EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Recommendation in the 78-82mm waist range
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Recommendation in the 78-82mm waist range

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 

I am looking for a 2nd pair of skis to complement my Fischer RX Fire 8's.  I ski mostly Vermont slopes (Killington, Smugglers Notch, Bromley, Stratton), so western powder is only a once-every-few-years event!  After trying several skis for my primary pair, I really have enjoyed the "feel" of the Fischer RX Fire 8's ... they just seem to fit me well.  Had a good conversation with Scott (dawgcatching) that was VERY helpful ... I would just like a few more opinions.  I am 5' 10", 167 lbs. and, from what I can determine in the definitions I have read, probably a Level 8 skier.  I want something around the 78-82 mm waist range.  Looking at something just a hair more forgiving and less of a crossover with my RX Fire 8's capabilities than the iM78.  Right now looking at Blizzard Magnum 8.1 IQ, Elan Magfire 82 Ti, Fischer Watea 78.  Considered Legend 8000 as well, but probably a little damper than the feel I like.

 

I would greatly appreciate opinions on these or other suggestions.

 

BTW, Scott (dawgcatching) is great to deal with and would be my first choice to buy from!

post #2 of 26

add the Volkl Tigershark 12 ft to your list...

post #3 of 26
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the addition.  I have been told that the Tigershark 12 Foot might be less forgiving and a bit of a bear in the bumps ... is that a fair characterization?

post #4 of 26

Why not the iM82?  It's the best all around mid-fat I have owned in recent years.  It's a bit more versatile than the iM78 (I own both).

 

I'd suggest the Watea 84 instead of the 78 by a long shot -- it's a much better ski.  Just keep in mind that the Wateas are softer snow skis.  They will be OK on hardpack, but not in the zone. 

post #5 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes429 View Post

Thanks for the addition.  I have been told that the Tigershark 12 Foot might be less forgiving and a bit of a bear in the bumps ... is that a fair characterization?

 

Yes

 

SJ

post #6 of 26

I'm really enjoying the Head Monster iM82 this season here in New England. I never thought it would be as versatile as it turned out to be. It does everything and is fun. The sweet spot is just slightly back of normal and considering its high performance it's more relaxed a ski than I would have expected, and that needs far less attention to ski than the only other ski I have that outcarves it on hard surfaces, my Stockli Laser SL (66m waist). 

 

Even a little more relaxed yet is the Nordica Hot Rod Top Fuel, which is a 78mm waisted ski, and does everything almost as well as the iM82 - I only have a maximum of ten days on these, and they are in 170cm with the integrated Marker system that expands the sweetspot. I would consider selling them for an attractive price with a fresh tune-up, as I just don't use them now that I have the iM82.

post #7 of 26
Thread Starter 

Thanks for all the ideas!  It was my understanding that the iM82 and the Hot Rod Top Fuel, while both great powerful and versatile skis, would also be a little less forgiving.  Off base?  If I can get all the performance level I would ever need with a little more forgiveness for pilot error, why not go that route?

post #8 of 26

The iM82 is extremely forgiving, perhaps more so than the iM78.  I really find the iM82 to be an all-around great choice.  I'd only recommend the iM78 over the iM82 if hardpack performance is a priority.  It has an additional metal layer and bites better on hard snow.

post #9 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier219 View Post

The iM82 is extremely forgiving, perhaps more so than the iM78.  I really find the iM82 to be an all-around great choice.  I'd only recommend the iM78 over the iM82 if hardpack performance is a priority.  It has an additional metal layer and bites better on hard snow.

Thanks for the additional feedback.  By any chance have you skied the Magfire Ti (78 or 82), the Blizzard Magnum 8.1 IQ or the Legend 8000?  I am actually selling a brand new pair of iM78's because, when I got to try a demo, I thought it was a little less forgiving than I could get elsewhere.

 

Thanks again.

post #10 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes429 View Post

Thanks for the addition.  I have been told that the Tigershark 12 Foot might be less forgiving and a bit of a bear in the bumps ... is that a fair characterization?

 

For bumps, there are better, but they aren't that bad.

post #11 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes429 View Post
Thanks for the additional feedback.  By any chance have you skied the Magfire Ti (78 or 82), the Blizzard Magnum 8.1 IQ or the Legend 8000?  I am actually selling a brand new pair of iM78's because, when I got to try a demo, I thought it was a little less forgiving than I could get elsewhere.

 

Thanks again.

 

I skied the older Magfires (12) but not the newer ones.  Have not skied the Blizzards.  The Legend 8K is a great ski, very forgiving, but has a longish turning radius compared to other skis in the category (could be a plus or a minus).  Myself, I prefer the iM78 to the Legend 8K.

