EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Who has skied icelantic?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Who has skied icelantic?

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
Good, bad, comments ? Just curious.
post #2 of 25
5'6", 145 lbs, level 7. I skied this year's Pilgrims in 169cm about 2wks ago in packed powder/man made snow. For a light ski, good edge hold, fun and lively. They appear to be very well made. Pressed by Never Summer locally in Denver I believe. No, no commercial interest.
post #3 of 25
Look in this forum for numerous Icelantic reviews. I demo'd the 173 Shaman last year & completely LOVED it. Absolutely brilliant in crud, chowder, and powder! I'm hoping to hop on a pair of the 184's this year.
post #4 of 25
I've skied the Shaman, last winter out in Steamboat. I have a current pair of NeverSummer produced skis in my quiver and really like them, nice skiing skis.
post #5 of 25
I've skied them (shaman and their nice, quality is decent but nothing great, to me they felt like a quiver ski that if I bought I might take out once every couple of years. they performed decently but nothing special about them. Edge hold was ok, they were easy to turn (no suprise), weren't all that stable at higher speeds
post #6 of 25
i have.

and you can, too.

Icelantic is touting that they will be doing a pretty major ski demo tour, so you might want to contact them via their website to see if/when they are going to be about.
post #7 of 25
Found this over at TGR...

Icelantic Colorado Demo Tourdates!


The Icelantic Demo tour was kicked off to a solid start with over 40 inches of fresh snow at Loveland over the last 48 hours. We will be traveling to over 60 resorts on the west coast allowing the locals to demo our entire fleet for free. Come demo the skis and learn about the Icelantic from everyone that makes the company what it is today. Check out the ski description and the new company video at www.icelanticboards.com The video shows a time lapse of our skis beign made, our gallery, ski construction/description and more. Everyone had a blast making it. Spread the word to your friends and we will see you on the mountain!
• DEC 3, Wednesday- A-Basin

• DEC 6-7, Saturday, Sunday- Copper

• DEC 10-11, Wednesday, Thursday- Steamboat

• DEC 13-14, Saturday, Sunday- Aspen

• DEC 15, Monday- Snowmass

• DEC 16, Tuesday- Crested Butte

• DEC 17, Wednesday- Wolf Creek

• DEC 19, Friday- Telluride

• DEC 20/21, Weekend- Silverton
post #8 of 25
post #9 of 25
FYI, the Icelantic crew is really cool.

I stumbled upon a demo day of there's at Loveland 2 seasons ago and not only did I get out on 2 of their models for about 45 minutes each, but I got to talk to the owner/founder at length about the company, his philosophy, etc. On top of that they bought me a beer for trying their skis and offering feedback.

Interestingly enough my main feedback was that their skis were too short and if they had something in the 177 - 185 length range I'd seriously consider them.

What do you know, this year they are offering a number of models in 180!

post #10 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by dookey67 View Post
FYI, the Icelantic crew is really cool.

I stumbled upon a demo day of there's at Loveland 2 seasons ago and not only did I get out on 2 of their models for about 45 minutes each, but I got to talk to the owner/founder at length about the company, his philosophy, etc. On top of that they bought me a beer for trying their skis and offering feedback.

Interestingly enough my main feedback was that their skis were too short and if they had something in the 177 - 185 length range I'd seriously consider them.

What do you know, this year they are offering a number of models in 180!

As of last year, their presses maxed out at 182. Not sure if that has changed.
post #11 of 25
I demoed the 184 Shaman and didn't care for the design. They planed up on powder, and crushed crud with ease, but I found the side cut to be excessive for that type of skiing; off-piste they tended to hook and dictate the turn, kinda squirrely, they didn't like long radius turns. They were OK on the little bit of groomers I skied them on, but who needs a huge fat ski for groomers?

I'd rate them a "So what?"
post #12 of 25
icelandictic skis are a solution for a problem that didnt exist. to much sidecut for true off trail expert skiing.

Most people dont realize that sidecut makes a ski less nimble in powder and crud.
post #13 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
icelandictic skis are a solution for a problem that didnt exist. to much sidecut for true off trail expert skiing.

Most people dont realize that sidecut makes a ski less nimble in powder and crud.
That is a blanket statement that isn't always true.
post #14 of 25
my review is one of the threads. I have the Shamans in a 173 and love them. A very fun, nimble ski. Stupid easy to ski pow and crud in. I am a mortal skier; I don't ski at uber mach speeds in pow so I felt they were fine at speed. Super easy to turn. A perfect match for a place like Steamboat. I will say that a 178 would be the perfect length and maybe go 150-110-135 instead. I think once they go beyond that, they loose their playfulness and quickness. Just my .02.

PS- if anyone has a Nomad for sale, PM me.
post #15 of 25
I've skied all the Icelantic skis in the last couple of years and owned the Nomads in 156 and 168. I like the maneuverability in the trees. At the demo Sunday, I tried the De'Nallie (park ski so a little different on regular runs), Scout (you can actually go this short and get some performance, I had to try for sh*ts&giggles's) and Pilgrim (tried the 179 and really liked it as an all-mountain/front side carver ski. It was really easy to throw around and pivot on as well.)
Give them a demo if you are on the tour stop - cool people as well
post #16 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
That is a blanket statement that isn't always true.
flex not sidecut is a greater factor.

the most nimble powder and crud skis have reversed sidecut so how does alot of conventional sidecut make a ski easy to ski anywhere but groomers?
post #17 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
flex not sidecut is a greater factor.

the most nimble powder and crud skis have reversed sidecut so how does alot of conventional sidecut make a ski easy to ski anywhere but groomers?
Sidecut is not a detriment in the trees or where you might be making tighter turns. It depends on the application that you will be using the ski, to make the blanket statement that it is no good, is wrong, it depend more where you will be skiing it. Yes, there are times when less is more, but my point is, it isn't always the case.
post #18 of 25
Been doing some reading about ScottyBobs and found this tele review that has some interesting comments about sidecut and powder.

http://www.telemarktips.com/RevSBCustomSkis.html
post #19 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
Sidecut is not a detriment in the trees or where you might be making tighter turns. It depends on the application that you will be using the ski, to make the blanket statement that it is no good, is wrong, it depend more where you will be skiing it. Yes, there are times when less is more, but my point is, it isn't always the case.
I disagree. I hated the Shamans in the trees (and tree skiing is something I spend A LOT of time doing), that the last place I want a ski to be predisposed to turning of its own accord. The stiffness of the shovel, combined with the side cut made feathering turns in tight spaces a chore rather than a joy.

Spatulas are a brazillian times easier to manage in the trees.
post #20 of 25
The Shamans are a love 'em or hate 'em proposition. IMO they were kind of interesting a couple of years ago. Less so given he current crop of rockered and hybrid skis.

That said, I kind of like the Nomads. I've skied the small and medium ones. Not surprisingly the small ones were definitely too small. No time on this year's new long ones. They are well made. They have a balanced feel. Fairly stiff. Fat enough to float. Carvy enough to carve. But not overly hooky - especially given its reported sidecut. Not my pick for a dedicated powder ski. And personally I'd lean toward a rockered ski for all around use these days, but the Nomad is good fun as a very all-around conventional ski. I'd put it on the evaluation list if you want a fatter conventional ski for a broad range of conditions.
post #21 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by volantaddict View Post
I disagree. I hated the Shamans in the trees (and tree skiing is something I spend A LOT of time doing), that the last place I want a ski to be predisposed to turning of its own accord. The stiffness of the shovel, combined with the side cut made feathering turns in tight spaces a chore rather than a joy.

Spatulas are a brazillian times easier to manage in the trees.
The Shaman is a bad example, it has such a short TR..I am talking about something in the traditional range, but not real straight.
post #22 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
The Shaman is a bad example, it has such a short TR..I am talking about something in the traditional range, but not real straight.
I just think it's a bad ski design, like they couldn't make up their mind what it was for.
post #23 of 25
VA, the ski is great. I think the bad design part is the 184 size they made. The 173 is a super easy, fun ski. It may be OK if they went to a 178 but I think it just looses it's fun factor over that.
post #24 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
VA, the ski is great. I think the bad design part is the 184 size they made. The 173 is a super easy, fun ski. It may be OK if they went to a 178 but I think it just looses it's fun factor over that.
but it unstable at speed and a pain on hardpack in trees because its too carvy...

it waas ok the day I demoed it at alta(173). After I got my Thugs and skied on several reverse cambered skis I discovered the quickest skis in powder while tree skiing are soft big and no sidecut or reverse sidecut. Trust me when I say this my 192 Thugs are way better tree skis than the shaman, and when you compare them to Praxis, spatulas there is no comparison.
post #25 of 25
I demoed the 181cm Nomad on Nov 30 at Loveland after the big dumps that weekend. I liked them so much I bought a pair. I found them to pivot easily in soft moguls and they plow through crud. They handled relaxed speeds comfortably. I didn't really push them since it was my first day in deeper snow this year. They were easy to turn quickly in trees also. I think they are an ideal ski for middle aged skiers sking powder in bumps and trees at places like Mary Jane. They had a nice even forgiving flex and the Icelantic people said there are no metal layers. By the way even though they say 105mm width they actually measure 111mm in the middle in the 181cm length.
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 › Who has skied icelantic?