or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 2004 Atomic AFT Sugar Daddys
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2004 Atomic AFT Sugar Daddys

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 
I wasn't looking for a powder ski, but found a local guy selling some 2004 Sugar Daddys in 183cm that are in good shape. I've become an Atomic skier, mostly because of who I ski with (a guy who works with the Atomic rep) and own a pair of '04 R:EX, '06 M9, '08 Nomad Crimsons.

When I was in Kirkwood last year, I demo'd a pair of Volkl Mantras in powder conditions and really liked them. I've never owned a true powder ski, but really missed having one the last couple years. I picked up the Nomad Crimsons in late March and never really had them in pow, so not sure if they are going to give me what i want/need when we get a dump.

My questions:

- How does the '04 SD compare to the '08 Mantra? Weight? Float?

- Will the SD be that much better than the Crimson in pow?

- Hard to tell how heavy the SD is compared to my other skis. Some of the other Atomics from the '04-'05 era were heavy (M:EX) and Atomic has done a nice job shaving ounces the last couple years. Is this a concern for the '04 SD model?

I'm a 50 y/o level 7-8 skier, 6'4", 200#, and ski exclusively in the West about 40 days a year.

Appreciate any comments. If I can get the Sugar Daddys for $350 is that a good deal?
post #2 of 7
First, $350 sounds like a lot for a 4 year old ski, unless they are minty fresh and they have a real good binding on them.

Powder: Crimson<Mantra<Sugar Daddy

Crud: Crimson<Sugar Daddy<Mantra

As far as weight, these will be much lighter than any Metron series ski.
post #3 of 7
is that vintage of SD the ones with the atomic only plates?

that plates adds a lot of weight, and makes you a hostage to atomic bindings only.

the new sugar/heli/tele daddies are plateless, softer tip, same shape, same stiff tail flex
post #4 of 7
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the thoughts...yes I think the binding is like my REX from the same year...must use Atomic.

The skis are in great shape with very few days, but I'm thinking its a lot of $$ for 4 year old technology.

Thanks, guys.
post #5 of 7
I believe those are on the rather stiff side, which is weird for a powder ski. IMO they were supassed rather quickly by later Atomic technology. They also have very little sidecut, making them pretty soft snow specific.
post #6 of 7

What he said, they are stiffer than the later gen Sugars which makes them a versatile but heavier animal. As far as I recall they had tons of camber as well, that too declines the flotation in pow somewhat.

If you have a Crimson in your quiver and look for a powder ski rather jump on a late season deal for s.th beefier underfoot with less camber (Gotama, Katana o.e.). The elder Sugars notably lack compared to newer gen Goats in the pow and else they don't really do anything better IMHO.
post #7 of 7
I used a pair of those for a couple of years in Europe. Good crud ski due their heft and stiffness, adequate in powder. However, I would not recommend buying them for any price due to the binding. All of them might not be bad, but I know of several pair that release without warning. The closest I've ever come to knocking myself senseless was when the binding just dropped off my foot after I did a little pre jump. Same thing happened a day later with my friend when the binding just released without any load.
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 › 2004 Atomic AFT Sugar Daddys