Elan Apex 178cm Review

Appreciate the great review; I'm your weight and just happened onto the same size Apex. (Now major population crisis in the 88-98 slot, but that's another issue, to be settled by better meds and some quality time alone with fleabay. ) My questions: 1) What bindings, and where are they mounted? 2) Have you tried them in tight places like the trees/bumps lower down on Blue Sky?

Actually, I prefer soft tails for skis I take hiking/sidebounds; "predictable" and "stabile" trump "thriliing" when you're working your way down a chute. Now trying to decide if this is too narrow to go AT. I was looking hard at the Spire when this fell into my world.  

I just wanted to add a bit to this thread.

I demo'd the Apex's last week when it was puking snow in the PNW: groomers ranged from soft to corn to icy (though mostly soft packed), there was a lot of fresh snow everywhere off the groomed runs and bumps were mellow and soft for the most part (i.e. still forming, though a few locations were getting iced and cut up on the backsides).  Also, I hit some variable terrain with wind blown crust and a bit of crud on a few steep locations filled with death cookies towards the bottom...

I then demo'd a set of Magnum 8.7s the day after in similar conditions.

For me - personally - I preferred the Magnums over the Apexs.  Both were great skis and I really liked the Apexs, but I liked the Magnums more: better high speed stability (length of 181 vs 177?), less chatter and better edge transfer (this was immediately noticeable on the hardpack), a little livelier and - probably most importantly - slightly stiffer.  I'm 200+ pounds and i found the Apexs a tiny bit soft for me.  The one area I liked the Apexs a bit better was in cut up weirdly spaced bumps (I think here their slightly softer feel was an advantage), but this was only minimally.  Both skis were great, but the Magnum 8.7 might just be something to consider if you're a bigger skier.

I picked a pair of 177 Apex's up via Dawg a few weeks back.  I have them mounted with Marker Tour F12's.  The mount is 1.5cm aft of the mark on the ski.  Boot sole is 302mm. My objective for these skis is to be a one ski option for trips involving piste skiing and alpine touring.  They are (supposedly) an upgrade from a Head Monster 82, 177cm, with a Fritschi Freeride Plus.  This set up is a few ounces lighter than the Head/Fritschi combo while being a few mms wider overall.  I love the Heads and asked myself more than once if this was a necessary expense.  The answer is yes, barely.

I'm a very experienced skier with 25+ years experience in alpine touring (bought my first AT boots in '82).  I've patrolled, coached, been a racer parent, and worked in ski sales and marketing (including ski testing).  I'm 6' and 180 lbs nearing retirement age but you don't have to wait around for me to catch up on the hill. 

Skis I own and like: Head Monster 82, Blizzard G Force Supersonic, Volkl Mantra.  I like metal sandwich skis with wood cores and low camber.

The Apex's were not on my radar.  I have always had respect for Elan's ability to build skis and innovate, but they always seemed to be a bit off base in getting the product dialed in.  My perception was that they were solid but unresponsive, so I really didn't pay any attention to them.  I was considering the Volkl Kendo and the Kastle MX88.  The Kendo seemed a bit heavy for touring (and Volkl's [lighter] tour ski using the Kendo mold doesn't have metal in it) and the Kastle is just too much $.  What I wanted was a wider, lighter Head Monster 82.  So I took a flyer on the Apex.

I did not immediately love the Apex and was questioning the glowing reviews on here.  It was slow into the turn, inconsistent, and would act indecisively at the bottom of the turn. I couldn't get on the edge early.  I retuned the skis, switched feet and picked up some improvement.  The snow conditions were inconsistent which made giving the ski a fair test difficult but I knew that I was working way too hard.  I wasn't balanced.  I wasn't relaxed.  The ski was dictating to me not the other way around.

My alpine boots are Nordica Doberman 130 Pro's.  Today I tried my touring boots, Dynafit Titans.  The Apex's felt comfortable right away.  These were the skis that I'd read about.  I was balanced, relaxed, confident.  I could get on the edge early.  I could generate snap coming out of the turn.  My theory is that the Nordica is too stiff for me to make the subtle adjustments to stay relaxed and balanced.  I can manage it on a 72mm carver but it doesn't do the job for me on an 88mm ski.  Whether that theory is right or wrong, I know that I'm quite happy with the Apex when I'm in the Dynafit which is the boot I use for touring anyway.

