or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Perfect Ski

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
I'm tossing up between a couple of skis at the moment and was looking for peoples thoughts on

Volkl Supersport T50 (111/68/98)
Rossignol Viper STX (110/65/98)
Rossignol World Cup 9S (115/63/104)
Head Cyber i.c 300 (109.5/64/94)

I am an ex instructor with good technique but perhaps not quite as fit as I used to be. I like short quick turns and steeps but of course I want that perfect ski that will go everywhere.

Postings on the Volkl T50's seem to suggest it is a little nervy and I'm wondering how it would hold in a big fast cruise. The Head 300's sound very teched up but is it all show? I believe that the Rossi STX are just a little softer with a larger sweetspot than the volkls, does anyone know if this is true?

Also I am 169cm any thoughts on length?

Or maybe some knows what that true all round perfect go anywhere high end ski is.
post #2 of 10
the t50's sound pretty sweet. But i dont think there is a "perfect ski" - maybe you should consider a short slalom ski or something like that.
post #3 of 10
I dont recommend the rossignol 9s world cup - that is if it is the race stock model. possibly the regular shelf model would be good for free skiing but deffinitly not the actual race ski. not only would you have to be very fit but you would also have to a bit insane to enjoy something like that... for more info you can see my reveiws of 2003 sl skis int he consumer gear review section. The volkl p50 sl would make a nice all mountain ski. More on this later, i have to get back to my calc 2 class (i hate summer courses).
post #4 of 10
Okay back from class now... As i was saying try the volkl p50 sl ski or one of their sl carvers that are int he p50 line or that porsche ski... whatever that is... looks like a nice marketing ploy though - probly will be $200 more than the same ski with different cosmetics. Anyhow, if i were you i would try out a few different slalom skis in varying conditions and see which one handles the best for you as an all mountain ski. I say this because different people like different qualities in a ski but from the sounds of it you will be looking at a slalom ski most deffinitly (unless of course you opt to go with more of an all mountain ski with a smaller radius such as the T50). Being that you were an instructor you know what to look for in a ski and you also knwo what your preferences are. once you try a few out i think you will be able to narrow it down to one that you prefer over the others.
post #5 of 10
Thread Starter 
Thanks for your words Heluvaskier. Would love to test them out first but unfortunately it will not be possible this year. Also I don't think anyone here is renting out 2003 models. The more I hear from people the more I am leaning to the T50. I am getting so many mixed reports about the Heads, everything from great all rounder to leave it for the gates. Now I guess I just have to get used to the idea of 161cm ski.
post #6 of 10
Thread Starter 
Just checked out your review on 2003 SL skis. I'm interested in the Elan SLX that you mentioned. Last week I had a day on the Elan Integra 9X (178cm) which were quite nice, pretty cruisy on the groomed, not quite the punch of the Sal Eq10 3V which I had for a week last year and found awesome with their invisible jet booster rockets in the back, tho not so great in the trees but they may have been a bit long for me (175ish).

Your comments about the P50's lack of hold on ice concerns me being an Aussie, we tend to get our fair share of bulletproof (and crud, and slush and rocks, and sticks...).
post #7 of 10
I don't know much about any of the skis you listed, however, I'll mention some of my favorites.

Atomic SL9- I have yet to find a situation in which it doesn't excel.

Elan Hyper HCX- I like this ski a great deal. I skied the 2003 for half a day last year and have asked the rep for a pair this year. I don't think it's quite as good a ski off piste as the Atomic.

Fischer RC4 Worldcup SC- I am looking at a pair in the wrapper. I demoed this ski last year and put it on a par with the Elan.

K2 Mach S- I "pro repped" for K2 last year and liked this ski a great deal. It does not have quite the energy of some other short carver/slalom skis.

I teach full time and end up on skis between 120 and 140 days per annum.I am 5'10" and weigh 180 lbs. Don't know what that is in metric. I ski all these in a length around 160 cm. I know that seems short, however, it does fine at any speed or conditions.

My $00.02!!!
post #8 of 10
I'm crazy about my Head's. Would never ski anything else.

post #9 of 10
Thread Starter 
Thanks for all your comments. I have bought the Volkl supersport T50's 5* in 161cm. My husband bought the Volkl Vertigo motions in 170cm. One thing I'm really excited about is the marker bindings that come with both these skis that can be very quickly and easily adjusted on snow to any boot length (so I get to ski both!).

Anyway, heading up this weekend so I'll let you all know how it goes.
post #10 of 10
Thread Starter 
And so they lived happily ever after....
Just to let you know I have found my own personal holy grail of Skis. Yes I have found THE PERFECT SKI. Well for me at least anyway.

Just spent a week on them at Thredbo (Australia). Fine Sunny days of around 10 degrees (celcius) with overnights of -3 gave us hard fast slopes tending to heavy at the bottom where the man-made stuff was turning to sand/slush. Lots of nice bumps dveloping on the drier, upper slopes and also some chopped up, windblown crap to navigate in areas as well. And these skis were really quite cosy on every condition .

Not to mention every turn type. Zip 'em in quick snappy shorts, practise technique in perfectly rounded mediums and scrape your hip on carve turns that cut like butter. The front edge was super responsive, millimeter adjustments changed the turn radius dramatically. No mucking around. Be on top, in control and drive the front like a shiny red Jaguar.

Wide tips floated to the top of heavy slush and sand like conditions resulting from melting man made snow on the lower slopes.

Narrow waist made it seem like you just cruise down the fall line of a bumps run.

Torsional rigidity allowed super stability at mach speeds.

In short they just rip!!!!!!!!!

As for length, as was asked in another post; I am 168cm, female (heavy set but sorry you don't get my weight I used to ski on 190cm straights, moved down to 185cm for my Lacroix shaped skis (though now looking at them I am hard pressed to find a curve at all on these match sticks), then after much convincing moved down to 178cm for my K2 Fours. I am an ex-instructor and tech who prefers fast technical turns but of course wants the dit it all ski. So what did I get? Well the sales assistant was trying for 154 but that was just tooooo bizarre, even 161 I had to be talked into but I think that was the perfect choice. I think the next length up would be OK for fast groomeds but would defeat the purpose of the ski, that is being able to take these skis off piste and in shitty conditions and still feel like you're skiing 10cm dry. Also it is not necessary it would just be a macho-livin'-in-the-'80s-how-many-vert-feet-did-you-do-today-wanna-come-back-to-my-lodge thing : , which very well may suit some skiers (especially those still cruising around in their one piece suits).

Other reviews I have read of this ski mention it being nervy at the tip and maybe too short, all I can say have you ever seen someone who thought they were a bit of the shit but were actually in the tails relying on the length of the ski to keep them up, try to take a ride on snow-blades and complain about the tips wobbling around so much. As I said earlier you must be on the tips of these ALWAYS (good advise all round though really), and remember that every millimeter adjustment translates as a huge adjustment in turn radius. I read about some people saying that they should de-tune the front of the skis : . Yeah right. Buy a Jag then put some bald tyres on the front (but hey at least you're still in the Jag...right?), alternatively buy a Honda and stay under speed limit. Seriously though, my husband is not as technical or in the drivers seat as much as I am and he just loves the Vertigo Motions with their wider waist, wider tail and slightly narrower tip allowing for more forgiveness when not on your front edge but still giving a nice platform.

I don't know how these skis would go with a lazy skier or with someone who tended to sit in the back. Ski these skis, don't ride them (riding is for lazy snowboarders ). Be confident of your turn shape, keep your legs under you. On ice make sure your angulation matches your inclination, but then of course this matched with keeping your edges in good nick is all what is required for ice, I don't think the ski makes any difference (comments on this opinion?). As I said I did not get to take them into powder but seeing how they performed in slush was good enough for me as slush is so much heavier. Being a skier that prefers a narrower ski in a world of mid-fats I was a little concerned about the width of the tip. But the narrow waist and tapered tail made it OK. I also think with this shape if you were a sl skier who tended to wash your tails this shape would not help. As I said you must be on the tips, maybe not quite as much as say the Elan Integra 9.0 or the Sal equipe series 10 3V but then these are race skis and feel like moon boots with turbo boosters in the tails in slush and heavy powder : .

Oh, and also love the binding system that you can change in about 3 minutes. My partner bought the Vertigo Motions with the same binding system and we kept talking about swapping all week. Problem was we were both just too much in love with our own skis and they suited our styles so much we didn't want to waste a run. Maybe we'll head up this weekend and give it a go.

From the Extremely blissed out one. [img]tongue.gif[/img]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion