EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Head IM 82, vs 88 or maybe Mojo 94...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Head IM 82, vs 88 or maybe Mojo 94...

post #1 of 39
Thread Starter 
This title begins to describe my dilema.  It's that time of the year when last year's leftovers are available at bargain prices and still with some selection.

I'm a 1 ski quiver kind of guy and I want to stay that way.

My current ski, which has 10 days on it, all from last year is a pair of Head IM 82's in a 183 length with a Head railflex binding - LD-12's I think.  My boots were a pair of Head S13 Superheats (all mountain high performance, last about 105mm, 120 flex). 

I loved this setup last year.  It was my first year on the IM 82's and when I bought them I just couldn't bring myself to make the jump from a ski that was 70mm under foot all the way to 88 mm, so I chose the IM 82's instead of the 88's.  And the boots were really very good too, although later in the day the fit did tend to feel slopier and I found myself clamping the buckles down more and more.

I had a issue with the buckles on these boots so I sent them back to head expecting them to fix them, but low and behold the sent me a new pair of this year's model of the Vector 120 which is the replacement boot for the S13.

Here's what I'm thinking...

Sell some or all of my current setup on Ebay.

I've found a pair of Atomic RT CS 140's - a full on race boot with a 140 flex and a last of just 98mm.  The fit is good and at 230 lbs, the 140 flex should be no problem...actually probably far superior to the Head Vector 120's.

While I'm at it, the deals around on a pair of the IM 88's in 186 length are so tempting.  And the IM 82's were terriffic, but I'm comfortable with that width now and the 82's could definitely offered a little more float in soft stuff.

All the reviews I've read on the 88's have been so positive, and with 6 mm more under foot and another 3 in length...I just see it as a win win situation.

Am I crazy?  Would I be going through a bit of trouble and spending probably a couple hundred bucks (net after the sale of the existing equipment) for little or no gain?  Or would the overall new setup be the significant improvment I suspect it might be, even though the current setup really is quite nice?

Would love to hear some thoughts from you big guys!  At 230 lbs, big skis and stiff boots just don't feel as big and stiff as they do to the average skier.



PS - The name is lame...just my email address.  Just couldn't come up with something clever that didn't make me sound like a tool...
post #2 of 39
 Yeah, the Monster 88 at 186cm was too much ski for me (I'm 150 lbs.), so I went for the M82 at 183cm and it's been great for the last couple of years.  Judging by your weight and stated experience with the 82's, I'm sure you'll like the 88 (except in tight places).

But why get rid of one for another if you're going to make such a minor change?  I choose your "little or no gain" option.

So don't treat the boots and skis as a package.  Change what needs improvement.

(fyi, this thread belongs in the "ski gear discussion", not the "member gear reviews")
post #3 of 39
 I haved owned the IM88 and now have 82.

Both are ok, but don't expect any significant increase in "float".  Neither is what could be considered floaters.  Both are good in hard to variable , crud, etc.

Also neither is much better than the other on ice.

I did enjoy the 88 more in general.
post #4 of 39
Originally Posted by nihols View Post

All the reviews I've read on the 88's have been so positive, and with 6 mm more under foot and another 3 in length...I just see it as a win win situation.

Am I crazy? 

Absolutely not at this moment…but the more time you spend here you’ll soon be humming loony tunes

Which 88?  The prior year(s) Monster 88 and 2010 Peak 88 differs with the Peak less some titanium softening it up a bit.  The 78 & 82 remain the same in ‘10 except for graphics.

post #5 of 39
Having been a skinny skier all my life then last year picking up the 88s.....I love them they are my favorite skis out of my 5 pair of HEADs....they can do it all....get them while you still can you will not regret it.
post #6 of 39
I'm about your size and my go to ski last year was the Watea 101 in a 192.  The only place my Monster 82's were better was in the moguls.

I'm going to try the Watea 94's this year to see if they have most of the wonderfulness of the 101's while being a little happier in the bumps.

