or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › metron m:9 v. metron m10
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

metron m:9 v. metron m10

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
I am about to buy Metrons.
I am level 5/6, skiing NY/NJ/VT, 186 pounds. I consider Metron 171 M9 or 164 M:10. I want to improve my skills this year, learn how to ski small bumps and feel more comfortable on black trails.
Is there a big difference b/w the two? I want to buy Metron that will allow me to have fun next few seasons.
post #2 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacpol View Post
I am about to buy Metrons.
I am level 5/6, skiing NY/NJ/VT, 186 pounds. I consider Metron 171 M9 or 164 M:10. I want to improve my skills this year, learn how to ski small bumps and feel more comfortable on black trails.
Is there a big difference b/w the two? I want to buy Metron that will allow me to have fun next few seasons.
How strong are your legs?
post #3 of 21
The 9 amd the 10 are the same shape (dimensions). How tall are you and how physicly fit are you? I think you could go eitehr way but stay with the 171 in the 10 also. Performance scale:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (M9)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (M10)

S0-if you are a 5/6, you will get more life out of a 10 vs. the 9. My son 5'8" 160, skis th em10 in a 171 all over the mountian asd in the bumps, he is a solid 7/8 level.. I like the M10 over the 9, but the 9 is still a nice ski too.
post #4 of 21
Thread Starter 
I am pretty fit; 5'10, 185 pounds, play tennis, volleyball, bike all year.
post #5 of 21
Either ski in a 171. The M10 will be a beefier ski and give you better edge hold.
post #6 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacpol View Post
I am about to buy Metrons.
I am level 5/6, skiing NY/NJ/VT, 186 pounds. I consider Metron 171 M9 or 164 M:10. I want to improve my skills this year, learn how to ski small bumps and feel more comfortable on black trails.
Is there a big difference b/w the two? I want to buy Metron that will allow me to have fun next few seasons.
At your level and given your goals, you might also consider the Metron-7. It has a more conservative shape than the other two and that can be a big help in moguls. (too much shape can spank a mid-level skier in bumps)

I have skied the 7 and the 9 and think the 7 can do about anything the 9 will do. The one exception is the really deep carves that will take a bit higher level skier to execute anyway. The 7 has plenty of edge grip for you and is a great bang for the buck.

SJ
post #7 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
At your level and given your goals, you might also consider the Metron-7. It has a more conservative shape than the other two and that can be a big help in moguls. (too much shape can spank a mid-level skier in bumps)

I have skied the 7 and the 9 and think the 7 can do about anything the 9 will do. The one exception is the really deep carves that will take a bit higher level skier to execute anyway. The 7 has plenty of edge grip for you and is a great bang for the buck.

SJ
I demoed the M7 (164). As a 6/7 level skier I went with the M9 (157). The M9 is ia little above my skill level, but it has made me a better skier and I will grow into it. I found the M7 to be a fun and easier ski. Truth be told I'd be very happy with the M7 in a 164. IMO the M7 would be a good choice for you depending on your goals and how much you ski.

For me I live in snow country and will ski 35 plus days a year. I plan/hope to hit the advanced level this coming season. Thus the M9 for me. However your goals may be less ambious than mine. If so consider the M7.
post #8 of 21
Thread Starter 
If I would have to go for M-7 it would not make a big difference to me.
Currently I ski Rossingol Bandit 178, the ski for intermediate skiers; I tested M:10 last year in Killington and M10 were easier to handle than my Rossi on the icy slopes of VT; I quess it means that I can handle M10. I ski about 25 days a year. I can put my skis on the edges. My goal is not to become the bump expert, but to jump to level 7/8 and be able to ski all terrain.
post #9 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacpol View Post
If I would have to go for M-7 it would not make a big difference to me.
Currently I ski Rossingol Bandit 178, the ski for intermediate skiers; I tested M:10 last year in Killington and M10 were easier to handle than my Rossi on the icy slopes of VT; I quess it means that I can handle M10. I ski about 25 days a year. I can put my skis on the edges. My goal is not to become the bump expert, but to jump to level 7/8 and be able to ski all terrain.
You just said it. Case closed. Buy the M10 in your correct length.
post #10 of 21
What was the length of M10 you tried?
post #11 of 21
Thread Starter 
I tried M10 164; why do you ask? you feel that 171 may be to long?
post #12 of 21
I asked because you said that you handled M10 with ease.
171cm may be different story - M9 could still apply ...
post #13 of 21
Thread Starter 

Metron M-10 AND length

So you suggest that I shall consider Meton M:10 at 164?
post #14 of 21
nope
171cm IMHO
post #15 of 21
A 171 at just 186 lbs might be overkill. It's a close call. But generally, too long is a bigger mistake than too short. If you liked then 164, get it, because you didn't demo the 171 and it will be different, since length is more of a factor than model with short radius shaped skis.
post #16 of 21
I demoed the M 10 in 171 and 164 last year. I preferred the 171, and I am lighter (172#) than you (level 7? skier) I am 6'1" tall, but the Metron "formula" does not take height into consideration. I agree with Phil, the 171 will be better for you. In addition, it should work better in powder, with its greater surface area. It should also have greater longitudinal stability in crud due to greater length.
post #17 of 21
I am also with the 171 crowd. I own the M9 in 171. I am 6' 175# and demo'd both M9 and 10's last year. Honestly couldn't feel much difference in either, but probably because I don't ski enough, only about 10 times per year. The M9 was easier to find, so I bought it. I think you will like either ski.
post #18 of 21
Thread Starter 

question re metron M:10

I found M10 at this web site

http://www.sierratradingpost.com/pro...x-412-Bindings

No other seller offers m10 in this color, not even on ebay. What does it mean? Defective series? Is it 2004-2005 model?
post #19 of 21
That is the '04-'05 model. Here is a picture of the '05-'06

http://shop.sierrasnowboard.com/browse.cfm/4,1036.htm

SJ
post #20 of 21
Thread Starter 

metron m:10 v. fischer amc 73

What the difference between these two?

I am level 5/6 skier who tries to improve my skills on East Coast. I consider M:10, 172 or AMC 73, 170.
post #21 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacpol View Post
What the difference between these two?
Same shape, the 10 is a beefier construction with Ti Puls arms.
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 › metron m:9 v. metron m10