Originally Posted by Captain_Strato
Most people's skiing changes at 50+, because bodies change.
It's natural you'd want a ski that's less stiff, and more forgiving as you age. Race skis are the epitome of "unforgiving".
The AC4's you mentioned, are for many, an "ultimate performance ski", probably one of the best in the rec category.
Hence, your "step down", is at a high level.
I'm also in the 50+ segment, and now prefer skis with greater smoothness. But, I'm not willing to surrender much stability, grip or quickness.
I just bought the Volkl AC50's. It's possible they're too much for me. If so, I may go to the Blizzard 8.7 Magnum, which is supposedly more smooth and forgiving. We'll see.
Yes the AC4/40/50 is no less demanding than a race ski but does have the ability to handle crud and powder/soft snow better. The AC50's are 3mm wider under foot than the AC4/40
and the width is noticeable on hard snow but nothing extreme.
I found the AC50's I demoed stiffer than my AC4s but slightly
more stable in crud. How wide you go with a mid fat ski depends
on the type of snow you strike most often where you ski. I find
I strike icy patchs/conditions mostly where I ski so would not want to go over 85mm under foot. I have heard the Nordica Jet
Fuel is a good similar ski at 84mm under foot. I have the AC4 in both 177cm and I84cm and for big wide open uncrowded
slopes I prefer the 184cm. I also have K2 Public Enemys in 179
but they lack the stability of the AC4's which explains why they
were about NZ $500 cheaper. I have also demoed the Mythic
Raider which felt similar to the AC4s but at 89mm under foot
a little wide for where I ski. I have also found the AC4's ski best with tall race orientated ski boots