EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 07/08 Head Skis: Men's & Women's
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

07/08 Head Skis: Men's & Women's

post #1 of 30
Thread Starter 
I'm back in Jackson after spending yesterday at Snowbasin during the ski manufacturers' 2008-model demo days. It's a very cool event and I even ran into an EpicSkier from the midwest. I do work with Head, so you should consider that in my reviews.

I skied on several new Head models and my wife did as well. Snowbasin - just like the rest of the intermountain west - hasn't had any significant snowfall in a few weeks, so we were skiing old snow. We skied primarily groomers but we did do quite a bit of off-piste skiing. The off-piste was mostly firm, chalky snow with some nice chicken-heads scattered around the south-facing slopes. It wasn't a great day for trying out powder skis but it was excellent for carving skis and some crud skiing.

Head skis are really starting to be a presence. The Head booth was very busy and there's a lot of buzz about the line. Part of this is DEFINITELY due to Bode being on the skis, but a lot of it is that Head is making very good, very distinctive skis.

Also, this show is kind of a hectic process and I tried to get as much info as I could on these various models, but I may have written a few things down incorrectly. I'll try to correct any errors as more information comes in.

So, here are my reviews:

Me: 6'1", 195#, pretty good skier who is still learning a lot. I've been at it for over 30 years. I'm best at skiing powder and crud but I've really caught the bug on carving and using the whole ski. I do most of my skiing at Jackson Hole, all over the mountain. My two favorite all-around skis right now are the Head SuperShape and the Head iM88.

1. Head Xenon 9.0. 170cm, 11m turn radius, 120-75-114. Green and white cosmetics. Cap construction, I'm fairly sure.

This was a really fun ski. I think it's aimed at the do-it-all market and it works pretty well at that. It's very quick, as the 11m radius would suggest, but I felt I could make a pretty long turn on it without too much trouble. It carves well and felt very good in the small-to-medium bumps I skied. The Head guys told me that it skis powder very well because of fairly soft tip, but of course I didn't have any powder to try.

2. SuperShape Chip. 170cm, 13.5m turn radius, 121-71-107. Mostly black cosmetics with a little red accent. Sandwich construction.

This is the intelligence chip version of the SuperShape Magnum (see below). This was a very cool ski. The chip must actually do something because there was a distinct difference in feel between this ski and the SS Magnum. The geometry for both the SS Chip and the SS Magnum is essentially a slightly wider version of the classic SuperShape. Head feels this might make the new skis appeal to a somewhat wider market segment that looks at the classic SS as too narrow underfoot. If that philosophy gets more people to try what I think is a great group of skis, so much the better.

This ski was SMOOOOOTH. The regular SS is a pretty smooth ski anyway, but the SS Chip is that in spades. It felt silky but really powerful. I was still able to make pretty similar turns to what I'm used to on the SS, but with maybe a bit more "authority". The Chip is probably a better crud ski than the standard SS, due to both the chip and the somewhat wider profile. This ski doesn't have a lot of what you would call "snap", but it sure gives you a nice ride.

3. SuperShape Magnum. 170cm. 13.5m turn radius, 121-71-107. Black/white/green cosmetics, sandwich construction.

I guess I would say the difference between this SS and the Chip version is livliness. It makes the same turns, it just gives you a little more feedback from the snow. This ski was getting really great reviews from many people who were coming in off the hill. I really enjoyed the ski and feel it is probably a slightly better choice than the traditional SS for a skier who's looking for a bit more versatility. The extra width does make the Magnum a bit more of an all-around ski for crud and light powder. I still love my traditional SS for anything short of boot-top powder/crud, but the Magnum probably extends that soft-snow performance metric enough to merit really serious consideration.

4. iM95. 171cm. 17.3m turn radius, 128-93-118. Red/black cosmetics, fairly low-upturn tip. NEW ski for Head. Cap construction, I believe.

Well. This is an interesting ski. I was very surprised at how easily this ski turned compared to all the short-radius skis I was trying. This is a VERY light-weight ski. It had demo bindings on it but it still felt like a feather. There was obviously no powder, but it bowled through the crud I skied much better than I would have expected for a ski so light. I would love to ski it again in some serious junk, but right now it feels like a very good candidate for a backcountry board.

5. Mojo 90. 186cm. 20.2m turn radius, 124-89-117. Cap construction. New cosmetics for '08 - a kind of whitish/sky blue color scheme.

This ski is essentially unchanged except for the cosmetics. I like this ski a lot and I don't know why I don't own a pair. It skis "shorter" than the listed length, and works really well as an all-around ski, especially for someone who spends any time in the park or pipe.

6. SuperMojo 105. 191cm. 34.5m turn radius, 131-105-122. Also new cosmetics for 2008. White/blue similar to the Mojo 90. Cap construction I think.

This just wasn't the right kind of day for this ski. I feel like this is a great ski for powder and crud and going flat-out on big slopes, but those just weren't the conditions we had. If this is your kind of ski, you probably already know it.

And now for some women's skis:

My wife is 5'7", 130# and a strong skier. She loves powder, junk, and crud, makes moderately carved turns on groomers, but isn't really into high speed skiing. Her two favorite skis right now are the Head XRC 1400 and the K2 Axis AK.

1. Every Thang. 156cm. 11m radius, 122-72-106. Muted cosmetics with some black, gray, and green in it. New ski for 08, cap construction.

Neither my wife nor her friend were very excited about this ski. It's the women's version of the Xenon 9.0 that I reviewed above. I'm not sure my wife is ready yet for the mental leap to come "down" to a ski this short and with this short a turn radius. Both she and her friend felt it was a little "bouncy" at speed. They just weren't thrilled with this ski.

2. Wild Thang. 161cm. 15.4m turn radius, 121-81-107. Redesigned ski for 2008 with grayish/blackish cosmetics. Sandwich construction.

Well, she (and her friend) liked this one. She's ready to replace her K2's with this ski. She said it was smooth, stable, easy to ski, and felt "like a truck" in plowing through the crud sections that we skied. The geometry is just about perfect for what she likes in a crud ski, so it wasn't too surprising that she felt good about this one.

3. Power Thang. 163cm. 14.2m turn radius, 111-66-97. Cap construction. New ski for 2008. Blackish/grayish color scheme.

Four turns into her first run on these, she shouted out that she was in love. She had a big grin on her face and was making much more high-angle turns on the groomers than she ever does. You could tell that she just trusted this ski completely. We did crud, bumps, and groomers, and she raved about it. I can tell that there'll be a pair of these in her locker before too much longer.

4. Roxy (no, not HEAD) Joyrider. 162cm. 13m turn radius, 126-74-105. Kind of a psychedelic greenish/bluish/whitish color scheme. I'm not sure about the construction.

As my wife was trading out Head skis, she and her friend were being given a good-natured hard time by the girls at the neighboring Roxy tent. The two of them decided to try a pair and ended up on the Joyriders. They both liked the ski a lot and felt it would be a very nice all-mountain ski at Jackson Hole. Luckily for me, my wife wasn't *quite* as thrilled with them as she was with the Heads. Really nice skis, though.

Okay... that's the reviews.

There will, however, one more reivew coming up but that one needs its own topic. I got to ski on a REAL world cup slalom ski. Whoa, doggies!
post #2 of 30
thanks for the great write up. I am on a 155cm volkl racetiger slalom ski and it is getting a little short for me (5' 8" 170lbs). I am, and have been for a few years, very interested in the supershapoe chip. Now I am interested even more due to extra width underfoot. I am looking for a ski that is just as powerful as my volkls, has great edge hold and stability. However I would like something a little more versatile and forgiving. I know that to get more versatile and forgiving i need to shy away from race stock skis, which i understand. So with that said do you think the supershpe chip is a good choice.

