or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2003 1080 length

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 
First of all, I would like to say how refreshing it is to find a board that's not overrun by "you suck 'cause you ski salomon/rossi/etc..." children.

Secondly, I would like to apologize for posting yet another length question, but I'm kinda between a rock and a hard place.

How did I get in this position? Well, I decided that I needed new skis this year, so I sold my old skis at an pre-season swap. But now I'm stuck with no skis, and work (I'm an instructor) starts in a few weeks!

So I've got a pair of 1080s waiting to be prepped in a 171cm length. I was asking about the 181s but the guy at the store was firmly against me getting those because he really believed that I wouldn't be able to flex them properly given my weight (130 lbs - 5'10"). I also checked the salomon product selector on the website, and IT thinks I should also get 171.

So it sounds like a no brainer right? Well, not quite. These are going to be my only pair of skiis, so they have go pretty much everywhere (with a bit more emphasis in the park - which I why I want the 1080). Given that, I am now second guessing myself because I'm thinking I MAY need the extra stability/floatation because I ski pretty aggressively (not superhero speeds mind you, but pretty fast) and I live in British Columbia. On the other hand, I really wanted a new pair of skis because my last pair were 190cm Atomic 9.18! Needless to say, I really wanted to go shorter.

I was kind of hoping that someone who knows the characteristics or who have even maybe skied it before might have some insight in to the length question for this particular ski.

HELP!

[ November 20, 2002, 11:52 PM: Message edited by: superiorWANG ]
post #2 of 7
The freestyle 1080 is significantly wider than your Atomic carving skis. I think the length of 171 cm. is OK,since the 181 is the longerst length you can get in that ski. For your skill level and weight, I think it is a good match, but it is still better to demo first, which at this point in time may not be a possibility for you.

The ski you have chosen to buy is a twin tipped free style ski, and in fact defines the catagory, since Solomon invented it with the input of the "New Schoolers." That means a responsive ski, that is at home in the terrain parks, doing jumps, but may be disappointing as a cruiser/carving ski that you are used to.

Hopefully, others who have actually skied the 1080 can provide more detail about their experience.

Frankly, if you rnot doing a lot of jumps, or terrain park skiing, there may have been some better options for a ski purchase. Make no mistake, the 1080 is a fine product, but may not be the best choice for the type of skiing you do now or wish to do in the future.
post #3 of 7
My son is 21, 5' 11", 165# and is getting the 1080s in a 171cm. Theses will not only be his park/pipe skis but his everyday all-mountain skis. He lives on the West Coast and will be skiing snow much like you encounter. I wouldn't get the 181 at your size. Considering your weight I would even consider the 161cm unless you're in your teens and still growing.

The 1080 is still the king of twin-tips and this years model is even better.
post #4 of 7
superiorWANG,

I think I can shed some light on the 2003 1080, as I just spent a day on my 181's on Monday at Mammoth. As a reference, I am 5'8", 170 lbs. As it turns out, the 1080 is a bit on the soft side, but makes a nice all-mtn. ski. It was nice on the steeps, as it was easy to turn, yet held a solid edge under foot. It is forgiving and favors a balanced stance. It will get pushed around a bit in heavy snow or crud, although those conditions the other day were limited. On the groomers, it was simply a blast. The 1080 was not nearly as stable as my Axis X Pro at speed, but it will rail and run if you stay balanced. Lastly, it is great in the park. That 80-mm waist is wonderful for landings.

HOWEVER...

I would not want it to be my only ski. I would get a K2 Enemy in the 173-cm size for $299 (you'll save $200) and get a better all-mtn. ski that will ski the whole mtn. including the park. I saw a ton of Enemies all over the mountain the other day, while most 1080's were found only in the park...well, except for mine.
post #5 of 7
I also have bought a pair of 1080's in 171 size.Not sure if i went too short too.The raised tail does take away some effective edge,so it will probably ski like a 165 or so.
Important!!:when you take them to a shop label the front of the skis,the twin-tip and graphic design have fooled many a skitech.

Also check where you center the bindings on the ski,the factory mark is totally freestyle,i will probably mount them 2 cm back since i want them for freeride.
post #6 of 7
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Bandit Man:
superiorWANG,

I would not want it to be my only ski. I would get a K2 Enemy in the 173-cm size for $299 (you'll save $200) and get a better all-mtn. ski that will ski the whole mtn. including the park. I saw a ton of Enemies all over the mountain the other day, while most 1080's were found only in the park...well, except for mine.
Thanks for the rundown bandit man! thanks to everyone who replied. I've decided to stick to my original decision of 171. I figure that way,at the very least, I'll have the best park ski (jack of all trades -> master of nothing right?)

I was looking at the K2 Enemy, and besides the fact that I can get Salomon pro-deals (not K2), they also seem a bit wide (90mm). I'm concerned about this because I would have to use them to teach...and pulling intermediate/novice turns on those monsters can't be a heck of a lot of fun.

Thanks!

[ November 23, 2002, 01:41 AM: Message edited by: superiorWANG ]
post #7 of 7
Quote:
Originally posted by superiorWANG:

I was looking at the K2 Enemy, and besides the fact that I can get Salomon pro-deals (not K2), they also seem a bit wide (90mm). I'm concerned about this because I would have to use them to teach...and pulling intermediate/novice turns on those monsters can't be a heck of a lot of fun.
The Enemy I was referring to was the park ski Enemy, with a 75-mm waist, not the AK Enemy which has, as mentioned, has a 90-mm waist. Since you get your 1080's on "form" and at a significant, then they will be worth it. At $499 retail, I think most folks should look elsewhere, though. BTW, last week Sollie sold out of the 181-cm length indefinitely, so the 171-cm may be the only choice left.

[ November 26, 2002, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: Bandit Man ]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion