Masters Racer GS Ski (Head vs Atomic)

[SlapChop]

Hey Guys,

New poster here - Hailing from Canada (Ski out of Ottawa, eastern Quebec). I've really enjoyed the discussions I've been reading regarding skis, whether it be WC vs consumer, or the Masters review roundups.

The bottom line up front for this post has to do with some final deliberations regarding two GS skis (with a third in the rafters).

1st Pair: which is number one on my radar because I've been able to actually ski them in 183cm, are the Atomic Redster G9 RS but in 176cm

2nd Pair: never skiid them, but the price is decent at the moment - Head WC Rebels iGS RD SW RP WCR 14 (I think) in 176cm.

Both have a reported 21cm radius, which is about right for our glaloms that get set

Third that I have my eye on are a pair of Rossi Hero FIS F25s in 175cms.

Currently I'm on Rossi F13s (FIS HERO) 165cms for slalom. (circa 2016)

My background - I'm 5'11, 190lbs, 33 years old, raced up until 18, then went to University and skiid recreationally until this past year where I've gotten back into racing and coaching with a vengeance. I spent most of this year getting my boots fitted properly (Tecnica R9 130s, with a ton of punching and grinding for my duck feet) but they fit like gloves now. I'll be on snow probably 4-5 times a week next season, split between the two disciplines. (Coaching, racing and training)

Anyway, any insight into any of these choices would be greatly appreciated - or some recommendations aside from these skis. For reference, I have skiid on next year's blizzard 183cm GS and the blizzard masters, neither were as enjoyable as the atomics.

I look forward to your opinions!

 

[hbear]

Everybody makes a good ski. Just a matter of what feels best with how you ski given I doubt you are testing by comparing time.
You are right in the Blizzard is a bit beefy for the adult ski (junior skis they are great).

I haven’t been on the Atomics but lots of coaches (academy ones too) suggest it’s a good “softer” (its all relative of course) ski and not the burly beast I knew them to be. The Head is a great ski (I have multiple versions and have the 175/25 FIS as well) and I love how damp it is. However it’s pop is not progressive (its flexes then after you really get on it, it kicks like a mule once you get to a certain point) and a bit hard to explain.

If you are looking at the one from ASO, it’s a great price for sure. But I’d hesitate if you haven’t been on it or even their FIS SL ski (you’ll get what I mean if you have and pop their skis) and really like the Atomics. (As coaches here suggest they ski quite differently).

Just some thoughts. I’m sure @ScotsSkier will have some good insight.

 

[SlapChop]

No, I wasn't able to test them in a course so no times. I've skied the gs with my slalom skis this year, so realistically I'm looking for something that is a solid performer (good on ice, but nimble enough to make it around a tighter course) in a course where the gates are maybe 23-25m apart. So my enjoyment was mostly based on how it felt underfoot and how well I was able to initiate and ride through the turns.

Your description of the head (because I think that's the one I'm looking at) is interesting. That's kind of the pattern that I enjoy with a GS ski. Something that only really pops once get into it, but has lots of room to flex prior to.

https://www.corbetts.com/2018-head-wc-rebels-igs-rd-sw-rp-wcr-14-skis/ this is the ski I'm looking at presently head wise - not sure if it's their FIS model, as I'm not the most educated on the current Head lineup. It's roughly $600USD for the ski only.

 

[Swede]

Don’t have much to say about the ski (Head) but team mates to my daughter has been on that ski in 181 (r>23)for U16, seems to be a great ski. It is FIS compliant for youth racing and basically the same construction, but it’s not the full-on, which has a r>30m, little longer length and stiffer flex. Depending on how you ski (you say you have a race background) you might want the bigger version. Perhaps slap on a bigger ff binding. I wouldn’t be afraid of r25-28 in a 25 m set unless on very flat terrain.

 

[HeluvaSkier]

Both have a reported 21cm radius, which is about right for our glaloms that get set

That IS a very tight set.

 

[SlapChop]

That IS a very tight set.

Yes! Honestly, wearing my slalom skis wasn't always a bad thing, except for losing speed in the flats. Our hills aren't exactly huge close to Ottawa, so it tends to be more slalom country around here. I know they try for 25m sets, but some of the hills just don't have the length to make it worth it.

The head coach of the hill I'm looking at coaching at next year was skiing on older 27m FIS Fischers, and he is a talented skier (definitely skiing better than I was this year) and he mentioned the 27m was too much for him. Lots of guys are either going 25m versions of FIS compliant skis (usually U16 version) or the masters.

A number of guys are on the Masters (Rossi Masters 18m) which has interested me, but I found the Blizzard Masters skis to feel a little too dead and unresponsive for my preference (or perhaps I just wasn't flexing them enough to make them work for me).

Keep in mind that while I've got a racing background,I still have a long road ahead of me to get back my proficiency, not to mention develop beyond it. So I figured a shorter FIS U16 ski wouldn't be so bad. A bit more surface area to make up the lost second or two I'm losing in our 30-40 second GS courses.

 

[Swede]

Inme the shorter U16 skis are not always easier. We had the 170 and then tried 175 and 183 cm FIS Rossi Hero, the 183 was much better/easier (for my daughter,). Stability and smoothness, much nicer flex. The short are sometimes a bit 'chubby' if you understand what I mean. The 183 Rossi/Dynastar is a very nice ski.
The old r27 men's FIS GS:s are supposed to be a real pita, I've never skied them.

 

[BGreen]

Inme the shorter U16 skis are not always easier. We had the 170 and then tried 175 and 183 cm FIS Rossi Hero, the 183 was much better/easier (for my daughter,). Stability and smoothness, much nicer flex. The short are sometimes a bit 'chubby' if you understand what I mean. The 183 Rossi/Dynastar is a very nice ski.
The old r27 men's FIS GS:s are supposed to be a real pita, I've never skied them.

Yep. I had a girl on a 183 Rossi for SG because her 175 Dynastars took forever to show up (literally got lost in a warehouse). Ultimately she decided she preferred the Rossi even though it was too big for her. She was a little faster on the Dynastar, but there was no confidence there. She just preferred the way it skied and it gave her more confidence.

If you are going to be coaching, a 175ish GS makes a good coach ski. Keep in mind you are up to 100 lb. “fatter” when carrying gear and a soft ski can get unpredictable.

 

[razie]

Yes! Honestly, wearing my slalom skis wasn't always a bad thing, except for losing speed in the flats. Our hills aren't exactly huge close to Ottawa, so it tends to be more slalom country around here. I know they try for 25m sets, but some of the hills just don't have the length to make it worth it.

Many coaches are not good with math... going from 25m to 21m adds less than 2 gates every 10 gates... would you sacrifice skiing and training on proper GS gates with the nice ski and turn shape all season, for 2 more sucky turns every 10 turns?

I know many do it, but it's not computing for me...

cheers.

p.s. Get the Head. Damp, easy initiation, more stable than the Atomics and definitely not bland, once you get on it right.

 

[crgildart]

My background - I'm 5'11, 190lbs, 33 years old, raced up until 18, then went to University and skiid recreationally until this past year where I've gotten back into racing and coaching with a vengeance. I spent most of this year getting my boots fitted properly (Tecnica R9 130s, with a ton of punching and grinding for my duck feet) but they fit like gloves now. I'll be on snow probably 4-5 times a week next season, split between the two disciplines. (Coaching, racing and training)!

I'd be looking at low 180 cm models instead of mid 170 cm models. I'm 5'9" 170 and ski a race stock stiff 185 GS for NASTAR and high speed cruising. But I just ski for fun. if the gate sets in Masters are tighter and you're not needing high speed hold I guess going shorter would be better.

 

[BGreen]

Many coaches are not good with math... going from 25m to 21m adds less than 2 gates every 10 gates... would you sacrifice skiing and training on proper GS gates with the nice ski and turn shape all season, for 2 more sucky turns every 10 turns?

How about 25m with a chicane at 22m every few turns. No rule that they all have to be the same distance. Sorry, thread drift.

 

[SlapChop]

Thanks for all the replies so far.

So I'm looking through the deals on the site on the Head line - they only have either 176cm and 186cm. They also have 2017 model of, what I'm presuming to be the same skis as the 2018s for about $200 less. I don't imagine there is much, if any, substantial changes to the ski from the different years?

At the moment I'm leaning towards the 186cm variant, unless there is a reason I should keep my mind on the smaller ones.

Thanks again!

