New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Head Xenon 7

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 
Head Xenon 7, 149cm.

Skier, female, 120 lbs, 5'3", level 7ish.

Other skis - Atomic SL9 150cm, Atomic Balanze (Metron) 150cm

Long story short, After one day loves the Heads. In fact, likes them so much is telling her friends about them (something she rarely does with ski gear).

I purchased the Xenon for my wife based on input from my coach (he suggested that the Head flex pattern would help her reach the next level). She thought it was a waste of money because she liked her Atomics just fine. After 2 runs on the Xenon she had a huge smile on her face. She was making better turns and skiing cut up pow and crud with more confidence. The skis are light yet stable, forgiving, and responsive.

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #2 of 17
Why did you get a guys ski for your wife? The Head Everythang has all the same features and its designed for a female's weight/center of gravity.
post #3 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey View Post
Why did you get a guys ski for your wife? The Head Everythang has all the same features and its designed for a female's weight/center of gravity.
Because all females aren't the same and for the most part this female specific ski stuff is marketing (just ask a racer).
post #4 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Because all females aren't the same
Agreed, except I would think that a ski designed for a 180 pound guy wouldn't be a good match for someone who weighed 120. But hey, if she likes them, she likes them.
post #5 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey View Post
Agreed, except I would think that a ski designed for a 180 pound guy wouldn't be a good match for someone who weighed 120. But hey, if she likes them, she likes them.
In skis, in boots, in mounting point of bindings - in everythang - what counts are results. May we forever be wary of the word "should" and embrace the word "is" when it comes to ski gear.

She likes the "a ski designed for a 180 pound guy" better than the Balanze - which is "designed for a woman".
post #6 of 17
Thread Starter 
Where did you get the information that states the Xenon 7 in a 149cm is designed for a 180lb skier?
post #7 of 17
180 is the average weight of an adult male. It's actually higher than that in the US. They'd probably take that into consideration when designing skis.
post #8 of 17
Thread Starter 
How often do you see 180lb male skiers on a 149cm ski?
post #9 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
How often do you see 180lb male skiers on a 149cm ski?
Not very often, but do you think Head uses a lighter core for the 149 than the one they use in the 177? I doubt it. The women's ski I mentioned above does. It sounds like your wife is a beast on the slopes and can handle the stiffer, heavier ski. More power to her. A lot of women can't. That's why I have a hard time with the idea that someone should switch to a mens ski to "go to the next level".
post #10 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey View Post
Not very often, but do you think Head uses a lighter core for the 149 than the one they use in the 177? I doubt it. The women's ski I mentioned above does. It sounds like your wife is a beast on the slopes and can handle the stiffer, heavier ski. More power to her. A lot of women can't. That's why I have a hard time with the idea that someone should switch to a mens ski to "go to the next level".
There is nothing stiff or heavy about the Xenon 7. Have you skied one?

BTW, there are often major differences between different lengths of the same model ski. Often a difference of only 5cm results in a ski that is totally different.
post #11 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
\
I purchased the Xenon for my wife based on input from my coach (he suggested that the Head flex pattern would help her reach the next level).
Is your coach affiliated with head skis by any chance. sounds like a load of crap to me.
post #12 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilT View Post
Is your coach affiliated with head skis by any chance. sounds like a load of crap to me.
Not that I know of although he does sell them. Personally I enjoy the flex pattern of Head, Elan, and Fischer skis. Much more so than what I find with Atomics (and I've got four pairs of Atomics so I'm fairly familiar with them).

Oh, and what's with all this debate in the Gear Review section?
post #13 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max_501 View Post
Not that I know of although he does sell them. Personally I enjoy the flex pattern of Head, Elan, and Fischer skis. Much more so than what I find with Atomics (and I've got four pairs of Atomics so I'm fairly familiar with them).

Oh, and what's with all this debate in the Gear Review section?
Dunno if it's the "flex pattern" or what -- but I was on these (in 177cm length -- I'm male, 6'6", and 280lbs) today at Wachusett and loved 'em.

Not "heavy" in either weight or feel. I could turn them pretty quick and my edging blows. Definitely not a super-stiff ski either.

Also, conditions at Wachusett today could generously be described as "soft", and less generously as "slush". Although there were some icy areas on the upper slopes in the afternoon, and the Xenon seemed to hold up really well for me on those too (better than the Monster 78, that's for sure.)
post #14 of 17
Max, Have you had a chance to ski it (Head Xenon 7.0)? I am considering it and the Head Supershape.
post #15 of 17
It must be the softer snow where you ski. I tried the Xenon 9 at a demo along with a few other Heads. I could hardly wait to get off of them. Definately a low level ski. Very "forgiving", couldn't hold and edge on hardpack well enough to make any kind of respectable turn force, the opposite of the Head supershape in terms of grip, torsional rigidity. Similar feel though.

cb,
If you like putting the ski on edge and feeling some force through your legs during the turn, stick with the Supershapes.
post #16 of 17
I have both the SuperShape and the Xenon 7.0 The SuperShape is the ski for hard pack and hard crud, and for max carving and more pop out of the ski. The Xenon 7 is the ski for soft snow. It holds an edge very well on hard pack (3° side edge angle & sharp tips & tails) but will chatter more than some other skis if the skier doesn't keep it in the groove. On soft snow the Xenon 7 is the most fun I've had with my clothes on. It's silky in deep snow, but not big enough for the float I'd like. On soft pack or crud or (not icy) bumps it is FUN. It carves great with a 13 m radius and holds that carve--but not quite the pop when released compared to the SS. And light. And cheap. I'm glad I have mine. I've loaded them to two guys who've both come back with huge grins. I'm 6', 200#, and the 170s are just right for me. Some expert skis found the Xenon 9.0 tail too stiff and feel the 7.0 is the better choice in this line.

Every ski has a performance ceiling and a performance floor. A rental ski has the lowest performance floor for the beginner and a low ceiling. A race ski has the highest performance ceiling and a very high performance floor. They've got to be skied just right to get the outstanding performance. The Supershape has a performance ceiling that is quite high and a moderate performance floor...don't try one if you're a backseat driver. The Xenon 7 has a performance ceiling that is almost as high as the SS and a performace floor much lower. It has a huge sweet spot. It's easy for a low intermediate to ski it well and great fun for a very good skier.
post #17 of 17
The 2009 Head Xenon 10 has much better performance on hard pack than the 2008 Head Xenon 9. I have tried both and prefer teh 2009 version which seems much improved.

I actually preferred the Xenon 7 over teh 9 which is weird as well.

Mike
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews

Gear mentioned in this thread: