New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Peak 82 vs Sultan 85

post #1 of 22
Thread Starter 
 Does someone have a sense of how these two skis compare?

I am looking ideally for something that will complement my '09 Gotamas. 
post #2 of 22
 The Sultan is superior on hard snow by a long shot.  The Peak is a better in soft snow, including powder and crud.  The Sultans have a racy, snappy feel, while the Peaks have a smoother, quieter, damped "Head" feel.  I have not found a speed limit on the Sultans, but the Peaks will start to chatter if you push them very hard/fast on hardpack.  Both great skis, with the Sultan catering more to the hardpack range of the all-mountain envelope, and the Peak catering more to the soft snow side.  Both will cover the spectrum for most skiers, and both are fairly low-risk if you were to buy them without a demo.
post #3 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier219 View Post

 The Sultan is superior on hard snow by a long shot.  The Peak is a better in soft snow, including powder and crud.  The Sultans have a racy, snappy feel, while the Peaks have a smoother, quieter, damped "Head" feel.  I have not found a speed limit on the Sultans, but the Peaks will start to chatter if you push them very hard/fast on hardpack.  Both great skis, with the Sultan catering more to the hardpack range of the all-mountain envelope, and the Peak catering more to the soft snow side.  Both will cover the spectrum for most skiers, and both are fairly low-risk if you were to buy them without a demo.
I agree that the Peak is a bit better in soft snow, but I was always able to get close to race-like hold out of it on hardpack too. I am not too heavy, though, and haven't skied the Peak and Sultan back to back.  The tune on both is awfully important: make sure the Sultan base is flat, and if you want a more aggressive Peak, go .7 degree on the base bevel.  With that tune, the Peak is a better hard snow ski.  I agree that the Sultan is light and lively, the Peak a bit more damp and smooth, very stable.  Both are really nice skis, hard to go wrong either way.       
post #4 of 22
Both great skis, I just had an awesome weekend on the Sultan's in Whistler. Fantastic all round ski. For the conditions I was in (2-10 cm on top of harder snow, lots of chewed up off piste), they were great. They really really like to fly down the mountain, really fun turn initiation. One issue I had was that they weren't easy to reign in if you just want to cruise. The little soft snow I did find, they handled very well.

I skied the Monster 82's last season and have skied the Peaks twice this year. The Monsters were my go to ski until I picked up a pair of AC30s which just seem to suit me perfectly. They were really great in soft snow for only 82mm and, they just blast through crud. Very powerful, damp ski. Likes to be pushed hard. And, I found that I could always get a good feel for the snow on hardpack.

I spend a lot of time in the trees and I appreciated that they were both nice and snappy there. The Peaks, I found, turned more reliably where the Sultan's turns were very snappy and sometimes a bit too quick. It is likely that is simply due to my style.

All in all, I agree with 219 and Dawgcatching, both great all mountain skis with the Sultan's leaning towards harder snow and the Peaks leaning towards softer snow.

As a note, I have a pair of brand new Peak 82s for sale (172cm), at the moment, if you decide you are interested.

Cheers,

-Matt
post #5 of 22
Matt -- You mentioned that you like to ski in trees.  How well do your AC-30s ski in trees, compared to the Peaks and Sultans?  Also, how do these three do on moguls?  Thanks.
post #6 of 22
Jim -- I'm usually in the tree in powder, on the days when it's deeper (more than a 6-12 inches), I preferred the Peaks. Great handling in the soft snow. Very maneuverable and reliable.

On days when there is less snow (less than 6-12 inches or hardpack) and it's had time to get cut up, I'd always take the AC30s. Really smooth, easy turning. Half the time I don't even realize how fast I'm going until I look at the trees flying by.

As for the Sultans, I was only on them last weekend and there was about 6 inches of fresh at the beginning of the weekend with some flurries throughout and they handled nicely on the chewed up snow. I'm not sure if it was just the conditions or how I was feeling but, I found that I was sometimes turning them too much or to quickly in the trees. They handled the snow very well and are very responsive, though.

I'm not much of a mogul person, unless they're in a powder filled bowl. That being said, I'd probably go with the Peaks, followed by the Sultans. They have a nice flex and are nice and reliable. The AC30s are a bit grippy for moguls. They really like to dig in and carve. I didn't do very much mogul skiing on the Sultans but, they seemed pretty solid.

Cheers,

-Matt
post #7 of 22
Selling brand new Sultans in the Gear For Sale forum.  $450 in their wrapper, if interested..
post #8 of 22
Matt -- Thanks.  A few weeks ago, I demo'ed the AC-30s for a half day, but not in trees or moguls.  I found them to be quite stable whizzing down hardpack and cutting through snow clumps.  Both the Sultans and Peaks (78 and 82) are on my demo list.
post #9 of 22
No problem, Jim. I am absolutely in love with the AC30s in almost every condition. Glad you enjoyed them.

Also, I have brand new Peak 82s on sale for $450 if you are interested, Ras.

Cheers,

-Matt
post #10 of 22
Thread Starter 
Firstly thanks for all your feedback - based on this I have settled for the Peak 82s. I think I will prefer the more mellow ride. 

MattH - thanks for your offer but unfortunately at 6,4" and 210lbs the only real size option is the 183s. 
post #11 of 22
No worries. Definitely wouldn't want to get ski that is way to short for you :). Hope you enjoy them when you get a pair.
post #12 of 22
Are the Sulatans the replacement for the 8000's  I am looking to replacement my 8000's which are my favorite ski and I was wondering if they were a similar ski only 6cm fatter?
post #13 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYSkier55 View Post

Are the Sulatans the replacement for the 8000's  I am looking to replacement my 8000's which are my favorite ski and I was wondering if they were a similar ski only 6cm fatter?

This is 6cm fatter: http://fat-ypus.com/home/a-lotta.php

Can't say they'll ski like the 8000's, though.

But the Sultan 85 is the replacement for the Legend 8000.
post #14 of 22
On the original question  Peak 82 vs Sultan 85, I believe that the closer comparison would be Peak 78 vs Sultan 85...

I have not skied the Sultan 85 but have had a lot of experience on the iM 78, 171 and 177, and the iM 82, 172, and extrapolating from the reviews on the Sultan 85 written by dawgcatching et al, I would be willing to bet the iM 78 (now Peak 78) would ski closer to the Sultan 85 than the iM 82 (peak 82)...
I found the iM 78 to be better on hard snow and bumps than the iM 82, just as I'm reading that the Sultan 85 is more hard snow biased than the Peak 82...

The Peak 78 is an awfully good 50/50 all-mtn ski and can be had for a reasonable price...

What do I know?   Boo!
post #15 of 22
 FYI--I ask Scott (dawgcatching) to compare the 82 and the Sultan 85. Here's his reply:

The Sultan has more pop, a little more energy in the tail.  It also feels bigger. The edgehold is not as good on really firm snow, stability is top-notch, and it does a bit better in soft snow than the 82. I think it is more of an off-piste ski than the 82 is.  I skied the Peak 88 today, and it is more like the Sultan than the 82 is.  In the 178cm length, the Sultan feels like a very stable bruiser; good ski!
post #16 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by DtEW View Post




This is 6cm fatter: http://fat-ypus.com/home/a-lotta.php

Can't say they'll ski like the 8000's, though.

But the Sultan 85 is the replacement for the Legend 8000.
 

Actually, I'd say that the Sultan 80 is the closest replacement for the 8000.  The 80 is a bit softer than the 85.
post #17 of 22
Thread Starter 
 Guys-

based on the above, I bought the Head 82s as my principal ski and some '09 Goats as my powder ride,  both in 183/4 and both with Barons. 

I took them both out to Austria for a few days: 

- Day 1, soft snow, but getting a little thin on the ground:  

I first went out on the Heads, were I felt at home straight away. Given that they were meant to be my main ski I expected to stay on them for the whole first day, but since there was no problem I went onto the Goats after a hour or so. 

Wow what a difference! While I could not fault the Heads in any particular department, they felt distinctly bland in comparison. The Goats have this "surfy" feel that is addictive and they seemed to have so much more character. Yes, you have to put more work in (but that is part of the fun) and in compensation you get stoked on every run. 

- Day 2/3 approx 5ft of fresh dump over two days:

I think you can all guess which I was riding then, and won't bore you with yet another Goat-praise-thread.


- Day 4/5 refreze, crud, soup, moguls, ice patches:

Back to the Heads for the first of these days. Pluses are great turn initiation, reasonable side grip (but not excellent) and overall ease of use. The minuses, I have (to be fair) are based principally on not having bought them as a one-ski quiver. They do not shine at anything in particular and therefore lack character. The edgehold on ice is not that of a carving ski, the float (for my weight of 210lbs) is not enough to venture off the groomers and for some reason they wanted to pick up a ton of speed all the time. 

The second day was back on the Goats, even though the conditions were far from ideal. Initially was not having fun on the ice, but eventually got the hang of it enough to say that you can ride them in these conditions, but you need to work quite a bit. Still loved the "longboard" feel. 

Conclusion

- In love with the Goats and will ride them whenever feasible

- The 82s are easy, but suffer from not being as captivating as the Goats. I would say that these are a great one-quiver ski for someone that is looking at moving on from pure carvers and likes to go skiing late in the season. Given a multiple ski quiver,  I probably should have gone for the 78s, which are reviewed well here and would work better on non-Goat days. 

- After the last day on the Goats, I came to the conclusion that unfortunately you cannot use these as an everyday ski in the Alps. I have read on this site that in those sort of conditions the Mantras excel and I found a great deal on an '09 pair of 184s.  I know there is some overlap with the Goats, but figure that I will enjoy the Mantras more than the 82s on groomers and hard-pack days. 

- btw, v. happy with the Barons
post #18 of 22
I'm glad it's not just me, The AC30's jam (08-09)!  It's like an extension of my personality and physical being.   they rip the trees steeps, powder just not real practical in the bumps if you want to spend half a day in them.     and while I can ski the bumps with them, they are really stiff and unforgiving in big bumps.    So I DON"T KNOW WHAT TO GET NOW! 
First I was going to get the Nitrous, supposed to be better in the bumps, then swayed towards the Elan 82ti, (don't make them anymore and I heard they were heavy??)
Watea 84's? can't handle the speed like the ac30's
sultan 85 (much wider than ac30's, just don't now)
head peak ??

Damn, I just give up!  I need to demo them but good luck on finding all of them....
Can anyone tell me what is going to ski like the ac30 (or close to it) and still handle the bumps?   I divide my time up between trees(steep), steep chutes, and bumps.   The AC30 rock in 2 out of three catagories.  I thought they were great in powder also, but I also came from straight 195's. 
I am 5,8   weigh 185, ski hard 22 years 14 of which in the backcountry but not so much anymore now that I moved from Colorado to CA. 
post #19 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdiddy View Post

Can anyone tell me what is going to ski like the ac30 (or close to it) and still handle the bumps? 

 

pdiddy --  Don't count me as an expert, just a reader of reviews.  FWIW, in the realskiers reviews, 11 skis --by my count -- got both a "5" (highest score) for "clean carve" and received the "true bumps" award.  Of those, only two have a waist wider than your 08-09 AC-30s:
-- Head Peak 78
-- Stockli Rotor 84. 

Of those two, the Stockli also received the "off piste" symbol.

Now, if you wanted mild bumps, a 5 for clean carve, and the "off piste" award:
-- Dynastar Sultan 85
-- Salomon XW Fury
-- Salomon XW Tornado
-- Line Prophet 90
-- Line Chronic Cryptonite
-- Elan Magfire 82 XTI
-- Atomic Nomad Crimson Ti
-- Kastle FX 84
-- Kastle MX 88 
 
(Caveat: no guarantee that I found every ski that meets the above criteria.  I made this list three months ago while eating a sandwich and returning phone calls).   
post #20 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier219 View Post

Actually, I'd say that the Sultan 80 is the closest replacement for the 8000.  The 80 is a bit softer than the 85.

That's exactly what the Dynastar rep told me at the demo hut last Saturday.  The 85 is a bit beefier than the 8000.

I liked the 85 a lot.  There wasn't any actual powder, but I skied firm  to very soft-but-thick snow and the ski did very well.  Railroad track arcs when I  wanted them, and very easily initiated pivot turns when I wanted to do that.

I'm thinking about getting a pair to replace the Mantras - the Mantra is a great ski, but I think I could use something less demanding in powder since I basically still suck at it.
post #21 of 22
Stocki Rotor, I'll check it out.   thanks man
post #22 of 22

HI Matt, read your reply with interest as I`m considering either ski for the coming season. Can I ask you if you`ve still got the Peak 82s, and if so are they used / brand new or with bindings and what length.

Either way I`m trying to find someone with some experience of them to advise on the length I need. What height / weight are you.

Sorry for the personal question.

Thanks in advance for your reply, Paul.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion