Comparison Review A Layman's Look at 2020 Skis

[James]

Depends how soft and deep. You can feel when you get on a 0.5 base from a 1 in softish snow.

Thought I should post the tuning angles for you guys.

Before 2018 most Stocklis left the factory with a 1/1. Things have changed and our new tuner is really cool. I'll try to find a video, but it is the premier machine on the planet and is a special build that Montana created to our design requirements.

AX and all Stormriders 1.3 base bevel/2 sidewall
Laser Series and smaller race skis 1 base/2 sidewall
FIS race ski < 184 0.7 base and 2 sidewall
FIS race > 184 0.7 base and 3 sidewall.

but do you really think that you can "feel", 0.3 Deg difference on the base bevel? Maybe if you are a very experienced racer on very hard snow, you might be able to discern it. But, a recreational skier on "normal" ski area conditions? Not a chance.

Yes. Give those "recreational" skiers a 0.5 from a 1 base and they'll certainly notice. They'll complain the ski is grabby, hooky, hard to turn. They might just think it's hard to ski, they forgot how to ski. They won't know what it is.
To cope, a shop might just detune the tips and tails. Unfortunately that's still too common.
Your accuracy point is another thing. The 1.3 could become 1.6 easily.

Anyway, it's been only 1-2 two years since apparently Stockli came out of the stone age of 1/1.

 

[ScottB]

For Stockli to put a 1.3 deg. base bevel on their carver skis is absurd. No question they make great skis, but damn they really need to rethink their factory tune. I bought my son a Moment Bibby Pro ski a few years ago. (115mm wide) They just got a new ski tuning machine that year. It came with a perfect .5 deg / 2 deg tune and it skied like a dream. I have skied a Renoun with a 2 deg base bevel and it was virtually un-skiable on hard snow. Anything over 1.0 base on a carver is really just taking away from the ability of the ski. I guess they want to cater to the rich folks who want the "best" (most expensive) ski but aren't good skiers. A forgiving easy slarvy ski won't bite a poor skier in the butt.

Now that's a serious off season rant, if I do say so myself

 

[Jim McDonald]

Now hold on a minute there, Pilgrim. I got bit in the butt -- well, the left ankle, actually -- by one of those forgiving, easy, slarvy, base 1.3 Stocklis.
And while I'm not one of the rich folks, and wouldn't even consider one of those most expensive Zai skis, I can certainly claim to be not a good skier.
Has it occurred to anyone that Stockli may simply have made a business decision? That they can make a whole lot more money by "dumbing down" base bevels by a whole 0.3 degree (OMG!) to make their skis more skiable to posers like me, because they well know that all y'all better-than-Bode bros are anyway going to immediately run down to the basement, grab your kits and get to work fixing those crappy factory tunes by getting that base back to a proper 0.01 and the side to 9.9.
Hey, I enjoy TGR rants too...on TGR.

 

[Swiss Toni]

In March 2017 Stöckli completed an upgrade to their factory, it was originally built in 1986 and was designed to produce 25,00 pairs p.a., by 2014 production had reached 50,000 pairs p.a. so space was a bit tight. They have increased the size of the production area by 20%, purchased 11 new machines and optimized the production process, previously the skis traveled 2 kilometers during production now they only travel half that distance. They now have the capacity to make 65,000 pairs p.a., in total the investment amounted to CHF 4 million.

In 2010 they installed a Montana Saphir 2 Pro, the new “tuner” is a Montana Saphir that has been modified to make it better suited for use in production. It was installed in 2016, so Stöckli have been able to set base and side edge angles other than 1/1 for some time.

I don’t think the measurement of ski edge angles is covered by ISO 7796:1985 (Skis -- Geometry -- Measuring conditions) so there probably isn’t a standard method for measuring them. Are they measured at a single point or are they measured at multiple points along the edge and the mean reported, to what degree of accuracy are they measured etc. etc.?

I think the angles given by the manufactures are more likely to be the machine settings, or the product of fertile imaginations in the sales & marketing departments. If they are the machine settings then the resulting edge angles will vary, Wintersteiger quote edge angle tolerances of ±0.25 degrees for their automatic machines, unfortunately I don’t know what the tolerances are for Montana machines.

 

[ScottB]

Now hold on a minute there, Pilgrim. I got bit in the butt -- well, the left ankle, actually -- by one of those forgiving, easy, slarvy, base 1.3 Stocklis.
And while I'm not one of the rich folks, and wouldn't even consider one of those most expensive Zai skis, I can certainly claim to be not a good skier.
Has it occurred to anyone that Stockli may simply have made a business decision? That they can make a whole lot more money by "dumbing down" base bevels by a whole 0.3 degree (OMG!) to make their skis more skiable to posers like me, because they well know that all y'all better-than-Bode bros are anyway going to immediately run down to the basement, grab your kits and get to work fixing those crappy factory tunes by getting that base back to a proper 0.01 and the side to 9.9.
Hey, I enjoy TGR rants too...on TGR.

First off, apologies for a poor choice of the word "poor skier". More correctly it should be beginner level skier. (not implying anything about you Jim, just a general remark). Secondly I am sorry to hear it sounds like you were injured while on your AX's. Actually they are my AX's now. I now own the skis you sold to MDF. I will give them a good spanking for you.

I agree it sounds like Stockli made a business decision. Good for them, but I suspect you are not aware you cannot fix a "1.3" deg base bevel. You can only file it larger, not smaller. To get it back to a smaller number, you have to grind down the base of the ski so the bevel is ground off and then re-apply it. I have to pay $95 to have that done. Almost impossible to do by hand. The side bevel can be changed to any number you want with a file very easy, so you won't hear anyone complain about that.

This will never come to be, but if all skis came with 0.0 or 0.5 base bevel, then the shop could increase it to whatever is appropriate for a particular skier and it would be optimized for everyone. I like mine small, so it always costs me an extra cnote to get it that way.

BTW, thanks to you and MDF for taking such good care of my skis.

 

[ScottB]

I think the angles given by the manufactures are more likely to be the machine settings, or the product of fertile imaginations in the sales & marketing departments. If they are the machine settings then the resulting edge angles will vary, Wintersteiger quote edge angle tolerances of ±0.25 degrees for their automatic machines, unfortunately I don’t know what the tolerances are for Montana machines.

For a point of reference, I bought Jim M's Laser AX's recently. I don't believe they have had a base grind done to them. The edges are in very good shape. I measured them myself at about 6 points on each ski. I got 1.5 deg, + 0.00 / - 0.25 deg. (1.5-1.25 deg range). I would peg my measurement as accurate to +/- 0.25 deg. So, based on a sample of one, it seems the 1.3 deg base bevel number that seems to be quoted for Stockli is accurate. Other than higher angle than I like it, Stockli seems to do a very good job on their tunes. I was fairly impressed with the bottoms of the skis.

Thanks Swiss Toni for the info on Stockli.

 

[Brad J]

I would dare say that most folks wouldn’t notice the difference between 1 and 1.3. Most on this site probably would, I had a expensive tune that was .75 and quickly realized that it was to much for me an retuned to 1 degree. I just bought a pair of Laser Gs and now want to know that they are set at.

 

[Tony S]

So, @FairToMiddlin ... If I'm going to buy a 96, do I buy the Kästle FX 96 or the Elan Ripstick Black 96? Supplemental info: I fell totally in love with the Elan Wingman 82 cti last weekend. Specifically I liked the combination of compliant longitudinal flex with slice-y accuracy on edge. Does the Ripstick feel like that? Did you get on the 96?

 

[Tony S]

The [Evolv] 90 has a noticeably stiffer tail than the V92, stiffer than just about any recreational ski.

Really? I was on the 172cm version for an afternoon last weekend and didn't notice that. Great ski in any case. I was reminded of Sierra Jim's hymn to the virtues of "medium".

 

[James]

They should've smoked another one-

I just bought a pair of Laser Gs and now want to know that they are set at.

This from Lindsey B, above.

AX and all Stormriders
1.3 base bevel 2 sidewall
Laser Series and smaller race skis
1 base 2 sidewall
FIS race ski < 184
0.7 base and 2 sidewall
FIS race > 184
0.7 base and 3 sidewall.

I don't think many above U16 want a .7 on a slalom ski.

 

[Brad J]

They should've smoked another one-

Wow !, Definition Of Baked

 

[Ken_R]

Really? I was on the 172cm version for an afternoon last weekend and didn't notice that. Great ski in any case. I was reminded of Sierra Jim's hymn to the virtues of "medium".

I didnt notice the tail at all on the 179cm's The ski felt extremely balanced to me. Loved it.

 

[Jim McDonald]

I will give them a good spanking for you.

No need! I'm just glad there're in the hands of someone more capable of enjoying them (overbeveled as they are).
The injury was my fault, not the ski's, so no bad karma attached. I'm now the happy owner of the 175 AX, far better suited to my 72kg.
AFAIK Stockli markets the AX as an all-mountain ski, NOT a carver, so a 1.3 base bevel may disappoint but is hardly absurd.
The Laser SL/SX/SC come with a base beveled at 1 -- even if that's also too tame.
But the bevel decision is Stockli's to make, just as it's your decision to buy their skis (and fix them to your liking) or go elsewhere.
(I do realize that a grind would be the easy fix; I just figure "real" skiers use files and elbow grease rather than trust an inept shop rat .)

 

[James]

Wow !, Definition Of Baked

+ "What type of skier do you see on this ski? Like who's the ideal person who's going to get the most for what it's designed for?"

"...Somebody who lives on chairlifts."

"If you have a gondola...in your home town...and you just want to ski a hundred vertical feet- a hundred thousand vertical feet, everyday. Black edition. You can't go wrong."

+ "Tell me about the terrain at Red [Mt] you skied this on."

"I skied this on groomers. You know, I didn't venture off piste too much."

Jonny Mosely

 

[Tricia]

Augment SL World Cup
But what it offers that sets it apart is the ability to pick your flex. No, really: you can have any ski it makes, from WC FIS to all mountain, in your choice of stiffness on a reverse 1-to-10 scale (1 being Ligety, 10 being rather soft). The SL I was able to get on was labeled a 6, which ended up being a little softer than the usual non-FIS recreational SL,

The AM77 Titanal I skied at A-Basin is a 6, and while it was achievable for a few runs, I found it to be a tad on the demanding side if I were to ski it all day with my current skill set. It actually inspired me to amp up my skills. Whether its a ski lesson from someone like @Bob Barnes or masters training from the likes of @ScotsSkier, the AM 77 in a 6 makes me want to be a better skier.

 

[Tony S]

The SL I was able to get on was labeled a 6, which ended up being a little softer than the usual non-FIS recreational SL, and a good bit softer than any other FIS SL I have been on.

This is really interesting. The SL I tried at Loveland was the 155 in flex 6, I was told. I've owned and skied several 155s, including an older Völkl consumer SL and my current Blossom FIS SL. Plus a couple Rossis in there briefly. Maybe it was the excessive sunshine or the plausible Rocky Mountain snow. Or maybe it was altitude weakness on my part. But I found the Augment very stiff. Too stiff for me.I wonder if the 157 you were on is a different deal somehow.

 

[Tony S]

The AM77 Titanal I skied at A-Basin is a 6, and while it was achievable for a few runs, I found it to be a tad on the demanding side if I were to ski it all day with my current skill set. It actually inspired me to amp up my skills SPEED.

Adjusted to reflect my impression of this ski. Super smooth, super quiet. Also easy on the eyes. Not versatile enough for my size, usual terrain, and typical skiing habits to make me want to buy it. If I skied big high speed GS turns habitually like Phil I'd probably be all over it.

 

[Tricia]

Adjusted to reflect my impression of this ski. Super smooth, super quiet. Also easy on the eyes. Not versatile enough for my size, usual terrain, and typical skiing habits to make me want to buy it. If I skied big high speed GS turns habitually like Phil I'd probably be all over it.

I would agree with that.
My first impression was, Wow this is super fun, smooth and incredibly stable on edge.
After about 4 or 5 runs I was feeling like I wasn't doing the ski justice, however, the AM 77 didn't let me down.

 

[James]

This is really interesting. The SL I tried at Loveland was the 155 in flex 6, I was told. I've owned and skied several 155s, including an older Völkl consumer SL and my current Blossom FIS SL. Plus a couple Rossis in there briefly. Maybe it was the excessive sunshine or the plausible Rocky Mountain snow. Or maybe it was altitude weakness on my part. But I found the Augment very stiff. Too stiff for me.I wonder if the 157 you were on is a different deal somehow.

Slalom 157/8's in general are stiffer than the 155/6's. The numbers just make it easier to tell. The shorter ones are meant for lighter skiers. So, you're comparing different skis.

Afaik, Augments flex index applies to each ski only. So a 6 in one ski isn't directly comparable to a 6 in another. Just relatively. As in a 6 is towards the soft side of the middle.

 

[BS Slarver]

Baked or not, Hansen’s skiing looks pretty solid to me on the RS black.
Blister and some big Sky locals are also giving this and the new 106 black a thumbs up as well especially as a 50/50 ski
The 106 black has been put on my 2020 short list, I guess it’s time to fire one up !