New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is this a good ski?

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
HFirst off hi to everyone im not to this forum

ski in question- Head 2006 I.XRC 1100 Super Railflex Skis

I currently am skiing on salmon street racer 08 165 cm While is is a good ski i don't enjoy fast carving because it vibrats WAY to much it is not stable at speed i am thinking the 1100 will be better then the stiffer 1400 as i have back problems and want it to take little bit of impact i am 15 and have done many ski courses all the way up to pre-instructor. What are your thoughts? Yes i know this isn't the newest model but i dont ahve alot of money to spend so this would be a good compromise i believe. also what do you suggest for bindings? You think the 170 would be a good length im 6" tall and would like this ski to be an aggressive fast carving ski i dont do jumps moguls or woods ...

thanks for reading this

Steven
post #2 of 20
Thread Starter 
I just wen through the head selection thing to help you pick skies and it suggested this http://www.head.com/ski/products.php...=racing&id=899 in the 177cm length. would this ski http://www.levelninesports.com/head-...7cm-p-871.html be about and equal performer? if not what is last years model of the "chip super shape" or the "chip XRC"

Please help

Steven
post #3 of 20
Head has been playing fast and loose with the 1100 IXRC name. For a complete list of these and other skis see Realskiers subscription site (($20)). In the meantime, I think in 2006, it was the 1200 SW that was the ski to get. If I recall correctly, the one without the SW attached to the name is a cap construction, and not quite up to the performance standard of the "sandwich" skis. I think in other years there was an 1100 SW which was quite good.
post #4 of 20
Thread Starter 
So would the 1100's be a better ski then the 1400's i thought the 1400's would be better as the head website is recomending the head supershape chip

Does anyone know a good source for the older ICRC 1400 177cm? head is recomending the the head chip supershape which im sure is an amazing ski but because its this years model its very expensive is the IXRC 1400 ski similar?

Steven
post #5 of 20
Consider this ski: http://cgi.ebay.com/HEAD-1200-SW-CP-...QQcmdZViewItem

This is a sandwich construction ski and a great carver. It's a large step up from the Salomons you now have.

Michael
post #6 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying freak View Post
Does anyone know a good source for the older ICRC 1400 177cm? head is recomending the the head chip supershape which im sure is an amazing ski but because its this years model its very expensive is the IXRC 1400 ski similar?
Depends on which year iXRC 1400 you get.

This one (old)


is a bit different

than this one (new,easier):




post #7 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrettscv View Post
Consider this ski: http://cgi.ebay.com/HEAD-1200-SW-CP-...QQcmdZViewItem

This is a sandwich construction ski and a great carver. It's a large step up from the Salomons you now have.

Michael
We have a winner!
post #8 of 20
Thread Starter 
So you uys suggest the 1200's? thats what i orginially thought the reason i was goign to go with the 1400's is simply because the head website suggest the new ski that cantunamunch posted. So i thought the 1400 would be the closts comparison,

I know it will be a huge difference but thats good only really want/need a fast carving ski.

Steven
post #9 of 20
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post
Depends on which year iXRC 1400 you get.

This one (old)


is a bit different

than this one (new,easier):





looking for the old one, as it will be a lot less expensive then the new one (i hope)
post #10 of 20
What about an RX9?
post #11 of 20
RX9 is good.
post #12 of 20
If you can get the 1200 at anywhere close to that auction price you won't be disappointed. Absolute screamer of a ski, and really a higher performance model than the 1400. Head pushes the 1400 as the top of the line, or has in the past, because it has the full Chip Intelligence technology, but the 1200 is the true performance king of the XRC line - at the risk of yet another car analogy around here, the 1400 is like a 7 series BMW and the 1200 is an M5 - both have a ton of power, but the 7 is more of a smooth ride while the M5 is sportier and more raw energy.

If you're an aggressive carving skier, you won't be let down by the 1200.
post #13 of 20
Thread Starter 
Ok so il take a closer look at the 1200 because the 1400 is a smoother ride do you think it would make it easier on my back or is there not really going to be a difference (i have back problems so something that absorbs a little impact will probably help a bit..)

although they do say the lower number is a softer ski so unless some one has a reason for me to change il go with the XRC 1200 177cm I have herd that the 1100 is the exact same ski just a different year?? is this true:S?
post #14 of 20
I think that 177 might be long for you.
post #15 of 20
The naming conventions are a little bizarre with the 1200 and related skis. I'll try to explain as best I can.
At first ('04 season I believe) there was the i.XRC which was a cap ski and only in one model.
In '05 they expanded they came out with the XRC 1100, 1100SW and 1100 Chip. The 1100 was the same as the original XRC, the 1100 Chip was the same but with the Chip in addition to the standard "intelligence" system. The 1100SW was a new ski with different geometry and construction from the others.

In '06 the line was changed to the 1100 (same as the original XRC), 1200 (same as the '05 1100SW) and 1400 (same as the 1100 Chip).

In '07, they overhauled the XRC line, and they kept the 1200 and 1400, but the dimensions and constructions were changed (both have the same construction and dimensions, the 1400 just has the Chip). The catch is that they also brought out the Supershape Speed, which is the same as the 1100SW/1200 with a different name and topsheet.

Finally after all that, in '08 the skis are all the same as in '07, just some minor topsheet updates. If they weren't some of my favourite skis of all time I wouldn't put up with this sort of marketing foolishness

Edit: At your size you could go with either the 170 or 177, but I would lean towards 177, unless you like to go towards slightly shorter radius skis.
post #16 of 20
Well done CanuckInstructor!
post #17 of 20
Man's really got some good HEAD there...badum...bum.

Yeah I know that was horrible.

Nice summation Cannuck. I might just use this info to get me some new skis.
post #18 of 20
Thread Starter 
Just came back form a demo

Well i tried 3 skis

Head xrc 800: nice ski a bit too soft for my licking

So they suggested a K2 apache crossfire over all i think i liked this one the best of the three i tried very nice a predictable very stable nice feeling when carving

I also tried a Dynastar Contact 8 nice ski wasn't my favoirt although it seemd to shoot you (or as the guy said "catapult") you at of turns and i really did like that feeling

So with all that what is the best ski that is similar to the crossfire but a little more energy return coming out of the turns?

Steven
post #19 of 20
Thanks for the descriptions and comparisons of the Head skis, Canuck Instructor. I now am better able to understand their names and distinguish between the models.
post #20 of 20
The Head i.XRC1100 is a great ski. I think the 170cm ski might be exactly what Steven wants. Yes, Head shuffled the designations just to confuse all of us.

I'm not sure any of the i.XRC skis were cap, or maybe the low end. My wife's '05 i.XRC800s are sandwich construction, as are friends' i.XRC1100s of the same year and newer.

Head uses the chip to damp the skis greatly. Many of us find them damped too much. They're called doctor & lawyer skis by the reps...very smooth on groomed runs.

I really, really like the Heads in the family quiver...i.XRC800, SuperShape, new Xenon 7.0 (really good skis and cheap, carve like a dream, but not as precise as Supershapes, said to be FUN in bumps.).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion