or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Volkl Tigershark 10 161 or Blizzard Supersonic 167?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Volkl Tigershark 10 161 or Blizzard Supersonic 167?

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
Hi everyone.  I have been reading post on here for sometime and it helped me narrow down my ski search, but I cannot decide between these two.  I was able to ski the Tigersharks for 3 days, one on a local mountain and the other two at Killington and enjoyed  them.  I would purcahse them but, my hold back is how many great things I read about the supersonics and that the shop seems to be pushing them more.  I am a aggressive east coast skier looking for a good frontside ski.  I already have a good powder ski so I am not worried about that.  My local dealer has the supersonics as well, but is down to the last pair so I am unable to demo them.  From what I have read they are lighter and faster then the volkls.  I am looking for any feedback on either skis, or ideally between the two.  I was also able to find a pair of Blizzards online for $800.00 that were used once.  Is this a good deal?  Thank you for any help!
post #2 of 9
Seems like if you are going to compare these two models, it would make more sense to compare the Volkl 161cm with the Blizzard 160cm (not the 167). What are your height, weight, and ability level?

I own the Blizzards and like them, but even so I would always say to go with something you know you like rather than something you might like. Have you tried any other skis in this general category - high-performance carvers that are slightly wider and more forgiving than race skis? For example, Fischer Progressor 8s or the Nordica (Mach 4, I think) or the Head Supershape Magnum? If you try two or three skis in this category and still like the Volkl, buy them and don't worry about the Blizzards. Some day you'll get an opportunity to demo them, and if you fall in love you can make that your next ski.
post #3 of 9
A lot more information is needed to make a good suggestion for you, ie, weight, height, etc.. I haven't been on that Blizzard but the Tigershark 10 is a nice ski that can hold its on against most skis.
post #4 of 9
Below is the link to those who have reviewed this very well-regarded ski, including my 2 cents. As for price, that is a lot for a used ski. Late last season I paid around $450 for a demo pair.
Good luck. By the way, you will like whichever you get.
http://www.epicski.com/products/blizzard-g-force-supersonic-iq/reviews#490
post #5 of 9
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the help.  I am 5'11" about 188 (give or take as I tend to drop about 10 lbs as the winter goes on).  High level skier although I do not consider myself a expert. I tried Rossi classic 70 Ti's and the tigersharks.  I thought I should be comparing the 160 as well, but the dealer keeps telling me the Blizzard will fit me better with a 167.  My current ski (Rossignol Scratch FSR) is 167. 
post #6 of 9
You are only skiing around a 160?  And I thought I was short skiing my Rossi CX80's in a 170!  I'm similar size to you.  I would think that you should be in at least a 167.  All and all, I think the Blizzard is a better all around ski, but if you like short radius turns (it sounds like you do), then either one would do.  And btw, 800 is way too much.  You can get it for 780 new.
post #7 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wkerat View Post

Thanks for the help.  I am 5'11" about 188 (give or take as I tend to drop about 10 lbs as the winter goes on).  High level skier although I do not consider myself a expert. I tried Rossi classic 70 Ti's and the tigersharks.  I thought I should be comparing the 160 as well, but the dealer keeps telling me the Blizzard will fit me better with a 167.  My current ski (Rossignol Scratch FSR) is 167. 

Yeah, not sure how you ended up demo'ing the Tigarsharks in a 161. I would have thought at least one size bigger for you - maybe two. Whatever skis you demo within a given category, you need to be skiing them in comparable lengths to get meaningful results. I have tried the Rossi 70 Tis. They are a signficantly turnier ski than either the Tigersharks or the Supersonics, and - based on the available lengths: 155,165,175 - made to be skied a bit shorter.
post #8 of 9
Thread Starter 

I am not sure either.  I thought he would be giving me the 168's, but swore I should ski the tigersharks in a smaller size.  I tried he 165 70 Ti's.  I found a place that has the supersonics to demo about 2 hours from me so I may take a trip to a mountain up there and try them sometime soon.  I may call to see if they have the tigersharks as well so I can get a back to back try.  Thank you for your help.  The dealer up there has the supersonics for $1049, which I agree is a lot.  Where did you find them for $780?

post #9 of 9
Sorry just checked and both places that had them for 780 both sold out.
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 › Volkl Tigershark 10 161 or Blizzard Supersonic 167?