BTW- I mainly ski the east on groomers and hardpack, but usually venture oout west once a year. (i already have a pair of seths for that )

thanks,
Eric
post #3 of 30
Hey Bob,

After skiing some Pontoons, I'm super excited about the whole rockered thing for powder and soft snow. I mean realy excited. It works. Rumor was that Head was going to play in that sandbox, but they have apparently bailed for this year. Any sense of whether or not they might jump in with something (credible) given the buzz around K2's, Salomon's and Volkl's offerings in that space?
post #4 of 30
HI Bob,

I am glad you had a good time out at Snowbasin. I was going to make the trip, but with no new snow in weeks, we decided to call off the 600 mile drive (each way), as it didn't sound conductive to testing skis, especially the all-mountain and wider variety. You didn't ski the new Monster iM78, did you? We have our demo here in a couple of weeks, and snow is in the forecast!

All 2013's on sale right now at Dawgcatching.com.  Get an extra 10% off with off10fb2013 which is valid only for epicski members.

Reply
post #5 of 30
Great info Bob, thanks.
Scott, will you be getting any rides on the Magnum or magnum chip, they sound like winners. Will you be carrying any of them?
post #6 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robscapes View Post
Great info Bob, thanks.
Scott, will you be getting any rides on the Magnum or magnum chip, they sound like winners. Will you be carrying any of them?

I will gladly take special orders, but not likely stock the Magnum. Narrow skis just don't sell anymore. I have been trying to get rid of my iXRC 1200's at cost ($499 w/binding), with no takers! For such a superb ski, I figured they would be at least somewhat popular. Everyone wants a midfat or wider these days.

I will write up a review on the Magnum in a couple of weeks. It will be tough to distinguish all of these Head hard-snow models. IF they are keeping the 1200 (hard-snow high-end ski), 1400 Chip (hard-snow cruiser), Supershape (hard-snow versatile carver), Supershape Speed (hard-snow pseduo-race ski), Magnum (wider Supershape Speed, not really sure how it can differ significantly from the 1200), and Magnum Chip (analogous to the 1400 Chip) things are going to get very confusing. Too many similiar skis! Head should just pick the two top models (Supershape and whatever they feel to be the most versatile, high-performance GS type) and stay with those. I didn't go to Vegas, so I don't know if the 1200 and 1400 are going away, but if they are, then the Magnum makes more sense (although the 1200 was a better freeski than the Supershape Speed).

All 2013's on sale right now at Dawgcatching.com.  Get an extra 10% off with off10fb2013 which is valid only for epicski members.

Reply
post #7 of 30
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post
I will gladly take special orders, but not likely stock the Magnum. Narrow skis just don't sell anymore...

... Everyone wants a midfat or wider these days.
I know what you mean. The shop I work with the most, Teton Village Sports, has to really cajole people to try skis narrower than 80mm at the waist. Even when we've had firm, hard snow for three weeks!

It just doesn't make any sense to me. Skis that are narrower underfoot are just so much more responsive on hard snow.

Go figure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

I will write up a review on the Magnum in a couple of weeks. It will be tough to distinguish all of these Head hard-snow models. IF they are keeping the 1200 (hard-snow high-end ski), 1400 Chip (hard-snow cruiser), Supershape (hard-snow versatile carver), Supershape Speed (hard-snow pseduo-race ski), Magnum (wider Supershape Speed, not really sure how it can differ significantly from the 1200), and Magnum Chip (analogous to the 1400 Chip) things are going to get very confusing. Too many similiar skis! Head should just pick the two top models (Supershape and whatever they feel to be the most versatile, high-performance GS type) and stay with those. I didn't go to Vegas, so I don't know if the 1200 and 1400 are going away, but if they are, then the Magnum makes more sense (although the 1200 was a better freeski than the Supershape Speed).
I do understand this complaint. The 2008 Head lineup has a LOT of hard-snow models with a pretty fine line delineating their "optimum" conditions. The good news is that if someone is looking for a very specific type of carving ski, Head probably has it. The bad news is that it'll be nearly impossible to demo because no shop is going to carry them all.
post #8 of 30

monster line

Scott:

Do you have any info on the IM78?

Is the tail rounded like the 88 and 82 or is it squared off?

I'm thinking it might be a good hard snow ski for those who don't want the narrow ski thing anymore.

The IM88's I got from you are absolutly great on all but ice/hard moguls.

Suprising quickness and agility along with the soldity to rip huge turns right through crud, cut up and uneven snow without a worry.

I wish I could say that is the narrowist ski I'll need in New England, but...I'm pretty sure I don't want another race sl/gs? carver, so maybe the IM78 does the trick???

Im88 for the am and IM 78 for the pm?

I can't wait for your impressions.

Got
post #9 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post
I will gladly take special orders, but not likely stock the Magnum. Narrow skis just don't sell anymore. I have been trying to get rid of my iXRC 1200's at cost ($499 w/binding), with no takers! For such a superb ski, I figured they would be at least somewhat popular. Everyone wants a midfat or wider these days.
Scott, both you and Bob have got that right.
It seems that the industry push to get people to buy fatter and fatter skis is really working. Lord knows if there hasn't been a recent dump, this isn't really necessary and probably counterproductive for most skiers.
Despite the versatility of many of the fatter skis, nothing handles groomers like a ski under 70mm.
I'd like to know what most people are doing with the fatties this year with the nation-wide dearth of snow. Let's hope for a better second half snow-wise.
post #10 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters View Post
5. Mojo 90. 186cm. 20.2m turn radius, 124-89-117. Cap construction. New cosmetics for '08 - a kind of whitish/sky blue color scheme.

This ski is essentially unchanged except for the cosmetics. I like this ski a lot and I don't know why I don't own a pair. It skis "shorter" than the listed length, and works really well as an all-around ski, especially for someone who spends any time in the park or pipe.
Bob, I suspect that it skis shorter because it is. I compared the running surface of my 174 Snoop Daddy's to my daughter's 176 Mojo 90 and discovered that the Snoop Daddy running surface was considerably longer.

BTW, those Head Worldcup skis were HEAVY. They put my Metron B5's to shame!
post #11 of 30
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Si View Post
BTW, those Head Worldcup skis were HEAVY. They put my Metron B5's to shame!
That's true on SO many levels.

Sorry... couldn't resist.

post #12 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post
It will be tough to distinguish all of these Head hard-snow models. IF they are keeping the 1200 (hard-snow high-end ski), 1400 Chip (hard-snow cruiser), Supershape (hard-snow versatile carver), Supershape Speed (hard-snow pseduo-race ski), Magnum (wider Supershape Speed, not really sure how it can differ significantly from the 1200), and Magnum Chip (analogous to the 1400 Chip) things are going to get very confusing. Too many similiar skis! Head should just pick the two top models (Supershape and whatever they feel to be the most versatile, high-performance GS type) and stay with those. I didn't go to Vegas, so I don't know if the 1200 and 1400 are going away, but if they are, then the Magnum makes more sense (although the 1200 was a better freeski than the Supershape Speed).
From the consumer's point of view this is a good thing, imo. I can see the shop's issue as to deciding what to carry, but the choices will be there for skiers of all level. Many manufacturers have serious holes in their line-ups, but that shouldn't be an issue for Head. In all reality though, even if they offer all of these skis for next year, they will likely cut it down to the best sellers in the future.
post #13 of 30
Bob and Dawg,

Is head discontinuing the regular Super shape in favor of these more use delineated models or are they going to be additions along with the already existant supershape??

I only ask because your reviews seem to lead me to think that I'd be better off buying this seasons supershape instead of next year's chip and magnum models.

Liam
post #14 of 30
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liam View Post
Bob and Dawg,

Is head discontinuing the regular Super shape in favor of these more use delineated models or are they going to be additions along with the already existant supershape??

I only ask because your reviews seem to lead me to think that I'd be better off buying this seasons supershape instead of next year's chip and magnum models.

Liam
Sorry for the confusion, Liam.

No. Head is definitely not discontinuing the "original" SuperShape. As far as I know, it will be available essentially unchanged.

It didn't occur to me to ask if they were changing the cosmetics, but I believe the ski will be available whether it looks a little different or not.

