Individual Review 2018 Stockli SR95 184

[James]

I have both the 14/15 SR 95 and 17/18 SR 95's. I've been skiing my 14/15's all year since the snow has been so sketchy and it's nice to ski rock skis and not worry, plus I can save the new ones for when it's good.

I did ski the new ones (17/18) for a couple hours and found them to be really nice. Hard for me to describe the differences, but one thing I noticed was that the new ones carved really well and also still did the bumps well. They of course didn't carve like a Laser AX, but still pretty fun. The difference however may be the new edges versus the old ones with lots of miles on them.

I think you would be very happy with the new ones, they're such great skis.

I have the 14/15 in 192cm. (lots of baby seal pelts needed)

How's the tip of the new one? Is it as soft as the 14/15? Quite easy to get that 192 to make shorter turns on packed snow.

 

[SBrown]

How you feel about the 175cm length? Asking because I'm around your size, a few inches shorter and a little more than a few pounds heavier. I'm 5'6.5" ~140lbs and feel caught in between the 166cm to 175cm SR95 sizing. I'm more inclined to go with the 175cm, not really interested in a 166cm all mountain ski but haven't demo'ed them and therefore don't know if I should keep the '17/18 SR95 on the radar.

So far so good. I haven’t skied them in deep snow, but I have other skis for that. They are super quick but at the same time stable; I haven’t ever felt off balance fore or aft. I think the 175s would be fine.

And yes, they are durable. I have had them in some kinda shitty conditions over on Pali at Abasin, even did an accidental slide down about 3 ft of rock (it was a flat rock, but it was a rock), and they took it just fine.

 

[Kite Pilot]

How's the tip of the new one? Is it as soft as the 14/15? Quite easy to get that 192 to make shorter turns on packed snow.

The tip feels very similar, I probably need to put some more time on them to give a better opinion, but first impression was that they are very agile.
Love that top sheet on the 14/15's, mine have been super durable.

 

[SnowDuck]

Good reports! Thanks much. Like the feedback about the new ones absorbing bumps and crud piles well. Point and shoot sounds good to me. Nice to have some suspension in those conditions. And to hear that they have no problem at speed. Excited to venture onto the SR95.

 

[Tony S]

I got the 175s this spring and pretty much turned them into rock skis immediately. [sacrilege, I know] But they are just so much fun in variable conditions! And by that I mean, trees and bumps that might have exposed rocks and roots, dust on crust (or 7" fresh on top of 6" rocks), chunder, just whatever you throw at them.

This is such good news to me. Currently have a big hole in my quiver, bookended, at 85mm and 108mm, by other @SBrown picks. Now I just have to wait until you move on and buy these from you.

 

[James]

You could get the '14 ones for relatively cheap. $650 w/Saloman Z12
Maybe you could get credit for the bindings.
http://www.powder7.com/Stockli-Stormrider-95-Skis-174cm-New-2014/for-sale

 

[Tony S]

Blech. No rush. I don't need no virgin sticks. Happy to wait for the well-trained pair that already knows how to ski like sbrown.

 

[James]

Blech. No rush. I don't need no virgin sticks. Happy to wait for the well-trained pair that already knows how to ski like sbrown.

You did hear her talk about the rocks?

We can look at it on the beach Mother's Day...

 

[Tony S]

Btw, I am possibly the least fussy skier here when it comes to bindings. Even I won't ski those Z12s. I had a pair. Yuck.

 

[Tony S]

I forgot how young the professor was. Meaning ... how old I've gotten.

 

[Tony S]

You did hear her talk about the rocks?

Meh, that's what grinds are for.

 

[James]

I looked it up. Russell Johnson, the professor, died 4 years ago- at 89!

 

[Tony S]

I looked it up. Russell Johnson, the professor, died 4 years ago- at 89!

Yikes!

 

[SkiNurse]

You're not allowed to let @SkiNurse on those skis.

(I am looking for a pair in my size....)

 

[Tony S]

(I am looking for a pair in my size....)

Are you buying by height or by ovary size?

 

[SkiNurse]

Are you buying by height or by ovary size?

Yes.

 

[SnowDuck]

Anyone compare the SR95s to the legendary Kastle MX98 or the coming 2019 Kastle MX99? End of ski season thoughts and onward to summer... Stockli or Kastle, Ginger or Maryann.

 

[SBrown]

Anyone compare the SR95s to the legendary Kastle MX98 or the coming 2019 Kastle MX99? End of ski season thoughts and onward to summer... Stockli or Kastle, Ginger or Maryann.

I tested the MX99, and it was a bit of a handful for me until I started going about 40 mph. I am 135 lb, so there's that. (And when I took it back to the tent, I had a chat with Chris Davenport, who was also holding a pair of 176 MX99 demos, and we agreed that it needed a bit of detuning up near the tips.)

I haven't skied the SR 95 at those speeds, because I don't have to. That's the main difference I found ... but that's not to say they won't do it.

 

[Noodler]

Although I don't have the 2018 SR95 specifically, I think this is still the best SR95 thread to put this information.

Right before my health problems knocked me out of skiing for years, I had purchased a pair of the 2015 SR95 skis (184cm, green lettering). They have sat in my garage for years waiting for my return to skiing. I had demo'd them twice before purchase and I was just amazed at the hard snow performance for a wider ski.

There have been a few posts in this thread regarding the differences in the SR95 over the years. Recently I was able to find a great deal on the 2017 SR95 (with the carbon inserts). I now have 4 days on the 2017 SR95, including one from our recent deep snow day. I have really enjoyed my days so far on this version of the SR95 and it was fantastic in the 3D soft snow we had on Friday in CO, but something was really bugging me about these skis - they just didn't seem to be the SR95 I was remembering from years ago.

So I dusted off the 2015 SR95 skis to compare them to the 2017 SR95. Wow - other than the name and the dimensions, these are quite different skis. The 2nd generation SR95 from 2014-15 (and originally 2013-14), has a ton more camber, much less rocker/rise in the tip and is stiffer throughout. The 3rd generation SR 95 from 2016-17 (and originally 2015-16) has some camber, but a lot more rocker, and is quite a bit softer and lighter. I am going to try to get some pictures of the differences and post them up.

The 4th generation SR95, originally released for 2017-18 and still available this season in 2018-19, lost the carbon inserts, but from what I'm reading I think it is more similar to the 3rd gen ski in its rocker profile and stiffness. Can someone who has direct experience between the 3rd and 4th gen SR95 compare them? If Stockli sticks to their 2 year cycles, then the SR95 is due for another refresh and will be seen at SIA in a few weeks (if it sticks around).

Paging @LindseyB

 

[Ron]

we'll be on them for sure!