or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Salomon Czar Review

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 

 

Me 5' 8” 145 lb Probably level 8, an experienced powder skier (lived in SLC for 9 years)

First time user of rockered skis


 

“Fat” skis I own(ed) Chubbs, Pocket Rockets, Mantras


 

Test ski Solomon Czar 174 cm – 128-108-118 mm. Twin tip with a a tip rocker only, normal mid section and tail. Mounted on back line.


 

Conditions – 7-8 feet total snowfall reported during the 4 consecutive days I skied the Czars. Snow quality ranged from new snow with rain on top, creamy dense wind blown, 3 feet of light powder and deep crud.

Also skied them the day after a reported 2-3 feet (the snow at this resort seems to fall in 6 or

12 inch increments. :-). Very good quality snow, blown around by the wind a bit and then thickening up as the sun hit it later in the day.


 

Good to excellent performance in all of the above conditions. No problems with tip dive or hooking in the inverted snow pack skied on day one. I was able to stay pretty much on top and without bogging down in either the uncut or the crud. The tip rocker and narrow tip shape really seem to work. Fun skiing under poor conditions, much better than expected.

The skis were quick and turney in the low angle slopes skied on day two. Very easy to pivot and skid, confidence inspiring in tight trees.

On day three I started out on low angle slopes again, I think the ski shape helped in the deep snow that fell overnight but the snow was just too deep for flat terrain. Higher up the mountain things were better and the turns were effortless in the deep snow. This was good quality snow, I think I would have been fine with most other fat skis as long as the pitch was steep enough. The thing that was surprising to me was how well they did in the deep crud, really smoothing things out and rolling over or through pretty much everything in their path at the low to moderate speeds I ski. Confidence inspiring. This “non submerging tip” thing seems to help in crud as well.

Days 4 and 5 let me try them out in day old powder and more crud as well as soft groomers and infant moguls. Still excellent crud performance and at least by my standards OK groomer performance, best when I kept plenty of pressure on the tips and kept them turning. As the crud thickened up and the moguls started to grow the skis were more work as expected.

Overall I would describe the Czars as fun versatile powder skis with good crud performance and good enough performance on soft groomed snow.


 

post #2 of 11

It's looking like these not just something for the inexperienced powder skier like some other posts here would indicate.  Sure they continue to sound like they don't have the crud busting or groomer abilities of the brawnier wide-bodies (like the Dynastar HT's), but they sound better for more powder-focused in-bounds skiing especially for lighter-weights and/or if you want something nimble which doesn't require high speeds to turn.

 

Thanks!

 

P.S. Any thoughts about how these compare with your other fat skis, past or present - to date my favorite powder ski was the Chubbs, though I might be practicing revisionist history since its been many years since I've skied them.

post #3 of 11

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post

 

It's looking like these not just something for the inexperienced powder skier like some other posts here would indicate. 

One of the problem with posts valorizing stiff beefy skis or p***ing on softer lighter skis is that they get posted by aggressive skiers, often larger guys, almost always racing background, who understandably want different attributes in a ski than many excellent lighter or less aggro skiers. 

 

Maybe when you sell or see too much of a certain "popular" model, you just want to let off steam here by allowing yourself to be less than enthusiastic.  Which is fine; that's one of Epic's functions...

post #4 of 11

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

 

 

One of the problem with posts valorizing stiff beefy skis or p***ing on softer lighter skis is that they get posted by aggressive skiers, often larger guys, almost always racing background, who understandably want different attributes in a ski than many excellent lighter or less aggro skiers. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well said beyond, and especially meaningful when you consider that the bulk of epic reviewers are > 180 lbs...

Notable exceptions are dawgwatching, yourself, ski-ra and a few others...

 

Would eating more cheeseburgers put us in the mainstream, or in the hospital?

....................................................................................................................................................

If you don't know where you're going, every road takes you there.

                                                                                         Alice in W...

 

post #5 of 11

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nfp158 View Post

 

 Would eating more cheeseburgers put us in the mainstream, or in the hospital?

 

 

Both. 

post #6 of 11


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nfp158 View Post

 

Well said beyond, and especially meaningful when you consider that the bulk of epic reviewers are > 180 lbs...

Notable exceptions are dawgwatching, yourself, ski-ra and a few others...

 

Ditto that beyond and nfp158, though even dawgcatching seems to laud skis that are beyond my weight level (i.e., the Watea 84's are plenty powerful for me, while dawg found them kind of wimpy, and I don't think its my aggro level or skill).  Anyway, to be fair 180lbs. (and growing) is the average weight for a US male, so saying a ski is such-and-such is probably truer to the majority of Epicskiers.  But I'd like to think that we are more than just a group of "Madison ave." thinkers and are actually trying to evaluate skis with the broad range of Epicskiers in mind (if only as a footnote)....  Til then I'll need to continue to read between the lines, demo in self-defense (good idea regardless of weight), and being a nag with my "but what about for us light-weights" posts.
 

post #7 of 11


 

Quote:

 Originally Posted by nfp158 View Post

 Would eating more cheeseburgers put us in the mainstream...

I keep eatin' 'em but 'nuttin's happenin (except for the ever-growing Napolean complex)....

post #8 of 11

You can count me in the light weight division (135 lbs). I have a hard time deciphering some of the reviews when they are written by a heavy weight. I havent tried the Czars but the wife has the Obsethed, it would be an interesting to see how they compare.

post #9 of 11


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard View Post

 

...I havent tried the Czars but the wife has the Obsethed, it would be an interesting to see how they compare.

Me too! The Czars and obSethed's are at the top of my list for demo'ing next year (I wasn't able to this year since the CO Front Range demo shops seemed to view these camber-tweaked skis as exotics, though I think next year this will change).  SJ's feedback on these favored the Czar's (I can't recall on what post I read this, but he seemed to be saying that the Sethed's tail rocker made the ski feel like it wanted to wheelie - but he ain't no lightweight, so it's off to demo these myself).
 

BTW - how does the wife like the obSethed's?

post #10 of 11

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post

 

(I can't recall on what post I read this, but he seemed to be saying that the Sethed's tail rocker made the ski feel like it wanted to wheelie - but he ain't no lightweight, so it's off to demo these myself).

 

I'm 125lbs and wheelies are not an issue on my 'Sethed, which is 169cm mounted traditional (+0). I'd have to say the 'Seth's tail even when mounted that way is still obnoxiously long, especially noticeable when I'm going through gauntlets of trees that required kick turns. On the upside, the same tail saved me many times on nasty drops so I'm keeping it, but not any longer... don't worry about wheelies if you're lightweight.

post #11 of 11

I agree, they're a great powder/crud ski, but not good at all on hard snow.  I picked up a set used set at a great price last year, but definately not a one-quiver ski...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews