New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

80-86mm midfats

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 
Next addition to my quiver will likely be a midfat mostly for use in the west on days when it's been a while since big snow. On those days, I tend to spend a good amount of time in the bumps, but not exclusively. So, looking for all mountain jack of all trades master of none midfat with more frontside/carving emphasis and pretty good bump performance and respectable crud performance. Will also use these for eastern days after a moderate snowfall (3-8").

I'm 5'9" 170lbs former racer, ski pretty aggressively, level 9-ish. I have Tigershark 10s w/ switch for eastern hardpack and Blizzard Titan Argos for western off-piste. Figure I'll add this midfat and then a true powder ski (maybe Kuro next year) and call it a quiver.

Would love to hear some compare/contrast on the following contenders from folks who have skied some/all of them (or feel free to recommend s-thing else altogether):

Nomad Crimson
Cold Heat
Fury
Afterburner
Jet Fuel
Blizzard Magnum 8.1 (more $ for 09s when they're out, I know)
AC50 (another 09)

Thanks in advance!
post #2 of 19
If you check out the Epic Sponsor forum, you'll find some awesome deals on a few that you mention.
You may want to consider the Fischer Watea 94.
IIRC Sierra Jim has a deal going on now for the Crimson.

What is really holding my interest right now is the Blizzard!
Sweet skis coming around the bend for next year, to replace the sweeeet skis we all got last year.
post #3 of 19
mythic rider
post #4 of 19
Thread Starter 
Yep, I've seen the deals. Great prices from Dawg and SJ!

Re the Mythic: it's a bit more of a flat off-piste ski than I'm looking for for this slo tin the quiver...I demo-ed it this year...liked it a lot but felt like it really wanted to run in S-shaped (as opposed to C-shaped) turns...and while it gets from edge-to-edge pretty quick for an 88mm ski, I think I want something a little narrower and quicker for frontside bumps.
post #5 of 19
I really like my jet fuels. I would ski it any day here in JH
post #6 of 19
sometimes I wonder if they actually make ski you are looking for. For me alot of those skis in that range. volkls unlimited ac4, nordica top fuel jet fuel alcohol butane(i don't know i keep up with the names of those skis), atomic metrons. Most of those skis look really inviting in like a 180-185, but i'd like to see one build like those but with less cut 14mm maybe instead of the 17-18mm that most of them have.

Basically a 4x4 powertrac with some more width. have some 4x4 bigs But too soft in the tips. So i'm skiing on 188 p40 fl for that purpose. cause the 192 powertrac are to long when my legs get tired.
post #7 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Re-Skier View Post
Re the Mythic: it's a bit more of a flat off-piste ski than I'm looking for for this slo tin the quiver...I demo-ed it this year...liked it a lot but felt like it really wanted to run in S-shaped (as opposed to C-shaped) turns...and while it gets from edge-to-edge pretty quick for an 88mm ski, I think I want something a little narrower and quicker for frontside bumps.
Then consider the Legend 8000.
post #8 of 19
I really like the Afterburner in 178cm. I'm 6', 185 and ski pretty aggressively. After skiing it for a full season in both east coast conditions (ice, hardpack, midwinter pacjked powder, wet new snow, 3" powder dump ) and unusual Tahoe conditions (hardpack to spring slush), I have found only one complaint. In hardpack conditions, at high speeds, on very steep slopes the ski chatters pretty good when transitioning from a skid to a carve/edge set. I don't know if this is the result of the ski's width or my lack of technique, but my Fischer RC4 WC RC's never had this issue. I sold the RC4s and my east coast alternate is a pair of Dynamic slalom carvers in 173cm. They only got 3 days use this year (out of about 25 days).

In any case, I find the ABs to be very good at carving (18m TR?), unbeatable in plowing through crud, decent to very good in soft moguls, and great in moderate depth new snow. They suck when skiing on breakable ice crust over wet glop - oh wait, maybe I suck when skiing those conditions . My brother in law is 6'3 and 220 and he prefers the 186 (20m TR?). I haven't tried the next step up (Jet Fuel), but I am closer to 50 than to 45 : and enjoy a ski that does not punish me or require me to be "on" all the time.
post #9 of 19
I own Mythic Rider and have demoed the Afterburner & Jet Fuel. Sounds like we're the same size & ability.

The MR & AB are similar, IMO. Very versatile. But I understand if it's not what you are looking for.

I had a hard time bending the Jet Fuel. It was amazing at arcing high speed turns but I found it to be otherwise worthless at my beefy 165 pounds. I've read a ton of similar comments on these forums. JF is great for bigger & heavier guys but unweildly for us whafes.
post #10 of 19
Here is my take on these (I have skied everything listed below, but not the Blizzard 8.1)

Nordica Jet Fuel: great ski, somewhat stiff, fairly damp, very powerful. Likes speed.

Nordica Afterburner: better choice for lighter skier, same feel as the JF, not as stiff though.

Head iM82: very powerful yet forgiving in bumps, great carver, very stable for its length, not a ton of energy

Volkl AC50: lighter feel than most, quite stable, a little more laterally aggressive, good carver

Blizzard Mag 8.7: powerhouse carver, traditional wood-core feel, moderate flex, great ski

Fischer Cold Heat: fairly stout, very damp, powerhouse carver, great stability

Elan 82Xti (2009 ski) similar to the Cold Heat but a bit lighter and snappier, powerhouse carver, damp but with power underfoot, very stable

Elan 82ti (2009 ski) a bit softer than the 82Xti (less metal) same characteristics but better for lighter skiers

Sollie Fury: another great ski, a little lighter on the snow than some, very stable, a little softer and more forgiving flex

Atomic Crimson: a little lighter, quite forgiving, a great carver and very verstaile, maybe not the powerhouse in crud that the Nordy, Elan, Blizzard, and Head's are.

Overall, this is a great list. I could own any one of these skis and be very happy. After testing all of the 2009 product, my 2 personal favorites are the new Blizzard Magnum 8.7 (I know you asked about the Magnum 8.1, but I have not skied it, although the 8.7 is a similar layup) and the new Elan 82X/ti. I am currently on the 82X, but am trading it for the slightly softer 82ti, as the flex is a little stout for me on the 82X. Both of these skis combined superb carving performance with unshakable stability in crud and moderate flex, which is key for me at my weight. Also, I liked the length: 174 and 176cm, respectively, gives me enough stability when venturing off-piste into moderate crud, but doesn't kill me in the bumps. 170cm can feel a little short off-piste. Then again, my Huge Troubles seem to be getting all of the love when there is more than 4" of new snow these days.

With that said, any one of the skis on this list is a great choice. I loved my time on the Cold Heat this year, as it had a great feel;I skied the iM82 last week in bumps and hardpack and was impressed with it's stability and versatility; the Jet Fuel/Afterburner is always a great ski (although I wish they would make a ski in between these two in terms of stiffness); the new AC50 is very solid, although has a different feel than the wood-core skis; the Crimson is a forgiving yet solid all-mountain performer; and the Fury is one of my favorite all-mountain skis. Have fun!
post #11 of 19
Scott saved me a lot of typing (and I type sloooowwwly)...............

Great list from the OP and an accurate read on the capabilities of those models. Despite the widths, they are in fact (IMO) biased a bit more toward the frontside than the back.

SJ
post #12 of 19
Mythic is a great all mountain ski and not an off-piste ski. The After Burner is great but has horrible bindings
post #13 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by skierhj View Post
Mythic is a great all mountain ski and not an off-piste ski.
What in the world are you talking about? If you can ski, the Mythic is great off trail. Sounds like operator error to me.
post #14 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonnie View Post
What in the world are you talking about? If you can ski, the Mythic is great off trail. Sounds like operator error to me.
+1

I too had to reread that post several times to make sure I wasn't missing something
post #15 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by skierhj View Post
Mythic is a great all mountain ski and not an off-piste ski. The After Burner is great but has horrible bindings
I think what he meant was that it's not STRICTLY an off-piste ski (which is not what I said of it...certainly not what I meant in my post about it). I agree that the MR is a nice ski all over the hill, but it's construction and geometry favor longer S-shaped turns. You can get from edge to edge reasonably quickly on it, but when on edge it doesn't want to come all the way around for C-shaped carved turns. It wants to run. I found it to do pretty well in bumps actually b/c you can soft edge it nicely and it's not at all hooky.

But still, the sweet spot for the ski is the backside in shin-deep pow or skied up 2 day old snow, crud etc. I once skied it at Vail in knee-thigh deep fresh pow, and it did well but would rather have something 100mm+ in those conditions.

For this slot in the quiver, I'm more interested in the midfats that are more all-mtn skis that handle the backside in mixed, old snow conditoins OK. To me, the Mythic is a backside ski in its DNA that's just made narrow enough and early engaging enough to do better on hardpack than it's fatter, floatier brethren.

My $0.02 on the matter, anyway.
post #16 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Re-Skier View Post
...............To me, the Mythic is a backside ski in its DNA that's just made narrow enough and early engaging enough to do better on hardpack than it's fatter, floatier brethren...............

My $0.02 on the matter, anyway.
This is a very accurate analysis of the MR. I ski it a lot and it's my current go-to in this width range but it's not as good a frontside ski as say an AB, JF or similar. It is my current choice in this range b/c it is as good a crud buster as I have found within category.

SJ
post #17 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
This is a very accurate analysis of the MR. I ski it a lot and it's my current go-to in this width range but it's not as good a frontside ski as say an AB, JF or similar. It is my current choice in this range b/c it is as good a crud buster as I have found within category.

SJ
I don't disagree.

Today Vail had 4" of fresh on top, lots of crud and sun baked crust underneath.

Mythic did great all over the hill and is far more enjoyable for me to ski in these conditions than my Mantras

I disagree somewhat in its ability to make nice s-turns. They seem to do the job well for me. But that's a matter of personal preference, I reckon.
post #18 of 19
I own a Mantra too but haven't taken it out since I got on the MR.

SJ
post #19 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by skierhj View Post
Mythic is a great all mountain ski and not an off-piste ski. The After Burner is great but has horrible bindings
Another lemming in the Marker-hater line.

So I'm skiing at Squaw and hit a spot where the snow turns from decent to breakable crust over glop. My down hill ski breaks through followed almost immediately by the uphill ski; the downhill ski hits something that drives it over the top of the uphill ski (the edge mark is about 8 inches in front of the binding toe); the worst tip cross I've experienced in the last 30 years. The downhill ski released with almost no pressure on my knee as my uper body was heading 90* from the direction of the ski (downhill).

Yeah. Markers suck alright.

BTW, I have them set at the recommended DIN, skied hard in glop moguls at Sun Bowl (Squaw) and Sun Bowl (Alpine) and never even came close to a premature ejection.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion