This year gave us a new opportunity at SIA, a "not exactly sure what we will be testing” opportunity. In 2014, we knew we would be on hard-snow skis. In 2015, we knew we would be on soft-snow skis. For 2016, conditions ended up putting us on every kind of ski, from 68 to 112 mm underfoot (I think I stopped at 106).
The trend for the 2016-2017 crop was a move toward skis becoming more “accessible.” Kästle did it, Atomic did it, Nordica did it, Salomon did it, Elan really, really did it, and so on. These manufacturers (and others) either rebooted or replaced a current model with a softer-edged version that can be skied by more types of skiers. Or, if skis didn't become softer, they were given a shape that reaches down to the intermediate or advanced skier and gives them a boost (Kästle and Elan, in particular).
If you're reading between the lines, you might be wondering where the burly, charge-y skis are going. In general, they're either going away or getting narrower, as in sub-85mm, frontside narrow.
As stated above, this is a trend, and not an absolute. Some ski makers didn't change at all: Blizzard is holding fast with Flipcore, although they received a modest softening/accessible-izing last year.
Sub-90mm Skis
Blizzard Quattro 84Ti
Dimensions: 129-84-113
Radius: 17.5m@181cm
Size tested: 181
Design: All New
Blizzard has been spending a lot of money rebooting frontside skis, early and often. The number of new models since the 2012 Magnum 8.0 and 8.5 has made it hard to keep score. Two short years ago, I tested the excellent 800S and the X-Power 810; both were energetic carvers with power and good snow feel. Now Blizzard has the new Quattro series (with an old name), and it feels like a step back; the sound of my voice in the voice memo I made for it had that slightly disappointed “faint praise” tone.
What all that means is that the Quattro is great at laying cheater-GS-type trenches on the groomed trails. Period. It doesn't inspire you to venture off piste like an FX85 (although it is superior to the FX on piste), it doesn't say, “Hey, let's ski the bumps under the lift!” to you. Blizzard’s frontsiders of two or three (four? time flies) years ago seemed more encouraging.
The question that comes to mind is, “Why make a ski 84mm underfoot with that kind of personality?” The 71mm Blossom Great Shape feels right at home with a bit of dour frown stirred into its style; it is meant for the same kind of serious business. If the goal was to create a line of skis that shares nothing with the playful (but surprisingly capable) narrow off-piste 77mm Latigo, they have succeeded in no uncertain terms. But whereas Kästle has two distinct lines, FX and MX, that each have a specific focus, neither is a one-trick pony. The Quattro is.
Blossom Great Shape
Dimensions: 121-71-106
Radius: 17m@181
Size tested: 181
Design: Carryover
This ski is misnamed, but then so are Fischer Vacuum boots, as both manufacturers have chosen a more friendly marketing angle. The Great Shape should be called the Great Construction, although doing so would probably put them out of business. Quel dommage, what a loss, here we go in ze sauce…
This is a crazy fun ski. Turn shapes are modifiable, it shrugs off crud and end-of-day messy groomers; the Great Shape has fantastic, accommodating construction inside. Sure, it may encourage you to ski fast, but what it really wants you to have a go at is skiing aggressively, not necessarily fast. Pick a tree on the side of the hill to turn toward. Now, in the middle of the turn, pick a tree 20 m higher up the slope and try to turn more tightly toward it. Don't give up, this ski wants you to be a better You.
Blossom White Out
Dimensions: 131-77-110
Radius: 16m@182cm
Size tested: 182
Design: New Construction
Best ski in test.
Best value in test.
Drahtguy Kevin and I wandered over to the Blossom tent on a whim. I'm not saying that I’ll be changing my name to Snoop Lion, but this ski was a near-religious experience. I would not be surprised to learn that Ullr allows snow to fall just so people can enjoy the White Out. It has everything: stability, forgiveness, playfulness, great turn initiation. The relatively fat, relatively soft tip is fat and soft in all the right ways: it pulls you predictably into turns, it eases comfortingly over irregular snow, it makes me a happier skier.
I'm on a 77-ish kick, truth be told. I own (the first step is admitting my addiction, right?) the Stöckli OTWO (75mm), this year's Head Rally (77mm), and the outgoing Kästle MX78 (would you believe it's 78 underfoot?). Throwing the White Out into the mix, if I had access to just one of the four, it would be the White Out overall (even considering the 2017 Rally, which has a really nice feel to it).
But best value?! Yes. This premium-feeling ski is $749 flat, and I would take it over two skis in my quiver that retail for $400 to $600 more.
Blossom Wind Shear
Dimensions: 124-77-110
Radius: 17.5m@180cm
Size tested: 180
Design: New Construction
This is the old Hart Pulse, literally, If that means anything to you. I admit, it feels a generation behind the White Out, but it is still a stable, encouraging ski. What I cannot understand is its existence next to the White Out. Both are 77 underfoot, why sell them? It's almost as confusing as the Nordica Nrgy and Enforcer at 100 underfoot, with one as the clear standout.
I'm not in the industry, I have no dog in any of these hunts, I’m a layman. But if Blossom could kick the Wind Shear to the curb and make a White Out 87 or 93 that preserves the essence, they would have a fantastic stick that isn't available on the market today.
Head Rally
Dimensions: 136-77-115
Radius: 14.7m@177cm
Size tested: 177
Design: New Construction
I own last year's 177 Rally, and it is a fine "easy SL" ski. The new Rally is altered sufficiently to be called new, but has enough of its predecessor that a blindfolded test would be a challenge. (Note: pugski.com does NOT recommend that you ski blindfolded. But if you do, please video it for our entertainment.)
Its difference lies in feel. Perhaps it is the Graphene, I am not ready to get on that bandwagon, but it is a quieter, less vibrate-y Rally, not that the last one was bad at all. Apart from that, it has the same "sub-cheater GS" sidecut, which is why I call it an easy SL. The tip looks different from this year, but still initiates very well; tip the ski and it engages, and a smile appears on your face with the response. It has a hint of rise that resists tip dive off piste, a versatile mid-70s ski. I would place its off-piste skills above the 174cm Renoun Z-90 that I skied a few days after the SIA test.
Dimensions: 127-76-107
Radius: 17m@175cm
Size tested: 175
Design: All New
For a ski company with no recent racing pedigree, this ski was a nice surprise. It has a real cheater GS shape, a stack-height-raising system binding, and real hard-snow performance. The stack height makes the ski feel narrower and quicker edge to edge; in fact, I initially thought it was 68 mm underfoot. Stir in a tip that responds to your inputs, and a construction that doesn't budge when the G-forces start to build, and you have excitement under your feet on the groomed. At this width, it reminds me of the Dynastar Course Pro from two years ago.
What do you want a ski in the mid-70s to do? Nth degree of hard snow performance? This should be on your short list, especially if you cherish the day when 70s were all mountain and 80s were pow skis. Some rivals of the SuperCharger are the Head Rally, Blossom White Out, and definitely the Kästle MX78 (or perhaps this year's MX74, I didn't get to try it).
With all of its impressive hard snow performance, K2 could have put some retro graphics on here: it would have been a nice touch, and a reminder they've got Olympic and WC medals laying around, even if they have gathered a bit of dust over the years ….
Kästle FX85 HP
Dimensions: 119-85-108
Radius: 19m@181cm
Size tested: 181
Design: Carryover
This ski sucked, then got a little better, and finally excellented. I'll avoid the soapbox as much as possible, but Kästle struggled with putting well-tuned skis in the hands of testers. The first pair I was given was horrible on hard snow; it simply did not want to hook up and start a turn. I understand that Kästle has the MX line, which is more committed to laying trenches while the FX leans toward off piste, but an 85mm ski should be decent on groomers, or at least not crappy. Things got better off-piste; the shape and flex is super accommodating, very encouraging. Whatever was going on with the tune became less of an issue in soft bumps, trees, etc. But as I turned them in, I couldn't hide my disappointment in the FX85 HP's lack of balanced, all-mountain competency.
Polite words were exchanged with the Kästle tent (and exchanged again vis a vis the MX89, see below), and then the next day I decided to try again; every year, there is a pair (or three) of skis that leaves a sour taste and warrants a second or third look before a verdict is delivered. On Day 2, the FX was properly tuned, and it was sublime. Turn initiation on groomers went from terrible to above average: pick a target and tip the skis, and they enthusiastically move across the hill. The fun kept going when I ducked into trees, slashed an untracked line, or powered through crud. The ski was very composed; it never did anything unexpected, or unfun.
Kästle MX89
Dimensions: 129-89-113
Radius: 18m@180cm
Size tested: 180
Design: New Construction
Kästle revamped the FX line last year, changing the skis' shape and feel noticeably. This year it was the MX's turn to go under the knife. The difference is minimal, but better. My old MX88 has a 20m turn radius in the 178, the 180 MX89 has a 18m turn radius. The MX74 and 84 have similar subtle sidecut reductions as well compared to the outgoing MX78 and 83. The result is a ski that feels very familiar, in a comforting way, but is even more enthusiastic (and accessible to more skiers) than in years past. Plenty of skis out there perform on hard snow, but few can reach into the sublime with trees, crud, and bumps with the ease that the MX does.
Quality control reared its ugly head again in the Kästle tent, however: the 89 I was given was noticeably concave shape on the base. When skied on edge, the 89 was stable and predictable; increasing edge angle to tighten a turn was a satisfying thing. But any other method of affecting turn shape (pivoting, side slipping, brushing the tails) was unnerving, the ski was fighting me, wanting to snag an edge. I'm picturing being given a track day in a Ferrari 458 Italia with bald tires….
Völkl RTM 86 UVO
Dimensions: 132-86-114
Radius: 18.1m@177cm
Size tested: 177
Design: NGT
I have spent the last two years at SIA trying to like Völkl skis, without success. The current Mantra is, to me, the Pontiac Aztec of ~100mm waisted skis, a collection of attributes that doesn't achieve harmony as a wide all-mountain ski. The Kendo I skied last year was a horror, a ski that wasn't ready for testing and shouldn't have been put in the Völkl tent for public consumption (I hear it is sorted out now, but I couldn't be bothered to get on it, the memory was too fresh…). The zero-camber RTMs of two or three years ago were also a disappointment, a loss of focus of what 81-84mm skis should be good at doing. So, how do you imagine I feel about this year's attempt at finding a good Völkl?
Well done, Völkl.
The RTM 86 is an excellent 80s all-mountain ski; it makes me think of Kästle MXs in terms of "firm snow focus, with soft snow skills to boot." It feels very connected to the groomer, excellent feel, very predictable tip, and a flex/sidecut shape that can make tall, grande, or venti arcs. In Sail Away Glades, it has an ease of negotiating bumps and trees that reminds me of the Stormrider 88 (but a bit more brutish, not as silky) or my venerable MX88. I like this ski.
The trend for the 2016-2017 crop was a move toward skis becoming more “accessible.” Kästle did it, Atomic did it, Nordica did it, Salomon did it, Elan really, really did it, and so on. These manufacturers (and others) either rebooted or replaced a current model with a softer-edged version that can be skied by more types of skiers. Or, if skis didn't become softer, they were given a shape that reaches down to the intermediate or advanced skier and gives them a boost (Kästle and Elan, in particular).
If you're reading between the lines, you might be wondering where the burly, charge-y skis are going. In general, they're either going away or getting narrower, as in sub-85mm, frontside narrow.
As stated above, this is a trend, and not an absolute. Some ski makers didn't change at all: Blizzard is holding fast with Flipcore, although they received a modest softening/accessible-izing last year.
Sub-90mm Skis
Blizzard Quattro 84Ti
Dimensions: 129-84-113
Radius: 17.5m@181cm
Size tested: 181
Design: All New
Blizzard has been spending a lot of money rebooting frontside skis, early and often. The number of new models since the 2012 Magnum 8.0 and 8.5 has made it hard to keep score. Two short years ago, I tested the excellent 800S and the X-Power 810; both were energetic carvers with power and good snow feel. Now Blizzard has the new Quattro series (with an old name), and it feels like a step back; the sound of my voice in the voice memo I made for it had that slightly disappointed “faint praise” tone.
What all that means is that the Quattro is great at laying cheater-GS-type trenches on the groomed trails. Period. It doesn't inspire you to venture off piste like an FX85 (although it is superior to the FX on piste), it doesn't say, “Hey, let's ski the bumps under the lift!” to you. Blizzard’s frontsiders of two or three (four? time flies) years ago seemed more encouraging.
The question that comes to mind is, “Why make a ski 84mm underfoot with that kind of personality?” The 71mm Blossom Great Shape feels right at home with a bit of dour frown stirred into its style; it is meant for the same kind of serious business. If the goal was to create a line of skis that shares nothing with the playful (but surprisingly capable) narrow off-piste 77mm Latigo, they have succeeded in no uncertain terms. But whereas Kästle has two distinct lines, FX and MX, that each have a specific focus, neither is a one-trick pony. The Quattro is.
- Who is it for? Folks who want to be on groomer and on edge each and every run of the day. They're out there, and this is their ski.
- Who is it not for? Skiers who require more versatility; maybe you don't have a huge quiver, and your ski needs to do it all, even if that means some compromise on hard snow. Have a look at the Volkl RTM 86 UVO instead.
- Insider tip: The Ca didn't have metal, and it felt slightly less planted/connected compared to the amazing (and amazingly expensive) non-metal Renoun Z-90. I only made a few turns on it, but the Quattro Ti had more of that connected-to-the-snow feel, at a slight cost in heavier, less flickable nature.
Blossom Great Shape
Dimensions: 121-71-106
Radius: 17m@181
Size tested: 181
Design: Carryover
This ski is misnamed, but then so are Fischer Vacuum boots, as both manufacturers have chosen a more friendly marketing angle. The Great Shape should be called the Great Construction, although doing so would probably put them out of business. Quel dommage, what a loss, here we go in ze sauce…
This is a crazy fun ski. Turn shapes are modifiable, it shrugs off crud and end-of-day messy groomers; the Great Shape has fantastic, accommodating construction inside. Sure, it may encourage you to ski fast, but what it really wants you to have a go at is skiing aggressively, not necessarily fast. Pick a tree on the side of the hill to turn toward. Now, in the middle of the turn, pick a tree 20 m higher up the slope and try to turn more tightly toward it. Don't give up, this ski wants you to be a better You.
- Who is it for? Skiers with room (and funds) to add a rather narrow ski to their quiver but who still want fun and versatility.
- Who is it not for? Skiers with a smaller quiver that hope this can cover everything under 85 mm or so; this is a delightfully made narrow ski, but it is just shy of real all-mountain cred.
- Insider tip: Psst! This Blossom (like the White Out) is a great value, too. At $749 flat, you get a very expensive feel for almost middle-of-the-bell-curve money. Also take a look at the 164 (13m, suspiciously SLish), 170 (14m), and 176 (16m); pick your personality, and have fun.
Blossom White Out
Dimensions: 131-77-110
Radius: 16m@182cm
Size tested: 182
Design: New Construction
Best ski in test.
Best value in test.
Drahtguy Kevin and I wandered over to the Blossom tent on a whim. I'm not saying that I’ll be changing my name to Snoop Lion, but this ski was a near-religious experience. I would not be surprised to learn that Ullr allows snow to fall just so people can enjoy the White Out. It has everything: stability, forgiveness, playfulness, great turn initiation. The relatively fat, relatively soft tip is fat and soft in all the right ways: it pulls you predictably into turns, it eases comfortingly over irregular snow, it makes me a happier skier.
I'm on a 77-ish kick, truth be told. I own (the first step is admitting my addiction, right?) the Stöckli OTWO (75mm), this year's Head Rally (77mm), and the outgoing Kästle MX78 (would you believe it's 78 underfoot?). Throwing the White Out into the mix, if I had access to just one of the four, it would be the White Out overall (even considering the 2017 Rally, which has a really nice feel to it).
But best value?! Yes. This premium-feeling ski is $749 flat, and I would take it over two skis in my quiver that retail for $400 to $600 more.
- Who is it for? Folks tired of reading about people gushing over Stöckli and Kästle, back and forth forever, in the premium category.
- Who is it not for? Good question. It's accessible to a lot of people, not by being softer, or rocker-ier, but through sheer quality.
- Insider tip: The 170, 176, and 182 each have a different personality, from "grintacular, near-WC SL” in the 170, to "ridiculous all-mountain fore/aft forgiveness without loss of excitement” in the 182. What mood do you want this ski to enhance? If you're not sure, get the 176, and enjoy some of the best turns of your life.
Blossom Wind Shear
Dimensions: 124-77-110
Radius: 17.5m@180cm
Size tested: 180
Design: New Construction
This is the old Hart Pulse, literally, If that means anything to you. I admit, it feels a generation behind the White Out, but it is still a stable, encouraging ski. What I cannot understand is its existence next to the White Out. Both are 77 underfoot, why sell them? It's almost as confusing as the Nordica Nrgy and Enforcer at 100 underfoot, with one as the clear standout.
I'm not in the industry, I have no dog in any of these hunts, I’m a layman. But if Blossom could kick the Wind Shear to the curb and make a White Out 87 or 93 that preserves the essence, they would have a fantastic stick that isn't available on the market today.
- Who is it for? Folks who want a Hart Pulse and can't find any, or cheater GS lovers who wish that a more versatile, easier-going ski with that sidecut existed. Here you go.
- Who is it not for? Someone who couldn't imagine themselves on a ski under whateveryourthresholdis mm in width, probably north of 85 or 90 mm. This isn't the ski that will change your mind. However, the Whi… OK, I'll stop now.
- Insider tip: Try both the White Out and the Wind Shear, if you can. I suspect some will prefer the Wind Shear, but they might not have as big a smile as the White Out advocates.
Head Rally
Dimensions: 136-77-115
Radius: 14.7m@177cm
Size tested: 177
Design: New Construction
I own last year's 177 Rally, and it is a fine "easy SL" ski. The new Rally is altered sufficiently to be called new, but has enough of its predecessor that a blindfolded test would be a challenge. (Note: pugski.com does NOT recommend that you ski blindfolded. But if you do, please video it for our entertainment.)
Its difference lies in feel. Perhaps it is the Graphene, I am not ready to get on that bandwagon, but it is a quieter, less vibrate-y Rally, not that the last one was bad at all. Apart from that, it has the same "sub-cheater GS" sidecut, which is why I call it an easy SL. The tip looks different from this year, but still initiates very well; tip the ski and it engages, and a smile appears on your face with the response. It has a hint of rise that resists tip dive off piste, a versatile mid-70s ski. I would place its off-piste skills above the 174cm Renoun Z-90 that I skied a few days after the SIA test.
- Who is it for? A World Cup SL owner who wants an all-mountain alternative, something a bit more forgiving, a little less "Jane, stop this crazy thing!" than your SLs that want to arc endlessly down the fall line, but aggressive enough to lay the trenches you're used to.
- Who is it not for? If you aren't comfortable being on edge, a lot, this might not be for you. A more sedate alternative, incredibly, would be the outgoing Kästle MX78 (I own that, too), which is also very “quiet" and damp.
- Insider tip: The 177cm is the reference length; 184 is probably reserved for 11/10th skiers, and the 170cm gives up some of the forgiveness, brings it back toward the SL ski (the 170 has a 13m radius) that you probably already have.
Dimensions: 127-76-107
Radius: 17m@175cm
Size tested: 175
Design: All New
For a ski company with no recent racing pedigree, this ski was a nice surprise. It has a real cheater GS shape, a stack-height-raising system binding, and real hard-snow performance. The stack height makes the ski feel narrower and quicker edge to edge; in fact, I initially thought it was 68 mm underfoot. Stir in a tip that responds to your inputs, and a construction that doesn't budge when the G-forces start to build, and you have excitement under your feet on the groomed. At this width, it reminds me of the Dynastar Course Pro from two years ago.
What do you want a ski in the mid-70s to do? Nth degree of hard snow performance? This should be on your short list, especially if you cherish the day when 70s were all mountain and 80s were pow skis. Some rivals of the SuperCharger are the Head Rally, Blossom White Out, and definitely the Kästle MX78 (or perhaps this year's MX74, I didn't get to try it).
With all of its impressive hard snow performance, K2 could have put some retro graphics on here: it would have been a nice touch, and a reminder they've got Olympic and WC medals laying around, even if they have gathered a bit of dust over the years ….
- Who is it for? Beer leaguers who don't want to show up on the same Atomic D2 cheater or Head Rebel that everyone else is on.
- Who is it not for? One-ski quivers, unless you live and breathe hard, on-piste snow. It's a focused ski, and it frowned at me when I took it into Sail Away Glades hoping for some off-piste lovin'.
- Insider tip: I got nothing. If you are considering a ski like this, you don't need any inane mutterings from me to help you decide.
Kästle FX85 HP
Dimensions: 119-85-108
Radius: 19m@181cm
Size tested: 181
Design: Carryover
This ski sucked, then got a little better, and finally excellented. I'll avoid the soapbox as much as possible, but Kästle struggled with putting well-tuned skis in the hands of testers. The first pair I was given was horrible on hard snow; it simply did not want to hook up and start a turn. I understand that Kästle has the MX line, which is more committed to laying trenches while the FX leans toward off piste, but an 85mm ski should be decent on groomers, or at least not crappy. Things got better off-piste; the shape and flex is super accommodating, very encouraging. Whatever was going on with the tune became less of an issue in soft bumps, trees, etc. But as I turned them in, I couldn't hide my disappointment in the FX85 HP's lack of balanced, all-mountain competency.
Polite words were exchanged with the Kästle tent (and exchanged again vis a vis the MX89, see below), and then the next day I decided to try again; every year, there is a pair (or three) of skis that leaves a sour taste and warrants a second or third look before a verdict is delivered. On Day 2, the FX was properly tuned, and it was sublime. Turn initiation on groomers went from terrible to above average: pick a target and tip the skis, and they enthusiastically move across the hill. The fun kept going when I ducked into trees, slashed an untracked line, or powered through crud. The ski was very composed; it never did anything unexpected, or unfun.
- Who is it for? Lots of people: bump skiers, folks wanting off-piste prowess without a ski width measured in three digits, or a narrow one-ski quiver.
- Who is it not for? The extremes. If you are shopping for a hard-snow ice pick, or a ski for your AK heli trip, there are more focused options.
- Insider tip: This is the third-generation FX, and it has shed some weight compared to Gen 2 (and has a lighter, non-metal version as well). If you want a ski in the backcountry that will thrill you on the way down, and not kill you on the way up, the FX line is once again a solid option.
Kästle MX89
Dimensions: 129-89-113
Radius: 18m@180cm
Size tested: 180
Design: New Construction
Kästle revamped the FX line last year, changing the skis' shape and feel noticeably. This year it was the MX's turn to go under the knife. The difference is minimal, but better. My old MX88 has a 20m turn radius in the 178, the 180 MX89 has a 18m turn radius. The MX74 and 84 have similar subtle sidecut reductions as well compared to the outgoing MX78 and 83. The result is a ski that feels very familiar, in a comforting way, but is even more enthusiastic (and accessible to more skiers) than in years past. Plenty of skis out there perform on hard snow, but few can reach into the sublime with trees, crud, and bumps with the ease that the MX does.
Quality control reared its ugly head again in the Kästle tent, however: the 89 I was given was noticeably concave shape on the base. When skied on edge, the 89 was stable and predictable; increasing edge angle to tighten a turn was a satisfying thing. But any other method of affecting turn shape (pivoting, side slipping, brushing the tails) was unnerving, the ski was fighting me, wanting to snag an edge. I'm picturing being given a track day in a Ferrari 458 Italia with bald tires….
- Who is it for? Aggressive all-mountain skiers, folks who demand the ski on their feet to be smooth on any part of the mountain, and are willing to pay for it.
- Who is it not for? Penny pinchers, easy cruisers; this is still a serious ski.
- Insider tip: I can't believe I'm saying this about Kästle, but be wary of the tune out of the wrapper. Get it done by someone you trust.
Völkl RTM 86 UVO
Dimensions: 132-86-114
Radius: 18.1m@177cm
Size tested: 177
Design: NGT
I have spent the last two years at SIA trying to like Völkl skis, without success. The current Mantra is, to me, the Pontiac Aztec of ~100mm waisted skis, a collection of attributes that doesn't achieve harmony as a wide all-mountain ski. The Kendo I skied last year was a horror, a ski that wasn't ready for testing and shouldn't have been put in the Völkl tent for public consumption (I hear it is sorted out now, but I couldn't be bothered to get on it, the memory was too fresh…). The zero-camber RTMs of two or three years ago were also a disappointment, a loss of focus of what 81-84mm skis should be good at doing. So, how do you imagine I feel about this year's attempt at finding a good Völkl?
Well done, Völkl.
The RTM 86 is an excellent 80s all-mountain ski; it makes me think of Kästle MXs in terms of "firm snow focus, with soft snow skills to boot." It feels very connected to the groomer, excellent feel, very predictable tip, and a flex/sidecut shape that can make tall, grande, or venti arcs. In Sail Away Glades, it has an ease of negotiating bumps and trees that reminds me of the Stormrider 88 (but a bit more brutish, not as silky) or my venerable MX88. I like this ski.
- Who is it for? Travelin' skiers, someone who wants to throw one pair of skis in the double bag, pack all their clothes and gear around it to weigh in right at 49 lb, put their boots over their shoulder, and get on the plane. It's a great choice if you don't have the luxury of choosing.
- Who is it not for? Cruisers; this isn't a high energy Vizsla (woof woof), but it will encourage you to burn some calories and lay them over to experience the snow connection, or stuff the tips into variable snow to see who flinches first: the RTM, or the mountain.
- Insider tip: If you have the means, this is the RTM to have; it's the least "price point-y" model, it’s got all the toys and tech.
!
To lay it on the line, he is no longer a layman reviewing skis.
