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

What is the new Rictor 82?

eok

Slopefossil
Skier
Joined
Nov 18, 2015
Posts
856
Location
PNW
Atomic X83 XTI? That's the conclusion I came to when considering replacing my Amp Rictor 82 Xtis last season; although I believe the X83s would be a significant "step up" in performance.

That was last season. This season, the Nordica Navigator 85/90 is on my short list. Not exactly a Rictor 82 replacement but a significant step up - but, like the Rictor, forgiving, easy peazy - yet they will rip when you dial it up.

Regardless of the above, I've decided to keep my Rictor 82s for another couple seasons. They're still in great shape and still fun.

I should have mentioned: Last season, input from @Philpug helped me appreciate the Atomic X83 as a potential Rictor replacement.
 

WheatKing

Ice coast carveaholic
Skier
Joined
Dec 24, 2015
Posts
258
Location
Ontario, Canada
I love my rictors.. they're my easy going, ski all day ski, unlike my turbochargers which demand that you carve all the things.. but they're starting to show their age and abuse.. does the same stupid easy translate to the mindbenders? i've been looking for a longer ski that's still easy, a bit smeary, but can still lock a carve on hardpack when i tip them over.. I usually set my edges to 4/1 due to the ice I normally encounter.. Navigator 85/90 are on the list, but i'm wondering if the mindbender 90c would be suitable..

I tried to replace them with Atomic Nomad blackeye Ti (precursor to the X series) and didn't like them. Too.. burly.
 

martyg

Making fresh tracks
Industry Insider
Joined
Nov 24, 2017
Posts
2,216
I have a new in box, never opened pair of Stockli Laser AX's w / bindings in 175 that I might be willing to part with.
 

Sibhusky

Whitefish, MT
Skier
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Posts
4,806
Location
Whitefish, MT
So, I've got the 84Ti's on order.
So, they arrived. I seem to have developed mental issues about new skis, based on the last two go-arounds I had, and this was no exception. I seriously don't know how people compare a bunch of skis back to back unless conditions are perfect. Naturally, the last three sets all arrived and got sampled right in the midst of difficult spring conditions and suffered from my distrust.

However, the new ones didn't suffer long. This time I went immediately to get a very specific tune on the skis because of how I suffered last time, trying to ski them right out of the box. And I made sure that I had a long discussion with the tech and had previously taped the exact instructions right on each ski so there wouldn't be some "piece of paper was too far away for me to look at it" scenario. And then I took then home and checked the work closely. The first day I stayed on the snowflake terrain and just felt the difference in balance points, reliability of edge, difference in ramp height, turn radius, etc. on the simple terrain. Then I put them back in the locker for a few days and skied my regular skis until conditions changed from hard pack and death cookies with grooming anomalies to having a nice corn layer over groomed hardpack. A few more runs on that snowflake stuff and then up onto blue terrain. Survived several runs, but was mentally exhausted by the gummy snow and really just fear of the unknown. Next day took them to the summit and decided we were becoming friends. I'm still not infatuated, but it's looking like I will become so.

Differences noted relative to the 82xTi:

- slightly wider underfoot so a hair less quick edge to edge, but not significant except mentally.
- much wider shovel means the ski surfs better in slush, which was nice
- turn radius longer which means I have to block that fact mentally and push the ski more forcefully when I need tighter turns. I assume I'll learn to compensate over time. It's only a change from 15 to 15.9 in the 170 length
- stiffness due to extra later of titanal is welcome on the hardpack, I'm not sure how much increased confidence is due to the fact my Rictors had 210+ days on them and had lost torsional rigidity a bit (I was thinking they might have but still trusted them completely) and how much of the improvement is the extra metal, but I'm feeling it.
- I think once the season is over and everything is home I'll be looking at binding impacts - stand height, ramp, mount point, just to understand how that might be different. I think I'm adjusting already and won't notice a thing over time, but just as I notice huge differences when switching from my powder skis to my groomer skis, I feel like this pair is some middle ground between the two.
- I'm perplexed by the higher ratings of this ski compared to the Rictors, frankly. They don't seem hugely different in any particular wowzer fashion. So far the difference to me is subtle and at this point I still love the Rictors and am only willing to say I might someday feel the same about these, but that's as far as I'd go. I think the quick turniness of the Rictors is more fun. These haven't precisely lost that, but .. Not as wowed.
 

eok

Slopefossil
Skier
Joined
Nov 18, 2015
Posts
856
Location
PNW
Yeah, I hear 'ya.

The Rictor 82 was often described as a re-spin of the Recon. Perhaps, but (to me) the Rictor 82 design always seemed different enough to set it apart from the Recon. The Rictor was/is such an accessible versatile ski design that was quite easy to ski but seemed to have that extra reserve of performance that advanced/expert skiers could tap & appreciate. It was the kind of ski I could throw in the car on any ski day and know I'd have a good day on the hill - no matter what the mountain offered that day. And it was my go-to ski for multiple seasons for that very reason.

To me, the Ikonics are different animals with personalities different from the Rictors. NOT saying that's a bad thing.
 

Sibhusky

Whitefish, MT
Skier
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Posts
4,806
Location
Whitefish, MT
Further observation. The Ikonics seem to reward aggression far more than timidity. Whether this is a balance change or a reduced sweet spot, I'm not sure. Another reason to look at the binding differences.
 

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,624
Location
Reno, eNVy
I seriously don't know how people compare a bunch of skis back to back unless conditions are perfect.

Testing conditions do not need to be perfect, they need to be consistant. In fact, I do not want perfect condtions, perfect conditions will mask the short comings of ski. When we test skis it will tend to be similar skis on the same day in the same conditions. But to your point, the average consumer does not have that opportunity, they will test ski A on a Tuesday at resort 1 then ski B at resort 2...three weeks later then while night skiing, they take a run on ski C at resort 3. This is not getting into the condition variables let alone the differences in tunes. [Phil ducking]Demoing skis is very well one of the most over rated criterior for choosing a ski. [/Phil ducking]
 

Sibhusky

Whitefish, MT
Skier
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Posts
4,806
Location
Whitefish, MT
I've demoed skis in the past, back to back, same route, and been able to compare them. But "spring conditions" with chickenheads, grooming anomalies, hard pack, and some grabby snow because the corn hasn't arrived has got to be the worst possible testing scenario for this woman. And of course I'm always buying these skis in the spring, my LEAST FAVORITE part of the season. I swear it exists so that I don't care that the place is closing.
 

Sibhusky

Whitefish, MT
Skier
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Posts
4,806
Location
Whitefish, MT
Follow up. Did not get on these skis this year until now (late February). Kept using the Rictors because I trusted them utterly and my skiing skillz this year have been lagging due to fitness issues. But had an excellent day with them yesterday. They are seriously more tenacious on steep hardpack than the Rictors but reconfirming my impression last year they want you to be in charge. The reward comes when you are not feeling tentative. I cannot imagine me ever using these skis in trees or moguls. They are skis for groomers and maybe days where there's some snow or chop on a consistent surface but not for conditions where grip is low on your consideration list relative to maneuverability. I'm really not sure why they widened the ski except that the wider shovel helped in spring slop.
 

eok

Slopefossil
Skier
Joined
Nov 18, 2015
Posts
856
Location
PNW
My follow-up. I ended up choosing the Nordica Navigator 90 (179) to fill the slot my K2 Rictor 82xti (170) occupied. The result: great choice.

The 'Nav '90s just seem to me to be a great progression from the Rictors, in every way. The 'Nav 90s are a great versatile-yet-forgiving frontside ski with lots of performance. Glad I snagged 'em!
 

Sibhusky

Whitefish, MT
Skier
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Posts
4,806
Location
Whitefish, MT
Further follow-up on the iKonics 84ti. They barely got any use the past two seasons due to my fitness issues. (Remember I said they like aggressiveness.) However, this year I'm doing far better and have started taking them out more often. They aren't the best when I'm feeling timid due to fog, and we've had a lot of fog this year. But they are delivering now when I can see what's what. We've got an odd mix of nice, substantial, snow over lurking hardpack and these skis apparently like those conditions a lot. I may finally retire the Rictors (293 days) except for early season.
 

Sponsor

Top