• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

Tony S

I have a confusion to make ...
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
12,612
Location
Maine
Skis I'm considering aside from the AX: SR88 at 177, Blosson White Out at 176, Atomic Vantage 83cti at 175, Monster 83/88 at 177, Titan at 177, FX85 at 181

I don't have a good sense of the Atomic. Even so, I'd say the FX85 doesn't fit with the others unless you're taking about the HP. Several of the other skis have much more carve in their pockets - especially the Titan, which I liked but bears no resemblance to the FX, which I own. The FX can rail arcs if you insist, and if you're not expecting a lot of tail. But is all about hopping, bopping, and slithering gleefully and carelessly through shallow soft snow and bumps. Having met you, I think you should try it, because the flex is easy but not noodly; you can ski it long. It's a hoot for those of us who can get over ourselves. :)

20180428_112439.jpg
 

KingGrump

Most Interesting Man In The World
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
12,196
Location
NYC
I'd say the FX85 doesn't fit with the others unless you're taking about the HP.

Nope, even the HP doesn't have enough beef to be driven hard. It is OK for jibby jabby kind of stuff. Want to rail a turn, barking up the wrong tree.
 

Jim McDonald

愛スキー
Skier
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Posts
2,101
Location
Tokyo
Thanks to everyone who's offered advice & suggestions; it's all going into the mental hopper in hopes something brilliant emerges.
Yes, the SR88 & FX85 are outliers in my list (which is only about half the actual list I've compiled), although I did think that anything with Kastle written on it would be pretty stable at speed.
So if the AX at 167/168 wouldn't be inappropriate, I'll add that and a Titan at 170 to my list.
Again, these post are helping clarify my thinking and are much appreciated.
:hail::hail::hail:
 

Jim McDonald

愛スキー
Skier
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Posts
2,101
Location
Tokyo
And...apologies to MattD for hijacking the thread!
 

Lorenzzo

Be The Snow
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
2,984
Location
UT
If we're ever in the same place at the same time, you are welcome to try my 167s. If we and @Lorenzzo are ever in the same place at the same time, you could probably try both the 167s and the 175s :)
Going forward same place means JH or GT as it applies to me.

My AXs are now two generations old (pre-turtle shell) although I found the next generation to only show its difference in very firm conditions. I tested 2019 AX-s 175 on hardpack and bumps only and it's slightly easier to ski in those conditions but still has almost race ski grip. Differences between the three generations are subtle. My AX-s are my all-time favorites for all but deep conditions (>5 in.).

I'm 6"1" 185 and on the 175. I was concerned going that small in an all-around ski but Squid at Jan's, a very informed and experienced Stockli guy was firm about not going longer than 175 in fact said the 167 might work. I have to say, I've never felt a lack of stability even at speed, they're super stable. I did try the gen 2 183 and felt they didn't add anything but took away some versatility. So as between the 175 and 183 unless one is a total Clyde, shorter is probably the better choice, although my recommendations as per above are to some extent extrapolations from prior gens. I haven't been on 167s.
 

Jim McDonald

愛スキー
Skier
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Posts
2,101
Location
Tokyo
I doubt I'll find anywhere to demo Stocklis here in Japan, so special thanks to Cosmoliu & Lorenzzo for their generous offers, and I may indeed find myself in JH/GT this coming winter.
Looking back, I skipped a few seasons in the late-90s, just as straight skis were disappearing in favor of some new-fangled parabolic thingees. Then in 1999 my ski shop guy, who'd always had me on 200cm boards, handed me a pair of 170 Volkl Motion Carvers, saying I'd be fine on them. And I was!
So the idea of the shorter AX is starting to sink in. Again, thanks so much to all the Pugs.
 

LabMan

No Turns
Skier
Joined
Dec 4, 2015
Posts
92
Location
Dublin, OH
I originally bought the 183 AX, coming off the predecessor AR, and it was a huge, jarring change. I didn't like it at first, but over time adjusted to larger turn radius and slower response time. Then was able to compare it to the 175 AX and I went back to not liking the 183 (I'm 6'1", 155 lbs). The 175 is still very stable at high speeds on groomers.

Re the AX vs the Z-77: the AX is much more precise and has an aggressive attitude, the Z-77 is softer, less predictable in variable conditions and less decisive in it's response. I probably would like the 174 more than than the 180, but at that length it would need to be a lot more burly for me.
Z-77 has completely different characteristics than the AX. It is NOT a beer league, knife down the hill as fast as you can ski. Just my 2 cents worth.
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top