or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2006 Atomic Sugar Daddy Review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2006 Atomic Sugar Daddy Review - Page 2

post #31 of 35
OK, I have a good question, kind a technical...I have a pair of Atomic R-ex's that I'm trying to compair with the 'Sugar Daddy' Anyone have any comments? (I'lll tell you later)
post #32 of 35
Thread Starter 
R-EX's are much stiffer, with less float and better edge-hold.

SD's from 2005 onwards (after they lost the mounting plate) were less stiff, but still beefy.

R-EX's are a big mountain ski that can do powder duty, but won't float and surf like the SD's in the deep stuff.
post #33 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by bumpking View Post
OK, I have a good question, kind a technical...I have a pair of Atomic R-ex's that I'm trying to compair with the 'Sugar Daddy' Anyone have any comments? (I'lll tell you later)
SD is 99mm underfoot, REX is 84mm (about 15% narrower, far less float)

SD has a 28m turn radius, REX is considerably smaller about 21-23M depending on size.
post #34 of 35
I just ordered these for $509 shipped from Backcountry Outlet with the Atomic / Salomon FFG 14 driver bindings (a first for those too). I'll chime in on inmpressions in a few weeks. Looked like a killer deal and I'm anxious to have a set of wider skis that are not alpine touring.
post #35 of 35
Cirque, if you don't mind, I'd like to have some info as to where you've mounted your bindings and why you did so.
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 › 2006 Atomic Sugar Daddy Review