Supershape Titan

[HeluvaSkier]

...not sure on the stiffness of the SS Magnum, but I recall making them do some impressive things on a soft-ish groomer. They aren't race ski stiffness, but certainly a more than capable short turn ski.

If the Titan follows those characteristics it might be worth a look... although in talking with Harald on the topic it was more the shape of the Titan that makes it less than useful (aggressive tail)... think Rossignol CX80. I'm certain it is a decent ski, but probably gives up a lot in versatility to skis like the IM78 and IM82 [and the new 84]. I definitely want to try a pair at some point as they probably suit my skiing style and typical terrain... but I wouldn't put them on the feet of just anyone.

FWIW, I own 180cm CX80's [similar category to the Titan I think]. They are good skis, but not versatile at all and not a good learning ski. Again, a ski that I would only recommend to a select few people who already had a very strong movement foundation and awareness.

[Mac]

Mac,

just looking at the list of skis you already own...why do you need another ski? More specifically another 78mm waisted ski? That's a pretty good list of skis that all, except the Contact Ti, cover similar terrain and purposes.

I've already said several times that I'm not actively looking to buy any more skis. On the contrary. Last season I started out with five pairs, now I'm down to two, sold the rest. The Kastle MX 78 as my do it all everyday ski, and the Elan 82 Ti's that I use as rock skis and for spring slush. And you're right, I'm not going to buy another 78mm waist ski, unless I find one that is superior to my MX 78's. That's the main reason I sold the others, because the MX 78 does everything the other ones did, and was more versatile. But I still think the Titan is worth a look.

[serious]

Anyone have any opinion about the 2011 Salomon XW Enduro in 170cm. I bought them on an impluse to replace my floppy Elan Mantis 662 and without doing any research. I am 5'6", 155 lbs. I do prefer skis with decent flex but I wanted something stiffer, without going for a GS ski (which I have already).

[Mac]

Can't help you there, haven't owned any Salomon stuff in a while. Never had very good luck with the stuff I did own, and their customer service was terrible. Salomon put out a pretty nice product going back to the days of straight skis, but their quality really seemed to take a hit after that. Might of had something to do with the constant changes in management and ownership, seems like they were on a merry-go-round for a while. But they say that their product has improved lately, a lot of their skis have gone back to wood cores now. I've heard that the Enduro is a pretty decent ski though, that is if you believe what the ski mags say.

[Mac]

"although in talking with Harald on the topic it was more the shape of the Titan that makes it less than useful (aggressive tail)... "

Could any of that have to do with the KERS affect? I have heard that the KERS is less noticeable in the Titan than it is in the Supershape or the Magnum, but I have no experience with any of the skis with KERS to go on. If I remember right, the time when Harald demoed the Titan was at the ski show at Winterpark, and everyone that was there pretty much agreed that the conditions were more like a bad day in the northeast than they were a typical Colorado day, so that might have come into play too. But this is all speculation on my part till I get a chance to actually try them.

[Tuomo]

Anyone have any opinion about the 2011 Salomon XW Enduro in 170cm. I bought them on an impluse to replace my floppy Elan Mantis 662 and without doing any research. I am 5'6", 155 lbs. I do prefer skis with decent flex but I wanted something stiffer, without going for a GS ski (which I have already).

Hi,

I had a chance to test XW Enduro last spring. After an hour I decided to buy them. Since then I've only used them few days mainly on groomed runs but I really like them a lot. My skis are 177 and they are perfect for my size (180 cm, 75 kg). You are a bit shorter than me so I hope 170 cm is long enough for you.

[serious]

Thanks Tuomo for the feedback!

[Mac]

Okay, time to update this thread. It's taken me a while to get out and demo some of this stuff, mainly because the conditions have been so marginal that the shops have been reluctent to let their gear out the door. Have been to a few demos, but they never seem to have what you're looking for in the size you want.
Anyway, got to try the new Supershape Magnum last weekend. Conditions were a couple of inches of fluff from the day before on top of a very firm base. At 6'1" and 210 lbs, I would typically grab a 177. Unfortunately, all they had was a 170, so I decided to give that a go. And I'm glad I did. This new version is nothing like the older pre-KERS model that I owned. Everthing that I didn't like about the older version has been addressed with the new model. Where the old pair I had didn't track very well, had a very soft tip and overall flex, and were lacking grip on truly hard snow, the new ones were just the opposite. Noticably stiffer overall, yet with an even progressive flex. No issues with stability, no tip wander, just pulled you into the turn with very little effort. And oh so smooth underfoot, a real Cadillac ride. And these things were a total ice skate. Skied some typical New England frozen rock hard scraped off bumps in total control, and the skis didn't buck or kick, very well behaved. That smooth, even flex I mentioned before really came into play here. Versatile turn shape, easy to change the radius mid stride. And the ski was very agreeable whether you wanted to push it or whether you just wanted to work on slow speed technique drills. I must admit that I didn't want to give these back at the end of the day. I went away wanting a pair. Badly.
Skied the SS Titan 177 a week later. Conditions were snow the day before changing to rain then freezing overnight, so we're talking frozen washboard first thing in the morning. The kind of snow that kills your feet after the first run. Lots of piled up crud on the sides of the trails, with snowmaking going on, so there was a variety of conditions depending on where you went.
I'm going to reserve judgement on the Titan for now, as I suspect that there was a tune issue going on here. First run of the day was on a blue-ish green buffed out frozen groomer, just the type that you figure the Titan should excell at. And the ski never felt right from the very first turn. I should have been screaming down that run laying them way over, and instead, I went all the way down trying to figure out what was going on there. And things didn't get any better when I got into some variable conditions. The skis were a ton of work, took a concentrated effort and a lot of upper body input that Harald wouldn't approve of just to get down the runs. After a handful of runs like that, I decided it was time to put them back in the truck and grab my own pair, because I wasn't having any fun on those, and my legs were about shot, and it was only 10 o'clock.
So I'm just writing them off as a bad tune. Both myself and some of my friends have gotten some pretty funky tunes out of the shop that I got these from in the past, so I'll just leave it at that for now. If I have a chance to try another pair down the road, I'll give it a shot, cause I'm sure that these are a far better ski than the ones I tried that day.

[Max_501]

Mac, it sounds like the old Magnum you had was defective. I've been on at least 3 of them and they all skied like a stiffer wider SS. Its a great ski. Your findings with the Titan aren't much different than what HH mentioned when he tried it. That's too bad because on paper it looks great.

[Mac]

You may very well be right about the pair I had being defective, as unlikely as it sounds. There is no way that the KERS system alone could account for all the difference that I felt between the pair I demoed and the pair that I owned.
As far as the SS Titan, I'm still holding on to the bad tune theory for now. I have had skis come out of that shop with fresh tunes that were literally unskiable. I was hoping that the pair I tried still had the factory tune, but no such luck. So I was leary of them even before I got on them. But I've just had too many people rave about that ski. Get on YouTube and plug in SS Titan, and all you hear is that it's everyone's ski of the year, etc. Bob Peters over on Epic who has a lot of days on them said it was his favorite every day ski of all time. I find it hard to believe they can all be wrong. I've probably told this story before, but it's similar situation. Going back to around 2003, I had my eye on a pair of the Head iC 180's. From the info I had gathered about it, I thought it would be an ideal ski for me. I demoed it up at Stowe. Took one run on it and brought it back as fast as I could. By the end of the run my legs were toast from trying to horse those things around. Maybe it's just me, I said to myself, but they were definitely not the ski for me. About two weeks later, I saw the same pair in a shop down at Killington. My thinking was that no ski could be as bad as the ones I had previously tried, so I decided to give them another go. My running across another pair must have been a good omen.Turned out to be my favorite ski of all time. Kept those longer than any ski I've owned. I'm not going to go out of my way to try another pair of Titans, I'm not actively looking to buy a pair. But if I do run across another pair, I might give them another shot. Just because you never know.

[Max_501]

What you wrote reminds me of the the Atomic Metron B5. People RAVED about that ski. But was it really that good?

[HighAngles]

I've tested the Titan on 3 different occasions. I loved them once and hated them twice. IMO, you're at the mercy of the tune and the binding position. I guarantee that if I owned a pair I would be able to make them work well for me... with my own tune and my preference for binding position worked out.

If you think about it, there's no difference in construction between these and other Heads we all have liked. They're just a bit wider (like the other 78s) with a deeper sidecut. They should work and they most likely can be made to work.

[Mac]

Yes, I spent some time on the Metrons. Which leads me to the question of what the point is in having a wide carving ski to begin with. Are they more stable, are they better in powder, are they more versatile? Are they going to be an advantage in variable conditions as compared to a more traditional carver like the SS Magnum? From my experience, I would have to say no. IMO, they are heavier, more bulky, harder to manuver through trees and bumps, just more cumbersome in variable conditions. And from my experience, they don't tend to float any better in powder, they just seem to require more effort. I had a chance to demo some of the wider 80mm carvers this year, similar to the type of ski that Heluva mentioned in his post, and they weren't worth a darn in ungroomed conditions. I think that's why the rocker design has started to work it's way into some of the all mountain carver category. I own a pair of the Blizzard 8.1's with a slight tip rocker. It does make the ski a little more manageable in funky conditions while still providing good edge grip and decent carving performance. But it's still not the sports car performance feel that I love in a ski like the new SS Magnum. But I think the notion that a wide carving ski can be an effective one ski quiver for most situations is not going to work, at least for me. In this case, wider doesn't necessarily equate to better.

[Mac]

Here's a perfect example of what I'm talking about. By today's standards, you would be foolish to try and ski these conditions on anything less than a fat ski. By my way of reasoning, even the SS Magnum would be 10 times easier than the stuff JCK has got to work within this footage:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcs393efYmk

[jbotti]

There was a time when very few could ski powder especially on those skinny skis. We should all long for that day to return!! By today's standards, those conditions are sweet and very easy to ski!! Butter powder in trees that are not very tight at all.