EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › iXRC 800 to Monsters 77, 78 or Supershape: upgrade for quebec skier ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iXRC 800 to Monsters 77, 78 or Supershape: upgrade for quebec skier ?

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
Hi,

My specs: 6'1", 165 lb,
Ski's: iXRC 800's (177 but consider to go shorter).
Expert in our east coast conditions (Le Massif), more a technical than a power skier

I have the feeling that I'm getting to the limits of the XRC800's, mainly when I'm in the bumps. On piste is OK.

Demoed some ski's at the end of last season:
- Atomic SX 10 b5's: super on icy hardpack, but not great for short turn and in the bumps;
- Dynastar Contact 9: didn't care for them, too anonymus;
- Fischer Progressor Flowflex: did quite well in all conditions, but seemed to ask for quite some input (power).

So currenly I'm looking for a low budget upgrade for my XRC 800's, and found these for a low price:
- 2007 Monster 77 RF (170cm);
- 2008 Monster 78 SW (170cm)
- 2008 Supershapes (175cm).

- How would these compare to the XRC 800s ?
- Will the monsters be good in icy on piste conditions (edge hold in comparison to XRC800);
- Should I consider the Monsters given the fact that we hardly have real powder/deep snow conditions around here ?
- What are the main differences between the 2 Monsters ?
- Should I consider the Supershape, given it's length and the fact that I'm more a technical than a power skier and spend quite some time on our more bumpy black diamonds ?

- Should I forget these and spend more (Metron 11's ?)

Questions, questions, ....

Thx for the input !
post #2 of 24
I'm familiar with Le Massif, have skied the 800's and 77's, own SS's and 1200's. IMO, what you gain by going to the high 70's - mainly better chop/crud peformance - is more than offset by the reduced handling on ice, which Massif gets a lot of. My SS's are superb all arounders, but if they have a weakness, it's ice at speed. So my rec (drumroll): None of the above. Go find a pair of 1200's. Believe me, unless you're ready for the Olympics, you won't find their limits, they grip ice like a pitbull, have that Head dampness, and thrive at higher speeds than the 77/78 line. Because they're a cross, they'll do just fine in moderate chop and crud. As good as the 77, IMO.

Or if you have more $, get the iSpeeds...
post #3 of 24
Seconds on the 1200.

An older 1400 would be less of an upgrade but more immediately enjoyable.

PS I think you might want to demo Dynastars higher up in the line.
post #4 of 24
Thread Starter 

added another one

thx for the reactions.

- How would the XRC 1200 SW compare to the 800 ?
- Also, good idea to go shorter (170 ish ?)


Found good deal on the Fischer RX 8, which seams interesting: shorter turn radius than the XRC 800, and I guess a bit stiffer.
post #5 of 24
1200 is like a 800 on steroids. I'm your weight exactly, first demoed the 1200 in a 163 at Le Massif, in fact, it was enjoyable also at most speeds most people ski. Went for the 170, it's all I need and probably then some. Comprex has a good point, I should have mentioned the 1400, which will have a slightly lower performance envelope, but is also a bit less demanding, a bit damper/smoother still. All great skis.

Owned a RX8 a few years ago. Also a great ski, but vastly different feel and mission. More of a SL-ish carver, so as strong or stronger on ice, likes shorter radius and quicker turns, but far lower speed limit than the 1200/1400 series; not even as high as the 800, and will get kocked around in rough snow or crud. I see RX8's as lively, precise, and energetic, amazing skis to perfect your carve on, thus more a competitor to the SS's. OTOH the 1200/1400's are quick, smooth and powerful, demand more technique to being with. So the Fischers will be easier, and thus in some ways more fun than the Heads. But not the ski for beating your friends to the bottom. Which is another kind of fun...
post #6 of 24
Thread Starter 
Thx for the replies.

Looking for <71mm waist now.

If not wanting to stay with head, what other ski's could I consider that would have the same or better performance in icy east coast conditions (I like the edge grip of my XRC800's) ?
post #7 of 24
Contact 4x4 (short) or last year's LTD
Fischer Progressor 8 or last year's RX8/Fire
last year's Elan Speedwave 12
last year's Volkl Allstar
post #8 of 24
Pieter, you can find all head ski specs here:

http://www.skidetails.com/en/skiSear...&id_stagione=2

I would consider expecially iXRC1100 (www.skidetails.com/en/skiDetail.jsp?id_model=582)

anyway you can also look at:
Fischer Progressor 9+: www.skidetails.com/en/skiDetail.jsp?id_model=519 (70mm)
Head Supershap Speed: www.skidetails.com/en/skiDetail.jsp?id_model=581 (68mm)
Elan Speedwave 12 (2008): www.skidetails.com/en/skiDetail.jsp?id_model=294 (70mm)
post #9 of 24
Go with the Supershapes, they will not disappoint!!!!!!!!
post #10 of 24
Funny, based on the reviews I have read, I would think the Supershapes would be the best for what he is looking for, that being a ski that is good for technical and good for bumps, of which the Supershapes are ideally suited for both (tight turning radius and softest of the SS line).
post #11 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie-Rich View Post
Funny, based on the reviews I have read, I would think the Supershapes would be the best for what he is looking for, that being a ski that is good for technical and good for bumps, of which the Supershapes are ideally suited for both (tight turning radius and softest of the SS line).
He is pretty light and moving up from an iXRC 800. That is a definite jump. See what he says about the SX b5.

For someone who says they're a technical skier on Charlevoix hardpack and bumps, we want to make absolutely certain he can flex the ski without having to spend time skiing under his level while he gets used to the ski.
post #12 of 24
why not the SS magnum? I think that's a better match also, Blizzard Supersonic
post #13 of 24
I say go for the Supershape. It will be more flexible than the higher end XRC skis for bumps, and since he isn't encountering the speed limit on the 800, the Supershape should do well enough on the groomers.
post #14 of 24
wouldn't a SS Magnum be a little better in bumps and still not really give up anything on the groomers or are you looking at this from more of a groomer/carve perspective.
post #15 of 24
For typical hard snow and ice conditions in Quebec I would prefer the SS over the magnum. The magnum would likely have the edge in the bumbs, true, but IMHO, it gives up too much performance on ice in order to work well in moguls. The SS works great on the hard stuff and gets by in moguls.

The SS is sort of between the SS Speed and SS Magnum in terms of mogul and hardpack performance. It doesn't have quite the performance at higher speeds that the SS speed does, but thanks to being a little more flexible it's not as bad as those skis in the moguls, while still working well at most speeds on the ice and hardpack. Other's may want to draw their line in a different place, but that's where I see it.
post #16 of 24
Thread Starter 
Great, all the interesting comments.

I have seen a pair of SS (the 'regular' ones) quite cheap, but in 175 length.
Should I let pass and rather look for 170cm, considering the XRC800's in 177 feel sometimes a tad long in the bumps.

thx
post #17 of 24
Excellent explanation, thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
For typical hard snow and ice conditions in Quebec I would prefer the SS over the magnum. The magnum would likely have the edge in the bumbs, true, but IMHO, it gives up too much performance on ice in order to work well in moguls. The SS works great on the hard stuff and gets by in moguls.

The SS is sort of between the SS Speed and SS Magnum in terms of mogul and hardpack performance. It doesn't have quite the performance at higher speeds that the SS speed does, but thanks to being a little more flexible it's not as bad as those skis in the moguls, while still working well at most speeds on the ice and hardpack. Other's may want to draw their line in a different place, but that's where I see it.
post #18 of 24
Finn,
If it were for my personal use, I would go for a supershape speed at 177 and live with it in moguls, 'cause I like to go fast more than I like moguls, but for the original poster, I think the supershape would be best.

Pieter,
Go for 170 cm; 177 will feel too long for what you want to do. Either supershape, or supershape chip.
post #19 of 24
I'll have to get back into this cuz I ski a fair amount at these places, own the SS and the 06 SW 1200 (which is the 07 SS Speed), and in all honesty, not convinced the SS has enough bite on ice. Not bad, understand, but even at 1/3, not an ice skate.
post #20 of 24
Beyond,
How well do you find the '06 1200SW performs in the bumps? Which would you prefer for bumpy black diamonds?

I also thought of the Fischer RX8 or Progressor+8, but he does seem to like the Head XRC800 so a step up from there, but with similar Head feel seems to be about right. I don't think the speed would be the best tool given a fair amount of time on icy black bumps.
post #21 of 24
Hi Ghost - Yeah, I find 1200 dampness and moderate sidecut helps it get through bumps maybe better than you'd expect, but like my old 6* keeps asking if we can stop this s**t and get back to the high speed ripping. SS's are softer, more forgiving, but that deep sidecut keeps wanting to grab and carve. Probably take the SS's, but you're dead on about RX8/Progressors (and I'd add Contacts); as much or more ice grip, a lot more friendly in serious bumps. IMO neither has that Head calmness at speed, but unclear what his priorities are...

Another random thought: Stockli Crosses (not Pros) or the syn core XL's? Excellent grip with the right plate, preternaturally smooth, fine in bumps as long as you stay relaxed and take a classic line, high speed limit...
post #22 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pieter View Post
Hi,
...
- Dynastar Contact 9: didn't care for them, too anonymus;
...
Found your post while I was searching for Dynastar Contact feedback. Couldn't help but wondering why is "anonymous" bad?
post #23 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skid View Post
Found your post while I was searching for Dynastar Contact feedback. Couldn't help but wondering why is "anonymous" bad?
Demoed them the same day I tested the Fischer RC4 Progressor Flowflex (and skied my XRC 800's), and in comparison with both, the contacts 9 lacked a little something that makes you go 'wow'.

It's probably an OK ski, but it didn't challenge me at all. I don't consider them as an upgrade from my XRC 800's.

Just my 2 cents though...
post #24 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pieter View Post
Demoed them the same day I tested the Fischer RC4 Progressor Flowflex (and skied my XRC 800's), and in comparison with both, the contacts 9 lacked a little something that makes you go 'wow'.

It's probably an OK ski, but it didn't challenge me at all. I don't consider them as an upgrade from my XRC 800's.

Just my 2 cents though...
In other words, they didn't stand out. Thanks for your reply.

I took your mention of "anonymous" as un-recognisable, and was curious as to why. As Beyond stated, the higher Contact models like the Contact 11, Limited, 4x4 might offer you more than the Contact 9 you demo'ed.

Happy shopping.
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 › iXRC 800 to Monsters 77, 78 or Supershape: upgrade for quebec skier ?