Supershape Titan

Post your questions/comments about Gear here

Supershape Titan

Postby Mac » Tue Sep 27, 2011 6:40 am

Moderator Note - Topic split from http://www.pmts.org/pmtsforum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=3452

It seems to me like the Supershape Titan would be an obvious choice that would fulfill all the requirements that you guys have mentioned, yet it almost never gets any run here on the forum. Basically a slalmon design with a 78mm waist. In fact, I don't think that I've ever even heard anyone say that they actually own a pair here. I know the ski got rave reviews on Peter Keelty's site, as it has from people I know that have had experience with it, but yet it ever hardly gets mentioned here. I find that kind of strange, but I've never skied it, nor have I ever skied anything with a rocker design, so I'm only speculating here. Also, there is a great article over on Peter's site that is well worth watching. Some wonderful footage, both old and new. Just reinforced the notion to me that efficient movements are not a fad that goes in and out of style with the weather. Go to Peter's site and click on "Great Skiers".
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby jbotti » Tue Sep 27, 2011 7:39 am

Harald skied the SS Titan and hated the ski and reported it here when the skis were first introduced. I beleive he said it was too stiff, with a poor flex patttern and in general a bad ski. It's possible I am being slightly too harsh, but he didn't like the ski.
Balance: Essential in skiing and in life!
User avatar
jbotti
 
Posts: 2184
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:05 am

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby HeluvaSkier » Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:02 am

jbotti wrote:Harald skied the SS Titan and hated the ski and reported it here when the skis were first introduced. I beleive he said it was too stiff, with a poor flex patttern and in general a bad ski. It's possible I am being slightly too harsh, but he didn't like the ski.


Also commented on too much tail on the ski causing it to be difficult to release, and not really practical outside of groomers, where other skis like the IM78 don't have the same tail shape and are more suited to 3-d terrain. The combination of the stiffness and the tail that won't release makes for a ski that is not useful on the majority of the mountain. I love the concept of the ski, but feel that the execution is poor.
Discipline is the refining fire by which talent becomes ability.

www.youtube.com/c/heluvaskier
User avatar
HeluvaSkier
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 7:29 pm
Location: Western New York

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby Max_501 » Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:40 am

Mac wrote:I know the ski got rave reviews on Peter Keelty's site, as it has from people I know that have had experience with it, but yet it ever hardly gets mentioned here.


Unfortunately the reviews on that site don't always match with the results we get when testing skis.

h.harb wrote:Head totally blew it with the Titan. It's s stiff board that bucks and kicks on chop or crud and it's heavy and slow side to side.
User avatar
Max_501
 
Posts: 4124
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:39 pm

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby Mac » Tue Sep 27, 2011 11:30 am

Interesting. But it seems to me that Harald also was not impressed with the Icon 80 the first time he tried it, either. As I remember, that turned out to be a tune issue. Not really surprising, either. Head has developed a reputation for poor tunes from the factory, mostly due to over beveled/inconsistent base and side bevels. I remember a Head ski that I tried once was one of the worst skis I had ever had on my feet, and I had the good fortune to be able to try the same ski again later with a good tune, and it ended up being one of my favorite skis of all time. And then again, maybe it's (the Titan) just not a very good ski. But on the other hand, I've had some people tell me that it's one of the best skis they've ever been on, so who knows. I'm wondering if they changed the ski at all between when it was introduced last year and this year's version. The reviews this year on Realskiers were considerably better than last year's. I've been told it is the same ski with slightly different graphics, but who knows. The only sure way to know is to try it for yourself. As soon as the snow flies, I'll give it a try and let you know what I think. I'd hate to let a potentially good ski like that fly under the radar.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby jbotti » Tue Sep 27, 2011 12:06 pm

It doesn't sound like what Harald didn't like about the ski had anything to do with the tune. Bad tunes don't make skis buck and kick in chop.
Balance: Essential in skiing and in life!
User avatar
jbotti
 
Posts: 2184
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:05 am

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby Mac » Tue Sep 27, 2011 1:23 pm

I don't know about that, I've had some skis with funky tunes that were just about unskiable. I find it hard to believe that all the people that tested it in the 2012 Realskiers review could be that far off the mark. Not to mention other people that I've talked to about it. I'm not trying to make a case for it, as I said, I've never even been on it myself. I just find it hard to believe that a ski that is that well liked in general could be so bad.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby Mac » Tue Sep 27, 2011 1:27 pm

Here's the most recent review from Realskiers:

Supershape Titan
128/78/114 (13.5m) 156,163,170,177 Re-tested. More appreciated than ever.

