Stockli Quiver Build

[John Baumer]

I can only address the carving issue regarding the Stockli lineup. I have the Laser SL, Laser SC, Laser GS and the Laser AX. All of them are in the longest available size, 170, 177, 185 and 183 as I am a large person. I know this looks like a silly amount of overlap for a person to have, but what can I say? You like what you like, and they all get regular use. If you value carving the Laser SC is really an exceptional ride with a surprising amount of versatility. The AX is not the carver that the SC is. The SC really lights up when you put some attitude into it. In short, the SL is for when you really feel the need to lay em over and are prepared to put full effort into it and make more turns. The SC is a blast in its own right, the AX for a mellower experience on more varied conditions. The GS is a different ride altogether, Its a 19.4 TR race ski that is outstanding for what its built for. That would be running gates and ripping in a non crowded hill. IMO, the Laser SC is hard to pass on.

 

[VON]

I can only address the carving issue regarding the Stockli lineup. I have the Laser SL, Laser SC, Laser GS and the Laser AX. All of them are in the longest available size, 170, 177, 185 and 183 as I am a large person. I know this looks like a silly amount of overlap for a person to have, but what can I say? You like what you like, and they all get regular use. If you value carving the Laser SC is really an exceptional ride with a surprising amount of versatility. The AX is not the carver that the SC is. The SC really lights up when you put some attitude into it. In short, the SL is for when you really feel the need to lay em over and are prepared to put full effort into it and make more turns. The SC is a blast in its own right, the AX for a mellower experience on more varied conditions. The GS is a different ride altogether, Its a 19.4 TR race ski that is outstanding for what its built for. That would be running gates and ripping in a non crowded hill. IMO, the Laser SC is hard to pass on.

+1 for the Laser SC

I figured I'd give my two cents since I've spent A LOT of time on the Laser SC, SX, and AX.

I currently own the Laser SC in 177 and an older pair of Stormrider 95 in 192 (the 25m turn radius version from ~6 years ago) that I picked up on a crazy eBay deal this offseason. I'm 6'4", 185 lbs.

I used to own the AX in 183 and eventually unloaded it because I was looking for something with a little more off piste versatility. I found that in the Stormrider. Once you've got a Stormrider in your lineup, then all of a sudden the need for an AX really starts to diminish if you already own a more frontside-biased ski, because the SC (and the SX) offer significantly more power, energy, and precision on the frontside.

I view the AX as more of a one ski quiver for someone with a strong bias to the frontside and a preference for a more relaxed ski. It still has plenty of top-end when you want to push it, but it won't kick you in the teeth for lapses in technique the way the S-series skis will.

The SX is one of the most exhilarating skis I've ever been on. But in crowded resorts, I rarely found the opportunity to responsibly open it up, so I sadly offloaded it to someone who uses it to great effect in a beer league. Despite its shorter length and radius, the SC can reliably handle insane amounts of speed and longer radius turns than you'd expect.

I know this is a matter of opinion (and means), but based on where I ski and how I ski, my quiver goals are for a quiver of 3:

75-80mm frontside scalpel (16-18m radius)
95-100mm "all mountain" tool (20-23m radius seems ideal to me)
110-115mm resort powder day ski (24-28m radius)

 

[Dave]

I'm in Western NY so same conditions as to what you see on a daily basis. I own the SC in 170 (15/16 model yearI think??). It's my DD here unless there is some fresh snow or spring conditions in which case I prefer a wider ski. When I go out west I bring one ski (my Bonafides or Liberty origin 96) as I don't like bringing more that one ski when I travel and a 90 something seems to work well for me in the widest variety of West Coast conditions. I demoed the AX prior to purchasing the SC and in my mind the SC was a far superior ski for what I was looking for. Much more energy on groomers while still competent in bumps and mixed conditions. In other words, I found the SC to be a better mixed condition ski than the AX is a carver...if that makes any sense.

I'm 5'5" and 160ish and the 170 is dialed for me. I would think that you wouldn't want to go shorter than a 170 in the SC. I find it a pretty easy going ski with relatively soft tips/shovels for the category.

So yeah, the SC and Stormrider 95 would be a pretty sweet quiver for you in my estimation. I know I could get by with it!

as always...YMMV

 

[Smiles]

Thanks everyone. I really appreciate all of the perspectives. I am definitely leaning more toward the SC than I was before.

As for the Stormriders, I find it interesting that no one seems to talk much about the 105, here or seemingly elsewhere. Is the 95 just that much more versatile? Is it just better known? Maybe it is just my search skills and the discussion is already out there, but I am not seeing it. (Similarly, why are there few comparisons of the Stormrider 95 and Renoun Endurance 98?)

Thanks all. This has been super helpful.

 

[givethepigeye]

Thanks everyone. I really appreciate all of the perspectives. I am definitely leaning more toward the SC than I was before.

As for the Stormriders, I find it interesting that no one seems to talk much about the 105, here or seemingly elsewhere. Is the 95 just that much more versatile? Is it just better known? Maybe it is just my search skills and the discussion is already out there, but I am not seeing it. (Similarly, why are there few comparisons of the Stormrider 95 and Renoun Endurance 98?)

Thanks all. This has been super helpful.

On the SR 105s, I don't have buyers remorse in any way on the 95's BUT I do wish the I had taken the 105s out - my previous travel, everyday ski was 104. I had heard so much about the 95 (and it was all that everyone said). But it does seem to ski a little shorter, and seems super quick, which is prolly good as I get to my mid 50s, But I am curious on the float - the FX 104 really were good @ 184. I plan to try the 105s in a couple weeks out at JH - who knows maybe I'll have another pair of Swiss skis too. Sizing is 186, but the 184 seems a short 184 on snow - maybe that's some of the "secret Swiss fondue sauce".

 

[oldfashoned]

Wow, not a bad choice amongst the four...on that thought..all four? You only live once and you can't take it with you. Make sure you shoot @dawgcatching a message to put a deal together for whatever you choose.

I second this! I called Village Bike and Ski and talked with Scott for about 30 minutes last season and we decided on the SR88 was the ski for me and I am totally satisfied. He had to order the ski, and I still received them in a few weeks. Excellent customer service!!

 

[BS Slarver]

I could also use some intel on the 105 if someone spent anytime on them. I have spent a fair bit of time on the 107 and find them a total blast even on the soft groomers.
If I could only take only one pair west it would be a toss up between the SR 95 / 107

 

[surfsnowgirl]

Have their been significant changes on the Laser SC over the years. I know width is one of them as the 2009 I just found is 63 underfoot and the newest ones are 72. Any other major changes?

 

[Wendy]

@Smiles I’d go with the SC and the SR95, As a level 9 skier, I’m sure skiing the SC in unexpected soft snow or crud would be no big deal. Around here, a lot of skiers ski slalom or GS skis in anything.

I own the SR100, which is a discontinued women’s version of the SR95. I can’t say enough about this ski....so smooth and powerful. It was my OSQ last year in UT and CO and I never wished I was on another ski. If I had to replace it, I’d go with the SR95, or the slightly softer SR97, I wouldn’t go wider.

 

[Juanito]

I recently went through a similar process trying to add a wider, powder capable ski to complement my Laser AX (2016 version). I ended up purchasing the Stormrider 97, which is a stretched version of the Stormrider 88.

I spend most of my time skiing in Park City and am more of a finesse than power skier.

The Laser AX is an amazing ski for me. As others in this thread have said, it is very versatile. Great on groomers, hard pack, in bumps, trees and moderate amounts (6-8”) of fresh or cut up powder. Flex in tips and tails is just right.

I’m shorter and lighter than you so get plenty of float with a ski in the 95-100 range. I’m also quite a bit older than you and want to avoid the added knee torque that accompanies a wider ski.

Skis I considered were the Stormrider 88, Stormrider 95, and Kastle FX95 (both HP and non-HP). I pretty much eliminated the SR95 and FX95HP as being a bit too much skis for my size.

I contacted Scott @dawgcatching thinking I would purchase the Stormrider 88. Scott agreed that Stormrider 88 would work very well for me but thought that the wider Stormrider 97 would be a better 2 quiver companion to my Laser AX (which is 78).

We’ve had a pretty pathetic ski year in Park City, so I’ve only been out on the Stormrider 97 a couple of times. They ski very much like the Stormrider 88; silky smooth, quick underfoot, grippy enough on hard pack, nimble in bumps and fun to open up in wide turns. I’m working on a review that I hope to post soon. I am glad that I chose the 97 over the 88. The 88 and AX are similar enough that it would be a coin toss to decide which to take on a given day. The choice between the AX and 97 is much easier.

As to your original question, I would pair either the AX or SC with the Stormrider 95 … and plan on taking just the Stormrider 95 for you trip out west.

 

[Kite Pilot]

I'm a little late to the conversation, but I find the SR95 the best all around ski for bumps and varied terrain. I also have a pair of Laser AX for early season groomers which make it really fun before the good stuff opens up. I have an older pair of SR 107's but I didn't find them as good in powder. The SR95's are OK up to a few inches, but more than that a dedicated powder ski is nice. I have a pair of Nordica Enforcer 110's and just got back from a week of heli skiing with them and they did well, but a bit wider ski with more rocker would have been nice, but they're great for area/resort skiing.

For your situation you might get more use out of the AX's or SC's at home and then the SR95's for your trips west. Maybe find a good deal on some powder skis (there are lots of good ones) and then take the SR95's and dedicated powder skis for the trips.

Good luck

 

[wallyk]

Hi all,

I am 5'10", 176 lbs, level 9 skier or so, in my 40s, and I ski about 16 days a year -- ten on a little eastern hill and 6 somewhere out west in March.

I am trying to decide between the Stockli Laser SC and the Laser AX and between the Stormrider 95 and the Stormrider 105.

As for the SC or AX, at the little hill I spend my time going back and forth from carving lots of fast turns and doing bumps, to skiing relatively slowly with family, friends and kids where I am trying to model good skiing. So, versatility is valued. That said, on the little hill, for years I have skied slalom skis, and I've always enjoyed skis that have energy to release at the end of a turn. But, given the variable weather it seems we get, I also now want something that will power through the slush and mashed potatoes. It seems like the difference in the bumps between the two skis is marginal.

I read dawgcatching's review where he referenced the AX being an instructor ski, but I saw another post where someone said that instructors are on the SC this year. The instructor reference speaks to my desire for versatility. I've also been told that the SC is a little more fun as between the two, and that given my relative level of technical competence that I would be able to be just as versatile on the SC as the AX. I also recognize that unlike Scott, I am not at a big hill, but a little hill, and so maybe the SC would be a better choice. Unfortunately, demoing is really out of the question.

And, should I be thinking about the western trip when I evaluate the narrow ski choice? Were I to go out to a place like Steamboat in March, would I be likely to use the narrow ski most years some of the time in a given week? Or, is the SR95 or SR105 something that I would use everyday I am there and leave the SC/AX at home?

I feel like it is rare that I actually get a real powder day, so would the SR95 be a bit more versatile and a better choice in trees, bumps and on the steeps?

Given all of the above, I was thinking of it this way:
1. Laser SC and SR95 and then just take one ski out west.
2. Laser AX and SR105 and take two skis out west.
but, then I thought:
3. Laser SC and SR105 and take two skis out west.

So, the only combination I ruled out was the AX and the SR95, but as I write this I wonder if they are different enough it would make sense to do that.

As for sizing, I think the SC in the 170, though I am concerned the AX could ski a bit long in the 175 and be too short in the 167.

