Had the chance to demo the Vantage 90 CTI on 2 different days this week. First day was all hardpack with patches of ice ... not necessarily the ideal conditions suited to this ski. I must say, however, I was quite impressed with the carving prowess of these skis, and how easy they were for varying turn radii. After 4-6 inches of wetter snow one day, followed by 1-3 inches of dryer snow today, I took the skis back out for another test. The combination of light and lively feel, with carving capability and quick edge-to-edge transition in tight spaces was VERY attractive to me. No adjustment period for me on these skis, and they just seemed extremely versatile in terms of turn shape, conditions they were comfortable in, etc.
I am wondering what the impressions were of those who may have had the chance to ski both the 90 CTI and the 100 CTI. Do they ski very similarly, or are they 2 different skis underfoot? If the 100 CTI is just as versatile, light and lively, and if it is close to as quick edge-to-edge but adds some additional stability and damping, it could be the perfect ski for me!
One oddity I noticed with the 90 CTI. When I first got them on my feet, I was tapping them together on the lift. The sound they made was quite light and "woody", and it made me think this would be a ski that would be thrown around a bit in crud and likely not all that stable at higher speeds (for me, that is!) The performance on the hill belied those impressions, as I never felt it losing edge grip or nearing the edge of its stability envelope. It is clearly not as damp as many other "heavy metal" skis, but not a pushover in manky conditions either. The trade-off for light and lively energy and versatility seems like a good compromise for my purposes.
Would love to hear from those who have skied both the 90 CTI and the 100 CTI.
I am wondering what the impressions were of those who may have had the chance to ski both the 90 CTI and the 100 CTI. Do they ski very similarly, or are they 2 different skis underfoot? If the 100 CTI is just as versatile, light and lively, and if it is close to as quick edge-to-edge but adds some additional stability and damping, it could be the perfect ski for me!
One oddity I noticed with the 90 CTI. When I first got them on my feet, I was tapping them together on the lift. The sound they made was quite light and "woody", and it made me think this would be a ski that would be thrown around a bit in crud and likely not all that stable at higher speeds (for me, that is!) The performance on the hill belied those impressions, as I never felt it losing edge grip or nearing the edge of its stability envelope. It is clearly not as damp as many other "heavy metal" skis, but not a pushover in manky conditions either. The trade-off for light and lively energy and versatility seems like a good compromise for my purposes.
Would love to hear from those who have skied both the 90 CTI and the 100 CTI.
. I also skied the Nordica Enforcer 100. they live up the hype. great versatile ski that can do it all, and so it well. it was more damp than the Vantage100 but also a little heavier. It was surprisingly quick, easy and smooth in the bumps. they nailed it with this ski, but personally I prefer a little lighter and livelier ski. I would ski them if they were given to me and I love the PROTO graphics but the regular proction color is just UGLY. I was also pleasantly surprised by the SALOMON MOUNTAIN 95. a touring oriented ski with lots of carbon but there was no chattering jitteryness often associated with light weight carbon skis. must be the FLAX. it was quick and light yet smooth and stable at high speed GS type turns and was fun, easy and SMOOTH in the bumps. the Dynastar mythic 94 Was a little disapointing by comparason. It has the same shape as the Cham but is much softer and has that typical Carbon "shake your fillings loose" feel in harder snow. would make a great touring ski for western type soft snow.
