New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Return to skiing

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 
My son's interested in skiing, so I've decided to hang up the snowboards and join him. I had skied for 22 years before going total knuckle-dragger. I've skied Outer Limits @ Killington, Paradise @ MRG, etc.

I'm looking for a used pair of ski's that'll handle New England ice and forays into the bumps. Anything from 2003 to present. I guess I'm asking is there an "All New England - All Mountain Ski?" Any recommendations would be appreciated. Cheers!
post #2 of 15
I loved my Salomon X-Screams. They rocked in everything. My 1080s can also handle anything Okemo throws at me, and hold there own out here in CO too.
post #3 of 15
Thread Starter 
Cool. Thanks for the tip.
post #4 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by peobus View Post
I had skied for 22 years before going total knuckle-dragger.
Knuckle dragger? Hmm, new (to me) skier term. The visual does fit though.
post #5 of 15
Thread Starter 
My local tech suggested that if I went with a new ski, I should try the K2 Apache Crossfire at 181cm or the Volkl SS at 184cm. What skis from the past few seasons were meant to perform like those?
post #6 of 15
Peobus: Those could work.

What's your height, weight and ability level?

These days, a lot of skis - especially carving skis for eastern hardpack - are skied short.

Many people don't go over 170 cm.

All mountain skis, however, are usually skied a bit longer.

If you're looking for skis with excellent hard-snow edge-hold, brands with racing pedigrees tend to excel: Atomic, Volkl, Fisher. Other brands are also well-regarded.

The choices are vast, and much will depend upon your skills, preferences, and size.

Ski designs have evolved a lot over the past few years. Performance, and ease of use have improved dramatically.

With a bit of guidance, you should be able to find some superb gear at great prices.
post #7 of 15
Thread Starter 
I'm 6'0" and 195 lbs. Yeah, I could lose some weight. I surf, skate and play hockey/roller hockey to stay in shape.

I grew up skiing as often as possible for as long as there was snow. I was really into it, and loved bumps and anything steep. Never raced, though. And, yes, skis have changed since I took up snowboarding. That's why I'm so confused. In the old days, I'd have just used a slalom ski, for quick turns and ice. Bumps here in the east are usually harder (ice) than out west, so the harder (flex memory) ski usually worked for me. East coast powder is a myth, so I'm not concerned about it. Does that decsribe a product that's been out for a while?
post #8 of 15
I have a pair of Atomic 10/22 that are about 4 years old.
193cm. In great shape. PM if interested. I am moving to all mountain and power skis for the west and midwest.
post #9 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by peobus View Post
I'm 6'0" and 195 lbs. Yeah, I could lose some weight. I surf, skate and play hockey/roller hockey to stay in shape.

I grew up skiing as often as possible for as long as there was snow. I was really into it, and loved bumps and anything steep. Never raced, though. And, yes, skis have changed since I took up snowboarding. That's why I'm so confused. In the old days, I'd have just used a slalom ski, for quick turns and ice. Bumps here in the east are usually harder (ice) than out west, so the harder (flex memory) ski usually worked for me. East coast powder is a myth, so I'm not concerned about it. Does that describe a product that's been out for a while?
In your shoes, I'd consider the Atomic SX-9, or SX-10 (a bit stiffer) at about 170 cm length. Or, a Fischer RX-8, same length. These are all narrow, slicers - a rec version of slalom skis - but not TOO stiff.

If you'd like to go a few cm wider, for more versatility (but you'll give up a bit of edge-hold), the Volkl AC-3 is a great choice - 177 cm.

If you can find a pair of Atomic IZOR's in a 177 (or 170), I've seen those for $389 on ebay, WITH bindings. Also a great choice.

I wouldn't suggest going more that 180 cm for anything but a powder ski. Technology and torsion control allows for much shorter skis, with outstanding edge-grip and control.
post #10 of 15

another Nordica (06' & 07')...

06' Nordica Speedmachine "14.1", 68mm waist..()
.......Became.....
07' Speedmachine "14.2",116-70-102..(slightly wider & with binding system, but I don't think they changed any materials)
post #11 of 15
Thread Starter 
Spoke with a buddy of mine who likes speed and ski's Atomic R11's. He suggested the softer R10's due to my affinity for bumps. So it sounds like I'm looking at softened slalom ski. Again, I'm looking to purchase used from '03 to '05. What were the '03-'05 Volkl and Atomic models that fit my bill?

Oh...knuckle dragger = Snowboarder (me).
post #12 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by peobus View Post
Spoke with a buddy of mine who likes speed and ski's Atomic R11's. He suggested the softer R10's due to my affinity for bumps. So it sounds like I'm looking at softened slalom ski. Again, I'm looking to purchase used from '03 to '05. What were the '03-'05 Volkl and Atomic models that fit my bill?

Oh...knuckle dragger = Snowboarder (me).
Atomic's SX series are softened slalom skis, the R series are more like a softened GS ski.

The R series are wider, but better in all-round conditions, and probably better at speed.

I'd say forget the R10's. They're wider than the R11's, and the R11 was a better ski (especially after introduction of the "Puls" aluminum bars on top).

I owned the R11 Puls in a 180 cm. It would be perfect for you. It's not too stiff, and it'll be better in bumps (narrower) than the R10.

You can probably buy 'em on ebay or at a swap for $150, with bindings. Super choice!
post #13 of 15
Thread Starter 
Great advice! Thanks for your help, all!
post #14 of 15
I'm moving this over to ski gear where you'll get more play and tons more advice. Get ready!
post #15 of 15
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the move. Any Volkl or Fischer skis that are similar to the Atomic R11?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion