EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › '06 Head World Cup i.SL RD Race Stock Skis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'06 Head World Cup i.SL RD Race Stock Skis

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
my purpose is to learn carving with it.

anyone know its weight compare with 08 racetiger stock sl?

what would be the difference in use? ( torsional stiffness, turn initiation, rebound, non-carving use)

thanks in advance
post #2 of 22
You want to learn to carve with these? That's like saying you want to learn to drive in a Ferrari. A better ski to learn to carve on would be a Volkl Tigershark, Fischer RC4 WC SC or any number of recreational high performance carers.
post #3 of 22
My suggestions would be the Head SuperShape or the Head i.SL Chip.
post #4 of 22
Thread Starter 
Max - thanks. Want to tell the difference between the two:
SuperShape vs the Head i.SL Chip



Eric - very good analogy. It is myself that use the wrong word. it should have read 'to improve carving'.
post #5 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by carver_hk View Post
Want to tell the difference between the two:
SuperShape vs the Head i.SL Chip
It looks like they have stopped making the Head i.SL Chip and instead only offer the i.SL (non Chip version) of the i.SL.

Given that I think I'd go with the SuperShape (I own a 165cm and a 170cm, I prefer the 165cm for carving).
post #6 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
It looks like they have stopped making the Head i.SL Chip and instead only offer the i.SL (non Chip version) of the i.SL.

Given that I think I'd go with the SuperShape (I own a 165cm and a 170cm, I prefer the 165cm for carving).
Max - yes, it probably is better when I use it for all mountain too. Currently my regular skis is 160cm. Do you think its ok or would you recommend 165 as head is easier to initiate turns?
post #7 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by carver_hk View Post
Max - yes, it probably is better when I use it for all mountain too. Currently my regular skis is 160cm. Do you think its ok or would you recommend 165 as head is easier to initiate turns?
What is your height and weight?
post #8 of 22
they are to much to learn on.........pass them along & get another easier initiating ski. you will be happier
post #9 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
What is your height and weight?
5'7" 140lb
post #10 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by iriponsnow View Post
they are to much to learn on.........pass them along & get another easier initiating ski. you will be happier
Thanks for your kind advise.
post #11 of 22
They also have the new Supershape Chip, their flag-ship ski.
post #12 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie-Rich View Post
They also have the new Supershape Chip, their flag-ship ski.
yes, upon Max advise i m looking at this one.

'06 Head Worldcup i.Supershape CP 13 Expert Skis

good price and my usual length. any comment?
post #13 of 22
[/quote]Eric - very good analogy. It is myself that use the wrong word. it should have read 'to improve carving'.[/quote]

hk, got it, I kinda figured that's what you meant but I coundn't resist. I still think the RC 4 WC SC would be a good choice but enjoy whatever you chose.
Eric
post #14 of 22
I also have to say that the RD is a poor choice of ski to become a better carver on. Even if you have some beginning carving skills, it's not a good ski to improve your skills on unless you're already at a relatively high level - the reason for this is that any race stock ski is going to be hard to bend, so often people without good technique will end up introducing bad habits into their skiing in order to get the ski doing what they want. That's not a recipe for long term success in your skiing.

Get a ski like the Supershape - it's a great one to become a confident carver on. Then you can start thinking about race stock stuff.
post #15 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie-Rich View Post
They also have the new Supershape Chip, their flag-ship ski.
Just to be sure everyone's clear, the new 07/08 Chip SuperShape is built on the same geometry as the new 07/08 SuperShape Magnum. I believe the only difference between the Magnum and the Chip SuperShape is the chip technology. BOTH of those skis are 5mm wider underfoot than the traditional SuperShape.

And to hopefully attempt to clear up any confusion, Head calls the "original", traditional SuperShape the iSuperShape. They call the Magnum the iSuperShape Magnum and they officially call the chip version of the Magnum the Chip SuperShape.

The iSuperShape Magnum and Chip SuperShape dimensions in the 170cm model are 121/71/107 with a 13.5m turn radius.

The iSuperShape dimensions are 121/66/106 in the 170cm model with a 12.1m turn radius.

