EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Nordica Mach 3 Power vs. Volkl AC30
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nordica Mach 3 Power vs. Volkl AC30

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 
What would I be giving up between the Mach 3 Power vs. Volkl AC30 in the East?

I currently ski the ac30 in 163 and didn't realize how stiff it was until I demoed the Mach 3 Power 162 yesterday. I realize many reviewers have said that the Nordica is really stiff, but on the hardpack yesterday at Sunapee I felt like I could bend the the nordica easier than my AC30. Maybe it is just more sidecut in the Nordica, but that thing loved to turn and was easier to ski than the ac30. Although, it did seem a bit slower with longer turns yesterday.

How does the Mach 3 Power perform in varying snow conditions? Yesterday, there was just hardpack, harderpack and ice. Maybe I bought the wrong ski. Could the Nordica be the one ski quiver to replace my AC30?
post #2 of 15
In the East the Nordica could be a one ski quiver.

But we need to know more, please provide your weight & height. Also talk about how and where you ski.

Michael
post #3 of 15
Thread Starter 
37 yo, 5'6" and 145#. I can ski all mountain in east but refining an old technique (almost phased out a more weighted one footed style in all but the steepest stuff) to leading with inside leg carving. Carving on all but the steepest. Just retired the long straight skis (197 salomon 2s) for the Ac30 in January. Hope this helps. I liked the AC30, but felt like a stronger, more efficient skier on the Nordica.

Ski anywhere I can from Sunapee to Sugarloaf and any terrain including steeps 25%, groomers 50%, trees 15%, bumps 10%, etc. with differing levels of efficiency. Subject to change as family skills grow.
post #4 of 15
Warning:

Glad you had a good day on the Mach 3 Power, but IMO it is a very poor choice for a one-ski quiver if you're spending over 25% of your time off-piste. It's also fairly useless in powder.

Think long & hard about this.........
post #5 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Squeaky Wheel View Post
Warning:

Glad you had a good day on the Mach 3 Power, but IMO it is a very poor choice for a one-ski quiver if you're spending over 25% of your time off-piste. It's also fairly useless in powder.

Think long & hard about this.........
Worse than the ac30 with only 4mm difference in waist with an increase in shovel? Or is it not the width?
post #6 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJudge View Post
Worse than the ac30 with only 4mm difference in waist with an increase in shovel? Or is it not the width?
I find the Mach 3 power to be significantly more demanding than the ac30.

In fact, I own the Mach 3 carbon - which is not as stiff as the power - and still I find that ski to be significantly more demanding than the ac30.

The Mach 3 primarily serves as a front-side speed carver in my quiver.

If I were to own just one ski, the Mach 3 just wouldn't be it.

Of course, YMMV.
post #7 of 15
Thread Starter 
Interesting that you say that because I got that impression from the reviews that is was a more demanding ski. I just had the complete opposite experience. the AC30 seemed stiffer and more demanding than the mach 3 power. What sizes did you ski, how tall and how much do you weigh ?
post #8 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJudge View Post
Interesting that you say that because I got that impression from the reviews that is was a more demanding ski. I just had the complete opposite experience. the AC30 seemed stiffer and more demanding than the mach 3 power. What sizes did you ski, how tall and how much do you weigh ?
5'10', 165 lbs, 170cm
post #9 of 15
I haven't skied either ski, but the AC30 has about 3 meters more sidecut, so you will have to tip it further to get the same turn, and at 4 mm wider, it will also be harder to tip.

If I were looking for a mostly hard-surface ski, I would go with the Mach 3 power.
post #10 of 15
A good friend and his 120 lbs wife use the Speedmachine 16 as thier only ski. They both have lifetime passes to Snowbird and live is SLC.

A 72mm wide ski is all a good (and lighter weight) skier needs in the East.

Michael
post #11 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
AC30 has about 3 meters more sidecut, so you will have to tip it further to get the same turn, and at 4 mm wider, it will also be harder to tip.
I think you are on to something about the tipping, but I am confused about the 3 meters. AC30 radius = 15.1; Mach3Power radius=14.5. Should I be looking at something differently?
post #12 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Squeaky Wheel View Post
5'10', 165 lbs, 170cm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJudge View Post
I think you are on to something about the tipping, but I am confused about the 3 meters. AC30 radius = 15.1; Mach3Power radius=14.5. Should I be looking at something differently?
No, I mistakenly thought you skied the AC in 170. Turn radius affect not as bad as thought, width still as bad.
post #13 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Squeaky Wheel View Post
Warning:

Glad you had a good day on the Mach 3 Power, but IMO it is a very poor choice for a one-ski quiver if you're spending over 25% of your time off-piste. It's also fairly useless in powder.

Think long & hard about this.........
I love my Mach 3 powers, but I agree with Squeaky Wheel if they are going to be your only ski and you ski 1/4 of your time off paste I'd get a different ski. They are best front side curving at speed.

I've always thought that if I could have just one Nordica ski to do everything well it would be the Top Fuel in the East.
post #14 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by highpeaksdrifter View Post
I've always thought that if I could have just one Nordica ski to do everything well it would be the Top Fuel in the East.
I tried to demo the Top Fuel, but the guy that took it out just didn't come back timely enough. I didn't want to spend what could be my last day checking on a demo after every run. Still all things being equal (which they usually won't be) the Top Fuel is 78 underfoot and would be theoretically slower turn to turn than my AC30's.

I wonder if for casual skiing (those less aggressive times skiing with the family) that wider waisted skis for a short light weight person just need more leverage. Maybe there is some physics that say that a 72 waisted ski for a 5'6" person would be equalivent to a 76 for a 5'10" person with similar weight distribution in a similar length ski.
post #15 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJudge View Post
the Top Fuel is 78 underfoot and would be theoretically slower turn to turn than my AC30's.
Just rechecked the dimensions...maybe not because of the extra sidecut
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 › Nordica Mach 3 Power vs. Volkl AC30