I would have considered the Mojo 94's if I had found a deal on those before the Watea 94's.

Of the ones on your list, go for the 94's. 

But, I suspect you would love the Watea 101's.

I ski in Colorado.  If you ski hard snow a lot it might be different.
post #7 of 39
The 88s are OK in crud, but they are not powder skis at all -- much too stiff and the shape (both sidecut and camber) is all wrong.

I have both the 88 and 82, and find the 82 is a great all around ski that is very versatile.  The 88 on the other hand, is like a wide race ski, and is focused more towards fast, aggressive, on-piste skiing.

If you go with the 88, make sure you're good and make sure you're willing to drive them hard all day long.  These skis don't like to relax, and will not be forgiving of any sort of skidding or backseat weighting.

Don't get me wrong, the 88s are great skis, but they are not wider iM82s.  The 88s are lot more demanding and technical.

If you like the 82 but want to go wider, look into the Mojo 94 or even the Fischer Watea 94.  But I'd still keep the 82 around as a general purpose ski that you can goto for a wide range of conditions.
post #8 of 39
 Sounds like I'm going to have to get me a pair of these rockets!
post #9 of 39
Thread Starter 
WOW - Thanks for all the feedback!  All if it was very informative.

As far as the boots, I pulled that trigger, received the boots and they feel great.  They'll need a couple tweaks probably, but the basic fit is really solid.  No sloshing around at all!  And no major presure points.  So now I have the Head Vector 120's posted for sale on Ebay.

On the skis, I didn't see alot of this feedback until just now.  The first deal I had found on the 08/09 IM 88's went by the boards and is no longer available.  However, I found an even better deal on the exact same ski at a local shop.  $450 plus $25 mounting, plus NJ sales tax for the 08/09 IM 88's in the 186 length.

Because I live in the east and ski the west, I'm only going to drag one pair of skis so whatever ski I have must be a one ski quiver.  If I had it to do again, despite this great deal I just got and considering all your advice, I might have just stuck with the IM 82's.  I was interested in the 88's for better float which sounds is not something I'm going to see a big difference in vs. the 82's.  And while the Mojo 94's or one of the Watea's would be great skis for most typical western conditions, if I hit some especially firmer conditions, I think either IM 82's or 88's would be better on those firm or chunked up conditions.  If I get a deep day and really want something with better float than what I get out of the 88's I can always rent for the day.

So...the IM 88's are now on Northern NJ Craigslist for $295.  That's a steal considering they only have 10 days on them.  Thanks again for all your feedback.
post #10 of 39
Originally Posted by DonDenver View Post

The 78 & 82 remain the same in ‘10 except for graphics.


Don/others -- Yes?  The realskiers review of the 82 agrees with this, but I was confused by their review of the 78 (that whole word/sentence thing slows me down sometimes  ).
post #11 of 39
Thread Starter 
PS...that $450 deal on the IM 88's included a pair of the Mojo 12 bindings.  Rediculous - Right?
post #12 of 39
Well, I was just thinking of putting my Head Im88s 08-09 model in 186 with railflex RFD14s on ebay.  PM me and I'll beat that $450 deal.  Like new. Skied 5 days last season all out west.    I'm looking to thin out the quiver some.... 
Edited by Gaff - 10/9/09 at 12:50pm
post #13 of 39
I think the 82 would be the more versatile ski. I really like the im88, but its basicly a wide GS ski that crushes crud off piste and hauls ass on piste. Sort of a submarine in powder. Not the most manuverable in trees or bumps. I think there are better 1 ski quivers out there.
post #14 of 39
Fellow Rippers,

The 82"s are great all around skis for most days with a little soft snow underfoot.  The 88"s are rockets in the 186 lenght,  better be technically sound skier although.  I have a almost new pair of 88"s in the 186 lenght for sale with the white Mojo 15 binding for sale if anyone is interested.  Denver location,  Summit County or my mountain for fun Loveland.  $450.00  Skis have maybe 10 runs on them. 
post #15 of 39
I'm interested in your im82s.  PM me or just email messinap@comcast.net

