Stockli Laser AX...Size?

[mdf]

By the way, the 175's I tried belong to @UGASkiDawg . Maybe he can join the chorus.

 

[UGASkiDawg]

I agree with all the above, as @ski otter 2 said, the 175 and 183 are two different skis, and in your case, the 175 is the right ski and the 183 is the wrong ski..for what you are looking for the ski to do. You will be surprised how much you ski the AX compared to the other skis...you will be looking for bluebird groomer days to take them out and I will add, they will make you a better skier.

This.....and the number of days you will take them out (ie powder days) will increase. If I only had to ski on one ski the rest of my days this would be it although I could live with AR as well or augment 77 or 88. Arrrgh so many choices, so little time (not to mention money). 5'10" 175 and the 175 is puuuurfect. The 183 is too much ski for anything other than groomer bombing which is not what this ski is for. If you want a groomer bomber get a true GS ski.

 

[dbostedo]

I have a (possibly bad) tendency to seek versatility from any product, and I'm thinking I should reign it in on this purchase... I will have dedicated groomer days

In that case, perhaps you should put the Laser SC, Laser SL, or even an actual slalom or GS ski into the mix.

 

[ski otter 2]

I skied ^^ those guys’ 183. Still pains me thinking about it on the steeps. If you do go for it, go at least +2cm on the mount. Prob 3.
But the 175 is the size in that ski. Esp if you want to sell it later.

Yes, I agree. The 175s. A classic. The 183s feel heavier; and this is the deal with the 183s, at least at my lighter weight: at +3, they become easily turny, and versatile, like a Sean Pettit ski. I ski steeps, mild bumps and shallow powder/crud with them easily then - at that forward mount setting. At a regular setting of 0 to +1, I'd only want to be on groomers and things I could charge hard in the fall line gs style.

On the other hand, a very athletic, younger, skilled friend who is heavier and a strong skier (not just finesse like me) skis the 183s at +1 to +2. (His are adjustable like mine are). He kills it with the 183s, including in steep bumps, skiing faster than I dare in such terrain. Just stronger. (But he too wishes he had the 175 AX also!)

 

[Newc]

Well, the resounding chorus for the 175s is really confidence-boosting. While I am still in-shape and moderately athletic, I am definitely feeling it more now than I used to! Plus, from this ski, I’m not really looking for something that requires a ton of work, so the 183 would like be too much of a handful and ruin the vibe I’m looking for.

Re: the laser sc or sl, while I am not looking for a jack of all trades, the ax will still be the narrowest, least rockered, shortest, and most metallic ski in my quiver. I’m okay with it being moderately versatile - more specifically, left to my own devices, I could end up with 10 skis between 98-108mm.

 

[ScottB]

Well, I figure its my turn to chime in, I am now the third owner of Jim's, MDF's 183cm Ax's. I have only skied them a half dozen runs, on a very warm spring day in really manky, glue like, soft snow. I had on them on steeps, bumps, and cruisers. Even on steeps and bumps I found the 183 to be really easy to ski. For a 78 waist I was amazed how versatile the ski is. There is some construction tech in this ski that makes it unlike any other, and gives it its versatility. It doesn't get grabby in soft snow ( I credit the tip shape), it is initially soft flexing (good for moguls) but is also burly once flexed a bit (construction) and has turtle shell that makes it get very stiff torsionally, so good on high speed carves. The ski is not light, although it isn't really heavy either. Just right for its intended use. Finally I need to add that I am 6'4" and 240 lbs. My norm is a race ski, and I usually ski a 185-190 cm ski. So you could say I sized down to get on the 183 AX. I also plan to move the bindings forward, as it felt like it needed it. I will sort it out next season.

Within reason, unless you have the size to play linebacker for the Patriots, 175 AX is the proper length. If you want a versatile GS ski and have the strength, then the 183 AX would work. If you want a versatile carver then the 175 is the better ski. It has been described very well in the previous posts. I have not been on the 175 myself, so I am repeating what I have heard. I have skied a 180 cm and 187 cm Brahama and it is a similar difference. I own the 188 Brahama, but always think this is one heck of a lot of ski. I didn't get that feeling on the 183 AX, it just felt good to me due to my size and style. I think most others did get the "lot of ski" feeling on the 183 AX.

As far as the other laser's, they are all very groomer oriented. The AX can be skied anywhere with enjoyment. The others offer higher performance carving on piste, but won't necessarily be a lot of fun off piste.

 

[Newc]

@ScottB

Really insightful. I'm half a foot shorter than you, and 60 lbs lighter than you. I cannot imagine that anything in excess would work for me - for my intended use.

Thanks!

 

[Uncle-A]

Well, I figure its my turn to chime in, I am now the third owner of Jim's, MDF's 183cm Ax's. I have only skied them a half dozen runs, on a very warm spring day in really manky, glue like, soft snow. I had on them on steeps, bumps, and cruisers. Even on steeps and bumps I found the 183 to be really easy to ski. For a 78 waist I was amazed how versatile the ski is. There is some construction tech in this ski that makes it unlike any other, and gives it its versatility. It doesn't get grabby in soft snow ( I credit the tip shape), it is initially soft flexing (good for moguls) but is also burly once flexed a bit (construction) and has turtle shell that makes it get very stiff torsionally, so good on high speed carves. The ski is not light, although it isn't really heavy either. Just right for its intended use. Finally I need to add that I am 6'4" and 240 lbs. My norm is a race ski, and I usually ski a 185-190 cm ski. So you could say I sized down to get on the 183 AX. I also plan to move the bindings forward, as it felt like it needed it. I will sort it out next season.

Within reason, unless you have the size to play linebacker for the Patriots, 175 AX is the proper length. If you want a versatile GS ski and have the strength, then the 183 AX would work. If you want a versatile carver then the 175 is the better ski. It has been described very well in the previous posts. I have not been on the 175 myself, so I am repeating what I have heard. I have skied a 180 cm and 187 cm Brahama and it is a similar difference. I own the 188 Brahama, but always think this is one heck of a lot of ski. I didn't get that feeling on the 183 AX, it just felt good to me due to my size and style. I think most others did get the "lot of ski" feeling on the 183 AX.

As far as the other laser's, they are all very groomer oriented. The AX can be skied anywhere with enjoyment. The others offer higher performance carving on piste, but won't necessarily be a lot of fun off piste.

@ScottB that was a will written review, it was easy to understand and talked about parts of the ski in terms that are not too technical. Terms that every day skiers can relate to are better than some other reviews I have read even ones here.

 

[cosmoliu]

I think that for mdf to have sold the 183 AX on because it was a "lot of ski" speaks volumes.

 

[Guy in Shorts]

Re: the laser sc or sl, while I am not looking for a jack of all trades, the ax will still be the narrowest, least rockered, shortest, and most metallic ski in my quiver. I’m okay with it being moderately versatile - more specifically, left to my own devices, I could end up with 10 skis between 98-108mm.

Feel the same about my 177 SC's. My only narrow ski that fills the outlier big guy needs. Everything else in my quiver is 96mm or greater.

 

[Swiss Toni]

There is some construction tech in this ski that makes it unlike any other, and gives it its versatility.

Stöckli skis are glued together using the Redux adhesive system that was invented for use in the aircraft industry during WW 2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redux_(adhesive) as far as I’m aware only one other company uses it. Stöckli also split the cores in some of their skis into three sections, they then turn the outside edge of the two outer sections to the middle ensuring that there are continuous strips of wood behind the sidewalls, if you just mill the sidecut into the core bank you get short bits of wood behind the sidewalls.

Nordica also used to do something similar.