"Fantastic. Super stable and excellent rebound"

"Advanced to expert, no speed limit, great rebound."

"Carving rocket!"

"Grip without the 'pain' of a race ski."

"Very fun! Stable and great in short radius turns, even at high speed."

"Glued to the snow."

"Awesome, simply awesome!"

And so on . . .


clean carve: 5
smooth drift: 4
accurate: 5
stability: 5
rebound: 5
quickness: 4
lightness: 4
relaxing: 4

Builds confidence:
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby jbotti » Tue Sep 27, 2011 1:28 pm

Well refuting that is pretty easy. Let's remember that Peter's ski of the year several years ago was the Volkl Tigershark. I skied that ski in both versions and it was close to the worst ski ever made. There are zillions of reviews on Epic talking about how great the AC 40 and AC 50 were/are. From a PMTS perspective these are really bad skis. You can't bend them and in fact that are so stiff in the tip that when you apply tip pressure it actually bucks you off the tip.

My point is a very simple one, listen only to reviews from people you know and you know how they ski!! We know how Harald skis and what he is looking for in a ski and why he chooses them. Honestly I don't pay much attention to what the masses say about skis. For the most part they are using different movements in their skiing than I am, so why should their review have any relevance for me. I guess if you want to ski like teh masses you can buy those skis. If not you may want to re-think that viewpoint.
Balance: Essential in skiing and in life!
User avatar
jbotti
 
Posts: 2184
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:05 am

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby jbotti » Tue Sep 27, 2011 1:30 pm

Realskiers also gives a 5 grade for clean carve for some heaviliy tip and tail rockered skis. That's the same grade as the ISL RD gets. Come on, you can't be serious!!
Balance: Essential in skiing and in life!
User avatar
jbotti
 
Posts: 2184
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 10:05 am

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby Max_501 » Tue Sep 27, 2011 1:38 pm

IMO, ski reviews aren't very useful if you don't know the skill level and technique used by the testers.
User avatar
Max_501
 
Posts: 4124
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:39 pm

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby ToddW » Tue Sep 27, 2011 2:59 pm

Mac,

I don't think the Titan is a ski for you, but if you demo a pair from Forerunner let me know 'cause I'd like to see.

I skied the SS Titan 177cm for about 3 hours at MRG last year at the NE PMTS gathering. Many thanks to Glenn Scannell and Sport Thoma for making lots of free demo skis available to us!

I skied dan.boisvert's IM 78s the next day at Sugarbush in 177 and I own IM 78s in 171.

The two skis have similar form factors and identical widths, but that's where it stops. There was one sweet turn on the Titan that I remember still. But in general they were stiffer than the IM 78 and had a less progressive flex pattern. There was a brushy course set up for the kids that would've been easy for me on IM 78s. I tried it and bailed out after 3 turns because I didn't want to cheat, especially in front of Glenn and several PMTS skiers. It was fairly flat and I couldn't get the Titan to bend enough at that slow speed to stay in the course in a pure carve, despite trying to get way forward and tipping lots. (Strong skiers could no doubt do it, but your average improving PMTS skier wouldn't be up to the challenge.) I skied the Titan back to back with Icon TT 80 and Kaestle LX82, both of which I preferred to the Titan.

The Titan is solid in brushed turns. Although conditions were fairly well groomed that day, the ski seemed imperturbable in brushed turns. I suspect they'd be the same in heel-pushed turns ... maybe this is why they are popular in some circles. Overnight, we had sleet, rain, and snow. Everything at Sugarbush was bumped up. The 177 IM78 skied well in these conditions. I prefer it to my 171s, possibly because I'm a big guy. Hands down, the IM78 was a better ski for that day than the Titan would have been. I also skied my kers supershapes that day and preferred the IM78 as expected because the shovel plowed better through surface variations. IIRC, Glenn was on the Titans part of the day at Sugarbush. He skied beautifully on them, but he's an accomplished skier, race coach, and blue level PMTS instructor. And he'd probably look good skiing on a pair of 2x4 timbers.
.
ToddW
 
Posts: 511
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:41 pm
Location: live: Westchester (NY) / ski: Killington

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby HeluvaSkier » Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:38 pm

Let's also not forget why Harald chooses the skis he does - skis that are complimentary to PMTS technique - skis that reward it - not skis that you have to work extra hard to use PMTS technique. If you're trying to learn proper technique, why would you handicap yourself with a ski that makes it more difficult? My impression from Harald's typical training ski choices are that they are skis that REWARD excellent technique instead of skis that REQUIRE excellent technique in order to be skied effectively.
Discipline is the refining fire by which talent becomes ability.

www.youtube.com/c/heluvaskier
User avatar
HeluvaSkier
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 7:29 pm
Location: Western New York

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby dan.boisvert » Tue Sep 27, 2011 4:59 pm

You know, Mac, if you'd skied with us at the Northeast shindig last year instead of skiing in a lousy place like Colorado that weekend, you could've tried the Titans alongside some VIST and Kaestle, too. :mrgreen: (huge props to Sport Thoma for hooking us up with such sweet demos)

I've been on the 177cm Titans on a couple of occasions in different conditions (with fresh tunes), and the problem is really the flex profile, in my opinion. It's like they took an SS Magnum and made it wider. This is still not very useful off-piste for most of us, because the limitation on the SS Magnum isn't the width, but the flex profile. The tip spears into stuff rather than bending and riding over it, so you've got to be super careful about reading the snow and managing fore/aft. Great, so we go longer to get more fore/aft forgiveness...which leaves you with a ski you can't bend at any speed reasonable for the turn radius. Your choices are to either go short and have a ski that's very difficult to manage in any snow lacking a consistent and nearby base--where a narrower ski would be fine anyway and carve better on piste, too--or go long and deal with a ski you can't bend.

I suppose your third option is to develop great fore/aft skills and get really strong, and make them look as good as Glen does.

At your size, Mac, you'd probably be able to bend the 177 Titans just fine, but I'd be surprised if you preferred them over your MX78's off-piste, due to the flex profile. I imagine you'd feel the same way about the 177/184 choice as I did about the 170/177.


Thank you for starting this thread, jbotti. Your opening remarks include some bits I was discovering last season, but more depth and breadth than I'd found yet, which should give me some fun stuff to play with when the snow comes.
dan.boisvert
 
Posts: 212
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 4:11 pm
Location: Vermont

Re: Float and Velocity and Equipment Choices

Postby Mac » Tue Sep 27, 2011 8:01 pm

"Well refuting that is pretty easy. Let's remember that Peter's ski of the year several years ago was the Volkl Tigershark."
I agree with where you're coming from completely. But to be fair, Peter made mention that the Volkl was far from his own personal pick, but he said he recieved so many positive test cards on the Volkl that he couldn't ignore them.
And Dan, I respect your opinion, but at your weight, I would have valued it a lot more if you had tried a 163 instead of the 177. I'm thinking that ski in a 177 would be a lot of ski for someone my weight. And I've gotten to the point where I don't trust demo skis much anymore, I have found that the average tune on these skis varies from bad to awful, from my own personal experience.
As I remember, the ski that Harald made reference to was a pre-production prototype, and that he expected/hoped that they were going to make some changes to it before it went into production. So if that's the case, the ski that Harald tried could be totally different than the one that hit the shelves.
But don't worry, I'm not about to dump my Kastle's for a ski I've never tried. And as I said before, I'm not trying to build a case for the ski one way or the other. I'm just intrigued by the potential of the skis design, as I am by all the positive feedback I've heard about it. But I don't think we ought to write it off till we've had a chance to try it, which is exactly what I intend to do. I may very well come back and say forget it fellas, that ski really sucks. But even then, that would only be my opinion, someone else might have a totally different opinion. But when it comes to testing skis, your own opinion is the only one that really matters.
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 12 guests