EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Nordica HR-Pro Helldiver CA or Rossignol Phantom SC-87?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Nordica HR-Pro Helldiver CA or Rossignol Phantom SC-87? - Page 2

post #31 of 55
Thread Starter 
An expert skier does not need to be an expert skier in every terrain. Do you think all olympic slalom skiers are expert mogul skiers? Probably not. The same is true for anyone. Yes an expert skier should ski very well in all conditions but you do not need to be an expert of all conditions. Few people are. I thought since I can ski expert runs well I'm an expert skier. If I'm wrong I'm wrong and you can tell me kindly. However, you've never seen me ski so you really should just go by what I say. Thank you for finally being helpful though.

Mr. Crab- Thanks, but I've already decided on the Wateas. If and when I get powder skis, I might consider the Mantras again. I don't think I ever want to go much wider than the widest Mantra.
post #32 of 55
This thread is funny and yet it makes a point about how some skiers over rate themselves.

Two seasons does not make one an expert. Or even an advanced level skier.

Just my opinion
post #33 of 55
Thread Starter 
Ok your right. I guess expert skier is not the best way to describe myself. All I was trying to say is I ski expert runs. I am an advanced level skier, but I'm not gonna argue with you because we don't know each other so I don't really care how good or bad you think I am. Btw I started skiing when I was 5 and when I was 10 or so switched to snowboarding and just got back into skiing two years ago when I was 16. It's not like I first set foot on snow two years ago. I didn't think I'd have to tell my whole life story to get good advice on ski equipment, but I guess I was wrong. I didn't expect to have everything I said about myself questioned by people that I don't even know who think they can judge my skiing ability by how much I know about equipment.
Edited by sean stratford-jones - 4/23/10 at 9:59pm
post #34 of 55
Folk here just want people to be honest.That's all. 

It's OK to just be an *OK* skier.
post #35 of 55
Thread Starter 
I'm being honest. I'm not an *OK* skier. I'm an advanced skier who can ski expert runs and that's honestly the best way to describe my ability. Believe what you want, but I have no reason to lie about my ability to a bunch of random people online. Like I told you before I only described myself as an expert because I can ski expert runs, but I guess everyone's been right- that doesn't necessarily make me an expert skier. I was only trying to describe myself right. I was wrong and now I've admitted it, but you can't even accept that I'm an advanced skier. If in ur mind I'm a beginner who can barely get down a green run then go ahead and believe that, but stay out of here cuz ur not helping me by thinking that.
post #36 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Stratford-Jones View Post

An expert skier does not need to be an expert skier in every terrain. Do you think all olympic slalom skiers are expert mogul skiers? Probably not. The same is true for anyone. Yes an expert skier should ski very well in all conditions but you do not need to be an expert of all conditions. Few people are. I thought since I can ski expert runs well I'm an expert skier. If I'm wrong I'm wrong and you can tell me kindly. However, you've never seen me ski so you really should just go by what I say. Thank you for finally being helpful though.

Mr. Crab- Thanks, but I've already decided on the Wateas. If and when I get powder skis, I might consider the Mantras again. I don't think I ever want to go much wider than the widest Mantra.
Sean, I doubt anyone is picking on you but in all seriousness, an expert skier can ski pretty much any terrain efficiently and confidently.  There are very few people who fall into the true expert skier category.  Heck, I've skied for 26 years and I feel that I fall into a modest advanced skier category, even though I can ski some expert terrain decently and some with my butt puckered up.

I have a feeling that you have a lot to get out of the EpicSki Community and you have a lot to offer the Epicski Community.  Glad you're sticking around to feel your way.
post #37 of 55

Uh oh, just wait until he finds out that depending on Look or Rossi, they come in different colors .


OK, just so you don't have to ask, the silver ones are better, however if you want to know why, go search.......

post #38 of 55
Thread Starter 
Trekchick- I'm new to skiing as everyone knows, and because of that I didn't know how to rate myself. Honestly, I figured I could best rate myself by the runs that I can ski. I was wrong, and even though I obviously don't like how everyone told me, I'm glad they did.

snofun3- Thank you for another sarcastic response. I really appreciate it.
post #39 of 55
Hey Sean,
Some folk here just can't relate to the average skier who doesn't know all the definitions.  I can not blame you when boring hills have double black diamonds and signs that say "experts only", and when skis are labeled as "expert skis", and marketing hype says you have to be an expert to ski them without being thrown on your azz, but are in fact quite forgiving. 

Best bet is to just explain what it is you want to do with the skis and where (as I think you have) and leave the levels out of it. 

Just bear in mind that an "expert" hard snow ski will be too stiff to put to good use in very soft snow, where as an "expert" powder ski will be much softer and will not satisfy desires for high performance skiing on icy hard pack.  Don't rule out any ski because of it's category.  Look at what the skis are able to do well and what they do less well compared to each other and make your choice.

BTW The reviews at expertskier.com are well worth the 20 buck subscription fee imho.
post #40 of 55
Thread Starter 
Thanks Ghost. I think I'm gonna get some watea 94s. I lost a great deal though ... $250 and it was just available at the beginning of the week. Best deal now is $480. Still good, but really dissapointing. Do you know of any siimilar skis i might be interested in?
post #41 of 55
 Sean,

As I mentioned in the other thread, I think once you get used to the atmosphere here you will be fine. There are people here who have skied more in days one season that you have have thought of skiing your in whole life and what is cool is you can learn from them. I suggest you ask questions and listen and think about the answers that are given. You will find the depth of help that you will find on Epic is tremendous, you will also find that a little humility goes a long way. 

Relax, enjoy and listen. You will be better for it. 
post #42 of 55
Thread Starter 
Thanks Philpug.
Back to my question what do you guys think about the Line Prophet 90 Elite (lighter version), Volkl Mantra, or Nordica Enforcer? The Prophets are only like $575 retail so is that saying something bad about the skis or are they still quality skis?
post #43 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Stratford-Jones View Post

Thanks Philpug.
Back to my question what do you guys think about the Line Prophet 90 Elite (lighter version), Volkl Mantra, or Nordica Enforcer? The Prophets are only like $575 retail so is that saying something bad about the skis or are they still quality skis?


 You are a featherweight at 145, you talked about the Watea 94 in another thread, great choice. The Prophet Flite (not Elite) (or even the regular Prophet) is another fine choice. For a light guy like you, I like both of these over the Helldiver, SC-87 and even the Mantra. 
post #44 of 55
Thread Starter 
The Flite sounds too soft for me. I'm light , but I like to ski aggressively. Is the Prophet 90 as lively and quick-turning as the Watea?
post #45 of 55
Sean--Welcome to EpicSki!

I want to apologize for the rude welcome you've received from some of our community. It's a big bunch, and there are all types....

Regarding your ski question, I'm going to suggest that you'd be better off ignoring the brand, and considering skis based on their specifications (width, sidecut, camber) and characteristics of flex, shape, weight, and so on. Keep in mind that any "all-around" general-purpose ski is going to be a compromise--probably not ideal for any type of snow or type of turn. 

When you say you want something "quick-turning," that can mean several things. Unfortunately, a ski that is quick-turning on hard or groomed snow will be quite different from a "quick-turning" ski in powder and crud. On smooth snow, the quickest turning skis are shorter, narrower underfoot, and with deep sidecut--ie., a slalom race ski, meant to carve short-radius turns on hard snow. For you, the ideal slalom-type ski would be around 65mm underfoot, probably 155 cm or so, with a sidecut of 10-12 meters. But that same ski will be too stiff--especially at your weight--and too narrow and short to float and bend and shape quick turns in light powder. There, the ideal ski would be at least a little wider (75 mm and up underfoot), a little longer for fore-aft stability--say, 165-175, quite a bit softer so it will bend easily in soft snow, and probably lighter than a race ski (although some people, like me, don't mind a heavier ski that doesn't get bounced around so much in crud).

So it's your choice where on that scale of compromise you want to go. My recommendation would probably be a little narrower than the skis you've described, because if I could ski only one ski, I'd rather ski a carving ski in powder than a powder ski on ice and groomed snow. In the Hart line, which I am most familiar with, I'd look at the "Pulse" (124-77-110, in 162 or 170 cm) for a great carving/groomed snow ski that is more than capable, with good technique, in soft snow, moguls, and trees, or the "Attack" (120-84-110 in 167cm, or 123-86-112 in 174cm) for a ski that will work well in all conditions even without highly refined technique, although it won't be quite as much fun carving short turns on hard snow, or the "One" (130-94-120 in 166cm) for a ski best suited to powder and crud, but still OK for carving on groomed snow.

From your description, it sounds like the 84-94 widths might best suit your purposes. The Hart skis (Attack and One) in this category still have a sidecut radius in the 17-18 meter range--not slalom skis, but short enough to make reasonably tight turns with relative ease on the Deer Valley groomers. 

So, if I were you, I'd go try some skis in this range. At your lighter weight, look for softer-flexing skis. I wouldn't pay much attention to brand recommendations from anonymous skiers on the Internet. But go to the shops, pick 'em up and flex 'em, get the specs from the sales people, the manufacturer web site, or elsewhere. See if any ski or brand just "feels right" to you. See if you can demo some of them (try to ski them in a variety of conditions, if possible). Remember that how the skis are setup--what type of binding, where it's mounted, and how the ski is tuned--will have a big effect on the ski's performance and feel (much more than the name on the topsheet!). 

Don't forget, too, that the right boots and setup are more important than skis. And how you use them--technique and tactics--is more important than what ski you're on as well.

If you can afford it, some time with a qualified instructor would be ideal. You'll get more specific recommendations based on how you actually ski, along with some ideas and practice to make sure that your technique takes maximum advantage of whatever ski you choose. 
 
Good luck, Sean. And again--welcome to EpicSki!

Best regards,
Bob
post #46 of 55
 Bob brings up a couple good points, one is the boots and quite frankly, I am surprised it has gotten this far w/o out someone asking "what boots do you have?" because while skis (and bindings are the sexy and fun thing to talk about, boots are still the most important. 

Two, The Hart One might be a good choice for you, it is a well build and fun ski, although a bit stiffer and demanding that the other skis mentioned, it is a good alternative.

You say you think the Flite is too soft for you. Have you skied it? If not, how do you know? Again this goes back to some of my earlier comments, trust the people who are giving advice here. We are trying to help and have no other agendas or affiliations with any of these manufactures other than selling them in their shops. I am 195lb HAVE skied/tested the Flite (along with another 60-70 different skis this season alone) so I know who the ski is good for and I stocked  (and sold out of it) because it was a great ski for skied under 165-170lb's. 
post #47 of 55
Thread Starter 
I thought possibly it was too soft for me based on what people have said here. Not in my threads, but in others I found. Several people said the Flite would be too soft for an agressive skier. I try to ski as aggresively as I can while still being in control and having good technique, and as I get better at harder runs, I try to ski them more aggresively as I'm sure everyone does. Is the softness of the Flite not a problem for someone my size regardless of how agressively I ski? Of these for options which would you choose? (price matters, but will not be the deciding factor since they are all good prices- if the Wateas are  by far the best options, please say so).
Watea 94- $480
Line Prophet 90- $380
Prophet Flite- $300
These are all the 2010 versions in the 170 cm range. Would one of these fit my needs best or should I go with something else? I definitely want something under $500. Durability is also important since these will be my every day skis for at least 2 or 3 years maybe more. Demoing is not an option.
post #48 of 55
I will go out on a limb and say will prolly put on a few pounds of muscle and the regular Prophet will be a great choice.  I have a pair of 172's that I would be happy to do for the 380or  will send them to you for 600 shipped with Griffons. That set up will keep you happy for at least 2-3 years. 
post #49 of 55
Thread Starter 
Thanks a lot for the recommendation. I already found some new ones with Griffons for $560, but thank you for the offer.
post #50 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Stratford-Jones View Post

Thanks a lot for the recommendation. I already found some new ones with Griffons for $560, but thank you for the offer.

My set was new and shipped for that. But snag those for 560. Now. You struck oil, stop drilling. 
 
post #51 of 55
Thread Starter 
Anyone else have an opinion on the Prophet Flite vs. Prophet 90? It seems like the 90s a more advanced ski, but it might not matter for someone my size. OTOH, is it worth the extra $60? Which one is better at making quick, short turns? I assume that would be the Flite, but most reviews I've seen say the reg 90 is quicker edge to edge.
Bindings (Griffon) + skis:
Flite~ $480
Prophet 90~ $543
post #52 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Stratford-Jones View Post

Anyone else have an opinion on the Prophet Flite vs. Prophet 90? It seems like the 90s a more advanced ski, but it might not matter for someone my size. OTOH, is it worth the extra $60? Which one is better at making quick, short turns? I assume that would be the Flite, but most reviews I've seen say the reg 90 is quicker edge to edge.
Bindings (Griffon) + skis:
Flite~ $480
Prophet 90~ $543
 
Yes I have an opinion. It's almost May. The season is over.

Buy the above skis. Honestly at your stage of the game there are like 10 skis that will be fine for you. Just do it and post it up in December 2010. Geez!
post #53 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post




My set was new and shipped for that. But snag those for 560. Now. You struck oil, stop drilling. 
 

What he said ^^^^^
post #54 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Stratford-Jones View Post

Anyone else have an opinion on the Prophet Flite vs. Prophet 90? It seems like the 90s a more advanced ski, but it might not matter for someone my size. OTOH, is it worth the extra $60? Which one is better at making quick, short turns? I assume that would be the Flite, but most reviews I've seen say the reg 90 is quicker edge to edge.
Bindings (Griffon) + skis:
Flite~ $480
Prophet 90~ $543
The Prophet and the Flite are EXACTLY the same dimensions, one has metal one does not. There will be NO difference from edge to edge. As I said, either ski would be great, you cannot go wrong either way. You very well could get another season out of the Prophet once you improve and put on a few pounds. 

 
post #55 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post



The Prophet and the Flite are EXACTLY the same dimensions, one has metal one does not. There will be NO difference from edge to edge. As I said, either ski would be great, you cannot go wrong either way. You very well could get another season out of the Prophet once you improve and put on a few pounds. 

 




Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Barnes View Post

Sean--Welcome to EpicSki!


Don't forget, too, that the right boots and setup are more important than skis. And how you use them--technique and tactics--is more important than what ski you're on as well.

If you can afford it, some time with a qualified instructor would be ideal. You'll get more specific recommendations based on how you actually ski, along with some ideas and practice to make sure that your technique takes maximum advantage of whatever ski you choose. 
 
Good luck, Sean. And again--welcome to EpicSki!

Best regards,
Bob




Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 Bob brings up a couple good points, one is the boots and quite frankly, I am surprised it has gotten this far w/o out someone asking "what boots do you have?" because while skis (and bindings are the sexy and fun thing to talk about, boots are still the most important. 

Two, The Hart One might be a good choice for you, it is a well build and fun ski, although a bit stiffer and demanding that the other skis mentioned, it is a good alternative.

You say you think the Flite is too soft for you. Have you skied it? If not, how do you know? Again this goes back to some of my earlier comments, trust the people who are giving advice here. We are trying to help and have no other agendas or affiliations with any of these manufactures other than selling them in their shops. I am 195lb HAVE skied/tested the Flite (along with another 60-70 different skis this season alone) so I know who the ski is good for and I stocked  (and sold out of it) because it was a great ski for skied under 165-170lb's. 
 




Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post




My set was new and shipped for that. But snag those for 560. Now. You struck oil, stop drilling. 
 

These posts are some of the best advice you've gotten, from a couple of the best sources (among others) on EpicSki.  
You have, in deed, struck oil!
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 › Nordica HR-Pro Helldiver CA or Rossignol Phantom SC-87?