or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

One quiver ski advice

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
Profile: Former level 7-8 skier (not a bump skier and haven't mastered the knee deep stuff) while living in CO 5 years ago. 6' 165 lbs 40 yrs old, in great shape and 80% groomed trails. I ski 5-8 days a year out west and 2-6 days here in the mtns of NC. I will be skiing Breck and Vail in January.

I like to ski blue and black cruisers relatively fast, hit jumps (nothing too big) and want a ski that will support me, but not beat me up when I'm taking it easy. Mostly medium and long radius turns.

Since I don't have the time, access or budget to demo a diverse offering of skis, I have narrowed my options down to these skis and what my concerns are about them. I am leaning mostly toward the Blackeyes and looking for a midfat 78mm plus. Only last years models will fit into my budget. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Atomic Nomad Blackeye: Too much ski.
Atomic Nomad Crimson: Too much and too wide.
Atomic Nomad Whiteout: Not enough ski--4tix binding.
Nordica Nitrous: Heavy (local ski shop)--Might rattle at high speeds! Been there done that.
Nordica Afterburner: Same as nitrous, but 84mm waist.
Elan Magfire 12: Heavy, not nimble enough.
Head Monster 78: A really stiff ski at the local shop--non integrated binding.
Fischer AMC 79: Seems kinda bland--but on the list!
Dynastar 8000: Again bland, but on the list!

I really liked everything I've read about the Fischer Wateas, but seems more biased to soft snow and maybe not as stable at high speeds or good for NC skiing. Also, not many available to buy from last year.

Not a fan of K2's, volkls seem very stiff and had problems with Rossis in the past!

Thanks,

Craig
post #2 of 22
Blizzard Magnum 8.1
Hart Pulse
Elan 777

I agree with you about the K2's in this range but I wouldn't dismiss the Volkl AC30 or Rossi CS80, both are very nice skis.
post #3 of 22
Nitrous 178....the weight won't bother you.

OR

Legend 8K 178....It ain't bland

SJ
post #4 of 22
Thread Starter 
thanks sierrajim,

what are your thoughts about the blackeye?

craig
post #5 of 22
I like the Atomic Nomads a lot. They are however, a little more demanding than some other skis b/c they are very stiff torsionally (typical Atomic) but they are quite light. Thus, the feel is very grippy but can be a bit harsh. The Blackeye can spank you if you find the back seat very often (esp. in bumpz).

It's an awfully good ski, and one that I enjoy but probably wouldn't buy.

SJ
post #6 of 22
Volkl slalom skis can be purchased as an excellent alternative... and yet, at high speed, it will take "an act of God" to make them loose an edge.
In other wods... a very versatile ski, worth looking into, and well worth the additional 15% spending.
post #7 of 22
Thread Starter 
thanks again sierrajim,

the blackeye and nitrous were my first choices--last ?

would the blackeyes be less demanding in a 171?
post #8 of 22
Sure, a shorter ski will usually be a little easier going. You are not real heavy so the shorter length (on any of the three) is not way out of whack. I find shorter skis feel a little "busy" so I prefer a light ski like the Blackeye in 178. I'm 195# though and that is enough difference to be a factor. Nordicas ski very well in shorter lengths and the Nitrous is one of my favorite skis in this category so it's still my suggested choice.

Either if the other two is a great choice too though and you could certainly choose the 170-172 range. Naturally there are predictable tradeoffs, but realizing that is the most important part of ski selection.

SJ
post #9 of 22
Pick up some used Head XRC 1100's from two or three years back. Then demo a fat ski when you go out west.

Save yourself a lot of money.
post #10 of 22
Lib-Tech NAS Freeride

It's 93/99 underfoot, but it's got "magnetraction", so it has a solid edgehold.

It's been my everyday ski for a season, going on 2 now.

It's got a pretty big shovel, so it does decent in the pow, plus it has a 19 tr, so it's turny when you need it to be.

Underrated planks, but worth the funny stares in the lift lines.
post #11 of 22
Since the original question was an (approx) 78mm ski for skiing in North Carolina.....it seems to me that it's best to answer the question as it was asked.

As in.....(Q) "what blender should I buy?" (A) "check out this waffle iron"

Just a thought.....................

SJ
post #12 of 22
Thread Starter 
sierrajim,

it was my first post, but I agree with you on format. the majority of my skiing will still be out in the rockies (I have family in Denver), with the occasional 2hr drive to the ski resorts in NC. We just don't get much snow anymore.

do you have any of last years nitrous in stock? i'm heading back over to the local shop (only 1 in town) again today to look at the nitrous.

thanks again for your help

Craig
post #13 of 22
I like my Nordicas (jet Fuel 170) every day here in JH. I'm 5'10" 165 lbs and a strong skier. I also like the top fuel which I think is 78. Another ski I used a few times last year is the Dynastar contact 11. A very versatle ski. Sometimes the 2 sheets of metal in the Jet Fuels can make the ski a bit "lively" in the bumps, but its not bad. You just have to focus a bit harder. Or try the Nitrous/Afterburner which is less aggressive. I like the metal. Hope this helps.
post #14 of 22
did you consider a dynastar 4x4.... 2x on the blizzard 8.1
post #15 of 22
Craig:

Sorry I don't. Your best deal would be an '08 if you can find one. If you can't find an older one easily, you could PM me. I could get you squared away with a nice deal on an '09.

While the differences are not great, the '09 uses the new Integrated XBI system which has reduced the ski cross section and reduced the swing weight a bit.

SJ
post #16 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by ctpsmeg View Post
I really liked everything I've read about the Fischer Wateas, but seems more biased to soft snow and maybe not as stable at high speeds or good for NC skiing. Also, not many available to buy from last year.

Not a fan of K2's, volkls seem very stiff and had problems with Rossis in the past!

Thanks,

Craig
I bought a pair of Watea 84's from SierraJim at the end of last season. I got to ski 1 day of slush and junk at the local hil in Indiana before taking them out to Jackson Hole at the end of the season. I love them. They seem to be a great do everything ski. I am 5'10" 245lbs and a level 8-9 skier. I will probably use them as an everyday ski this year (unless I really love my new Gotamas).

I will also say that I tried a pair of Nordica Enforcers while I was in Jackson Hole and they were pretty awsome as well. They seemed to have a pretty generous sidecut for a ski that wide and if I find a good deal on a pair I will probably pick up a set.
post #17 of 22
Thread Starter 
thanks for the suggestions teton and finndog

no blizzard dealers anywhere close to me

jet fuel may be too strong for me--i am in great shape, but even though I don't run (mtn biker) I have runners legs. When skiing 25 days a year living in CO, I might have considered a stronger ski, but now I want a ski that can handle my high speeds 40-45+ mphs without chatter, but be light and nimble for more relaxed skiing with my blue run friends who don't ski very aggressive.

dynastar 4x4 are way over my budget

I know that a 1 quiver ski is a stretch, but that's all I can afford for now.

cheers
post #18 of 22
Take the Kastle MX 88 for a drive!
post #19 of 22
Check the specs on the 2009 Salomon Tornado TI. Nice ski. About where you are looking in terms of waist, decent float in deeper stuff.
post #20 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
did you consider a dynastar 4x4.... 2x on the blizzard 8.1
Definitely check out the Dynastar 4x4, or even the Contact 10 if you're willing to try something narrower.
post #21 of 22
CTPSMEG,
I am about the same size as you (5'11" 165lbs). I ski mostly Colorado front range resorts. For background, I ski ~50 days a year and do some racing and Master's training. My everyday ski is a 172cm Dynastar 8000. I demoed some of the others (Nitrous, IM78) along with the 8000s a couple of years ago. I liked the 8000s best although the other two were fine. The deciding factor for me was that the 8000s were very quick in the bumps and tight trees that I ski at Mary Jane. They are very easy to pivot in those conditions. They are also good in crud. They have more of a GS feel (19m turn radius) on the groomers than the other two. You do have to get pretty good angles on the edges to carve them compared to the other two but they are still comfortable at relaxed speeds. I have the older red/orange versions. They apparently toned them down a little and added some more side cut the last year or so. If you want a light, quick ski with a GS feel on the groomers then you might like them. If I were only skiing groomers I might have got the 178cm (I have the 8800 in a 178cm for powder). The 8000s are not real good on really hardpacked snow or ice at 172cm if that is a consideration. Then I use a race carver or run gates. If you want a damper smoother ski try the Nitrous or IM78. I thought the Nitrous was pretty good in bumps also and did not feel heavy on the snow.
post #22 of 22
I second rcahill's comments about the red/orange (06-07?) Legend 8000. I have a pair for my annual western trip and the days when there is more than 6 inches of fresh in Vermont. A versatile soft snow ski but not the best for firm eastern hardpack. I have a pair of Fischer RX-8s for that.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion