Would love your help with a ski recco: all-mountain/narrow

[DavidA]

Hi all--

Would love your help with a ski recommendation--

I am 5'8"/165 lbs..I am an 8+/or 9, mind-50's, I can ski everything on the mountain, in control and with strong technique. I am a finesse skier--I do not ski at blistering speeds. I ski every where on the mountain--bumps, trees, steeps. Of course I ski groomers--but only as means of getting from one place to another.

I have a pair of Black Crows Orbs--which is 91mm with some early rise--i love it--playful and lively.

I am looking for a narrower ski (84 or less) fast turning--ski that is comfortable is bumps and high trees. I understand or believe that many of the narrower skis are more carving oriented, a little too stout for bumps, and not so great at varying turn shapes.

So--I am looking for a short turn oriented--ski--that is energetic, lively, good in bumps/tight trees--can be taken all over the mountain..

Thank you for your input--

David

 

[Philpug]

Hey Dave.

On the narrower end, the Blizzard Latigo, at 78mm underfoot it will do what you want it to. If price is not object, the Renoun Z77, that will handle the chore too. The one system ski I like Atomic Vantage X 83 CTI, it can handle everything and the binding is a very good Warden Demo.

 

[Sierrajim]

Many if not most of the narrower AM skis are lowe end price point stuff and not ideal for your level of ski. Here are three that might fit the bill.

• K2 iKonic 85 TR-15/170
• Fischer Mt Pro 80Ti TR-16/173
• Nordica Nrgy 85 TR-17/169

None of these are ice picks but it doesn't sound like you need that. If you do need that, there are myriads of carvers in the 70-80mm range that will give great grip and a TR in the 12-15m range. However, they will not be all that great in bumps/tight trees.

 

[Philpug]

I forgot about the NRGy85, while the TR is longer it can easily be worked into a shorter turn plus it is a hoot in the bumps

 

[DavidA]

Thank you guys!

Would you include the Rally or Titan in this group or the MX 84?

SJ--you've identified my key problem--plenty of ice picks--but they're not really good all over the mountain. Today--I see many of the top skiers on the mountain--ski school directors, top pros--who rip the entire mountain--on narrower skis--

 

[Josh Matta]

low 180ish masters GS skis.....

 

[Josh Matta]

Thank you guys!

Would you include the Rally or Titan in this group or the MX 84?

SJ--you've identified my key problem--plenty of ice picks--but they're not really good all over the mountain. Today--I see many of the top skiers on the mountain--ski school directors, top pros--who rip the entire mountain--on narrower skis--

to be fair while there is some truth that a great skis can go almost anywhere on anything, I love to out gnar the skinny ski guys in the woods.

But like I said the vast majority of PSIA examiners are using masters GS skis as their technical skis, and have just spent a couple morning on mine. I totally get it. Better than any carver I have ever owned and anything IMO.

 

[KevinF]

I live in New England where we have our share of firm condition days. I like the Head Rally - it's a fun carver, different turn shapes, nice pop out of turns, decent bump ski (much better then most "narrow" skis). I'd hate it in trees, but my tree skiing is - to put it charitably - a work in progress.

I like to think of myself as being more finesse then power. 6'2", 175 pounds. I'm kind of between lengths, but I like the 170cm length for its playfulness.

 

[Read Blinn]

M. If I were you, I'd pick up an FX84 — reasonable cost (now), good tree ski, not an insistent carver (but happy to do the deed), entirely smooth and predictable, a great all-mountain ski (that Josh doesn't much care for ).

 

[Josh Matta]

M. If I were you, I'd pick up an FX84 — reasonable cost (now), good tree ski, not an insistent carver (but happy to do the deed), entirely smooth and predictable, a great all-mountain ski (that Josh doesn't much care for ).

all the skis straightness should be underfoot, not in the tip

 

[Read Blinn]

all the skis straightness should be underfoot, not in the tip

That's what makes it a not-too carver.

 

[Erik Timmerman]

The narrowest ski that I can think of that I'd enjoy skiing in the woods is the Volk RTM84. Maybe the 81 is good too, but I've never tried it.

 

[James]

If you're going Kastle I'd say skip the FX84 and go for the 85. Probably non hp since you're a finesse skier and not that heavy. To me there's nothing special about that 2nd gen Fx84.

But "fast turning" FX85? not really. Quick enough edge to edge though. Very neutral ski, does what you want. Great in bumps, prob decent for trees.

Not sure why you'd want fast turning, lots of sidecut, for bumps and trees. What do you mean by this?

 

[DavidA]

Hey James--thanks for asking that good question--

So I clearly understand that in bumps I'm trying to use only as much edge as necessary (or none at all) and ski on as flat a ski as possible; notwithstanding--won't a narrower ski--still come around faster as you're tipping your downhill ski into the back side or down the bump--versus a 90+ ski--

Does narrower have to mean much more side cut, by definition, isn't there a narrower ski that is more agile--but can also vary turn shapes.?

Maybe that is the Latigo?

 

[Josh Matta]

yeah again Master GS skis....

70mm underfoot 20 ish sidecut....

no reason to not own one.

 

[Lorenzzo]

I was on my Stockli AX in the current storm and it's a terrific soft snow, 3D ski while also able to carve really well. They're 78 at the waste 123 at the tip and a 17.5 radius but very accommodating to whatever.

 

[Read Blinn]

If you're going Kastle I'd say skip the FX84 and go for the 85.

M-a-aybe.

Where are you skiing, @DavidA? East Coast, you'll want the HP — I hated the 85 non-metal version on ice. If West, the non-HP 85 is as good as anything. I liked the HP quite a bit, but I was just as happy, maybe happier, putting my 84s back on.

 

[Erik Timmerman]

yeah again Master GS skis....

70mm underfoot 20 ish sidecut....

no reason to not own one.

You are kidding, right? He says he wants to ski bumps and trees and only ski groomers if they can't be avoided. Also, short turn oriented, that does not sound like a GS ski to me.

 

[Josh Matta]

not really...

he already has a 91 underfoot ski...

a 85 underfoot foot skis is barely any difference at all.

 

[Philpug]

not really...

he already has a 91 underfoot ski...

a 85 underfoot foot skis is barely any difference at all.

Yes, the 85 to 91 is not much different but the skis suggest perform dramatically different for what he wants to use them for.