EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2011 Big Mountain Ski reviews: >=100mm and fun-shape skis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2011 Big Mountain Ski reviews: >=100mm and fun-shape skis - Page 2

post #31 of 53


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post

Nice Job Dawg!  (As always) One point I wanted to highlight I discussed in another thread regarding "rockered" skis is the common mistake of how running lenghts are being viewed. You are dead on regarding measuring the RL when the ski is put on edge. That # is much more accurate and telling. We are now seeing companies like K2 and Blizz and ON3P moving that contact point on the ski in conjunction with the rocker to create more versitilty. I think the One exemplifies this. The S3 (a fun ski for sure) seems to have more of the "old" design and doesn't maximize the RL when on edge.  Do you agree? THis is why I went with the One in addition to being a little beefier.
"



curious Finn did you go with a 177 or 184? 

 

Blizzard really need a big floppy rockered powder board with hardpack performance be damned. 


Isn't that the Answer?  There aren't many people who won't think that is enough ski (many will think it is too much, and it seems to be the perfect compliment to a shorter, narrower, turny ski like The One).  The Answer is more of a pro-level freeride ski-not what you are looking for? 



nope its too much ski in the stiffness department and to little in the float department.  Makes almost no sense for a east coaster.... still might buy a pair though. there are much better powder skis for an east coaster than this. Bentchetler, S7, Billy Goat, hellbent and Katana all come to mind. Float and softness are perfect for our brand of freeriding.

 

The zeus is to straight, to much camber, and too stiff.

 

I want something ala Bentchentler but maybe alittle wider with IQ sliders :)

post #32 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post

Nice Job Dawg!  (As always) One point I wanted to highlight I discussed in another thread regarding "rockered" skis is the common mistake of how running lenghts are being viewed. You are dead on regarding measuring the RL when the ski is put on edge. That # is much more accurate and telling. We are now seeing companies like K2 and Blizz and ON3P moving that contact point on the ski in conjunction with the rocker to create more versitilty. I think the One exemplifies this. The S3 (a fun ski for sure) seems to have more of the "old" design and doesn't maximize the RL when on edge.  Do you agree? THis is why I went with the One in addition to being a little beefier.
"



curious Finn did you go with a 177 or 184? 

 

Blizzard really need a big floppy rockered powder board with hardpack performance be damned. 


Isn't that the Answer?  There aren't many people who won't think that is enough ski (many will think it is too much, and it seems to be the perfect compliment to a shorter, narrower, turny ski like The One).  The Answer is more of a pro-level freeride ski-not what you are looking for? 



nope its too much ski in the stiffness department and to little in the float department.  Makes almost no sense for a east coaster.... still might buy a pair though. there are much better powder skis for an east coaster than this. Bentchetler, S7, Billy Goat, hellbent and Katana all come to mind. Float and softness are perfect for our brand of freeriding.

 

The zeus is to straight, to much camber, and too stiff.

 

I want something ala Bentchentler but maybe alittle wider with IQ sliders :)

Makes sense!  Maybe they will come out with a "wider The One" w/o a bunch of metal.  The Answer seems just about perfect for big-mountain charging out here.  I wish it wasn't such a handful in bumps; that is a deal breaker for me, as I have never skied a deep day out here (save for my home mountain, which is lacking skiers) where it hasn't bumped out by mid-afternoon.  The few semi-big days I have been at Squaw, it was bumping out by 11am! 
 

post #33 of 53

The Answer is a ski a lot of people WANT to like. I agree here , I love the IQ system and it would be very cool to have my griffs and dukes to swap around on various skis. Bush, I have the Benny's as well and will be reviewing. Very cool dims and profile. Added bonus was I sent a message to Chris on FB and he actually took the time to respond regarding mount point. He really cares that people like his ski.

post #34 of 53

Interesting that you thought that the shogun was soft because it's a relatively stiff sk,i maybe it skis soft. What was the best mogul ski of the bunch?

post #35 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski=free View Post

Interesting that you thought that the shogun was soft because it's a relatively stiff sk,i maybe it skis soft. What was the best mogul ski of the bunch?



It did ski softer than it flexes.  Best mogul ski?  Probably the Watea 98.  It was really predictable, had good flex, not too stiff, and felt narrower than it was.

post #36 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveJinMA View Post

Hi Scott,

Between the Blizzard One and the Watea 98, would you say that one is more suitable than the other for a heavier (@230lbs) and less aggressive skier? This would be for a 2nd ski in a 2 ski quiver and mainly used for trips out west and the occasional great snow day back east.

 

The Blizzard Answer looks interesting, especially for the crudier snow days, but I'm thinking this may be a bit demanding. I'm looking for something that you can be "lazy" on towards the end of the day if need.

 

Thanks in advance for any input.

 

Forgot to mention, my daily driver is the Elan 777 I picked up from you a couple years back, so maybe the Spire/999 should be on my list as well.

 

Dave


Hi Dave,

 

The Answer is a great ski, but for what you describe, I agree it is better to look elsewhere.  It is a solid ski.  Me weighing ~80lbs less than you might make it all relative, but I found it to be a big mountain ski that preferred to run big and fast; it didn't exactly scream "lazy" to me.  

 

The One is softer in flex than the Watea, but both are pretty easygoing, and are more similar than different.  The Watea has an early rise tip and tail, The One has a bit of rocker tip and tail, and to me, the Watea felt a bit more powerful at the top of the turn, probably due to the earlier engagement of the tip.  It is also a touch stiffer, which gives it a bit more predictability in rough snow. The One turns on a dime, and I ordered one as my AT ski, based on the soft flex and very light weight.  For pure alpine use, I would choose the Watea-just a bit more glued to the snow and what I would look for in an off-psite ski. But, as The One skis a bit easier and pivots easier as well, it may be a better ski for you, although the Watea isn't going to push you around, by any means. The One also skis with more energy; it has a soft tip and tail and will really spring you out of the turns. Also, you can get flexibility with the binding, should you decide to run an AT setup.  Both would be excellent choices.  



Forgot to add the Watea is 450g lighter than a pair of The One's (176cm vs. 177cm), and the tip rocker on the Watea is around 5cm less than The One, and also has more camber underfoot, which is perhaps why it feels a bit more lively. 

post #37 of 53

Just one additional question to help me seal the deal on the Watea 98's. Dawgcatching...in your original review you implied the 186 was much more ski than the 178. I have fiddled with the 186 in the shop and it certainly does not seem like a burly ski. I am also 5'10 and 220 lb. physically strong but not super aggressive any more at 55 years of age. This will be used in the east for anything "soft" especially in bumps and trees. My inclination is to go for the 186. Your opinion would be appreciated.

post #38 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan o'neil View Post

Just one additional question to help me seal the deal on the Watea 98's. Dawgcatching...in your original review you implied the 186 was much more ski than the 178. I have fiddled with the 186 in the shop and it certainly does not seem like a burly ski. I am also 5'10 and 220 lb. physically strong but not super aggressive any more at 55 years of age. This will be used in the east for anything "soft" especially in bumps and trees. My inclination is to go for the 186. Your opinion would be appreciated.



Hi

 

I would go with the 186cm.  This ski is a lot more than the 176cm, but with the rockered tip, and early rise tail, it isn't overpowering.  I would probably opt for the 186cm personally, the 176cm would be a better AT setup (which is what I am probably going to run if I go Watea 98).  The running length on the 186cm is 151cm (this is w/o the skis pressed together, so basically where the contact point would be w/o the rocker implemented, which is running length in softer, but not deep, snow.  152cm is not overly long for a ski of that length:  If you skied at moderate speeds, or really tight terrain, or in bumps, then I would take the 176cm. 

 

post #39 of 53

Well now I am faced with a conundrum! I know that there are no absolute answers...so let me say this: I never found my 180cm Cronus too long in bumps or tight trees (where I ski most) and I find my 172cm Dynastar Contact Limiteds unstable on groomers. Those facts tell me go 186 with the Watea 98's. Is there anything about the Wateas that would suggest otherwise?

post #40 of 53

^^^^ Wow. You're 220 and skied the 172 Contact Ltd's? I owned the same skis, year before, and I weigh 165. (Oddly, also owned the 173 Cronus, could have easily skied on the 180's.) Methinks you've been seriously under-lengthed...

post #41 of 53
I cannot disagree with you! It is extremely difficult to demo skis around here (Montreal, Quebec). I have never seen a Dynastar demo day, there were no Blizzard dealers until this year, and there is one Kastle dealer who I do not believe has any demo skis. So...you learn from your mistakes. Hence I am being very careful before pulling the trigger on those Watea 98's. But indirectly, I think you eliminated my uncertainty.

Thanks!
post #42 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan o'neil View Post

I cannot disagree with you! It is extremely difficult to demo skis around here (Montreal, Quebec). I have never seen a Dynastar demo day, there were no Blizzard dealers until this year, and there is one Kastle dealer who I do not believe has any demo skis. So...you learn from your mistakes. Hence I am being very careful before pulling the trigger on those Watea 98's. But indirectly, I think you eliminated my uncertainty.

Thanks!


178cm is the correct length on the 4x4 for you, most likely. I am 172cm, at 5 foot 9, 155lbs. The 178cm just felt dead and dull, and the 165cm would have been like a slalom carver for me, probably like how the 172cm felt for you.

 

As the Watea 98 runs a bit short with respect to running length, I think 186cm is the only logical choice.  I bet if you measured your 180cm Cronus' running length, it would be right around 152cm as well, maybe even a touch longer. 

post #43 of 53

Hi Dawg. Lib Technology is doing some interesting skis (magne traction edges look appealing).

Have you thought about reviewing som of the wider skis from  - e.g. NAS Pow or NAS Freeride?

.

post #44 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuko View Post

Hi Dawg. Lib Technology is doing some interesting skis (magne traction edges look appealing).

Have you thought about reviewing som of the wider skis from  - e.g. NAS Pow or NAS Freeride?

.



I would love to-they haven't been to any local PNW demo shows that I have been able to attend though.  The recent show was rained out.  A lot of the smaller manufacturers that don't have dealer bases don't do the dealer shows, which is primarily what I get a chance to attend.  

post #45 of 53

Just thought I would throw in my two cents on this thread. I got to get in three days at Alta just before Christmas, 12/19, 12/20, 12/21. I am in my 60's and been skiing all my life starting at Stowe in the 50's. I don't know the level, but a pretty good skier who doesn't like speed as much as gnarly these days. Skiing with my two sons 28 and 32. (See snow history here   http://www.alta.com/pages/snowfallhistory.php)Snowfall: day 1, 21in 19.4% density, day 2, 17in 5.7%, day 3, 8in 10.5%. Mostly skiing the area near High Rustler and Eagles Nest with a few runs on the Backside and a few off the Supreme Lift. First day on my old K2 Axis XP's and they worked very well in the very dense powder. Next day was supposed to be colder and lighter, so I got a demo pair of Rossi S7's. The very light powder on top of the very dense powder was some of the best skiing ever, and the S7's worked perfectly. Very quick and forgiving; lots of float. Skiing chutes and open trees was a pleasure. Where there was no powder like where the patrol had been bombing for avalanche control, they had nothing. Very little edge hold, and not wanting to do much but hold on and wait for the next bunch of powder. Next day was supposed to be much less snow and heavier again, so I traded the S7's for Blizzard the One. A bit of a mistake. There was a lot more snow up on the mountain than expected and they opened up some terrain that was closed the previous day. These skis were fine in all the conditions the S7's were not; packed powder, bomb tracks, skied out crud. In the real deep stuff,  they were a problem. I really had to crank to get them to float and I got the pleasure of a number of face plants skiing from tracked into dense untracked and the skis just buried. At 98 under foot, it might have just been me, still an extra ten or 15 mm under foot would have been nice.

post #46 of 53
Thread Starter 

2 more quick reviews to add; skied in 40" of new soft snow:

 

2011 Dynastar Huge Rocker: quite stiff, could also be a bit longer (185cm is kind of short).  Very stable, non-tapered tip does not float that well in REALLY deep snow (the deepest I have seen in several years).  Once the run starts to get tracked a bit, really comes into it's own; isn't phased by unpredictable terrain, extremely stiff, a real crud blaster, good in softer bumps, a bit easier at the tip than the old flat cambered model. The tail is quite stiff, not the most forgiving ski, very high performance and will eat up choppy snow and mixed terrain.  Best in moderate new snow, to quite deep new snow and all kinds of crud.   Not a full-on soft pow ski, but then again, I can remember skiing 3 days this deep in the past 8 years, so not really a big deal!  Great every day local ski for Bachelor when it snows. 

 

2011 Atomic Bent Chetler: felt about 5% more float than the Huge Rocker, a bit wider underfoot, softer at the tip, and has the tapered tip which also helps float a bit.  This one was mounted a bit far forward, maybe even better in the rearward position.  Serious fun in the soft, barely cut snow; the tail was more forgiving than the HR, and it surfed a bit better. Responds well to good technical skills, but also forgiving for back seat drivers, which is why it is popular with intermediates (I wouldn't put an intermediate on the HR-it requires some skill to ski, at least in the longer length).  Speed limit in the soft stuff is the same as the HR, and it a bit more forgiving as well in chop and soft bumps: the tail is so soft, it almost bounces over the terrain. Once it gets crudded out, there is a bit of a loss of stability compared to the HR, and isn't as good there for faster skiers. Also felt like more of a shorter-radius carver, compared to the GS power feel of the HR.  Biggest difference was the nearly snow-skimming feel of the Bent, vs. the powerful, snow-moving blaster feel of the HR. Both were different executions that resulted in very fun skis.  I loved both of them, and preferred the Bent as an AM (new snow) ski, and the HR as a PM (getting tracked out) ski, and could be happy on either. 

 

Full-length review w/video to be posted soon. 

post #47 of 53

Dawg, looking forward to the full review...Would be great if you could go into a bit more detail comparing the OG Huge Trouble with the '11 Huge Rocker!...I'm gonna post a review of The One and the OG Huge soon as well.

post #48 of 53
There is a recent gear review of the Dynastar PR115. Is it similar to ski except for the twin tip? I'll be at Alta again later this month and am thinking about what I might want to rent if it dumps.

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/93883/2011-dynastar-pro-rider-115
post #49 of 53
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sugahloafo View Post

There is a recent gear review of the Dynastar PR115. Is it similar to ski except for the twin tip? I'll be at Alta again later this month and am thinking about what I might want to rent if it dumps.

http://www.epicski.com/forum/thread/93883/2011-dynastar-pro-rider-115


No, the Legend Pro Rider 115 has a tapered tip, no rocker in the tail, skis longer, is a bit softer, and more big-dump/big mountain oriented.  I think the new Huge Rocker skis more like the old Legend Pro/XXL than the current PR115.  We already sold ours, so I won't get a demo on them this year. 

post #50 of 53

Quiver and skis sizing questions - MX98 and Elan Olympus

 

Me 6'1" 190lbs 40yrs young, pretty aggressive level 7-8 live in PNW skiing local Vancouver mountains and Whistler.

 

Thinking of adding one or two skis to the quiver. I so love my MX78's that I am thinking of getting the MX98 as soft condition all mountain ski. My question is: is the 188cm the right size? 178 seems too short and will be too close to the MX 78. 

 

Second ski thinking of an Elan Olympus for my POW ski. From reading Dawgs and others feedback seem to be a versatile, capable ski, so much so I am tempted to do a two ski quiver and pass on the MX98. Sound like and easier going more versatile previous generation Katana. I owned and liked mine much more than the 2010 Gotama I currently have. Thinking of going 183cm for a bit more manuveribility in tight spots. Doesn't sound like I would over power it but would appreciate feedback / opinions on that.

 

I would consider the MX108, I know Dawg and others were trying to get some. I had the pleasure of skiing it for a few days on a ski trip and well it;s a silky smooth damp powerful ski. It's sold out everywhere and what I worry about is playfulness and manuveribity in trees. Two traits I did feel were it's strong points and things I want in my ski. Perhaps the early rise has helped changed that? I might take a gamble if I could find one..

 

 

 

 

 

post #51 of 53

Correction - The MX 108 was not overly well suited to trees and tight spots, punished back seat driving and liked being driven from the front of the boot. I found it better with a +1" binding adjust.

 

I would also like to thank Dawgcatching and Sierra Jim for their reviews. Both very helpful and informative. Such a contrast to the Ski Canada and other magazine tests that consist of a single run on each ski. You guys even go back and re-post with updates in changing conditions. Great reviews and skier feedback is a big part of what makes Epic is the best skiers site I have found to date.

post #52 of 53

Nice review

post #53 of 53

Brief update on my earlier comments

 

I decided to grab a pair of Elan Olympus in a 183 and have not regretted the decision. Best all-round ski in the 100+ mm segment I have owned or tried (heck it's my favorite ski I have owned over 88mm) at least until this past Friday when I finally got to try the BMX 108 in a 188cm. It's definitely a different ski than the first year MX 108 and is much more maneuverable and playful without seemingly having lost anything in the power or stability department. A bit more energetic and lively ski than the Olympus and that unique Kastle feel. I added more comments to Dawgs BMX 108 review thread. It's too bad Dawg didn't have a pair to test when this review was posted. That said every MX 108 sold out early as it is so If you want some for next season I would put your name on the list now...

 

 

 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2011 Big Mountain Ski reviews: >=100mm and fun-shape skis