I get the feeling I am really overthinking this, as it doesn't seem like any approach would be wrong. But, I figured I would put it out there to get some perspective. Given that it has been about seven and eight years since I last got skis, I'd like to get as much information as possible this time around. Thanks in advance.

Smiles

I have a very, almost identical quiver.........

Stormrider 88 and Kastle MX74, both purchased from Scott @dawgcatching

Why? After reading/researching and talking with Scott about the Stormrider 88, I believed that it was an ideal addition

 

[Ken_R]

Hi all,

I am 5'10", 176 lbs, level 9 skier or so, in my 40s, and I ski about 16 days a year -- ten on a little eastern hill and 6 somewhere out west in March.

I am trying to decide between the Stockli Laser SC and the Laser AX and between the Stormrider 95 and the Stormrider 105.

As for the SC or AX, at the little hill I spend my time going back and forth from carving lots of fast turns and doing bumps, to skiing relatively slowly with family, friends and kids where I am trying to model good skiing. So, versatility is valued. That said, on the little hill, for years I have skied slalom skis, and I've always enjoyed skis that have energy to release at the end of a turn. But, given the variable weather it seems we get, I also now want something that will power through the slush and mashed potatoes. It seems like the difference in the bumps between the two skis is marginal.

I read dawgcatching's review where he referenced the AX being an instructor ski, but I saw another post where someone said that instructors are on the SC this year. The instructor reference speaks to my desire for versatility. I've also been told that the SC is a little more fun as between the two, and that given my relative level of technical competence that I would be able to be just as versatile on the SC as the AX. I also recognize that unlike Scott, I am not at a big hill, but a little hill, and so maybe the SC would be a better choice. Unfortunately, demoing is really out of the question.

And, should I be thinking about the western trip when I evaluate the narrow ski choice? Were I to go out to a place like Steamboat in March, would I be likely to use the narrow ski most years some of the time in a given week? Or, is the SR95 or SR105 something that I would use everyday I am there and leave the SC/AX at home?

I feel like it is rare that I actually get a real powder day, so would the SR95 be a bit more versatile and a better choice in trees, bumps and on the steeps?

Given all of the above, I was thinking of it this way:
1. Laser SC and SR95 and then just take one ski out west.
2. Laser AX and SR105 and take two skis out west.
but, then I thought:
3. Laser SC and SR105 and take two skis out west.

So, the only combination I ruled out was the AX and the SR95, but as I write this I wonder if they are different enough it would make sense to do that.

As for sizing, I think the SC in the 170, though I am concerned the AX could ski a bit long in the 175 and be too short in the 167.

I get the feeling I am really overthinking this, as it doesn't seem like any approach would be wrong. But, I figured I would put it out there to get some perspective. Given that it has been about seven and eight years since I last got skis, I'd like to get as much information as possible this time around. Thanks in advance.

Smiles

Woah, awesome selection!

Here in Colorado I generally take two pairs of skis up to the mtns for multi day trips. This is my first year doing so and wow, the enjoyment factor went up for sure.

I mostly use my Monster 88's most days for ripping on steep groomers, bumps and all over the hill. Superb ski (88mm, 184cm) for me, love it. Awesome grip and versatility.

For pow days I use my Moment Deathwish (112mm, 190cm) or my newly acquired Black Crows Navis (Freebird or "Touring model, 104mm wide, 185cm). The Moments rule resort pow no matter how chopped up. The Navis are light skis that excel in undisturbed snow and soft conditions.

So basically my recommendation would be one groomer / all mountain ski that has good grip on icier steeps but still enough versatility to explore and a powder ski that is good in crud. To me the 88mm width (give or take) is perfect for an all mountain / groomer ski and a 105-115mm wide ski for powder with enough beef to bust crud.

(I am a bit larger than u but comparable, 6'-2", 190 lb, 44 yr. old)

 

[wallyk]

I have a very identical quiver and went through a similar section process this winter........replace the Laser SC with the Kastle MX 74, and add a SR88 and these are my go to skis.....can read @dawgcatching ,Scott's, review/comparasion between the Kastle MX74 and the Stockli SC here in PugSki.

Stormrider 88 and Kastle MX74, both purchased from @dawgcatching .....FWIW he is the only person that I would buy skis from now.....great service, great guy, made time to talk with me a couple of times before pulling the trigger on both pairs of skis, was a good year and I deserved a treat.

After reading/researching and talking with Scott about the Stormrider 88, I believed that it was an ideal or appropriate addition to my "quiver". I ski in Minnesota hence the Kastle MX74, which was purchased to replace a MX83 in a 163, which was is a fine ski and was purchased for at Camelback and VT, similar conditions to MN but longer runs. The switch to MX74 in a 172 was for greater stability. Great for a "daily driver"......can bang tight, to quote @dawgcatching "Warren Milleresque" turns, and then open into medium/long GS arcs. Tenacious on hard pack/ice and great in crud/loose granular. No real top end on the MX74, brought it to Breck and it loves going fast......the more you give, the more you get. It's a Kastle,

SR 88.......so much has been said about it I won't bore you. I purchased the SR88 in a 177 over the 95 as a primary ski for my adventures in the Rockies and Sierras, my "big mountain ski" because it doesn't always snow when I travel to ski. The SR88 is a fantastic ski and the reviews at PugSki are accurate. I demo'd the FX95HP and the SR95 in Verbier and they were both a lot of ski. The SR88 has performed well for me in a Breck in new snow, crud, above the trees, in the bumps and cruising at speed. Can handle everything.

Another reason for the 88 over the 95 is that I don't believe that a 95 is an appropriate selection for my ski style. Meaning because I don't ski big, wide open, long terrain on a consistent basis, poor me!!!, I don't fall into the philosophy that a +90 waist is appropriate. I'm from the camp that a good skier can take any ski any where. Heck, I skied above the trees and in the trees and in 8" of new snow last year at Vail, Big Sky, and Breck on a Kastle MX83 in a 163. Why? Because I can adopt my ski style to fit the ski. Am I glad I purchased the SR88? Yes. Awesome ski for what I need and how I ski.

 

[martyg]

I have the Lazer AX, SL, SC and GS.

If we still lived at Mt Baker, which receives far more snow than anyplace in CO, I might consider getting the Stormrider 95 - maybe two pair - one with tech binding, one with a DIN binding. Even at Baker, the AX would be my ski of choice 80% of the time.

The Lazer AX will not be made next year, so I purchased an additional pair. That is how much I like them. They are one of my primary day-in, day-out work skis and will handle any and all Western conditions, unless we see one of those dumps that drops 36" + in a day - which is very, very rare in the Inter mountain west.

If I have an advanced private, and it hasn't snowed in a few days, I take the SC's. They are a blast. not quite as versatile as the AX (or its new iteration), but the energy from turn to turn if you know how to carry that energy, is overwhelming. I have to drive that ski a bit more than the AX's, but it is a very fun drive.

Based on your narrative.... If you are a strong technical skier (and I mean you take clinics, get videoed a handful of times a year and work with a coach) get the SC. Otherwise the AX (if you can find a pair) would provide more versatility at home and in the west. They provide me with 80% of the carvability of the SC, but are a bit more comfortable to be on day-in and day-out.

Stormriders.... Overkill for a few days out West every year.

Enjoy!

 

[Ron]

Rumor has it a Pair of 183 SR 107's mounted with AAttack Demo's will be for sale very soon.....

 

[KevinF]

Rumor has it a Pair of 183 SR 107's mounted with AAttack Demo's will be for sale very soon.....

Hmmmm... Do I need the full set?

 

[Ron]

Yes you do!

 

[AmyPJ]

I'd like some AXs. On my bucket list.

 

[Jim McDonald]

Rumor has it a Pair of 183 SR 107's mounted with AAttack Demo's will be for sale very soon.....

How'd you know?