or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2008 Head SS Magnums

post #1 of 5
Thread Starter 
Hey there all Bears!
I've been researching this ski and have a line on a pair for what I believe is a good deal. From the comments here at Epic and some other sites my dilemma is what length?
I'm 181cm tall and weigh about 230. So, based on my lardy mass and semi-educated knowledge I'd pick the 170 length. Also, I should point out, I'm looking for a short race carving ski for on-piste ripping here in the East on predominately firm snow. I've got other skis for crud and deeper stuff.
I know and trust the shop owner who has a pair of the 163's which he seems to think will fit my bill and he's giving me a very good deal as well. He's my size, has skied this length and despite my faith in his knowledge/experience I'm holding off because they may be too short. Unfortunately, demoing doesn't seem like a practical option for me either.
I've owned shorties for about five years and love the fun factor they offer. Currently, I still own a pair of Fischer WC SC (165cm) and Elan SLX (162cm) so my thinking has come down to turn size. I'm thinking the 170's in this ski would give me a GS oriented performance and the 163's a more SL flavor.
Although my hesitation is only slight I'd like some advice from anyone with additional knowledge and/or experience they care to share.
Thanks in advance,
2planks
post #2 of 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2planks View Post
Hey there all Bears!
I've been researching this ski and have a line on a pair for what I believe is a good deal. From the comments here at Epic and some other sites my dilemma is what length?
I'm 181cm tall and weigh about 230. So, based on my lardy mass and semi-educated knowledge I'd pick the 170 length. Also, I should point out, I'm looking for a short race carving ski for on-piste ripping here in the East on predominately firm snow. I've got other skis for crud and deeper stuff.
I know and trust the shop owner who has a pair of the 163's which he seems to think will fit my bill and he's giving me a very good deal as well. He's my size, has skied this length and despite my faith in his knowledge/experience I'm holding off because they may be too short. Unfortunately, demoing doesn't seem like a practical option for me either.
I've owned shorties for about five years and love the fun factor they offer. Currently, I still own a pair of Fischer WC SC (165cm) and Elan SLX (162cm) so my thinking has come down to turn size. I'm thinking the 170's in this ski would give me a GS oriented performance and the 163's a more SL flavor.
Although my hesitation is only slight I'd like some advice from anyone with additional knowledge and/or experience they care to share.
Thanks in advance,
2planks
As a 66 year old, 165 pound, 5'8" tall level 7.5 skier, I own and ski the Magnum in 163 cm length. It's stable at speed on hard snow, but it's also easy in short turns at low speeds. That seems like an awfully short ski for someone of your size and weight.
post #3 of 5
I'm 6-2 and 220 lbs, I have the 170 which I feel is perfect for me. This is a dedicated groomer ski for me, so I went with the shorter length and was glad I did.

Try dawgcatcher, you may be able to get just a good of a deal in the size you need - I think right now he is selling the SS Mag for $650 including FF14 binding.
post #4 of 5
I'm 5'9, 155lbs and I ski the 170. I definitely wouldn't want it any shorter, although I'm a pretty strong technical skier. At 170, it's a 13.5m radius, so it definitely would be closer to SL than GS.
I'd say go 170 at a minimum for your size, and if you're a strong skier, the 177 might not be out of line.
post #5 of 5
I was actually on these again at Wachusett tonight in the 177cm length (I'm 6'6", 285 lbs., intermediate skier.) Weather was freezing rain yesterday, highs around freezing today and falling in the evening -- so pretty firm conditions, especially on the upper slopes. It actually was not nearly as bad as I feared it might be, but there were patches of solid ice and a lot of very hard snow. I had demoed this same pair of skis before on a much warmer/slushier day, and didn't like them at all. I thought I would give them a shot in the icy conditions, since that is where they are supposed to shine.

On the greens and easy blues I was still not impressed. I'm sure my technique is part of the problem, but I found them sluggish and hard to carve at low speeds, and jittery in bumpy/chopped-up packed powder (skis I liked a lot more in those conditions: Head Xenon 7.0, Head Monster im78, Dynastar Contact Limited). When I got them up on the (relatively) steeper pitches up top, with firm surfaces and/or ice:woah. They skied FAR better for me at higher speeds -- the higher the speed, the better they felt. And the edge hold on hardpack was very good. Sadly, they didn't help my midair balance when I went rocketing off what is normally a pretty small drop (near the bottom of 10th Mountain, that last rolling dropoff before the runout) at maybe 35mph and rolled/skidded about 30 yards down the trail. Whoops!

I wouldn't recommend it as a ski for an intermediate to learn on -- they don't behave well at low speeds if your technique is spotty, although ironically they get more forgiving at speed. Versatility may also not be that great (I didn't like them in soft snow, and I have no idea how they'd behave in anything resembling powder. YMMV.)

But if you want to rip on hardpack, check these out.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion