EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › RX-8, 5 star or im 72 in longer length
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RX-8, 5 star or im 72 in longer length

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
I have a head im72, 170 mm. I like the ski alot but it seems unstable for the speeds that I generate. I want the ski to be forgiving enough so that I have some energy at the end of the day. I'm 6'1", 185lbs and a level 8 skier. Should I go with a 175mm volkl 5 star, a fischer rx-8 (what size?) or just bump up to a 177mm im 72.

Any insights would be appreciated.

Mike
post #2 of 19
If you want to ski fast, get a Fischer Worldcup, SC or RC; pick your turn radius.
post #3 of 19

RX8 Size

I have the RX8 in a 165. I am 180LBs and ski fast - level 7-8 skier. Not a problem as long as you keep em up their edges.

No need to go to 175 in these. I think the 165 or 170 would suit your purpose fine. When I ordered mine at 165, I started second guessing the size thinking they would be too small. I am so glad I got the 165s, they are exactly what I wanted. They pull nice tight turns, but can let loose when you want to scoot. They have given me more control over my skiing so I am skiing the steeps with more style now.

I generally pass most people on the hill when I ski so I can speak to how they handle speed.
post #4 of 19
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the replies, I forgot to add that I had an atomic B5 in a 172mm length that I also felt wasn't stable enough. Although it was more stable than the im72. The rx8 looks like a good choice but at 170mm I afraid that it still wouldn't be enough.

Mike
post #5 of 19
I'm 6-1 225lb and on 180cm RX-8, which are great on hard snow at any speed. You could probably go one size smaller since you're lighter than me at the same height. The ski is not demanding, but not super forgiving either. It wants to be skied well to be rewarding. It will turn quickly with the slightest edge pressure at any speed, just make sure you're ready to turn too!
post #6 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmalloy
Thanks for the replies, I forgot to add that I had an atomic B5 in a 172mm length that I also felt wasn't stable enough. Although it was more stable than the im72. The rx8 looks like a good choice but at 170mm I afraid that it still wouldn't be enough.

Mike
I'm 5'11" and 185 lbs. Fischer's RX-8 @170cm should be fine given your size and very versatile at that length. There is no need to go longer, IMHO. To me the RX-8 has a lighter and snappier feel than the Fischer RC4 WC SC and the Fischer RC4 WC WC RC. The latter two ski models are quite versatile for race skis with a smooth, yet burlier feel than the RX-8. Any of these skis should easily meet your stability at speed requirements.

I've tried the Voelkl 5 Star once this season. It felt overly damp for my tastes. However, it's also a very stable ski and has enjoyed a lot of popularity. I've not skied the Head or Atomic skis that you mentioned.

Good luck.
post #7 of 19
mmalloy,
Could you please elaborate on what you mean by "wasn't stable enough". I haven't tried the IM72, but have noticed that the short-radius skis that I have tried ALL hunt back and forth trying to turn if skied flat on the snow as in trying to shush straight down the fall line. They are not unstable in the sense that slalom race skis were unstable 20 years ago at SG speeds; they don't flap wildly up and down at the tips when going straight and they don't provide next to no directional control at high speeds. If you are looking for that old stable feeling while going fairly straight, you might want to try a SX11 or something with a longer turn radius.
post #8 of 19
Thread Starter 
The tips tend to flap at high speeds during gs type turns. I have a pair of 178 mm nordica hot rod nitrous's that do fine. It may be that I just like the feel of a longer contact length under my boots.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
mmalloy,
Could you please elaborate on what you mean by "wasn't stable enough". I haven't tried the IM72, but have noticed that the short-radius skis that I have tried ALL hunt back and forth trying to turn if skied flat on the snow as in trying to shush straight down the fall line. They are not unstable in the sense that slalom race skis were unstable 20 years ago at SG speeds; they don't flap wildly up and down at the tips when going straight and they don't provide next to no directional control at high speeds. If you are looking for that old stable feeling while going fairly straight, you might want to try a SX11 or something with a longer turn radius.
post #9 of 19
If a B5 172 is not stable enough for you, I am not sure If the RX8's are the answer for you. I have been on both and the B5's have the edge in stability. The B5 172 is the most stable ski I have been on.
post #10 of 19
IMHO,

If you're going to go with the Volkls, the 5* will not be enough ski for you. Look, instead at the 6* (now Allstar) or Superspeed. These are beefier and built to go VERY fast while remaining stable.
post #11 of 19
I haven't tried the IM72, but it could just not be designed for the speeds your asking of it. The tips would then be flapping even going straight, not just wandering. If that seems like your problem, and you don't need to ski slowly get a Fischer WC SC.

