or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AC4 advice needed

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
Buddy o mine is pulling the trigger, what size is right?

Skier: 5' 11" 160 LB, level 8 skier
current ski: Soly Crossmax 10
intent of new skis: better off piste float, easier day off piste

should he buy the 170 cm or the 177 ?

I think the 177 to maintain hardpack performance rippin'

what say ye ?
post #2 of 10
177 to provide more float in the soft and rip big GS turns on the groomed
post #3 of 10
I also vote 177.
post #4 of 10
I am 5'11" and 190lbs. There is a huge difference in turn radious between the 170 and 177cm AC4s. I love my 170cm AC4s with the tighter turn radious as long as there is a little bit of soft powder around. I have a blast on these skis.

For real hard boiler plate days I prefer my 5 Stars at 175cm length. For waist deep powder days out west I use my Rossi B3 178cm with 95mm waist. I typicall bring both my AC4s and Rossi B3s out west.

I would recommend the 170cm AC4s.
post #5 of 10
Originally Posted by catskills View Post
I am 5'11" and 190lbs. There is a huge difference in turn radious between the 170 and 177cm AC4s.

I would recommend the 170cm AC4s.

the 07's in 170 ski like a cheater GS/SL ski but w/ mucho stability. Not so good in over boot top deep, but a great ski for hard snow for me.

(me 6', 215)
post #6 of 10
Neither, for what he wants. I demoed both last spring, reviewed them here, weigh 5 lbs more than your buddy. And folks our size fall through the cracks with the AC4. At my weight, the 170 is unbelievably quick, handles ice, groomed, bumps, trees, light pow wonderfully. But it doesn't have enough size to float, it gets knocked around a bit in deep crud, and its stiffish tip dives in more than 6".

OTOH, the 177 is more GS-like on groomed, not as exciting but smoother and ungodly fast, eats bumps for lunch. BUT your friend sez he wants a backside ski, yes? At 165 lbs, its shovel is so stiff that you still don't float up, you plow ahead. Very smoothly, but not real fast edge to edge. My Mantra's quicker in soft snow.

So at my size, both skis work better as fat carvers with a frontside bias. Neither can beat out several other similar sized sticks (iM82, B3, I'd bet the new Afterburner) for backside duties.

Go read the new review of the AC4 in SkiPressWorld. They give it very high marks, but say about the same thing...
post #7 of 10
Go with the 177CM. I'm 6' and 155lbs and they are good off-piste in up to a foot but they don't float well. Good crud busters though. If you want float look at the Legend 8000 in a 178CM. Similar turn capabilities to the AC4 but better off-piste than the AC4, IMHO.
post #8 of 10
Thread Starter 
Thanks for all the replies, I was sure the 177 weas correct but in this day and age of oddball goofy ass Metron skis, I wasn't sure if these were supposed to be skied short.

The concensus seems to be that they are a great piste ski that can do "some" off piste but that they begin to be less than great in deeper than 8 - 12" of snow.

Again his main intent was to make off piste, deeper snow easier after watching my change to 8800's last year and seeing how much easier and better my off piste skiing was. We have differing styles and hence I am not sure the 8800 is right for him as he really like going fast and long turns, whereas I like to play with the terrain and make lots of turns. I accept the lack on on piste performance & bite from the 8800 but he wants a one ski wonder. pretty decent on piste and off.

His current Solly Crossmax 10 is really a great ski for him, but it just doesn't come up in deeper snow and is alot of work there. Sadly his solly has no base left from so many grinds and waxes and sharpens and hence they are useless even as rock skis now. Litterly wore them out in 4 seasons.

At first I thought the AC4 was the best new choice, slightly bigger waist, better ski tech, volkl power and edging, but alas it seems it isn't a real good board off piste perhaps from too stiff a tip and the 82 mm waist.

What say ye? perhaps the snood daddy (possibly slightly lacking on piste), Karma (is it a park ski or not?), Gotma (can it carve), Head IM88 (requires beef and strength), Solly Fury (complete unknown, nothing but glorified sales reviews, Damn magazines), B3 (I think this lacks in the speed department) Fisher? RX?, Bro's (any good on piste?) Elan 777, others?

preferance would be to deeper snow ease and performance and good to great carving on piste.
post #9 of 10
Originally Posted by Marmot mb View Post

intent of new skis: better off piste float, easier day off piste
Given those two key words, I'd go along with those that suggest neither. I think the Snoop, the Fury, and the Nordica Afterburner are all easier than the AC-4 and better floaters.

They do not however, have the near racey carvey feel of the AC-4 so in the end, it is about his priorities.

"near racey carvey".......................this is a copyrighted technical term.

post #10 of 10
Thread Starter 
Just an update. My bud bought the AC4 in 177. We hit Marmot Basin for Opening Day yesterday and was about mid shin powder up top.

My bud took to those skis just fine. Didn't complain about difficult to manage in the fresh, loved them on the hard and chunked.

Damn him, now I have to put out to try and beat him.

I would say they are harder on the legs than his old Solly Crossmax 10's as he usually doesn't have leg muscle problems as he walks alot at work and does manual labour. But he was hurting in the leg department alot earlier in the day. But it was the first ski day out so perhaps this is expected.

from what I saw of him skiing them, and skiing with him my whole life, those are some fine skis and I can't wait to try them (bastard wouldn't give em up)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion