EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › next pair of skis Ac50s?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

next pair of skis Ac50s?

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
I mostly ski in virginia...  well groomed, good layer of ice with 2-5 inches of man made powder on top.

I'm currently on a pair of Volkl AC3s that are about 4 years old.  I bought them late in the season... they were demos.  I like them a lot, but would like to move up in the world.

I demod a couple pairs of skis last year and finally decided to stick with volkl.  I was much more comfortable on my skis than the rossi and atomics I tried out.

If I went to a pair of AC50s, would I notice a big difference?  What about the grizzlys?  My onlycomplaint with my AC3s (and this is most likely my fault, not theirs) is that it occasionally feels like my edges are sticking...  I turn, one ski turns, and the other just sits still.  I end up having to practically pick it up and get it back on track.   That's really what I want to get rid of. 

The wife said she'll buy them for me for Christmas, so it's just a matter of picking out which ones I want.  Unfortunately, in this area, I won't really get to demo either one as no one sells Volkl locally.
post #2 of 26
 You would notice a huge difference. First, it sounds like your AC3's are in the need of some serious attention tune wise. Past that, it looks like you have your heart made up that you want new skis, that isn't bad, but need a little more information on what would be a better choice for you, either the AC50, Grizzly (I doubt it) or even the new (and improved) AC30. How big of a guy are you? How aggressive? Will this be your only ski? Personally, trying to put together what you have given so far, since the majority of your skiing is in the mid atlantic, the AC30 would be my first suggestion. 
post #3 of 26
Thread Starter 
I'm 5'7ish, 190 pounds, 26 years old.  I've been skiing for around 13 years, and can ski about anything around here confidently.  This will most likely be my only ski, unless there's a good reason to keep my current AC3s.  I mostly ski at wintergreen, with the occasional day at snowshoe, Wisp, or sugar mountain in NC.  I live in Raleigh, NC.  When I get to wintergreen I head straight to the highlands, if that helps any. 

I mentioned my edges grabbing at times... Last year, late season and kinda warm, I took a fall in the highlands when my edge grabbed on me.  I was mid turn, and the next thing I know I was rolling down the mountain.  Broke my tibia and tore my ACL.  That's when I decided to get rid of them.   I've taken good care of them... I get them waxed frequently and my edges sharpened every season.
post #4 of 26
Strange regarding the catchiness on a tuned ski that has been kept waxed. Something doesn't add up, poor tune? bad bevel? I am sure there are better people than me here who can decipher what it is. Back to your new ski, I would still stay with my choice of the AC30 for you, with the 80mm waist, it is all you will need for the areas you are skiing. I think you would have a ton of fun on that ski in a 163, if you were skiing bigger, wider, longer trails, the 170, but if 90% of your skiing is in VA, the 163. 
post #5 of 26
i have to disagree: first the AC series is not ment for east/midwest condition. you would be much better of on tigersharks: better on ice and hardpack.
as of the edges: this might be not necessary the  bevel/tunning fault: it is very common mechanism of tearing ACLs on shaped skis: one  keep the turn, the other not: but in these situations  we should probably blame the Indian not the arrows...........
post #6 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by kubagr View Post

i have to disagree: first the AC series is not ment for east/midwest condition. you would be much better of on tigersharks: better on ice and hardpack.
as of the edges: this might be not necessary the  bevel/tunning fault: it is very common mechanism of tearing ACLs on shaped skis: one  keep the turn, the other not: but in these situations  we should probably blame the Indian not the arrows...........

I will disagree with you..AC..All Conditions. The TS and AC's aren't too different, just the AC is a bit wider (not much than even the TS12) . While the TS might be a bit better for  the ice, the AC will add much more versatility, I will sacrifice that Nth degree of edge hold for a ski that is better in crud and cut up snow. 
post #7 of 26
i'm giving my opinion based on my personal experience (have about 30 pairs of volkls in  my basemnt).

and , again,  what is most important for skiing  at midwest, is the grip on ice/hard snow. and for this condition TS is much metter than AC.

i'm entusiastic about AC series (have had ac4 ac40 and ac50  + grizzly), and this is a truely versatile ski but more for western condition.

for example: if i have to take only one pair of skis west, it would be grizzly.
if I go to wisp or 7springs or Blue Knob i'd take either TS or my racetiger GS or RT SL.

so i'm not  questioning your advise, but for east ,  there are slightly better choices than AC30.
post #8 of 26
I honestly think that the midatlantic is one of the few places where a wide carver like and AC50 makes a whole lot of sense to me. The two principal conditions they see all season from opening to close are rock hard bulletproof and various densities and deepnees of thinck wet crud (from snowcone to slurpee).  The 50 is going to be fine on ice, if you tune your skis regularly. And it has enough girth and agressiveness to ski well in the slop and refrozen stuff.
post #9 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by kubagr View Post

i have to disagree: first the AC series is not ment for east/midwest condition. you would be much better of on tigersharks: better on ice and hardpack. 

The AC series may not be "meant" for  midwest conditions, but they work really really well in them.  A tigershark would be a good choice, but it's not that different than the AC series.

As for the OP's "grabbiness" problem, I'd try to determine if it's the ski or the skier.  An evaluation by a competent tech for the skis, an evaluation by a qualified instructor for the skier.
post #10 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by kubagr View Post

i'm entusiastic about AC series (have had ac4 ac40 and ac50  + grizzly), and this is a truely versatile ski but more for western condition.
 

I don't like the AC series for skiing here in UT. The 50 is stiff (as a race ski) and hard snow focused. They do not bend much on soft snow, even on groomed runs. I don't think the 50 is very versatile here, other skis work a lot better.
post #11 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post




I don't like the AC series for skiing here in UT. The 50 is stiff (as a race ski) and hard snow focused. They do not bend much on soft snow, even on groomed runs. I don't think the 50 is very versatile here, other skis work a lot better.

I find the same thing is true for Kalifornia conditions. Despite the width, the AC series is of little use (at least to me) outside of very hard snow. In fact, none of the "giant carvers" truly excel in softer snow although some are certainly better than the AC 50.

SJ
post #12 of 26
depends, how hard you ski them
BTW: that's why i'm usualy carring my katanas witth me......
post #13 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayleaf36ff View Post

I'm 5'7ish, 190 pounds, 26 years old. 

When I get to wintergreen I head straight to the highlands, if that helps any. 

 

Bayleaf -- I've skied all the slopes of the Highlands lift on AC-20s.  Granted, you weigh 40 lbs more than me, but from what I know of skis (admittedly, not much) I don't think you'd need AC-50s just for those slopes.  In fact, on the moguls of Upper Wild Turkey, I would think that a stiff wide ski like AC-50 might be a disadvantage.

Just my $.02.    
post #14 of 26
From AC50 Powder Thread:

Volkl AC 50 in Powder?
09 at 10:55am
  • Joined: October 2005
  • Location: West Henrietta , NY
  • Post Count: 288
I am 6', 227 lbs and have 177 AC50's. Philpug and SJ are on the money with their assessments. I use the AC50's primarily as a front side ski with excellent edge hold on hard pack / icy surfaces, quick edge to edge for a mid-fat, no speed limit on groomers and blasts through crud. Also works well in SOFT bumps. I would not go longer for more float so as not to sacrifice quickness. They ARE a stiff ski and do not tolerate mistakes but reward those who know how to drive.

That being said I have 184 Gotamas and 173 Icelantic Shamans as my powder boards of choice. Last February @ Aspen I spent 5 days on the Shamans and 1 days on the AC50's as deep snow all week.

Another good ski with decent hard snow performance and superior powder performance to the AC50's are the Volkl Mantra's

My 2 cents - Falcon_O aka Charlie
post #15 of 26
Look into the Blizzard 8.1 and Especially the 8.7,  it IS better than the AC50..  I am a HUGE Volkl fan, been skiing them since 86 and I find the 8.7 Outstanding..  Especially as a frontside carver..  You owe it to yourself to try before you buy..  Demo my man... Demo....
post #16 of 26
Thread Starter 
I've heard of the blizzards but never really heard much about them.  I'll look into them. 

The problem around here is that no one carries a good line of volkl skies.  Getting a demo on them is about impossible.  You can demo K2 and rossi all day long, but good luck finding a volkl.  I was thrilled when wintergreen started carrying volkls as their new rental skis...  It's now an entire mountain of white and orange tigersharks.  Hopefully some local shops will jump on the bandwagon.      
post #17 of 26
Thread Starter 
The blizzards do seem to get VERY solid reviews.  I can get a set of magnum 8.7s for around 600 with bindings.  A little cheaper than the AC50s.  Anyone know of any reason not to get them?
post #18 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayleaf36ff View Post

The blizzards do seem to get VERY solid reviews.  I can get a set of magnum 8.7s for around 600 with bindings.  A little cheaper than the AC50s.  Anyone know of any reason not to get them?


 The only reason to get the AC50 over last years 8.7 is the AC50 has a better binding system on it but that is a stretch of a reason. This years 8.7 is the best of the two. 
post #19 of 26
I agree with the others, the AC50 isn't the greatest soft snow ski. You can do better in terms of versatility; something with good lateral stiffness, but a bit softer flex.  I would recommend the Sultan 85, the Head Peak 82, and perhaps last year's Elan Magfire 82ti.   The is the Blizzard 8.1 or 8.7, but I skied both of those a whole lot last year, and while superb hard snow skis, they are more of the "wide carver" style, and not really 50/50 skis.   I skied on the 8.7 with Holiday on them in 3-D conditions at Squaw, and he instantly noticed how they kicked my butt in bumps and were a bit of a handful in softer snow, compared to the Elan 888's he was on.  He skied the 8.7 on a prior day and had the same "wide carver" experience.   So, if you are trying to get away from the wide carver type ski, you may want to pass over those two Blizzi skis, unless you are big enough to really flex them.  They are considerably stiffer than the other skis I mentioned here.  But, if you are looking primarily at hard snow performance with a bit of versatility, the "wide carver" likely is just the ticket, and the Blizzards would likely be at the top of the list.  I would also put the Elan 82Xti up there as well, it is a bit softer than the 8.1 or 8.7 but significantly stiffer than the Sultan 85 or Peak 82.
post #20 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayleaf36ff View Post

I was thrilled when wintergreen started carrying volkls as their new rental skis...  It's now an entire mountain of white and orange tigersharks.  Hopefully some local shops will jump on the bandwagon.      
 


I'll bet that those rental skis are not Tigersharks.  They're probably the rental version of the Tiger Ten.  Tiger Ten != Tigershark Ten Foot.  They are very different skis.
post #21 of 26
if you don't see differences between TS and AC  this is EOT for me
post #22 of 26
Thread Starter 
Is there any reason to pay an extra 400 bucks for this years blizzard 8.1 instead of last years?  The 2009 is down under 500 bucks now.
post #23 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayleaf36ff View Post

Is there any reason to pay an extra 400 bucks for this years blizzard 8.1 instead of last years?  The 2009 is down under 500 bucks now.
If you can find last years in your size, I would say get them. But this years IS a better ski. Is it 3-400 better? I cant say that it is. 

 
post #24 of 26
I have an old pair of AC4's and have skied the AC50.  Frankly I didn't notice that much of a difference, especially where you ski.  However, this season I would not only check the tune of the skis but also the cant of the boot.  Last season I went to a new pair of boots and my first day on the mountain (Mt Rose, Tahoe) I noticed exactly the same problem.  I went to a good boot-fitter that evening and he noticed the boots needed adjustment.  Next day on the mountain the problem went away.  The AC3 was a good ski so if it's still in good shape, waste your money on boots and not new skis.  Anyway, that's just my opinion.  Many times the problem we think we have isn't the problem we do have. 
post #25 of 26
This years AC30 I also recommend.
post #26 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob4snow View Post

I have an old pair of AC4's and have skied the AC50.  Frankly I didn't notice that much of a difference, especially where you ski.  However, this season I would not only check the tune of the skis but also the cant of the boot.  Last season I went to a new pair of boots and my first day on the mountain (Mt Rose, Tahoe) I noticed exactly the same problem.  I went to a good boot-fitter that evening and he noticed the boots needed adjustment.  Next day on the mountain the problem went away.  The AC3 was a good ski so if it's still in good shape, waste your money on boots and not new skis.  Anyway, that's just my opinion.  Many times the problem we think we have isn't the problem we do have. 

Ha!  No kidding. By far the best thing I did last year for my skiing was install a 3mm lifter on one boot, to counter the shortening of my leg when it fractured.  My balance improved and I could make small, subtle movements instead of gross movements to fight my hips not being square.  We often worry too much about which ski to buy, when in reality there are TONS of good skis out there; any good skier could be happy on a list of about 20 of them.  Instead, most (more like all) of us could step up our skiing game with some good instruction and improved fitness and get much more benefit. With that said, new skis are fun and exciting! 
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 › next pair of skis Ac50s?