Great ski. You obviously NEED a pair.
post #15 of 30
Finally people are realizing what I picked up on when I bought the first Head chip model skis, i.c300 in 02, that Head makes some great skis and are technically superior than any other skis out there IMHO. BTW their tech support and warranty dept. is also A+

BTW their RD i.GS skis are awesome...real speed machines.
post #16 of 30
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
Hey Bob,

After skiing some Pontoons, I'm super excited about the whole rockered thing for powder and soft snow. I mean realy excited. It works. Rumor was that Head was going to play in that sandbox, but they have apparently bailed for this year. Any sense of whether or not they might jump in with something (credible) given the buzz around K2's, Salomon's and Volkl's offerings in that space?
How excited ARE you?

I haven't heard anything but I'll ask.

I'm so old-school that even looking at something like the Pontoon makes me wince. Nevertheless, I'm keeping a - somewhat - open mind. I guess I'd like to try a pair sometime. Ever it ever snows again, that is.
post #17 of 30
Thanks for posting reviews of the women's skis. I think Head makes a great ski, but I don't think they get the recognition they deserve. Can't wait to try the Power Thang myself!
post #18 of 30
I'll post some detailed thoughts on the Pontoon later. I was shocked at what it could do - so I geeked out (as usual) and thought about it, read various comments/articles and even looked up the rockered powder ski patent application.

I think that as more and more people play with these, the skepticism will decline dramatically. I went from curiosity to screaming laughter in 2-3 runs.

Are fat rockered or reverse cambered skis just a fat replacement for a skinnier conventional ski? No. Do I think they will ultimately rule in all conditions and uses? Probably not. Do they rip in powder and soft snow? Yes. Can you play with them in lots of ways? Yes. Are they big snow-sliding fun? Yes!

Seriously, if Head is not getting into this game in a real way they are missing a big important boat. If the real performance and behavior of new skis like the Hellbent, Katana and Rocker reflect the lessons from Spatulas, ARGs, Pontoons, DP Lotus, etc. then they represent a really important market that is just going to explode - for good reason IMO. At least out here. And I'd think in places like Jackson, Targhee, etc too.

More Pontoon specific thoughts later in another thread...
post #19 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters View Post
How excited ARE you?
Enough to put my money where my mouth is.
post #20 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotama View Post
Scott:

Do you have any info on the IM78?

Is the tail rounded like the 88 and 82 or is it squared off?

I'm thinking it might be a good hard snow ski for those who don't want the narrow ski thing anymore.

The IM88's I got from you are absolutly great on all but ice/hard moguls.

Suprising quickness and agility along with the soldity to rip huge turns right through crud, cut up and uneven snow without a worry.

I wish I could say that is the narrowist ski I'll need in New England, but...I'm pretty sure I don't want another race sl/gs? carver, so maybe the IM78 does the trick???

Im88 for the am and IM 78 for the pm?

I can't wait for your impressions.

Got
I won't have skied the iM78 until next week. I imagine it will occupy the niche currently filled by the iM77, but with a different feel. The iM77 feels a little more like a bulldozer, the iM82 a little lighter, and I expect the new iM78 to be similiar to the iM82 in terms of feel, just a narrower and quicker edge-to-edge ski.

All 2013's on sale right now at Dawgcatching.com.  Get an extra 10% off with off10fb2013 which is valid only for epicski members.

Reply
post #21 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach13 View Post
From the consumer's point of view this is a good thing, imo. I can see the shop's issue as to deciding what to carry, but the choices will be there for skiers of all level. Many manufacturers have serious holes in their line-ups, but that shouldn't be an issue for Head. In all reality though, even if they offer all of these skis for next year, they will likely cut it down to the best sellers in the future.
I hope it works out that way. All too often (judging from the PM's I receive requesting help) consumers can be overly confused with too many choices. Most skiers (excluding those of us who hang out on the gear forums) aren't gear heads and just want a quality ski that works. For these people, that could be one of many skis. Throw in bad habits that will cause certain skis to treat them rudely, and the results of what they like and don't like can be surprising. These recreational skiers will likely be overwhelmed by the number of choices out there, especially if there are 6 similiar models within a single brand. Not to mention that the large majority of skiers aren't going to be able to get a performance benefit or even distinguish much of a difference between, say the iXRC 1200 and Supershape Speed. Most of our customers won't demo more than two skis in a day, as they just get confused after a few runs, and walk away with more questions than answers. Even for myself, I love Head's hard snow skis, but when pressed to pick one that works best, it is a tough choice. I could be happy on 3 to 4, although I think the Supershape is the most versatile and would get my vote. Take that out of the equation, and I would be equally happy on the 1200, Supershape Speed, or most likely, the new Magnum (although I haven't skied it yet).

