EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Need Help with iM88 Choice
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Need Help with iM88 Choice

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
Seriously considering a pair of iM88 for me as a second ski.

I am 205lbs, real good skier, 5'10" and ski in the East. My present ski, and only ski to speak of is the Nordica Top Fuel - a perfect match.

This ski will be used in the East at Jay, Mad River, Magic and Jiminy Peak. I like to ski in crud and in the woods. As with all East coast skiers, I spend a lot of time in the bumps and may even come across some ice from time to time.

The question: is it a good ski, would it be too similar to my Top Fuel, is it a flat mount, what size would be good, (top fuel is 170). Anything that you can offer on this ski would be greatly appreciated.

I have an opportunity to buy a Head ski. If there is a better choice I would like to hear about it. I have not seen many iM88 in the East, yet it sounds like it would be a pretty good choice when there's some snow. I would be nice to add another ski that rips.
post #2 of 19
Paul - I won't be able to provide the in-depth feedback that will give you what you need to make the decision, but I can give some input.

Me - recently relocated to Utah from Midwest. Former racer and coach. I like laying trenches on the groomers almost as much as my new found love of powpow. 6'1" and about 190.

I wanted to find something that would ski like my GS skis with a bit wider platform as a transition ski for the conditions I see mostly here in Utah. After much research and demo's I narrowed my list down to 2 skis: im88 and Mythic Rider. I ended up with the im88 in a 186 and have never looked back. I did demo the Jet Fuel (178 I think) on a 8" - 12" day, but was not impressed. It felt heavy and didn't have much energy or feeling. I liked it much better on the groomed though. I really wanted to try the HellCat, but it wasn't available.

On the groomers, the im88's ski as well as my Fischer WC RC's (175) - every bit as stable, but as expected, a tad slower edge-to-edge. Arguably more fun in all conditions due to the longer length. Although I don't prefer bumps, I have found them to be adequate ... and even fun!!

In powder, they provide enough float to keep me going in the seemingly endless line of storms we have been blessed with over the last 6 weeks. As I said previously, my new found love of powder is a result of these new boards. True powder ski to join the quiver next season.

In the crud is where they excel IMO. They bust through the chop and tracked-out powder without ever feeling like they are deflected. Very easy to make high speed GS turns with confidence in the crud.

My choice for the 186 vs. 175 was based on the location and type of skiing I prefer. For me, the 186 was a great choice. You may want to consider the 175 for bumps, trees, etc, but would not go shorter.
post #3 of 19
Thread Starter 
Thank you, that is very helpful. Your comment about thr Jet Fuel is surprising. This sounds like a lot of ski.
post #4 of 19
I've been skiing the iM88 for three seasons now in the east, I love it. It rails on groomers, yet doesn't lock into a carve so it's very fun in bumps and trees. Very versatile. I would suggest the 175cm

The mojo 90 is another great ski, I'd say it's better in bumps and more playful than the 88 but not as strong at speed on firm surfaces.

I ski the 186cm, I'm 6'2" and 225#ish.
post #5 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedToSki View Post
... I won't be able to provide the in-depth feedback that will give you what you need to make the decision, but I can give some input.

... After much research and demo's I narrowed my list down to 2 skis: im88 and Mythic Rider. I ended up with the im88 in a 186 and have never looked back.

...True powder ski to join the quiver next season.

...In the crud is where they excel IMO. They bust through the chop and tracked-out powder without ever feeling like they are deflected. Very easy to make high speed GS turns with confidence in the crud.
The Mythic Rider was also a strong consideration, until this opportunity came along. I want a beefy ski that rips, but one that I can take into the woods in the East, where the snow is "variable".

Your feedback, NTS, is very helpful.


Whiteroom, my Top Fuels do lock into a turn and that is a fun feature, but not in the woods: I will look more at the Mojo 90s but this ski looks to be among the ideal choices for a guy like me.

The Top Fuel has side-cut, while this ski seems to be more of a 'straight' ski at 19 radius - maybe softer edging and a little skidding to bring the ski around.
post #6 of 19
one of the most damp skis out there you can straightline bumps fields and almost not feel it.
post #7 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
one of the most damp skis out there you can straightline bumps fields and almost not feel it.
Is that a good thing?:
post #8 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post
I want a beefy ski that rips, but one that I can take into the woods in the East, where the snow is "variable".
The Elan 888 should be considered also.

Michael
post #9 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrettscv View Post
The Elan 888 should be considered also.

Michael
its not damp or forgiving at all(the 888) but I think the IM88 is easier and more fun to ski on for most people, while still delieving the nearly the same level of performace.
post #10 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
its not damp or forgiving at all(the 888) but I think the IM88 is easier and more fun to ski on for most people, while still delieving the nearly the same level of performace.
The 888 is certainly less forgiving & damp, but I like a less damp ski, the Monsters can feel a little dead.

Having said that, the 183cm Monster 82 is one of my more useful skis.

Michael
post #11 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrettscv View Post
Having said that, the 183cm Monster 82 is one of my more useful skis.

Michael
Would that be because your other skis are Spatula's, AK Rockets and XXL's?
... just kidding with you.

It seems obvious to me that Paul has a line on a very good deal on a Head ski. The suggestions about other brands are helpful, but it seems he wants to know if the iM88 will suit his skiing. I would say it's a very good east coast tree ski for a technically strong skier that is also strong physically. It takes a little strength to ski it well, it doesn't like to be pushed around and it's not light, but it isn't hard to ski and it does almost everything well. It will make short radius turns if you drive it but it prefers longer radius turns and higher speeds. It will change turn shape instantly, there is no real speed limit, edge grip is excellent. If you like short-swing turns on the edges of trails there are better skis out there, if you like a ski that will trench GS turns on groomers yet still allow you to smear turns in the trees and ski a zipper line, the iM88 is it.
post #12 of 19
I would put them in the same performance and forgiveness range personally, as the iM88 is a little more damp, the 888 has a bigger turn radius and feels a little livelier. One guy I know says the 888 is more forgiving than the iM88, as he used to own the 777 and also has an iM88. Both are really good high-end skis, hard to say which I would recommend.

iM88 will feel wider than the Jet Fuel, definitely. It is a bit more damp, feels more off-piste oriented, as well as suited to bigger turns in crud than the Jet Fuel. I am too light for the Jet fuel (I ski the Afterburner now and then) and while I love the AB, it feels more like a wider carver with some versatility than a crudbuster. So, you will be skiing the Jet fuel on days where you feel like skiing a mid-radius all-mountain ski, and the iM88 where you feel like skiing a bit bigger turn crudbuster and new-snow ski. One thing about the iM88: it feels and acts a bit wider than specs would indicated, with regards to stability.
post #13 of 19
Thread Starter 
Don't know much about dampness. Sounds like a flat feature, one that could make the ski dull and unresponsive - truck like as opposed to snappy.

Damp as a characteristic means good in crud, slower response, wait for the turn and less 'pop'. More base, less trebble:

In comparison to the Top Fuel which I would say is somewhat damp.
post #14 of 19
I find the 888 to be very forgiving. My son has been skiing it since last season and has been having a blast on it.
post #15 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post
Don't know much about dampness. Sounds like a flat feature, one that could make the ski dull and unresponsive - truck like as opposed to snappy.

Damp as a characteristic means good in crud, slower response, wait for the turn and less 'pop'. More base, less trebble:.
That is a good understanding.

Michael
post #16 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post
Is that a good thing?:
for me yes I really like to ski bumps by just GS turning or larger turning. Mostly its me being lazy and ski that can stay stable at speed in bumps is prefered.
post #17 of 19
Yes, but Josh is talking about Utah moguls. I'm sure he knows that not all moguls are the same. (and I like high edge angle mogul ripping too..., its like using a knife to cut Styrofoam).

Michael
post #18 of 19
I've skied the M88 and M82. SKied the 88 in 175 and 186. I found the ski to be playful and fun, not the bruiser that you hear about sometimes. The M82 moreso. I'd say get the 175 for sure. If it were me, maybe I'd get the M82 in 172.
post #19 of 19
PJ: Like you, I was looking to replace my Top Fuels (178). I demoed the iM88 (186) yesterday and was really impressed (I'm not going to give a detailed review here, because I was not on my top form yesterday and didn't push these boys they way I normally would . Anyway, I liked them enough to pick up a pair in a 175. That'll be enough ski for me: I'm 6'2"/185 and a very agressive skiier, but I normally find myself in bumps, trees, tight chutes, rather than big open fields of pow so I like the idea of a shorter ski.

As for the Watea; I skied the 84 in a 174 and really thought it was better suited for a less aggressive skier. Not a bad ski, but very damp - to the point of sluggishness for my style. I like a little more POP coming out of turns.

Bottom line, though, demo all the skis mentioned and then decide what ski is right for you.

Have a ball!!!
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 › Need Help with iM88 Choice