The ski could be trying to carve a tighter radius due to it's sidecut than you want to turn at. As it alternately grabs and releases, you get the flapping. On hard snow a ski will not arc a turn wider than it sidecut radius. If you try and carve 21-m turns on the RX8 it too will have that problem. If that's seems like the case I would say try a Fischer RX9 or WC RC in 175 or 180, or superspeed in a similar length.
post #12 of 19
Thread Starter 
I do like to ski slowly also, especially toward to the end of the day when I'm tired. I also ski more slowly on bumps and some steeps. The RX9 sounds like a possibility but I saw some reviews stating that it doesn't do well in bumps. I want a well rounded ski that would complement the Nordica Nitrous that I have.
post #13 of 19
I'm about the same size as you, 6'1" 190ish, level 8.5, and I roll on Fischer RX6's at 175 and they absolutely rip, so I can't imagine you'd not love the RX8. I would have the 8's except for a cash issue when I bought what I did. I know 2 guys my size and ability who have em and they love em. I have no issues with a 175 length, and while I know that the RX8 is slightly stiffer than the RX6, I feel confident in saying that if you are looking for speed, edge, and style, any of the RX's, 6, 8, or 9 will rock and roll all day long! Just my 2 cents Heck, if you are concerned with the bump performance, go with the RX6, I run it all over the place, trees, pow when I was out west, crud, ice, groomers, and bumps of all sizes. It flexes just enough to do everything well, and is a rocketship on anything groomed. Again, just my opinion, but the RX6's smaller price tag shouldn't have anything to discourage you. You can't go wrong on the RX series for speed and all-mtn capabilities. (Fischer, will you hire me NOW?!?)
post #14 of 19
I am the same measurements as you, 6'1", 185 and also a level 8. I ski mostly at Mammoth and had 180 RX8's. It's was a perfect ski for my preferences given the area. Had 5* in 175 and disliked the ski, to soft and unstable for me.
post #15 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmalloy
I do like to ski slowly also, especially toward to the end of the day when I'm tired. I also ski more slowly on bumps and some steeps. The RX9 sounds like a possibility but I saw some reviews stating that it doesn't do well in bumps. I want a well rounded ski that would complement the Nordica Nitrous that I have.
In that case go with the RX8.
post #16 of 19
Don't think any of your skis listed are speed merchants. I have a RX8 in 170, weigh 166, 6'. It has a speed limit, even on edge, way below my three year old Volkl 6*'s. As do the 5* and the iM72. If you're concerned about stability at speed, instead of going longer why aren't you looking at different skis, more cross style? Think seriously about:

1) Volkl Allstar (168)

2) Head 1400 (170)

3) Elan Ripstick (170)

4) Fischer RX9 (170)

They'll all still give you nice medium radius turns, but will stay glued at speeds that'll melt your parka...
post #17 of 19
Indeed a soft flexible ski for slowly skiing moguls and a stiff stable ski for skiing at high speeds are two different skis. A compromise is required. No one ski will excell at both. The rx8 is a compromise that gives up a little at higher speeds, but gains a lot everywhere else. The WC RC, and the other longer radius skis mentioned would work great at speed, but not at slow tight turns in bumps. I guess you have to decide what is most important.
post #18 of 19
Just to add to the complexity, I have a pair of Fischer RX-9's @170cm.

The RX-8 and RX-9 are both versatile all around performers. The RX-9 actually works quite well in bumps at 170cm although I read the same magazine review that you likely did. The RX-9 is just more GS-like with a 17m radius at 170cm.

The RX 8 and RX-9 might get bounced around some in ruts on a race course where the RC and SC won't but on the groomed they are both very capable high speed carving machines. They both do just about everything else very well. Fischer hit a performance home run with the RX line including the RX6. The RX-8 may, as Ghost pointed out, be the best choice to complement your Nordica Nitrous skis.
post #19 of 19
Thread Starter 
It looks like the RX8 is the compromise that I'm looking for.
Thanks guys.
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 › RX-8, 5 star or im 72 in longer length