If you live in the US, you can find all the USA-available models and specs at this site:

http://www.head.com/ski/products.php?region=us

Of the Head skis mentioned so far on this thread, I've skied all three and I think I would choose the traditional (original) iSuperShape as my "learn to carve better" ski of the three. The Magnum and Chip SuperShape offer an improvement in soft-snow and off-piste performance, but at the cost of a bit longer turn radius.

I still think the iSuperShape is one of the best skis made for what I would call "second-tier" carving. That means it will respond extremely well to carving movements but it isn't *so* stiff and *so* unforgiving that it knocks you on your butt if you get a little lazy or out of position.

That's my $.02.
post #16 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters View Post
And to hopefully attempt to clear up any confusion, Head calls the "original", traditional SuperShape the iSuperShape. They call the Magnum the iSuperShape Magnum and they officially call the chip version of the Magnum the Chip SuperShape.
Bob, did the Magnum feel stiffer to you?
post #17 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanuckInstructor View Post
so often people without good technique will end up introducing bad habits into their skiing in order to get the ski doing what they want. .
I ll say this is very true. I have been using 06 racetiger stock for learning and acquired a lot of bad habits. I m now working very hard to get rid of my bad habits. Fortunately I am getting some great help from many experts. Those bad hibits are going away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters View Post
I've skied all three...The Magnum and Chip SuperShape offer an improvement in soft-snow and off-piste performance, but at the cost of a bit longer turn radius.
It is not too difficult to imagine from its 71 waist. But what is the crucial difference between the two chip technology?
post #18 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Bob, did the Magnum feel stiffer to you?
I didn't ski the SS and the Magnum back to back, but my recollection is that the Magnum *did* feel just the slightest bit stiffer. I know I liked the feel of the Magnum in a wide range of conditions, but I did think that overall it was a little less quick or responsive or however you would express that.

I'll be able to tell you more in a couple of months because a 177 Magnum will be my "everyday" ski this winter.
post #19 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by carver_hk View Post

Originally Posted by Bob Peters
I've skied all three...The Magnum and Chip SuperShape offer an improvement in soft-snow and off-piste performance, but at the cost of a bit longer turn radius.



It is not too difficult to imagine from its 71 waist. But what is the crucial difference between the two chip technology?
That's an interesting question. According to my Head guys, the ONLY difference between the Magnum and the Chip is the chip technology.

I skied the Magnum and then immediately went out on the Chip. I was mentally prepared to find very little difference between the two but for whatever reason I felt there was a pretty substantial difference. The Chip felt quieter and more "damp", which is a very difficult thing to articulate. I really liked the way it handled in crud, uneven hardpack, and cut-up stuff. I didn't necessarily come away feeling either the Magnum or the Chip was somehow "better", only that they were different.

Here would be my feeble attempt at comparing the skis using car terminology:

iSuperShape = Corvette

iSuperShape Magnum = Porsche Cayenne

Chip SuperShape = Chevy Tahoe
post #20 of 22
Thread Starter 
Thanks Bob
post #21 of 22

NO SKETCH FACTOR ...totol harmony required.

Last year I bought an '06 Head GS from a whistler ski club racer. 180 Head iGS w/ a vist riser- a 1/4 aluminum plate on big rubber blocks topped with a gold Tyrolia never-let-go.
Soft, soft flex but untwistable torsion. Really nice skis ! A great sweet-spot. No speed limit. NO SKETCH FACTOR and/but if you blow it, the high side waits... if your knee don't take out your chin on the way there. The reason there are intermediate skis is that; sometimes, one needs to shove the ski sideways to keep or recover balance. Full on race skis hate this- especially slaloms. Boot alignment is also an inescapable requirement.
post #22 of 22
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by g-force View Post
The reason there are intermediate skis is that; sometimes, one needs to shove the ski sideways to keep or recover balance. Full on race skis hate this- especially slaloms. Boot alignment is also an inescapable requirement.
I think it is something good to bear in mind.
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 › '06 Head World Cup i.SL RD Race Stock Skis