or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › B2s, 8000s or Sweet Daddys
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

B2s, 8000s or Sweet Daddys

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
Been on a pair of B2s but looking to change. Ski mostly up at Killington so hard pack but also like to get into the bumps and trees. Get over to Chamonix to ski a couple times and try to get out west once a year so get some powder as well.

Already have a pair of Rossi 9X for the carving days but need to add to the quiver.

Comments?

Leaning towards the Sweet Daddys
post #2 of 21
If you already have a carver why not go fatter? Dynaster 8800 or Sugar Daddy's? Or B4's. There is not as much downside as you think
post #3 of 21
Thread Starter 
That width going to give me trouble in the bumps?
post #4 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsa2299
Been on a pair of B2s but looking to change. Ski mostly up at Killington so hard pack but also like to get into the bumps and trees. Get over to Chamonix to ski a couple times and try to get out west once a year so get some powder as well.

Already have a pair of Rossi 9X for the carving days but need to add to the quiver.

Comments?

Leaning towards the Sweet Daddys
I loved teh Sweet Daddys when I sked them, but that would be a one ski ski for me, I wouldn't have anything narrower. If you have a 70ish ski, I agree with Alf, you have teh luxury of going to the 90ish range. If the Sugar Daddy is anything like the Sweet, that will be a great choice.
post #5 of 21
Thread Starter 
I would def do that if my 9Xs were good for anythign but carving on groomers. They are race stock and garbage anywhere else. Really just want to get the best all mountain ski but still be good enough to take out of New England when I actually get the chance to ski some real snow. My only concern with going wider...
post #6 of 21
We banged bumps all day at Stowe on saturday. I ski pocket rockets, 92 underfoot and Buckethead skis Volant Machete's which are 95 underfoot. Heck my daughter was on Rossi B3w which are 83 underfoot and tore it up. The width is not a problem in the bumps, what can be a problem is if the ski is really stiff. Off-piste overall its flat out easier on fatter skis. I do not want to make this thread a fat skis versus midfats, but because you go out west and to europe and have a carver you would be remiss not to go fatter.
post #7 of 21
Go to the trip report section on stowe and there are a few pics of Bucket and my daughter in the bumps on chinclip
post #8 of 21
Of the skis mentioned the fatter version are, B4 as with most rossi pretty damp, med stiff ski. The dynastar 8800 are super popular right now, a med stiff ski with a bit of metal in it. Supposed to be super lively. The sugar daddy is a soft playful ski. How much do you weigh?

Alfonse
post #9 of 21
Thread Starter 
Am 6'4" and about 205

What's a good ski then that is right at 90? Sugar Daddys are 99 underfoot
post #10 of 21

sweet sweets

These puppies have a split personality,,but you don't figure that out right away.
You can ski "on top of them", and also "get against and inside on them".
They are compliant to the terrain on one hand, yet hold on the slick just enough.
They are not "precise" by design intent, and in it's environment that's good.
A ski for bumps on frequent occasion,,,, a powder ski for those who know how to ski powder,,AND you can ski them a bit longer and not realize it. This too makes for a nice ski for skinning up,,,just notch the tail bar a bit.

Metron B5's, SX10's, and SL12's [all super in their own right], for the usual eastern bill of fare, but in the woods, or when it snows,or for Tuck's slush, or most anytime out on the left coast,,
I know what's going with me!!!!!
Light and lively,,put some HD rando clamps on them and ditch the rest of the "specialty quiver".
snodancer
post #11 of 21
Thread Starter 
You talking about the Sugar Daddys?

What do you know about the Scratch Sprayer? Have always liked Rossis and Dynastars, never actually been on Atomics.
post #12 of 21
Some here are missing the problem, which is that you'll only take ONE ski traveling to europe (very different, more ice/whipped cream than Rockies) or "west." Do you really want it to be a 90+ on the days when it hasn't snowed in 9 days and the advanced-expert runs are all bumped out? Yeah, a 90+ ski can do bumps surprisingly well (I can personally speak for old Rossi B-3, current Mantra and old PR's), but they don't really like ice, and the bumps should be big. I'd suggest something more in the 80's like a Volkl AC-4, the new iM-82, or a 777; they'll carve like crazy and still give you lotsa float for all but the biggest days. And the new B-3 ain't dogfood either. Think versatility, not fantasies of that epic pow dayon a pre-scheduled trip.
post #13 of 21
Thread Starter 
That's my main issue.

Will try and demo the Sctratch Sprayer BCs and the B3s.

Any issue with the Scratch Sprayers? Think they are about 88mm undefoot.
post #14 of 21
I concur on the m777 people rave about those skis. I hear they are an amazing tree ski. They are about 87 underfoot
post #15 of 21
bsa:

Maybe someone should ask this pertinent question.......

