public enemys' and a pair of pocket rockets and I'm going to see what happends. I'm just glad I'm not the only one with your opinion on the R-ex's . My buddy (the person who talked me into them)
can't say enough about them and thinks I'm just being a whimp for not being able to power them through breakable crust.(which I hate anyway)
but he is 6'5" and weighs 245 and we ski the same length. 177. That in itself may be the biggest problem. Anyway, thanks for your comments.
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 › 2007 Ski Testing - Advanced all-mountain/powder