or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Need some feedback on Blizzard lengths.....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Need some feedback on Blizzard lengths.....

post #1 of 5
Thread Starter 

So, I have skied "my" size on the Magnum 8.1 and 8.7 last spring. At 5 foot 9, 155lbs, that works out to 172 and 174cm. As I already have the Duke IQ binding, I need an AT setup, and am not really looking to go as wide as the Argos. At my weight, I rarely need something wider than 85mm, and I have a pair of Huge Troubles for bigger days. I want something a bit more all-around, as I will be using this as my main ski. Originally, the plan was for the Magnum 8.7 to be the ski in 174cm, but that is a little short for fast, wide-open skiiing, which is what I like to do.  Skiing the Kastle MX98 in 174cm confirmed this: great ski, but too short for big-bowl skiing. I was thinking the Stockli XXXL or Elan 888 (both are superb skis) but neither will work with my Duke IQ.  And, I really didn't want to step down to a Fritschi Freeride XL or Naxo, as they are a little soft for resort skiing (probably 90% in bounds, 10% AT use). 


I am thinking instead of a Blizzard 8.1 in 179cm.  Measuring the running length, it is identical to the 177cm 888, although the flex seems stiffer. Anyone out there my size try skiing this ski? If so, what were your thoughts?  The 172cm seemed short when I tried it, but never thought to give the 179cm a shot.  Looking for a ski that is stable at speed, but also not a tank.  On paper, it seems like a good idea, but some longer skis work for good skiers that don't weigh much (Stockli XXXL, Elan 82ti) while others don't (Fischer Cold Heat).

post #2 of 5

Will the 8.1 be a little heavy for an AT set up?  

From someone who skied  the 8.1 in a 172 for a few days, knowing it was long for me, I would think that the 179 would ski fine for you.


It really is a nice ski, even in a "too long" length, it was fun to ski on. 

post #3 of 5

Take a look at the Titan Cronus. Pretty good all-around, light but still able to track well thru crud.

post #4 of 5

I just skied the 8.1 in 179 Wednesday and thought that it was too stiff. While it held well, was damp and energetic and all that, I thought that it was too one dimensional in turn shape. Waaaaayyy tooo geeee- essssy.


The Cronus (180) is a good suggestion.



post #5 of 5
Thread Starter 

I am not too worried about weight on an AT setup.  I won't be skiing in 30 miles to climb a mountain, more like 3-4 hour approaches.  And, I am highly likely to be much more fit than my skiing partners, so a little extra weight is no big deal. 


The 179, flexing the pair in our shop, did seem pretty stiff.  Much stiffer than the Elan 82ti or 888.  It wasn't so much the length I was worried about, but the flex. There aren't many skis in the high 170's that have a great flex pattern for a lighter skier, and those that do (like the Elan 82ti) aren't applicable to AT use.  With regards to a GS feel in a ski, that isn't a problem for me. I like to ski bigger turns and at speed when I can.  I have a pair of 4x4's for real frontside use too.  But, I do need this ski to do well in bumps too.  I don't want a 2x4, which is the reason I didn't buy a Stockli XXXL in the first place.


I hadn't looked at the Cronus.  Skied it last year and thought it was a solid ski, but preferred my 888.  I will check that one out.  Either that, or stick with the slightly-short Magnum 8.7 in 174cm. 

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 › Need some feedback on Blizzard lengths.....