Here's what I can say about the Apex.  For a lighter weight ski, they are amazingly solid feeling.  They ski like a much beefier ski in spite of being lighter in weight and a bit softer flexing.  Not sure how they accomplish that.  I think they have a lot of metal in them and are quite stiff torsionally.  They have that nice metal ski edge feel to them.  Very positive.   Very powerful on edge.  Similar to the Mantra in that respect but the softer flex makes them more versatile.  [Here's some later information vis a vis the Mantra.  I have an older pair of Mantras, red ones, that I haven't used in a year or so.  I put new bindings on them and retuned them.  Skied them head to head against the Apex's.  The Mantra is much more of a take charge ski vs. the Apex which is a "what do you want to do" kind of ski.  Mantra is much more powerful with stellar edge grip.  Not as versatile as the Elan but it has a lot more punch].  Getting back to the Apex, the other big plus is the stability.  You can rip on these things and nothing spooky happens.   The Head Monster 82 is easier going but does get a bit more skittish as the speed builds.  The caveat to all of this is that today's conditions were absolutely perfect.  It was ultra-consistent firm (but not hard) snow with a 2" cushion of fluff on top.  Still, it's a hill I know well and I know how skis are supposed to work on that hill in those conditions.   

I was expecting a bit milder type of ski and hoping that there would be enough performance.  There is a passel (or is that a plethora?) of performance.  For a ski that I can use everywhere for lift served skiing and won't be a slug for touring, the Apex works as advertised.

Do we also need a quiver of boots? a passel/plethora of boots?

I give up....gonna get my feet tuned up....will that help?

I tried a pair of demo 177 Apexes late last year, and had them tuned 1/2, and wasn't impressed with their performance on hard AM snow, but was great in PM soft crud.

I have since sold the new pair that I bought on Egay, and went with 177 Kendos instead, which so far I like a bit better on groomers and about the same in crud.

I am 5'-7, 155 lbs, and still prefer my 08 Dstar Legend Pro Rider to either of these skis.

WDIK.....

Yes, in my case, multiple boots make sense.  I do a lot of alpine touring, so I do need something other than a stiff, full-on alpine boot.  Since these are my touring skis, ideally they should match up well with my touring boots.  I'm happy to report that they work better with my touring boot than they do with my alpine boots.  I also have learned that my alpine boots will ski better for me if I soften them up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by choucas 
 I also have learned that my alpine boots will ski better for me if I soften them up.

Yep. Last year I began to question my proclivity for stiff skis, this year same questions about boots. For a long time I thought the stuff about foot movement inside a boot was just flat wrong. I've had a few ah-hah moments since. 

Thanks to Dawgcatching, I too picked up a pair of Elan Apex skis in 177.   I had demoed some other skis prior to this with the Kendo being the ski I liked the most but I was still looking for something just a little more forgiving, and at 5'10" and 155, I'm in that "lightweight" category. 

So I got to ski these for the first time yesterday in very mixed conditions - some hard pack, some ice, some medium type bumps and even some chopped up snow.  These skis felt much like the Kendos in some ways, especially in their quickness and turn shape, but, as I was hoping for, they were a little more forgiving.  These have a very good flex for someone of my size and I found them to be quick and easy to ski in both the bumps (the skis absorbed the bumps very nicely and I didn't get tossed around), and in the chopped up snow, where again their well balanced flex helped absorb the varried snow conditions.  And in both instances I felt both comfortable and confident and was able to let the skis really go a bit.

I do agree though that they did not hold an edge on the harder stuff quite as well as the Kendos but I can easily give that up for their better (at last for me), crud and bump performance.  I didn't get a chance to ski them in any kind of real powder though but would expect that even there they will be better then both the Kendos and my old Monsters, but of course, not as good as true wider designated powder boards.

Again, thanks to Dawgcatching for helping me with these and to others for all of their advice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by beyond 

Quote:

Originally Posted by choucas 
 I also have learned that my alpine boots will ski better for me if I soften them up.

Yep. Last year I began to question my proclivity for stiff skis, this year same questions about boots. For a long time I thought the stuff about foot movement inside a boot was just flat wrong. I've had a few ah-hah moments since. 

Same here.  I replaced some older, very stiff boots a couple of years ago with something softer and my skiing improved drastically.  Suddenly I found I could really get the ski tips to bite into the snow and initiate a turn, and not be struggling to maintain my balance.  Apparrantly, I was simply not big enough or strong enough to properly flex the boots I had been skiing in.  So now I ski in somewhat wimpy boots (flex wise), but have a lot more fun then I use too.   
 

I did go to my local friendly boot fitter and had him soften up the Dobermanns by cutting out sections of the lower shell.  There are dotted lines on the boot shell showing where to cut.  The lower shell shape is now more reminiscent of a Lange and the boot works much better for me.  I skied the boot earlier this week on very hard snow here in Vermont and I was able to stay balanced and make smooth carved turns in rock hard conditions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawgcatching 

I am heading up there in a couple of weeks, and if we can squeeze it in, I will try to grab a demo and go up to SkiBowl for the evening.  Since they are web-direct though, we won't be able to sell any. A friend has the Wrenegade and seem to like them, although he has a big boot and we can't swap skis.  He does get pushed and bounced around more in cruddy snow than I do on my Huge Rocker though, but then again, it could easily be a technique issue. He seems a lot more backseat these days, not sure if it is the skis being mounted too far forward or what. 

A friend of mine who rides a pair of Wrens with a lot of camber (1"?) is pretty sure this is due to the camber, since he's skied a pair with zero camber before. A few people on TGR seem to have experienced that camber + bamboo/carbon = bouncy, moreso than camber with other sorts of cores. I believe that they're getting rid of the camber next year.

Camber might also explain the backseating. There were some complaints about the first year Billy Goats not being great in deep snow due to some tip dive issues. The second year, they removed a lot of camber, and the complaints disappeared. Their riders/testers also noticed a difference in deep snow performance with the reduction in camber. My pair of first-years were created halfway through the season, after this feedback was incorporated, and as such, have the lower camber.

So that's my theory:

Camber may mean an exciting ride on groomers and hardpack, but it sure does bounce you around in the crud (and probably makes it more likely that the tip will dive in soft snow).

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawgcatching 

Everyone I have sold them to has been extremely impressed with the Apex: seems like they should be more popular than they are.  It is every bit as good (or better) than the Kendo, which outsells it likely 20-1.  I have been ripping around on my pair this winter.  The only thing they don't do as well as some is in terms of energy on groomers, but that means they are more predictable off-piste.  

A little experiment that may mean absolutely nothing... but... could you take a look at the camber of each, and compare?

For those who have Mantra or Kendo, who do the compare to the Apex?  I'm intermediate-advanced, looking for an all mountain (looking to start getting off piste).

I own an older Mantra and a new Apex.  Both 177cm.  I'm 6', 180lbs, top level skier.  The Mantra is a wide GS ski.  It has a solid feel at higher speeds, but is less easy going than the Apex.  When I bought it, the Mantra was considered wide; now it's an all mountain ski for people who want good performance on hard snow out of a 95+ mm ski.  While the Apex is less demanding, it doesn't give anything away to the Mantra at the top end.  The Apex is supposed to be my touring ski, but I end up skiing on it all the time.  The Mantra hasn't been out of the garage yet this year and probably won't be.   The Kendo is the same construction as the Mantra and essentially the same dimensions as the Apex.  My guess is that it skis a lot like the Apex but the Apex has a bit of tip rocker so it will most likely be a bit easier in turn initiation and in inconsistent snow vs. the Kendo.  I've skied Volkls for many years and really like their skis.  You can't go wrong with them.  The Elan doesn't take a backseat to anyone and is well worth your consideration. 

Have you skied the Elan 888?  That is what I currently ski, and I really like them in anything less than 18" of fresh.  I especially like them in packed snow, where I find that they carve nicely in the bumps and are very quick with nice rebound.  On hard pack, which I avoid when possible, I find the ski to have solid edge grip and inspire confidence.  On really hard days I tend to ski the groomers, where once again I find the 888 to be superb.

The softer flex and rocker tip of the Apex sounds like it would be an improvement over the 888 in deep snow, but I am wondering what they might be giving up.