New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski advice, + size

post #1 of 18
Thread Starter 
Hoping someone can give me better insight.
These skis will be for groomers only, East Coast.
5'8" but only 135-40, so wondering if 170cm would be too long/
thinking 162-65 max?

skis on my shortlist are:
2004-05, Head Lightning/IM 70 Monster $130
http://levelninesports.com/head-2005...3cm-p-578.html
Head IM75 SRF Chip $370 w/bindings
The dynastar skicross 10, $389 w/bidnings
or fischer bigstix 7.6 - $260 with bindings
^^all actionsportsoutlets.com

Looking for a good east coast ski, and though the head lightnings are far cheaper, don't want to pass up on quality for $100 +/-

any help is really appreciated

note: Demoed the Head Supershapes and liked them a lot.
Found volkl all starts too stiff
post #2 of 18
165cm. Can't comment on those skis though. IMO 170 is too long though.
post #3 of 18
Eastern ski, groomers only--no doubt the Dynastar SC10. Great groomer Cross Ski. Smooth, lively, grood edge hold. The others skis are more designed for all-mountain use, great for crud, off piste or mixture. Of the choices listed, the Dynastar is the real groomer cruiser.

Head Supershape is also superb, but that wasn't in the original choices.
post #4 of 18
Thread Starter 

Groomer Curiser

A groomer cruiser is def. what I need!
Only other ski I found that might do it is
an apache blackhawk from K2, at $250 - but I think the skicross is better.

As for the supershapes, I demoed them last year, and really, really liked them.
post #5 of 18
If you really liked the Supershapes, but can't afford them (and hard to find last year's), you may be undershooting in your list. Agree on the Dynastar SC 10's, but think hard about Fischer RX8's, which can be had (last year's) for under 5 bills with superb bindings, can pretty much handle any east coast demands except for new wet powder, and are designed for lighter skiers such as yourself.
post #6 of 18
As noted, Supershape is a great ski, but the price will be nothing like the deals you quoted in your original post. How much are you looking to spend?
post #7 of 18
The Skicross 10 is the way to go IMO
post #8 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post
If you really liked the Supershapes, but can't afford them (and hard to find last year's), you may be undershooting in your list. Agree on the Dynastar SC 10's, but think hard about Fischer RX8's, which can be had (last year's) for under 5 bills with superb bindings, can pretty much handle any east coast demands except for new wet powder, and are designed for lighter skiers such as yourself.
What he said.
post #9 of 18
Thread Starter 

head, fischer and dynastar, oh my!

Well, the least I've found supershapes for is $400, sans bindings.
But I am in Canada. So that is before taxes, shipping, duties.

RX8's would be nice, but hard to find on the net for under $500.
^must factor shipping + duties.

I'm trying to strike a balance between performance and budget.
I mean, if those IM70's are only $130, and are decent skis, will I be missing out *that* much? I mean are they comparable i.e. Ford vs mercedes, or BMX vs mercedes?
Just trying to gauge the difference.
Maybe a used pair will come my way
post #10 of 18
There's a pretty significant performance difference between skis like the Supershape or RX8, and the iM70 Lightning. While the Lightning is a pretty capable ski, it's a women-specific model, so it's softer than the non-Lightning iM70, and you'd likely find it pretty lacking. They're just not made for the sort of high performance carving that the Supershape and RX8 are made for.

Looking at that site, I think a good comprimise would be the Head XRC 800 they have for $279 w/o bindings. It's a pretty high performance ski, not as much as the Supershape, but you'll still have a great ski that will be pretty versatile. Add $99 for the SLD11 bindings and you've got a very good setup for under $400.
post #11 of 18
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the insight.
Well, if I would find it lacking, then I would definately think twice!
However, it was touted on that site that it is a re-badged mens model.??

Waiting to hear back about those RX8's from a member on here.
Currently leaning to the skicross 10's.
post #12 of 18
While I haven't actually skied the Lightning, I'm pretty certain it's not just a different topsheet - I believe the flex is softer, and the center mount point may be slightly different (not sure about that part).
post #13 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanuckInstructor View Post
While I haven't actually skied the Lightning, I'm pretty certain it's not just a different topsheet - I believe the flex is softer, and the center mount point may be slightly different (not sure about that part).
though at 130-140 lbs the lightning might work just fine for you and if those are demo bindings then you can adjust the mounting position)
post #14 of 18
Thread Starter 
If found a pair at a local sportchek, but 170 in length (I figure too long as I am 173 and my ability?)
However, I am going to go back and compare the flex vs other skis.
From levelnine, the BLUE lightning form 2004/5 is jsut recoulored, and I checked and the waist is 2mm thinner.
But it is the same price as the im70 of that year.
I saw the year after's lightning c, which is white and very bendy.
Given the same starting price very likely they are very close, and that the other lightning is the year after bendy ski as mentioned on level nine.

PS I picked up Head worldcup boots, and hope they aren't too stiff though they were very comfy
^^I used to ski more when younger but surgeries kept me away for years
If I get a railflex/tyrolia setup, can I also slide the bidnings?
post #15 of 18
The railflex will let you slide the binding 1.5cm forward or back with just a screwdriver. If you know what you're doing, you can change it easier than that by adjusting the toe and heel positions on the mounting rail, but its not recommended unless you're sure you know what you're doing.
post #16 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadaSteep View Post
Thanks for the insight.
Well, if I would find it lacking, then I would definately think twice!
However, it was touted on that site that it is a re-badged mens model.??

Waiting to hear back about those RX8's from a member on here.
Currently leaning to the skicross 10's.
My daughter tried a head lightning, supposedly a more advanced model. It almost had her in tears. Anytime she would try to follow me, I had to stop and wait a long time for her to catch up. She explained that as soon as she got past a modest speed the things started shaking violently lake a loose tarp on a flatbed truck. She also complained that she was giving all the right commands tipping the skis to turn, etcetera, but the skis simple let go of the snow instead of turning. IMHO the IM70 should be avoided, unless you don't ski on hard snow and ice and don't ski over 20 mph and don't mind skidding. On the other hand, I guess they are pretty forgiving:.
post #17 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanuckInstructor View Post
The railflex will let you slide the binding 1.5cm forward or back with just a screwdriver. If you know what you're doing, you can change it easier than that by adjusting the toe and heel positions on the mounting rail, but its not recommended unless you're sure you know what you're doing.
How is moving the toe and heel piece on the mounting rail easier than using the screw? In order to move the toe or heel pice you would still have to unscrew it from the ski.
post #18 of 18
Sorry, you're completely right, it's not easier - little brain fart there obviously. It's not easier, but it does allow for adjustments greater than the +/- 15mm.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion