or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Icelantic Nomads VS Prophet 90/100
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Icelantic Nomads VS Prophet 90/100

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 
Hey Bears,

I'm trying to figure out my next purchase. I've been doing some research and think the Lines are what I'm leaning towards but the Nomads sound like a fun ski too.

6'0 225lbs Aggressive Advanced Skills. Mainly Ski New York resorts with a couple of trips to VT throughout the season. Currently on Magfire 14's. I love the Elans but I want to add a more powder specific/tree skier to my quiver.

The Line 90's are probably the most practical ski for my day in and day out usage but the nomads sound pretty versatile.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
post #2 of 15
I just bought the Icelantic Nomads in a 181 for use out here in the Colorado Front Range. I'm 5'11" and 165lbs. I found them easy to ski at my weight. They are a light ski and easy to pivot in trees and bumps. They might possibly be too light for someone your size, especially if you are really strong. I'm originally from the east and I don't think I would pick the Nomads for an east coast ski although they would be quick in the trees if that's where you like to ski powder. I also have the Dynastar 8800 which I have been skiing for 4 years and like in trees and bumps so you might consider the newer Mythic Riders for the east coast where a little less width might be better.
post #3 of 15
Thread Starter 
Thank you for the feedback RC.
post #4 of 15
The nomad is a fantastic ski, Much stiffer than the 90 but very nimble and versitile. It rips on any soft snow conditions but is not a hard snow ski although it can be worked on hardpack. I just skied it for 7 days in everything from soft groomers to over 2 feet of powder, including trees, bumps, broken and stiff crud. It's just a fun ski. For a ski that's 140-105-120, it was easy to get on edge as well. I was on a 168, the only time I wish I had a longer ski was on groomed or scraped off stuff, on the powder and broken, it was fine. I would like to try the 181.
post #5 of 15
correction, the tail is 130 on the nomad.
post #6 of 15
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the info...just out of curiosity do you think the Shaman's would be a better ski for what I'm looking to do? The reviews seem pretty good for this ski as well.
post #7 of 15
I wasn't really impressed with the Nomads. If you want a versatile 105mm waist look at the Gotama. The Prophet 100 is also a great ski. It's very good in fresh powder and also rips the groomers.
post #8 of 15
I have been strongly considering the Nomad for a specific purpose...tight, steep trees after a storm in the East.

I am 5'10" and weigh 200 pounds. I am not concerned about performance on groomed snow...I have other skis for that.

So the question is: Placing a premium on maneuverability and float just behind that in priority...would the 168 or 181 make more sense?
post #9 of 15
this is apreference thing. I am 6' 170 and found the 168 nomads to be quite floaty and manueverable. The picture on my posts was taken on Nomads in a 2 foot plus dump. They ski much longer than they seem. That said I do wish they were a tad longer for more soft groomer GS skiing. I bought these as last years demo's. I also own the Shaman in a 173 which is just a fun powder rippin board. If Phil see's this, he can comment. he skied them in the 168. I think for EC trees in any kind of softer snow conditions, these are just fun. As long as you ski in a neutral postion and dont tailgun on them, they are a blast. I didn't take anything more than 5' drops off rocks and such and they were very solid on landings. The thing that has me hooked on the Icelantics is the feel of the ski. It has a unique feel that is also enjoyed by snowboarders who ride Never Summer boards. Its a energetic, crisp feel, perfect blend of dampness with great feedback. The ski absords vibration very well.
post #10 of 15
I think I am leaning toward the 168 Nomads...but any additional input would be appreciated.

For the record...my other skis are the Blizzard Cronus (180) and the Dynastar Contact Ltd (172). Mostly I ski the Cronus. I pretty well avoid skiing the groomed, and as strange as that may sound coming from someone on the East Coast, I am fortunate to ski at 2 local areas that so little to no grooming and have surprisingly steep tree runs that accumulate allot of snow.

I do ski very neutral to forward on the Cronus and love it in most conditions. I just want to add a ski that is very maneuverable in the trees yet will support my 200 pounds.
post #11 of 15
allan @ 200 i would say go 181 for sure
post #12 of 15
Thread Starter 

Do you think that the Nomads @ 181 will be more steady at speed. Some of the feed back has said that there is a speed limit on these and they get squirrley when opened up.
post #13 of 15
FWIW, I demoed some 168 Nomads recently and enjoyed them a great deal. They are the first ski I've been on in a while that I found a speed limit on. I'm 6' 200lbs...definitely would go with the 181s I think. Oh, and for the record, while Icelantic says they are 105 under foot, they really are more like 110. If you put them base-to-base with a ski listed at 110 (I can't remember which ski I did this with) the Nomads are actually a bit wider than the "110" ski.
post #14 of 15
I would call Icelantic, they are very helpful. I'm 170 so another 30# can make a big difference.
post #15 of 15
My 181 Nomads measure 111 under foot (I used a pair of calipers)even though they say 105 on the top sheet.
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 › Icelantic Nomads VS Prophet 90/100