Ski recommendation

Post your questions/comments about Gear here

Ski recommendation

Postby marsound » Tue Feb 02, 2010 3:12 pm

Hello, I'm 5'11", 170ish lbs. Ski in the Tahoe area. I'm back skiing after a 12 year break. Picked up the Essentials book (fantastic!) and I'm trying to break the steering habit with PMTS :o . I can carve a turn consistently on blues, and less consistently on blacks, (I also want to eventually get more off trail).... I currently ski K2 Apache Raiders in 174cm. Okay ski, but not conducive to learning a more pure carve technique (longish turn radius). My goal is to pick up a narrower waisted, short radius ski to improve my technique, and If I can make the time next season, I plan on attending one of the camps.

My shortlist: Head Supershape, Supershape Magnum, Icon TT80, Xenon 9.0, i.XRC 800, (can pick up the last two cheap). I eventually intend to add a more "all mountain" ski after improving my skills. Are there other skis I should consider? Are any of these not recommended (e.g. Xenon's/i.XRC). I'm staying with Heads since they seem to be the "no brainer" recommended learning ski - One problem: Heads aren't available to demo at the resorts I ski.

Any suggestions/recommendations would be greatly appreciated...
User avatar
marsound
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:40 pm

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby meput » Tue Feb 02, 2010 4:31 pm

Your story sounds similar to mine. My time away from skiing was 35 years. On returning 2 seasons ago, I started off with Volkl AC 30's and was soon looking for different skis after finding HH and PMTS. A lot depends on what type of terrain you are planning to ski. Groomers? moguls? powder? off piste? You can not go wrong with Head iSupershapes. They can do it all, if necessary. The SS Magnums should also do it all (although I did not care for them when I tried them, not as quick as the SS's and chattered on hard pack). Demo'd '09 Xenon 8 and liked them. If you stay on groomers, I liked Stockli Laser SC's. Am currently on SS's and Monster 78's (rarely use the M 78's here in the east).
Walk to run. Tip to turn.
User avatar
meput
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:39 pm
Location: Downeast

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby marsound » Tue Feb 02, 2010 6:55 pm

Thanks meput. My long term goal is to be able to ski everything; short-term I need something for working on the exercises, which will be mostly on groomers. Sounds like the iSupershape can handle most conditions. My thought that something a little wider (but not too wide, which is my concern with the Xenon), but with a tight radius, would be a little more versatile, especially out west.

Did the Magnum's chatter when forced into a tighter turn, or just in general?
User avatar
marsound
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:40 pm

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby Max_501 » Tue Feb 02, 2010 8:14 pm

For a developing PMTS skier its hard to beat the SuperShape. At your size the 170cm would probably be the best bet if you want a bit more versatility out of it.
User avatar
Max_501
 
Posts: 4124
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:39 pm

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby Mac » Wed Feb 03, 2010 8:44 am

I would stay away from the SS Magnum, I had a pair last year. Very good bump ski, good in soft snow and crud, but does not hook up in a turn like the regular SS, especially on hard snow. Can't comment on the Xenon or Icon, haven't skied them, although I've heard peole say that the Xenons tended to chatter on ice. There are a lot of people that love the old XRC 800's. Very popular ski, I know people that are still skiing on them that say that ski changed the way they ski. But they haven't made that ski in a while, any of them you find have got to be at least two or three years old. I wouldn't worry too much about loosing much versatility with the regular SS, that ski will pretty much do it all. That ski will handle deep snow better than a lot of wider waisted skis, will be fine off piste, in bumps, and in anything up to knee deep or so. And besides, how often do you actually encounter snow deeper than that? Not very often. And if you do, then maybe it's time to rent for the day. And these midfats are not going to be all that much better in deep snow than the Supershapes, anyway. And the SS's are a lot more fun for everyday skiing, IMO.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby meput » Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:02 am

Marsound,

My experience with the SS Magnum's was minimal at a demo day. They were shorter than I wanted and their tune may have been suspect. The AC 30's were similar width and I did want a narrower ski. I tried them because they were available and they did not have iSS's to demo.

Listen to Max 501 and Mac. They have been around PMTS much longer than I have. Do a search of this forum re: iSupershapes. Most learning PMTS students have praised the iSS. It was the consensus of positive experience, on this forum with the iSS, that prompted my purchase of the iSS. I love mine.
Walk to run. Tip to turn.
User avatar
meput
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:39 pm
Location: Downeast

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby marsound » Wed Feb 03, 2010 11:56 am

Thanks everyone for the advice.

Would it make sense to pick up a new pair of XRC800s now in 170 with the Mojo 12 for less than $300 and use them until I can find a pair of very lightly used iSS or when prices drop on new at the end of the season? Seems hard to find the iSS in 170...
User avatar
marsound
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:40 pm

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby Mac » Wed Feb 03, 2010 12:01 pm

Might want to try forerunnerskishop.com. Last thing I knew, they were selling new SS w/bindings, 165, for $450. Think they still had a pair of 170's w/bindings that they were asking $550 for. That's a pretty great deal.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby dan.boisvert » Wed Feb 03, 2010 6:01 pm

I'm very much a beginner with PMTS and a pretty new skier in general, but I agree with the folks who are suggesting you avoid the SS Magnum. I'm about your weight and currently on that ski in a 170 (bought before I knew PMTS existed), and while I love it at speeds over a guesstimated 30mph or so, I have a very hard time bending it at the speeds I'm using while I try to learn stuff. I imagine this will get easier as my technique improves, but I'm not there yet. From what I've seen here, I think the normal SS would've been a much better ski for this purpose. Regarding chatter issues, I haven't noticed any with my SS Mag's, set to .7/3 and pretty meticulously maintained.

I'm also of the opinion that there's no point in buying new skis when all I'm going to do is bang them up anyway, so I might as well let somebody else pay for the privilege of putting on the first few scratches and buy them used for a lot less money. If I was in your position and saw somebody clearing out new SS's w/ bindings for <$500 though, I'd be tempted to buy the new ones. As a reference point, I bought my SS Mag's w/ bindings for $400 shipped last summer (including a Head ski bag), and the seller had beaten them up less in the 6-8 days he had on them than I did on my first..
dan.boisvert
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 4:11 pm
Location: Vermont

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby Mac » Wed Feb 03, 2010 6:35 pm

My experience with the SS Magnum's was minimal at a demo day. They were shorter than I wanted and their tune may have been suspect.[quote]
I'm not saying that the SS Magnum is a bad ski. They are excellent in moguls and crud. John Clendenin has used them as his everyday ski for the last few years at his camps at Aspen. I too suspected that the tune was off when I first bought mine. I experimented with different tunes, and never really found one that worked for me. But the same traits that make them good in bumps and junky snow also make them less desirable on hardpack conditions. The tip of the ski is very flexible, and just does not hook up into the turn the way the SS or even a ski like the IM78 does. But it is a lot more forgiving than the SS. The SS requires more attention to ski, the Magnum can be skied with almost any technique without spanking you. So it's not a question of one being a good or bad ski, it's a question of them doing somethings better than others. If I was to buy one or the other tomorrow, I would buy the SS, I like the way the ski performs better. But there are plenty of people out there that rave about the SS Magnum. It all depends on which one works best for you.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby marsound » Thu Feb 04, 2010 2:33 pm

Again, great info. Thanks all.

It sounds the the SS is the way to go for using PMTS to learn carving skills, with the only downside a lack of forgiveness? But perhaps that's a good thing by forcing me to not twist and steer and stay more on top of the ski (which I admit to getting a little lazy with current soft ski).
User avatar
marsound
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:40 pm

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby ToddW » Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:08 pm

marsound wrote:Again, great info. Thanks all.

It sounds the the SS is the way to go for using PMTS to learn carving skills, with the only downside a lack of forgiveness? But perhaps that's a good thing by forcing me to not twist and steer and stay more on top of the ski (which I admit to getting a little lazy with current soft ski).


If you use PMTS movements -- even if you are trying imperfectly to use them -- then the supershape is a good ski for you. Harald would not recommend them as a good ski for learning PMTS if he didn't have very positive experience with students at many skill levels. Supershapes don't like to be twisted harshly, but they'll both skid and carve. They will teach you to tip and not live in the backseat, but these are good things. If you're serious about skiing the PMTS way, then you shouldn't worry about the "lack of forgiveness" of the supershapes because they're not that unforgiving.
.
ToddW
 
Posts: 511
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:41 pm
Location: live: Westchester (NY) / ski: Killington

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby Mac » Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:32 pm

Because of the Supershape's wide tip and tail, and relatively narrow waist, they don't like to be skied flat, they want to be on edge all the time. They are not going to work as well for some who uses a lot of rotary movements and leg twisting/steering, but they are ideal for PMTS style movements. They have a way of keeping it from getting boring, but in a good way. They are a ton of fun to ski.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby meput » Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:33 pm

marsound wrote:It sounds the the SS is the way to go for using PMTS to learn carving skills, with the only downside a lack of forgiveness?


I agree with ToddW. The iSS forgives my many mistakes :oops:. They just do not like to be steered. Reviewers elsewhere, that use TTS, find the iSS unforgiving. Use PMTS movements and the iSS's will reward you.

Last season, after skiing ~ 25 days on my iSS's, I skied several runs on the AC 30's. This was in spring conditions and hoped their wider width would make them a better corn/mashed potato condition ski. Wrong, I found the iSS easier to tip and control, even in spring conditions. The AC 30's have been sold.

If you can find a pair of iSS's that are your length, at a price you are comfortable with, you can not go wrong with them.
Walk to run. Tip to turn.
User avatar
meput
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:39 pm
Location: Downeast

Re: Ski recommendation

Postby Mac » Thu Feb 04, 2010 6:00 pm

Meput, you bring up a good point that I discovered a long while ago. As a rule, wider waisted skis are generally thought to have an advantage in funky snow. But that is not always the case. The wider waisted ski may have more float, but the wider the waist gets, the more steering effort they are going to require from you to turn. And trying to steer a wider waisted ski through sloppy spring snow is going to wear you out in a hurry. I remember years ago before the days of shaped skis, I was skiing at Killington in sloppy spring slush bumps on a pair of old 203cm Dynastar X9 GS skis, and they were understandably wearing me out. I went down to the local ski shop, and asked the owner if there wasn't anything that would make skiing those conditions easier. He gave me a new ski on the market to try, a pair of Salomon X Mountains, with dimensions of 100-75-89. Back in those days, they were considered fat skis. They made skiing that slop so much easier that I bought a pair on the spot. A few years later, when shaped skis hit the market, I bought a pair of K2 Fours, and the X Mountains never made it out of the closet again. I skied those K2 Fours in everything, including spring slop, even though the Fours were 10cm narrower in the waist than the X Mountains. They were simply that much superior in every condition. That's why I said in one of my previous posts not to worry about the Supershapes being versatile enough to ski in most conditions. Fatter is not always better.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Next

Return to Gear

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests