EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 2007 Volkl AC2 vs. Supersport S4
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2007 Volkl AC2 vs. Supersport S4

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 
Hi all. I was wondering if I might get some input. I'm looking into getting my first set of skis, ones that I can improve into. I'm considering the Volkl AC2's or the Supersport S4's. I want to spend a maximum of $400. The reason I'm asking this here, is that I get different answers everywhere I go for what size ski to get. I'm 5'2'' tall and weigh 155 lbs (when I'm lifting consistently). I ski in Western New York, I like going kinda fast and I ski whaterver conditions predominte here (groomed I think?). I've been renting for the last 2 years and I am ready to have my own skis. Can anyone give me pros and cons of these, and tell me if they have integrated bindings? That seems to be the only consistent characteristic people have been telling me to look for. Sorry for the long, typical initial post, but any help would be appreciated. Thanks much.:
post #2 of 13
Both are intergrated. AC2 has a rail intergration while S4 has in ski intergration. How good are you at skiing is the question.
post #3 of 13
Thread Starter 
^ Oh, yeah, that might help. I would say I'm an intermediate skier, maybe slightly better. Definitely not advanced. Thanks again.
post #4 of 13
AC2 will be slightly better in powder (slightly), but even at that they arent great powder. S4 on the other hand will be much better on groomers. S4s are a tad bit stiffer than AC2s too. Both would be nice skis for an intermediate, but I think you would like the S4s more. AC2 sacrifices a bit much for its wider waist and isnt as stiff.

Also, S4 is rail, not intergrated. For some reason I thought it had iPT.
post #5 of 13
Hey offkilter...have you tried the AC2? I have...actually rented not on the slope, but locally from a sports giant type (Sports Chalet). A nice intermediate ski. Tight(er) turning radius, 72mm underfoot w/ pretty big sidecut (116-72-103)...I skied mostly groomers and some harder crud and they were nice. Held a decent edge on icy sections. This rental definitely helped keep me in Volkl's pocket...and somewhat pushed me to a Volkl S5 Supersport (I too am an aspiring advanced-type intermed).

I say if you are looking to improve you might wanna consider a Volkl Supersport (S3, S4, S5). Slightly thinner at the waist, more biased towards carving groomed/hardpack (you agree fellas?), although they're billed as 'all-mountain' (shoot...you can take whatever you want all mountain...level of effort/enjoyment will differ though, haha). This line went bye-bye after 06/07, and all three of the sticks can be found < 400 by the detail-oriented shopper.

I chose the popular 5* replacement (S5). Extended edges and titanium like the Allstar, just a little more forgiving (read: won't bite back as bad). It shoved me to the back seat a couple times that first day, but now we are very happy dance partners. Just made it to me last month...360 shipped w/ integrated Marker IPT 11.0. Light, flexible setup. 114-69-100 dims. Total carving machine...incredible edge grip. More cat than dog...makes you work for it's affection, but it's worth it. Couldn't be happier. You will be too once you get one of the Supersports, I'm bettin.

P.S. I don't have 'chatter' problems w/ my S5. I've read though some techniques induce this. I just let the ski carve it's own pretty curves, I don't fight it. You sound like a strong little package...especially if you're lifting, once you learn how to ski 'em you'll have plenty of leg to steer these. Just my $0.02
post #6 of 13
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the tips. I've been reading the archives and it seems integrated bindings shouldn't sway my decision. Now, does 154cm seem ok for someone with my stature and ability? I like to go fast, and carve, but not so fast I scare the hell out of myself. Plus, I plan on improving. I'm pretty sure I've always skied on the same size skis, so I have no idea what I would have a preference for. I wanted to do a demo, but those are done for the season I guess. Are there any opinions on what a short, intermediate, kinda fast skier should be on length wise? Again, thanks for the input.
post #7 of 13
You will most likely get varied responses on this. From where I sit, you are more heavy (you mentioned lifting, so I have to assume a good portion of that is muscle) than the typical 5'2 person. For the record I'm 34yrs ancient, 5'8 @ 162 lbs...sorta a built out ectomorph (Terrell Owens, btw, is the God of all ectomorphs. He shouldn't look like that). We aren't the same heighth, but we are similar weight. I would imagine your leg power to be equal or most likely superior to mine (I'm not lifting anymore).

Anywho, prior to purchasing my 154cm S5 it was came up from more than one bear that they were "too short" for me. I replied that I'm not a speed freak (echoed by you), and that I wanted shorter ones to maneuver at slow speeds while trolling along w/ my burgeoning 12yr old snowboarder (when I'm not carving fighter-jet arcs, of course). Comments on possible ski chatter or instability at speed were also mentioned. Shop I bought from even tried to get me to buy the 161 at least. Needless to say I stuck w/ my guns and bought the carving tool in an SL size.

I've skied them 5x now. Decent local mtn (1600' vert drop, 8200 peak) groomed/hardpack w/ slight afternoon crud the 1st time, not so good slush/heavy wet crud and then surprisingly decent nighttime "walmart powder" (what the liftie called the slush when it hit early night and crystalized, hilarious) and ice patched the 2nd time, then *incredible* fresh shallow powder on hardpack (not a ton, but fresh) and perfect grooms for times 3-5 (11K peak, 3K drop...yup, Mammoth. It truly is Mammoth!)

Verdict so far? No chatter if you let them 'ski' and you don't fight them. Speed instability? A touch playing catch up to my head-starting similarily sized bro-in-law on 180cm Salo Crossmaxes, but I felt that was a function more of the the actual conditions underfoot...on groomed you can control it. And pardon my intermed to advanced novelties, but it actually adds to the drama to have to control the wiggle at speed, lol. Fast enough for me to bomb down blues, fast enough for me to get in enough trouble on blacks. The ski definitely has much, much more envelope in it, so I feel I have only "up" to go in my abilities.

I would say I'm an advanced intermediate or low-level advanced (cuz I don't do off piste or any silly ACL-busting tricks). I'd say we are pretty similar in our abilities and aspirations -- same ballpark. I think most might comment on the 154cm ski to your vertical stature, but I think physcially it's much more than that. At 162lbs or so I can flex this ski pretty well.

All I can tell you is that I'm having A BLAST on 154s. Sure they're not a GS speed bomber -- I knew that going in. I wasn't looking for a Vette though...I was more looking for a Lotus Elise, if you will. I don't need speed I'm not going to use. And with the 154, I can operate w/ a huge smile factor (wait till you let this thing carve it up at medium speed) and NOT risk life or limb to have fun. It does take some work/leg strength to hold the tight inclination turns for an extended period. It does tire you out bouncing from edge to edge. But it sure is darn, darn fun. No complaints whatsoever here. Go for it and keep everyone offkilter
post #8 of 13
Thread Starter 
Hey, thanks for the thorough reply, it is much appreciated.
post #9 of 13
Not a problem, kilter. Just trying to shed some personal experience on the "that's too short for you" ski topic. Mythic topic, really. As in X shorter length won't work for y skier this tall, etc.

As an addendum...I skied my 154s again today -- sans child -- and I was in let 'er rip mode ALL day. Nice sunny CA day at the local mountain (left at 230 when slush/crud was taking over). Early morning groomers as far as the eye could see. Fast conditions -- perfect cold cordury to test envelope on the S5. No high-speed instability whatsoever. No GPS or anything empirical, but I was super-stable bombin' runs all day
post #10 of 13
If I were you I would go a bit longer. Longer ski = longer radius = more stability. Go with your height if you want something that will hold up when you ski faster.
post #11 of 13
I agree w/ you Rise (longer=more ski=more surface area to spread out mass). 5'2 tall = 2.54cm/inch x 62 inches = 157.5cm. I'd say 154cm is a pretty good match?
post #12 of 13
For his weight I think 163s would do fine as well. I am 145lbs and have no problem moving skis over 180cm.
post #13 of 13
Thread Starter 
Well, I ordered the 2006/2007 Supersport S4's in 154cm. They should be here tomorrow. Hopefully, I can get them mounted up for the weekend if there's still skiable conditions. I was thinking about the 161's but I felt those might be a bit unwieldy for me. Thanks again everyone for all your help.

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 › 2007 Volkl AC2 vs. Supersport S4