In what areas do you want the new skis to improve over your current B2's?
  1. Do you want them to be better in deep powder?? (if so, a fattish makes some sense)
  2. Do you want them to be better in heavier crud?? (if so, a fattish ski may make at least a little sense)
  3. Or do you want a little quicker ski?
  4. Or have a little more carve capability?
  5. Or better edge hold?
  6. Or a bit more stable at higher speeds?
  7. Or a little more damp on rough eastern groomers?
If you want improvement in these areas, a fattish ski and particularly a twin tip makes little sense at all.

IMO the best mid fat for mostly eastern conditions would be the Nordica Modified which would be an improvement over the B2 in all the areas from 3-7 and equal in #2.

Yes, I do know eastern conditions, (I lived in Stowe for three years).

SJ
post #16 of 21
Thread Starter 
  1. Do you want them to be better in deep powder?? (if so, a fattish makes some sense. Yes, though I'll see this two weeks a year total
  2. Do you want them to be better in heavier crud?? (if so, a fattish ski may make at least a little sense) Will see plenty of this so yes.
  3. Or do you want a little quicker ski? Were fine.
  4. Or have a little more carve capability? Yes, didn't hold an edge that great in hard stuff.
  5. Or better edge hold? Yes
  6. Or a bit more stable at higher speeds? They were not that stable but I was ok with that, I have skis if that's what I want.
  7. Or a little more damp on rough eastern groomers? To be honest not exactly sure what you're asking.
Didn't buy the right ski last time so want to be sure I'm getting into the right ski this time. Going to try the Prophet 80, Scatch Sprayer, what else???
post #17 of 21
Thread Starter 
m777 as previously suggested?

mentioned it before but want to be sure the ski is not that stiff, want to be able to get into the bumps whenever.
post #18 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsa2299
  1. Do you want them to be better in deep powder?? (if so, a fattish makes some sense. Yes, though I'll see this two weeks a year total
  2. Do you want them to be better in heavier crud?? (if so, a fattish ski may make at least a little sense) Will see plenty of this so yes.
  3. Or do you want a little quicker ski? Were fine.
  4. Or have a little more carve capability? Yes, didn't hold an edge that great in hard stuff.
  5. Or better edge hold? Yes
  6. Or a bit more stable at higher speeds? They were not that stable but I was ok with that, I have skis if that's what I want.
  7. Or a little more damp on rough eastern groomers? To be honest not exactly sure what you're asking.
Didn't buy the right ski last time so want to be sure I'm getting into the right ski this time. Going to try the Prophet 80, Scatch Sprayer, what else???
#1 = Fatter ski (pick one)
#2 = Fatter ski OK but a stiffer mid fat would be good too (Nordica Mod or Top Fuel)
#3 = B2
#4 = More shape (Modified, Nitrous, Top Fuel)
#5 = Same as #4
#6 = B2
#7 = Same as #4 & 5

So, Fat ski offers improvement in #1 & 2
Stiffer Mid Fat offers improvement in #2, 4, 5, & 7
B2 just fine in #3 and #6

I'd say the stiffer mid fat wins the debate. The Nordicas are excellent as well as some fine models by Head. Many other fine choices available out there too.

SJ
post #19 of 21
Thread Starter 
So I'll try and demo a pair of the m777 as well. If they can perform this time of year they will certainly be a good all mountain ski for me year round.

So right now am at:
Nordica Modified
B3
m777
Scratch Sprayer BC
Also to give the Prophet 80 a shot.

Pros/Cons against any of these on a comparison?

Also will likely get something in the 185 range, am a big guy but want maneuverability more than anything else, any objections there?
post #20 of 21
First, how big? 185-ish in a Nordica is a monster. Lot of solid sized experts on these threads ski them around a 170; several have noted that the next size up (high 170's) is really demanding, stiff. You might want to study up here on typical sizes used for each ski.

Second, how does a this fit with stated desire for maneuverabiity? If you're really big, you might want to think about beefy skis with metal, rather than long soft skis. M-777's, for sure, and as Sierra Jim sez, Nordicas, Heads, and strong aggressive skiers rave about the B-5, or the new M-11/B-5. Unless you're a NFL lineman, you'd ski it in a 172, which would make it a lot quicker than a 185. Fat shovel does fine in decent amounts of pow, chop.

Third, your demo list has a lot of apples and oranges. How do you compare a Scratch to a Nordica Modified except to realize they have different goals?
post #21 of 21
Thread Starter 
Scratch was another that I had no idea about but someone threw out there the other day so was really just trying to get some feedback on them besides their specs.

777 were what I was leaning towards so will look into what the best length for those would be. I do a lot of tree skiing and get in the bumps quite a bit so need something that can do both and sounds like this is the ski. Any objections there?

Never have done research before on skis so just being sure I'm getting the right all mountain ski this time.
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 › B2s, 8000s or Sweet Daddys