 

[Utahski]

I have the Head Master's in 186, radius is 25.4. Don't run gates with therm but it's a terrific easy turning, fun every day ski. A bunch of Park City Masters are on them. I've not tried the recent Atomic master's ski but do have other older Atomics and they're also good, I'd guess the new ones are very good. For your height and weight a 176 is too short.

 

[ScotsSkier]

Ok, a bit late to the party here, just back from Far West masters finals.

I have a couple of athletes on the Atomic G9 RS 183. Good ski, however i was trying to find a pair for someone last week and none to be found in the US in 183. dont know about Canada.

As Utahskier said at your height/weight i would NOT go to the 176. Not going to help even in tight courses. The 183/23ish ski will work much better. (And for those who cant get their head round this for a tighter course, let me give you a reference point. A Masters buddy of mine just placed second in the 55-59 platinum class at Nastar nationals - on a 188/30m FIS ski!! Remember the flex on a GS ski can be more important than radius!

The Head in 186/25 is a good option. The 181/176 Head might not be enough ski for you. Another ski well worth a look is the Rossi/Dynastar FIS GS in 182/23 . i had thought this was a "tweener" ski but it is much more capable across a wider weight range than a tweener

 

[BGreen]

Remember the flex on a GS ski can be more important than radius!

This needs repeating.

 

[James]

How's the Blizzard 184cm, >25m ski?

http://www.peakskishop.com/Blizzard-GS-FIS-GS-Race-Skis-2018-25-Meter-Non-FIS_p_5771.html

 

[SlapChop]

I hope you made out well/had a great race ScotsSkier. Truth be told I'm jealous of you racing this weekend. Our finals were a couple weekends ago, and our local hills capped off the season with a dual slalom event last weekend.

Lots of great insight from everyone here, has really helped clarify what I'm looking for. I keep going back and referencing the masters ski review thread as well- your words about flex are really resonating with me. Always cool to see people put into words 'feelings/actions' that you develop over years in a sport.

Anyway, based on the feedback here, and availability (looking like the Atomics availability is an issue, I'll know more about the Canadian opportunities tomorrow when I talk to a rep I know). I'm about 80% decided on getting the 186/25m head 2018s. The only other question I had pertains to an older model (2015) which are available, and what the substantial differences between the 2018 and 2015 ski are. I know the race plate is different this year, and the models from 2016 and beyond incorporate Graphene into the construction, but I wasn't sure what the skiing differences truly were, if the 2018 is a different/better ski overall. The 2015 is selling for $439 ($348 USD) vs $769 ($610 USD) for the 2018s.

This consideration is mostly a value for money as opposed to overall affordability. I'm of the understanding that a lot of the FIS/Racing skis are a slower progression in terms of year to year development and changes, but with the FIS standards changing this year I can't help but wondering if that has precipitated a more significant change in turn/flex characteristics for the 2018 skis vice models from 3-4 years ago.

Thanks again!

 

[ScotsSkier]

Yes thanks, a good weekend. 3 GSs, unfortunately we had to cancel the 2 SGs because of new snow! . Because I have had a few DNFs and missed races I had to score well in all of them to make the top 10 overall for the season ( I race open class rather than age group) so despite a few missteps I was able to squeak it out and get 7 th o/a for the season so pleased about that and several of my athletes scored class titles which I was most pleased about!

Personally I would just grab the 2015s. Not been much change in these apart from new graphics technology. The main difference in the plate is that the new one is predrilled but the previous fisher/ head/tyrolia plate has been around a long time and works well. Most of the R&d has been in the 30m/35m skis. Most brands got the 30 m women's ski dialed in a few years back and it has not changed much since then. The biggest breakthrough was getting a softer flex but retaining torsional stiffness and this has carried over to the 25m skis. The new men's 30 m skis this year drew heavily on what made the women's skis work so wel l and the things they developed to make the 35 m skis work

 

[SlapChop]

Alright, quick update. Just pulled the trigger on the 2017 Head I.GS RD @186 (turns out they had a pair of 2017 186s in stock for just a few dollars more than the 2015s).

Binding wise - any particular recommendations between the 16x and the 20x?

 

[ScotsSkier]

Both good bindings. What din are you normally running? If it is 12 or up I prefer the 20. I use the 20s on speed skis and on most of my GS skis but the 16 should work equally well