I think what works and what is of interest here on Epic doesn't always translate into the less-enthusiastic everyday skiing population. Most people just want a ski that is fun and doesn't push them around too much. How many Supershapes I have I sold on Epic this season?: 8. How many in the retail store? 0!

Cannondale tried introducing more models this past year with their road bike line, by introducing a parallel bike aimed at the "recreational" rider (ie non-racer) which in fact is almost identical to their traditional road bike, but with a different name and slightly tweaked geometry. So, instead of 4-5 core models, the line doubled into 8-10 core models. Add that each bike is available in 2 colors, and road bikes typically have a 6-7 size range, and a small shop like us can't stock enough bikes to have every price-point represented. We either carry a TON of bikes with a high overhead risk, or carry too few and lose many sales due to wrongly spec'd model, color, or size compared to what the customer wants. Which could have been avoided had they not gone in the marketing direction and offered a different yet basically identical line when compared to their longstanding CAAD series. Customers end up leaving confused and without buying anything. I am a firm believer in the KISS acronym.

All 2013's on sale right now at Dawgcatching.com.  Get an extra 10% off with off10fb2013 which is valid only for epicski members.

Reply
post #22 of 30
It was great to see Bob at the demo. After coming back home and sitting down to rethink all the skis we demoed, I will have to say that Head has the the line that makes the most sense for retailers and ski the most consitantly from top to bottom. The Xenon's where the biggest suprise to me. I don't have the dimensions for the iM 78 in front of me, but it was much smoother than the old iM77.
post #23 of 30

Bob - help on those magnums please

Hi Bob,

If it's not too much trouble, I have some questions on those head ss magnums. When it comes to carving on hardpack (I love laying down some precise lines) what rules - the head supershape or the magnum supershape? I already have the all mountain thing covered with the IM82. I was just about to buy the supershapes in a 165. I am 5'11, 160 pounds and an strong advanced, leaning to expert skier.

Does the magnum carve as well? Does it it initiate as well as the regular supershape. The big question is what would you rather take out on a harpack day if you wanted to lay down some precise lines? Next question, which one is easier to ski? Which one has more rebound?

many thanks

Brendan
post #24 of 30
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brendanan View Post
Does the magnum carve as well? Does it it initiate as well as the regular supershape. The big question is what would you rather take out on a harpack day if you wanted to lay down some precise lines? Next question, which one is easier to ski? Which one has more rebound?

many thanks

Brendan
Hi, Brendanan.

Given that you already have a pair of iM82's, these are my answers:

I would say the Magnum carves as well, it's just a heartbeat slower to shift from edge to edge than the standard SS.

Initiation seems just as good. It hooks up extremely well and seems to move through the turn just as well. Again, it's just the tiniest click longer to get it over on edge compared to the SS.

IF it were a "pure" hardpack ski I was looking for, I'd pick the standard SS. If I were looking for a ski with a little more versatility in powder and junk, I'd go with the Magnum.

I think the Magnum is a touch easier to ski in a wider range of snow conditions.

I honestly couldn't tell you that I noticed much difference in rebound between the two.

I think both are really great skis, but if you're looking for a companion to the 82 and you're looking for a more "dedicated" hard-snow ski I think I'd go with the standard SS.

Have fun.
post #25 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brendanan View Post
Hi Bob,

If it's not too much trouble, I have some questions on those head ss magnums. When it comes to carving on hardpack (I love laying down some precise lines) what rules - the head supershape or the magnum supershape? I already have the all mountain thing covered with the IM82. I was just about to buy the supershapes in a 165. I am 5'11, 160 pounds and an strong advanced, leaning to expert skier.

Does the magnum carve as well? Does it it initiate as well as the regular supershape. The big question is what would you rather take out on a harpack day if you wanted to lay down some precise lines? Next question, which one is easier to ski? Which one has more rebound?

many thanks

Brendan

I am probably lighter than Bob (I am 150lbs), but I found the SS to have a friendlier flex, whereas the Magnum was more powerful with better edgehold, and was a bit less forgiving and felt laterally stiffer. I tried to ski the Magnum in some bumps and crud and it didn't work well for me there. The SS was much friendlier in those conditions. The speed limit on the Magnum was higher and it was a better ski for GS speeds. If I was buying a ski to go fast on, the Magnum would be a great choice, but the SS is better at small turns and as an instructor's ski at variable speeds. The Magnum just wanted to run. I honestly didn't notice much difference between it and the standard SS Speed, except that it was a bit slower edge-to-edge. It may have had better float off-piste, but it was too stiff for me there. The heavier skier with us who tried it ranked it 1st amongst the hard snow skis he tried, slightly above the Tigershark 10, and well above the Contact Ltd., and Mach 3 Power .

All 2013's on sale right now at Dawgcatching.com.  Get an extra 10% off with off10fb2013 which is valid only for epicski members.

Reply
post #26 of 30

many thanks

Hi Guys,

many thanks for such great answers to my questions - really appreciate it.
post #27 of 30
Hey bob,

Re-checking this thread I missed the initial review and stats of the im95. 93mm waist and a 17 m turn radius?? Now that's appealing-I'm a pretty big fan of my im 88's (175)--Are they similar skis?? Notable differences between the two would be appreciated.

After reading Finndog's thread on the Mojo 90's I was leaning that way as my next year fat ski (and for me 88-95 is fat!), but that im 95 has certainly piqued my interest.

Liam
post #28 of 30
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liam View Post
Hey bob,

Re-checking this thread I missed the initial review and stats of the im95. 93mm waist and a 17 m turn radius?? Now that's appealing-I'm a pretty big fan of my im 88's (175)--Are they similar skis?? Notable differences between the two would be appreciated.

After reading Finndog's thread on the Mojo 90's I was leaning that way as my next year fat ski (and for me 88-95 is fat!), but that im 95 has certainly piqued my interest.

Liam
Hi, Liam.

The iM95 is kind of an interesting ski. It is VERY light, which in my opinion (and Head will probably jerk my skis if they read this) makes it more suitable for a powder-centric backcountry ski than a powder-crud resort ski. I felt I got bounced around a bit in junkier snow, which I attribute to the light weight (it CERTAINLY couldn't be my crappy skiing ability).

It is, however, a very quick-turning ski for its width.

I think the Mojo 90 is a more versatile resort ski. To me, the 95 would make an excellent choice for a dedicated backcountry ski, where you would be skinning up and then skiing down in mostly untracked powder. It'd be GREAT for that.
post #29 of 30
I could have sworn I posted in this thread the first time around:
post #30 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters View Post
Hi, Liam.

The iM95 is kind of an interesting ski. It is VERY light, which in my opinion (and Head will probably jerk my skis if they read this) makes it more suitable for a powder-centric backcountry ski than a powder-crud resort ski. I felt I got bounced around a bit in junkier snow, which I attribute to the light weight (it CERTAINLY couldn't be my crappy skiing ability).

It is, however, a very quick-turning ski for its width.

I think the Mojo 90 is a more versatile resort ski. To me, the 95 would make an excellent choice for a dedicated backcountry ski, where you would be skinning up and then skiing down in mostly untracked powder. It'd be GREAT for that.
Bob-thanks for the speedy and detailed (and honest!) reply! Now, for the Final question-is the Mojo 90 a better powder/crud/ tree ski than the im 88??
Or-using you're backyard as a point of reference..with soft snow (be it powder or crud or some other facsimile there of) which would you rather have on a run like Tower 3 Chute (a good example of a steep, often bumpy, narrow in spots "in-bounds" off-piste runs)?

I'm approaching my last two days of skiing this year-!que lastima!

Liam
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 › 07/08 Head Skis: Men's & Women's