EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Atomic SL12 PB vs. Blizzard SLR Magnesium
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Atomic SL12 PB vs. Blizzard SLR Magnesium

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 
I own, but have not yet mounted a pair of 06-07 165 cm race stock Blizzard SL Worldcup Magnesium and was wondering how they compare to the Atomic consumer SL ski.

A few days before tearing my ACL, I took out JMD's 165 cm 07-08 Atomic SL 12 PB and was impressed. I don't think I have ever been on a ski with this much shape and haven't skied anything this short since I was a kid, so I am not sure if it was the Atomics or just the fact that I was on a shaped SL ski.

I found the Atomics to be very versitile on the WROD at A-basin in that it held an edge, easy to initiate, felt comfortable going slow or moderately fast, could perform a variety of turn shapes, was not locked into a turn and seemed reasonable forgiving. They were well tuned at 1/3 and seemed like they would be a good ski to run on groomers (with my 5 year old or at speed) after I recover from my surgery.

My question is whether the Blizzards will be as versitile during my comeback as the Atomics (or whether I should be looking at using a different ski). They are tuned at 0.5/3...will this make them more hooky than the Atomics?

FWIW, I am close to 6' 3'' & 190 and hope to be skiing in Summit CO this spring.

Thanks,
Matt
post #2 of 10
Matt,
Good luck in your recovery.
While I've not skied the Atomics, I believe I have the exact same Blizzard Sl in 165. I bought it from Philpug last year and spent 2 days on it doing hard snow east skiing. I liked it so much that I sold my Supershapes and will use it as my prime front carver ski. It's all the things you described in the Atomics. Did not use it in soft snow.
I seem to remember some discussion about recommended mounting point being too far back to pressure the tips. Phil moved my bindings ahead of recommended line when he set them up. If all goes as planned, I am going to transition back to the Vist binding system originally mounted where I can experiment with correct location.
Hope this helps.
post #3 of 10
I have skied on a few skis in this class and can't imagine being happier than I am on my Blizzard Mag SL. That ski is a keeper!
post #4 of 10
Missed this thread.... thanks for pointing me here MEfree30. Interesting discussion. Im not an Atomic expert but I think the skis I have tested have been great. However, for me the Blizzard Magnesium SL is all that I ever wanted in a ski. I have also reccomended them to friends and sold at least 10 pairs and everyone has been completely blown away. Even lower level skiers (offcourse they are not used to RD skis so any RD skis would have been much better than they were used to). I have skied them on hard groomers, on racing tracks, bumps, powder etc. in other words true all mountain old school skis and I could not be any happier.

Living Proof, funny you should mention the mounting position. I abandoned Head for the Blizzard much because of the mounting position and the centermark. It was too far back on the Heads. Now I see that all Head skis come without the plate mounted so they evidently listened to my wining a few years back . Anyway, I started to read about the Ball Of Foot consept and came to the conclusion that on my iRace GS Head's that according to the BOF consept I had to move my bindings 4cm (!!!!!!) forward! I ripped off the crappy plastic CP13 plate and replased it with a VIST race plate 4cm forwards and you cannot believe what a difference. I whent from total crap to the podium in GS in our club races over night. The Blizzards still felt much nicer than the Heads and I have never looked back. Tried a pair of Head SL skis last year and the tuning was off offcourse but the Mags are my favorit skis hands down. Just bought two new pairs. I did mount my bindings in front of the centermark even on the Mags but funny thing is that the center mark on the new model of the SL Mags have been moved forward. Now the centermark aligns exactly with my boot centermark. Looks like the Blizzard testers came up with the same results I did.
post #5 of 10
The Mag SL is the best slalom ski I have ever tried.
post #6 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by U.P. Racer View Post
The Mag SL is the best slalom ski I have ever tried.
Who are you and why should I care what you think?
post #7 of 10
It would be nice to demo the Blizzard Mag SL. I am very comfortable on the Atomic SL12PBs I picked up off E-Bay this last summer. I selected them to use in the Masters Race Program at Copper Mountain Colo. Thanks to the adjustable bindings I was able to let both MeFree30 and geoffda demo them at A-Basin this early season (WROD). They both expressed joy at the versatility, edge hold, higher speed stability, and fun factor. There are many great skis available.The search is half the fun. James.
post #8 of 10
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the feedback guys.

Was just looking at the mounting point and running length on my skis and I think the top sheet mark would put my ball of foot pretty close to RLC.

What I did notice however is how little camber these skis have...I bought them used, but was told there were only about 20 days on them. Is very little camber a characteristic of this ski, or have mine flattened out?
post #9 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree30 View Post
Thanks for the feedback guys.

Was just looking at the mounting point and running length on my skis and I think the top sheet mark would put my ball of foot pretty close to RLC.

What I did notice however is how little camber these skis have...I bought them used, but was told there were only about 20 days on them. Is very little camber a characteristic of this ski, or have mine flattened out?
Mefree,
I just measured my camber at about 3/4" at the widest point. I measured by holding both both skis, bases touching, tip to tip, tail to tail. I believe my skis have less than 10 days.
Do a search from last winter on this ski and you may find the thread. Philpug may remember some additional details as he set my skis up.
post #10 of 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Living Proof View Post
Mefree,
I just measured my camber at about 3/4" at the widest point. I measured by holding both both skis, bases touching, tip to tip, tail to tail. I believe my skis have less than 10 days.
Do a search from last winter on this ski and you may find the thread. Philpug may remember some additional details as he set my skis up.
I measured the camber on my skis:
2006 model 2 seasons skied: 5,5mm
2006 model 1/2 season skied: 6,5mm
2008 model brand new: 9mm

Looks like there was less camber on the old models. It would be interesting to hear how philpug set your skis up.
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 › Atomic SL12 PB vs. Blizzard SLR Magnesium