I own a pair of im88s in 186 and love them.  They work well in crud and powder. Make sure you mount the boots on the line.  I've also skied them in 175, and that works well in the east and tight spots.  That's why I'm thinking of getting the 82s.
Edited by treebeard - 10/22/09 at 1:48pm
post #16 of 39
 great info everyone
I am now living in Calgary and getting into the big mountain groove coming from blue mountain.
I was on head im75 but just got monster 82 cause i still want to go rail to rail on the groomers but looking to expand up in range for some side country deep. sounds like I should skip the monster 88 and go to something like the volkl mantra for that 50/50 ski i can still take to fernie and kicking horse or the dive and still rip the groomers with the family. I would welcome input on this.
post #17 of 39
Monster 88 super high performance skis that will carve/blast thru crud or boiler plate (it is built like a race ski) not to be confused with the new Peak 88 which I have not tried but I understand is more "forgiving" (read: its a castrated version of the Monster.)
post #18 of 39
 any thoughts on a ski that is a little more deep friendly than the monster 88 but can still carve well at speed. 
if I already have the monster 82 I am thinking of by passing the 88 and going to the mid 90's this year and I will get a more dedicated powder ski over 100 next year. can anyone compare mantra,mojo,watea,mystic or anyother ski in that family for powder vs groomer versatility?? 
post #19 of 39
 I'm a pretty new member of the site and have actually never heard of Head making skis.  I know they made tennis rackets, but that's about it.  Looking for the post it seems like people are pretty happy with this ski, sounds like I'll have to go check it out...
post #20 of 39
I really like the Monster 88.  That said, if I had the 82, I'd want to make a bigger jump.  How about the PMGear Bro?  It's 99 under foot, and you can get it in 3 stiffnesses, so you can pick the one to suit your needs.
post #21 of 39
Thread Starter 

You're dating yourself...  You must be in your teens, or maybe 20's.  Lucky you...

Head made skis long before they got into tennis or just about anything else.  Back in the 60's, Head and Hart were the 2 biggest US ski manufacturers.  They were like K2 is now...which I beleive is still a US based company that manufacturers it's skis in China now.  K2's were originally made in the States, then somewhere in Europe, but now I think they're all made in China.

Head faded from the ski scene through the late 70's, 80's and 90's but have made a comeback in the last 10 years.  They never stopped completely, but they struggled for a long time and chose to focus on other industries.

Head's ski reps are among the biggest names in the sport.  Herman Meyer, Bode Miller, that American chick (forgot her name) that has cleaned up on the world cup circuit for the last couple years and a whole bunch more.
post #22 of 39
Thread Starter 
Sorry Treebeard...I meant Jando5 on that last comment...
post #23 of 39
Gonna throw up a quick review of the im82, last years 08/09 version, not this years peak 82. 

Me: 210lbs, 6'1 - other skis I have / like: 184 Volkl Mantra, 178 Dynastar 4x4, 190 Volkl Katana, 184 Stockli XL: 30-40 day Denver front ranger.   Most days spent in Summit.
Skis: Head im82 183cm w. Salomon STH14
Conditions: man made + light new at Abasin in CO.  7 runs top to bottom.

Review: just confirmed everything we have heard on the Im82, it really is one of the best all around, all mountain skis on the market.  I dont consider a ski like this a powder ski at all  and I am a quiver guy so I would not take this out after a bid dump.  That being said it really is a solid frontside / no new snow / ski.  It can lay over a really nice carve with a beautiful rebound out of the turn.  The round tail will hold as much as you want or you can wash it out and slide the tail around, very versatile.  Equally comfortable on long sweeping GS turns or quick poppy short turns.   The flex is perfect for this application IMO.  It is kind of a morph flex, it felt soft when I bent it into some small bumps and quick turns, but feels much stiffer when straightlining or carving a hard turn at higher speeds.  Didnt find a speed limit during this test at all.   If your looking for highly versatile groomer, bump, light crud performance ski - look here.  IM82 fits the bill.   Awesome ski in a two ski quiver mated with a powder board.  Fit and finish of the ski is also beautiful, solid construction we have come to expect from head.
post #24 of 39
Thanks for the review PowderChef, I picked up some 82's and look forward to trying them...soon.
post #25 of 39
Originally Posted by nihols View Post

So...the IM 88's are now on Northern NJ Craigslist for $295.  That's a steal considering they only have 10 days on them.  Thanks again for all your feedback.

What bindings do they come with?
post #26 of 39
Originally Posted by Gotama View Post

 I haved owned the IM88 and now have 82.

Both are ok, but don't expect any significant increase in "float".  Neither is what could be considered floaters.  Both are good in hard to variable , crud, etc.

Also neither is much better than the other on ice.

I did enjoy the 88 more in general.

I bought the im 72's a year ago for under $200 with bindings (level 9), how would the 88 or 82 compare?  I am thinking of adding a pair to my (1 ski) quiver for powder in southern or/northern cal, so we arent talking about 4 feet of powder, just like 6-12 inches
post #27 of 39
I have the Monster 78 (2008/09) in 183cm and was considering the Mojo 94 (or the Watea 94, or several others, you know the drill).  How would the Mojos in 180cm compare with the Monsters?  The 183's ski as long as I need in a ski.  Perhaps the longer Mojo is the better bet, or a wider ski to avoid overlap.
post #28 of 39
 sinbad, the Mojo 94 is a softer, more versatile, more forgiving ski than the iM78 (which to me is a fairly high performance ski even though it's not really marketed that way).  Whereas the 78 really rips turns on hardpack well, the Mojo 94 is more of a gentle giant of a ski in all conditions.  Not a real high performer, but very easygoing, smooth, and comfortable.  I think the Mojo is a good counterpart to the 78 if you're looking for something wider that will be better in crud, powder, and spring snow.  Depending on your height/weight, you can probably go with the 187cm Mojo -- that's what I ski.  The 180 would be a great point and shoot tree ski though.

The Watea 94 is not as smooth or damped as the Mojo, but is a bit more refined with higher performance.  I'd give the Watea the edge in powder and crud too.  It's not great on hard snow though; the Mojo's damping gives it an edge there.
post #29 of 39
Thread Starter 
Hey everyone, thanks for all the feedback!

In the end, I did sell the IM-82's and got the 2009 version of the 88's in 186 length.

I skied the 88's in Utah back in early Feb. and was disappointed.  They seemed hard to initiate turns with compared to the 82's and I wound up renting for the rest of the trip and figured I'd sell the 88's with just 1 day of skiing on them.  They should fetch a decent price...right?

When I had trouble selling them and couldn't get what I felt was a far price (I was asking $400 w/bindings) I decided to detune the tips/tails just a bit more and took them to Breckenridge/Vail for 4 days in early March and fell in love with them.

Both the 82's and 88's are great skis.  The 88's are just a little more demanding and really need to be skied a little more agressively most of the time.  They don't like to go too slow.  On my first trip I was out of shape and just wasn't putting into the skis what they needed to respond well.  Between the detune, loosing a few pounds and having a few more ski days under my belt for the year, I was able to push them hard enough that it made all the difference in the world.  Super stable, super predictable, rock solid performer.  But not for anyone that wants to lay back and let the ski do the work.

Thanks for everyone's input and have a great off-season.
post #30 of 39
Sorry to hear you were dissatisfied with the ski, especially since I was one of the people who recommended them.  But your assessment is correct to paraphrase: they are basically a wide race ski, and built like one.  The Peak 88 would probably have been more to your liking since I understand they are a bit more forgiving.  I love my iM88's, they are my favorite skis, but I generally just ski fast and hard.    

BTW there is a guy here that has some new Peak 88s and wants to trade them for the Monster 88s, maybe you two can swap.
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 › Head IM 82, vs 88 or maybe Mojo 94...