EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Buying new skis (choice down to 2)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Buying new skis (choice down to 2)

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 

g'day all well we are still 6 months off winter but i figured it would be coming up time to buy my new skis ready for next season, they normally have old stock clearances so hopefully i can snap a bargain on on of these sets of skis


So in your experience what is the better ski for me?

Just to help the choice...I am...


25 year old Male 182cm tall 95kg

Ski at resorts only on groomed runs the begginer to intermediate

I was looking at either the...


http://www.blizzard-ski.com/index.php?id=5#34,1,325,0,0 in 174cm 121-68-105-14


http://www.ski-review.com/ski_reviews/review/dynastar_contact_groove_ti_2010/ in 172cm 118-66-102-14


Would these skis be suitable for me and my level? Also are the lengths i've chosen too long for me?? or is that about right


Both seem as good as each other it's a tough choice to make. any help greatly appreciated

post #2 of 17

You must live in southern hemisphere?  Winter is just starting here!!  =)


Not sure about the blizzard.  The Dynastar Contact Groove is marketed to advanced/expert skiers.  These are generally stiffer and can really hinder development for a beginner/intermediate skier.


Those lengths are OK for you, but for a beginner/intermediate skiing only on groomed runs, I would even go shorter.  Maybe as low as 165.  The shorter ski will be lighter and easier to manuever.  You will be able to turn quicker.  The longer skis only provide more stability at speeds, but in the terrain you are talking about, that should not be an issue with shorter skis.


I have a friend about same size as you...he skied on 160cm slalom skis on groomed runs for many years and loved them.




post #3 of 17
Thread Starter 

Ahh ok the only reason i went longer was because i am using 170cm skis right now and i find them very easy to use. Also been rather heavy i chose a longer ski also due to this.


how stiff is the flex on the Dynastar in comparission? Is it similar to head i supershape?

post #4 of 17

what skis are you on currently?

based on your description of yourself, I assume you skid your turns more than you carve, but correct me if I'm wrong.


the Head iSupershape is also an advanced/expert ski.  It will be fairly stiff.


I recommended the shorter length because I find it to be more maneuverable and fun on groomed.  But if you prefer a longer ski, then by all means go for the 170-175 range.  It won't be too long for you.

post #5 of 17
Thread Starter 

yes you are correct in saying i probably tend to skid than carve, i've sometimes managed to do a full 360 lol only to stack it shortly after but i was having fun.


I thought i was getting the hang of carving too.


yeh i was told the supershape series are not very forgiving, is this the same with the dynastars? what do you think of the blizzards?


the skis i am using now are an old head series with about 60 around the waist, and about 110 up top i think not sure 100%



post #6 of 17
Thread Starter 
post #7 of 17

those blizzards also look like they are high performance skis.  All the advanced/expert skis will tend to be more stiff, harder to ski, and less forgiving.   Once you have learned to carve really well...these skis can kick some serious butt.  However, I strongly suggest an intermediate ski for progressing and learning to carve.


I'm not familiar with all the different models out there right now, but look for something similar to the fischer rx 6, rx fire or head xrc 800.  Do a search on epic and you should find plenty of suggestions for skis in your skill range.


60 something waist and 110 tip sounds like a shaped carving ski, so your current skis can't be that old.  Perhaps you are on a good pair and you don't even know it.  Not sure how often you get your skis tuned, but investing in some money to get a stone grind and tune for your skis can breath new life into them.


post #8 of 17
Originally Posted by Alienslayer View Post



there u go

hmm, I can't quite tell what ski that is.  What do the words say on it?

post #9 of 17

Both seem good.  At 95 kg, I wouldn't advise going any shorter than what you have chosen.

post #10 of 17
Thread Starter 

They are called Head cyber space apparently 10 years old roughly maybe 12


I also checked up the dynastar and blizzard ski mentioned above the sites claim soft-medium flex on both apparently very forgiving.


Can anyone confirm?


Just curious though which ski would give me better turning out of those 2? Which one has the better sidecut?


post #11 of 17

sidecut is a personal preference depending on what type skiing you will be doing.  There's no "better" sidecut.  Do a search for those skis on google and you should be able to find the sidecut information.


I would say generally

< 14m are short turn SL skis

14-18m turns are medium GS turning skis

> 18m are long GS turning skis


For groomed runs, I like as small of sidecut as possible.  More turns = more fun.  But too small of sidecut can be very hooky too, which might be harder to control.  Anything under 18m would be fine for you.  I would avoid getting a ski that's >18m sidecut if you're just skiing groomed runs. 

post #12 of 17
Thread Starter 

Cool well i guess the only way i'll know is by doing a demo on both, from stock which would you say performs better on groomed runs.


Looking mostly at...




Something not tooo fast ;)

post #13 of 17
Thread Starter 

Well so much for finding cheaper prices in summer........ i think i'll order them online..............


One guy in town has the Blizzard Soniq IQ Says they'll be a good learning ski for intermediate to advanced but says i should still have fun on them.


He recomended going the 167cm mostly because of my level begginer-intermediate and also because as mentioned above easier to turn on groomed runs


Only problem is the cost... $1300!!! FUCK THAT for a joke! i've seen em online for half the price!!! especially for a mass produced carving ski

Edited by Alienslayer - 12/10/10 at 11:26am
post #14 of 17

There are certainly some advantages to buying from a local shop, and I like to try and support local businesses, but if they are charging you twice what you can pay for an identical or very similar ski and binding, then you are not getting much value for the extra $600+.  In addition, you will undoubtedly have to pay sales tax on top of what the shop charges you, which could be another $100. No tax on the net, unless you are buying from an in-state company.


I shopped for a pair of new 2010-2011 model skis for my wife this year.  I found them with an inflated full retail price, but for sale on the net for $499 from numerous places. A local shop had them on the rack with that same price tag on them.  Yeah, I had to pay some sales tax, but they took her bindings off another pair of skis and remounted them on the new ones for free because I bought the skis there.  They said they realized they cannot compete unless they match internet prices, and I am telling all my friends who are looking for skis to go there, so there marketing plan seems to be working.

post #15 of 17
Thread Starter 

Well i've decided on blizzards but damn chosing a length is hard most say anywhere mid face which covers the 167 and 174, some say for begginer go less in size...


but my problem was when i first started learning to ski i used 160cm skis and i found it VERY hard to use. Maybe it was just a shit pair of skis i was learning on but i went to a 10 year old 170cm pair and creamed it in found them fast.


I'm tempted to go the 167cm because easier to turn but on the same level i'm tempted to go the 174cm because i want to get to at least a level of 7/10 for skiing and that's as far as i wanna go. would never do black runs.


i measured it up on myself and standing upright the 167cm come roughly around my lower nose the 170cm roughly around my eyes and the 174cm around my forehead


So basing it on that what would you go?

post #16 of 17

I just checked for you.

My SL skis come to my nose (standing in bare feet).  Tried various lengths in various similar skis before buying this ski in this length.

My GS skis are about six (6) inches above my head, but I didn't try out the lengths above and below to fine tune; it was the pair they had on sale, seems ok though.

My deep snow skis also about six (6) inches above my head, and again it was just what I found on sale, seems ok too.

My SG skis reach my wrist on my arm stretched up above my head (about 13.5 inches above my head).  I tried lengths above (too much work in moguls) and below (too unstable at maximum speed).


I weigh 75 to 80 Kg.  Your "beginner" status might cancel my weight, but then again, you've been skiing for a season are you not an intermediate now?


Go with 174 cm.  It really is pretty easy to control a 174 cm long ski once you get the hang of tipping the skis onto their edges to make them turn. 


Head Cyber Space XT from 2000 ?  You could do worse.  It is called a "versatile good carver" in realskier reviews.


If you are carving cleanly, which a good carver will let you do, you will be skiing fast.  If you don't want to ski fast you will need to ski uphill more and when appropriate incorporate a smearing/braking action into your turns.

post #17 of 17
Thread Starter 

thanks heaps dude yeh i have had so many mixed opinions on the sizes most say mid face so either size is good i was gonna try and trial them first but to be honest i can't see there been a huge difference between the sizes.


Umm what does realskier say about the blizzard soniq IQ???


174cm it is then :D after all if i leanr on it i'll get better btw i did not get into skiing until last month and a half of season


what do you consider intermidiate?


in aus we have begginer/intermidiate/advanced runs


i ski begginer and some... some intermidiate runs


i can carve pretty good on those skis very easy to turn hey and i find them easy to use even considering the length of 170cm :D


so what does this site say about them blizzards cos i'm considering putting in an order hey are they better carvers than the ones i have? also do i need to tune them or are they good as is?  and yeh even though the guy said go 167cm i think i'll go the 174cm only because of my weight :) and i figure it's still in my face area so it should be ok i'm guessing anything around your eyes for ski length is intermidiate level?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Buying new skis (choice down to 2)