EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › '08 Head i.XRC 400 & 700 - 'Big Box' Model Numbers?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'08 Head i.XRC 400 & 700 - 'Big Box' Model Numbers?

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
I recently stumbled upon two unusual models of skis at a 'Big Box' sports shop at the mall. (I know...let the flames begin) They where the Head i.XRC 400 and i.XRC 700.

Neither of these models appear on the Head web site, and I've had no luck finding information about these models from anywhere other than the 'Big Box' website (basically the same information on the signage at the store). :

What I noticed: the i.XRC 400 has graphics that are almost identical to the i.XRC 300 (at first I confused the 400 for a 300), but then I noticed that the 400 has 'Liquid Metal' technology that is not in the 300. When I looked up the technical specs and measurements, the i.XRC 400 appears to match the i.XRC 500...just different color. Same with the i.XRC 700...it has similar graphics as the i.XRC 500 but appears to have the same specs as the i.XRC 800.

I can only guess that the i.XRC 400 and 700 models where invented for Big Box stores so that consumers can't price shop between the Big Box and a 'real ski shop'. (you see this a lot with electronics, mattresses, etc....different model numbers in every store so you can't price match with the discount stores...even though the products are the same)

Seeing that the 400 has an MSRP of $499 (on sale for $359 right now!) and the 500 has an MSRP of $775....I can see why the 'real ski shops' would not want to compete. (Canadian MSRP, RF11 bindings included with both)

I've heard good things about the i.XRC 500 as being a great high-speed carver on groomed runs (that's what I'm looking for)...but if I can get the same capabilities for less than 1/2 the price with the i.XRC 400...???

Can anyone confirm if the i.XRC 400 is the same as the i.XRC 500? If it is not the same, what is the difference? : (aside from graphics)

Your insight and/or opinions are appreciated.


sh0rty :P

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #2 of 12
Thread Starter 

More Data...

I found this posting asking about the i.XRC 700, the responses appear to be pure conjecture: http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?t=47090

I don't buy the argument: "the 800 was "probably" stiffer. He could not confirm, but he said that it's almost impossible to have a ski 100$ less than a 800 and that is identical. Otherwise, a lot of people would have been angry."

The data I have colected for each model:

08 Head i.XRC 300 RF11 114-68-98 15.3 NO YES YES Blue $625
08 Head i.XRC 400 RF11 114-68-98 15.3 YES YES YES Blue $499
08 Head i.XRC 500 RF11 114-68-98 15.3 YES YES YES Black $775
08 Head i.XRC 700 RFD12 118-68-104 13.2 YES YES YES Black $799
08 Head i.XRC 800 RFD12 118-68-105 13.2 YES YES YES Red $1,075

Data fields are: Model, Binding in Package, Side Cut & Radius, Liquid Metal, Intelligence Chip, Fibre Jacket, Color, MSRP (CAD$) w. Bindings.


The more I look into this the more the 400 looks the same as the 500 and the 700 looks like the 800. I don't think you will ever find both sets of models in the same store. My guess...the 'big box' versions have a lower number just so the 'real ski shops' can justify the price difference. (the model number is higher, it MUST be better!)

Of course with no confirmed sources this is conjecture as well...beyond getting someone at head to admit this (unlikely)...I guess you would have to do a blind test of both to determine if they are the same. (I say blind test, so the number does not have a placebo effect)

sh0rty :P
post #3 of 12
The 300 was an entry-level rental model in years past, and presumably still is.
post #4 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by sh0rty View Post
I've heard good things about the i.XRC 500 as being a great high-speed carver on groomed runs (that's what I'm looking for)...but if I can get the same capabilities for less than 1/2 the price with the i.XRC 400...???
They are deluded. If you want a "great high-speed carver" from head, you should try 1100 SW, supershape speed or perhaps supershape. The 500 and 800 are not meant for high speeds.
post #5 of 12
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
They are deluded. If you want a "great high-speed carver" from head, you should try 1100 SW, supershape speed or perhaps supershape. The 500 and 800 are not meant for high speeds.
Speed is relitive to perspective. Cruzing groomed runs is different for a perpetual intermediate skiier than an racer or instructor level skiier. Those skiis are way out of my price range and skill level.

sh0rty :P
post #6 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by sh0rty View Post
Speed is relitive to perspective. Cruzing groomed runs is different for a perpetual intermediate skiier than an racer or instructor level skiier. Those skiis are way out of my price range and skill level.

sh0rty :P
Look around a little harder. I just picked up some barely used 1200's for under $300. WITH bindings. If you're looking at list prices at this time of the year, you're...high.
post #7 of 12
The iXRC800 is a superb intermediate level ski. By the way, these have "intelligence," but not the "chip."

For a great ski at a moderate price, but not the best on ice or frozen crud, the new Head Xenon 7.0 with the RF12 binding is MSRP US$640. I'm on a pair and they're FUN.
post #8 of 12
Maybe I can shed some more light on this subject:

I bought a pair of iXRC700 cheap at the spring sales -07 here in Finland. In Europe the 400 and 700 models are sold exclusively by Intersport. At least in our local Intersport shop you can find both the factory and "discount" models from the Head line side by side.

The iXRC700 ski is indentical to the iXRC800 when it comes to dimensions. One difference however, is the jacket material. The 800 has a smooth metal? jacket and the 700 has a rough carbon fibre jacket very similar to the iXRC500. Thus the 700 is probably not as stiff as the 800 which the Intersport salesman also pointed out. In his opinion the 700 is a bit "easier" ski compared to the 800.

In an independent amateur-test on a Finnsh forum the iXRC700 was said to be a tad more stable in steep terrain/high speeds than the 500. As the iXRC800 model wasn't available during that test no comparison was made to it.

Hope I did not add to the confusion. I've been going trough about the same search process as sh0rty, but had to rely on "instinct" and the attractive price at the end. I have only used the skis one day on less demanding slopes after the purchase but will give them a serious two-day run next week in Lapland.
post #9 of 12
post #10 of 12
My best guess in years past with our mnational chain is that the chain would sell a similar ski to the regular line up with the chain ski always having the HIGHER number for the same ski.

A rule of thumb with the XRC lineup is that the longerthe ski the stiffer you will want. I am 6'2" and not light. I like the XRC 1200 and I like it in a 163. Other very good and powerful skiers like this ski in a 170. I find it a very good ski in 170 length but I prefer the turnier 163 as it is more fun. Over the past 3-4 years I have also skied on XRC800/ic180/ic280 (all the same ski) in both 163 and 170. Far too soft in 170 but a lot of fun in the 163.

Mike
post #11 of 12
My guess is that the 700 has the dimensions and appearance of the 800, but is built like the 500. Similarly the 400 appears to be a 500, but has the guts of the 300.

There was an insert in ski canada from sportchek that described this feature. IIRC, they said graphics of the high end model, and the construction of "a lower end" model. I know it is vague, but that'd me my guess.
post #12 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikehoyt View Post
My best guess in years past with our mnational chain is that the chain would sell a similar ski to the regular line up with the chain ski always having the HIGHER number for the same ski.

A rule of thumb with the XRC lineup is that the longerthe ski the stiffer you will want. I am 6'2" and not light. I like the XRC 1200 and I like it in a 163. Other very good and powerful skiers like this ski in a 170. I find it a very good ski in 170 length but I prefer the turnier 163 as it is more fun. Over the past 3-4 years I have also skied on XRC800/ic180/ic280 (all the same ski) in both 163 and 170. Far too soft in 170 but a lot of fun in the 163.

Mike
Does'nt Head build the 163 and shorter lengths for women?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion

Gear mentioned in this thread:

EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › '08 Head i.XRC 400 & 700 - 'Big Box' Model Numbers?