 

BTW, the Legends were on www.tramdock.com/ a few times today for $370 with Fluid binding, which is a steal.  Keep an eye out if you want some.  They are up right now in fact!

post #12 of 26

I skied the Magfire 14 (82mm wide) for a few runs and it felt pretty similar to the Hot Rod Top Fuel, in that it was pretty forgiving but I felt I could bend the HRTF better and connect better as I found the Mags stiffer to the point where I thought I should probably go down a size if I were going to buy a set. Both were close to 170cm and I am 5' 10" 170 lbs. I guess I would say that the iM82 is probably a bit less forgiving than both of these, but I have found it to be a pretty forgiving ski.

post #13 of 26

You may want to add the Blizzard Magnum 8.1 to the demo list.  This ski has some great properties that you'd really enjoy.

 

 

post #14 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trekchick View Post

You may want to add the Blizzard Magnum 8.1 to the demo list.  This ski has some great properties that you'd really enjoy.

 

 

If you look throughout the thread, that is definitely one of the primary skis I have been considering.  I have not yet been able to get any feedback from someone who has skied it, so I am a little blind on that one.  Many of the other skis suggested have terrific properties but, like the iM78 I am selling, are a little more of a capabilities crossover with my RX8's than probably makes sense.  What can you tell me about the Magnum 8.1 IQ?  Since there are so many terrific skis in this range which I will never push to their performance limits, I will err toward forgiveness and versatility.  On that front, the Legend 8000 seems to be a good set of compromises and is highly rated in all reviews and feedback I have read.  I am just not 100% sure if the feel will be what I am looking for.  The other ski that seems to be a good set or compromises and high on the forgiving scale is the Hot Rod Nitrous.

 

Any further comments on the Blizzard Magnum 8.1 IQ or the Elan Magfire (82 or 78) Ti's, for that matter, would really be appreciated.

post #15 of 26

 8.1 over the Elan for sure. The Fusion system is very heavy on the Elans and are not as "flexible" on either performance, movability and travel as the IQ. 

post #16 of 26

If you want something on the other end of the spectrum from your RX8 I would look for something even wider than 82.  Watea 84 or better yet 94.  You already have a ski that is great on anything groomed and you can probably make it work in conditions that it is not great for.  Why not get a ski that picks up where the RX8 leaves off.  From reading reviews of most of the skis you have listed, I think you would find too many days where your RX8 and your new ski would both work equally well.  If you have a ski that really falls off in anything less than a few inches of new snow, you never have to debate which ski to bring that day.  Just a thought.

post #17 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 8.1 over the Elan for sure. The Fusion system is very heavy on the Elans and are not as "flexible" on either performance, movability and travel as the IQ. 

Thanks for that note on the Fusion system ... I had not heard that before, so that is very helpful.  I should have also mentioned that, other things being equal, I would prefer to opt for a lighter weight and feel.

post #18 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ManDown View Post

If you want something on the other end of the spectrum from your RX8 I would look for something even wider than 82.  Watea 84 or better yet 94.  You already have a ski that is great on anything groomed and you can probably make it work in conditions that it is not great for.  Why not get a ski that picks up where the RX8 leaves off.  From reading reviews of most of the skis you have listed, I think you would find too many days where your RX8 and your new ski would both work equally well.  If you have a ski that really falls off in anything less than a few inches of new snow, you never have to debate which ski to bring that day.  Just a thought.

A good thought ... I have been thinking about that myself.  My only hesitation is that, since I don't see very many "powder" days in the east, I would not get much use out of a purely soft snow ski.  Also, for the rare trips out west, I would like to only bring one pair of skis, so something with all-mountain and varied condition ability seems to make the most sense.

 

I appreciate all of the input ... it is definitely helping hone the decision process!

post #19 of 26

I'm seconding the wider than the 82 as a compliment to rx8 I think of the82 as a one-ski quiver for the east and  the rx covers a wide range of applications-especially in VT-to really maximize your two-ski quiver go a little wider (the Head im 88 is a better ski than the 82 to start with) but even a little wider and a touch softer will give you more options-the watea 94 in a 178 is a solid place to start...or even a little wider and more playful-like a 98-105mm waisted all-mountain twin-tip (something like the Rossi S5 or even S6 or Head supermojo etc).

 

Everyone makes good skis these days-just as dawg what's the best deal in given size and shape and jump on it!

post #20 of 26
Thread Starter 

OK ... I'm almost afraid to open this can of worms and confuse things more, but I suppose I ought to be as complete as possible in my search!  I do not think I would consider going any wider than the 80's ... just a personal preference.  If I WERE to consider something a little wider than the 78-82 range, the Watea 84 seems to be a pretty good complement to my RX 8's.  Any further suggestions for a good complement that is easy to ski (forgiving) and has a lot of all-mountain versatility?  Again, at 165 lbs. I am not looking for any powerhouse that I need to work aggressively.

post #21 of 26

Just skied the Watea 94 for a week in Utah on both hard and soft snow and it was great.  Skis like a "wide RX8" as others have said.  I had considered buying the Watea 84 and changed my mind after getting advice here.  I'm very glad I did.

 

Also skied the 94 one day here in PA before I left and it did well on icy hard eastern snow.

 

 

Quote:
 

Originally Posted by hobbes429 View Post

OK ... I'm almost afraid to open this can of worms and confuse things more, but I suppose I ought to be as complete as possible in my search!  I do not think I would consider going any wider than the 80's ... just a personal preference.  If I WERE to consider something a little wider than the 78-82 range, the Watea 84 seems to be a pretty good complement to my RX 8's.  Any further suggestions for a good complement that is easy to ski (forgiving) and has a lot of all-mountain versatility?  Again, at 165 lbs. I am not looking for any powerhouse that I need to work aggressively.


 

post #22 of 26
Thread Starter 

After lots of discussions, review reading and feedback, I decided that if I were to go slightly beyond the 78-82mm width range, I would narrow things down to the Watea 84 or the Hot Rod Afterburner.  Both have an 84mm waist, so I realize it is not that far out of the original range, but mentally I am not ready for a 90+ mm width ski.  I looked at the Top Fuel as well, but figured the Afterburner would have more than enough performance for me while being more relaxed to ski on.  

 

With the range now 78-84, finalists are Legend 8000, Magnum 8.1 IQ, Watea 84 and Hot Rod Afterburner.  Thoughts on these are as follows:

 

Legend 8000 - Tried and true, very versatile, less energy.

Magnum 8.1 IQ - Bit of an unknown, but lots of promise.

Watea 84 - Energy, forgiveness, more width underfoot, better in softer snow

Afterburner - Also tried and true, more hard snow capability and a bit more versatility than Watea.

 

I will likely pick amongst these, but if there is any feedback on my characterization being off, I would love to hear it.

 

Thanks again for all your help.

post #23 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by hobbes429 View Post

 Right now looking at Blizzard Magnum 8.1 IQ, Elan Magfire 82 Ti, Fischer Watea 78.  Considered Legend 8000 as well, but probably a little damper than the feel I like.

 

 


 

I demoed (and reported on) the Watea 78 / Legend 8000 and the 8.1's.  The are all fun skis.  I ended up with the 8.1's. 

 

Of the three above,  I think the 8.1's are more versatile than the rest.  They also have a bit more snap to them (more energy).  While I doubt they will ever see "eastern Ice" they held up very well on the hard pack areas in Jackson yesterday.  I think we hit almost everything an area could throw at you yesterday except deep powder and boiler plate.  The skis handled all of it.  I've had these in 2' of fresh when I demoed them (but didn't post a report) and they float REALLY well.

 

Hey......I bought them.......that should have said it all I guess.  It's a very well rounded ski.

post #24 of 26

A lot of respected skiers here are raving about the Blizzards, so that tells you something.

 

The Watea 84s are great skis, but personally I'd say to go for the 94s -- they are better in every way (even on firm snow).  Keep in mind that both the 84 and 94 are biased to softer snow.  I have a review of the 84s and 94s floating around if you can find it.  The 94 is probably my all-time favorite ski right now.

 

The 8K is also well known and has a faithful following.  It's a very friendly, versatile ski, albeit with a longer turning radius than many skis in this width range.

post #25 of 26

A Watea 84 for Vermont?  Seems like a bad match IMO.  From my experience with this ski, and having skied in Killington a bunch in my youth, that ski is probably least suited out of all the ones mentioned for your needs.

 

Have you considered the Fischer Heat series or the Atomic Nomad series?  Or maybe an Atomic Snoop Daddy? Or what about a Volkl AC series or K2 Explorer? Out of the ones you have listed, the Nordica maybe....

post #26 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by monologuist View Post

A Watea 84 for Vermont?  Seems like a bad match IMO.  From my experience with this ski, and having skied in Killington a bunch in my youth, that ski is probably least suited out of all the ones mentioned for your needs.

 

Have you considered the Fischer Heat series or the Atomic Nomad series?  Or maybe an Atomic Snoop Daddy? Or what about a Volkl AC series or K2 Explorer? Out of the ones you have listed, the Nordica maybe....

Thanks for the post.  I appreciate the alternative opinion.  Just want to make sure you saw that this is as a complement to the RX Fire 8's which are my main ski and work really well in the Vermont conditions I have seen.  I am generally not a fan of the K2 feel and, while I used to ski Volkls, have moved away from them as well.  Other thoughts?

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 › Recommendation in the 78-82mm waist range