This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Afternoon all.
I'm looking to upgrade my skis and am after some advice. The budget only stretches to one pair so I am looking for something that will be good for off piste and touring but also have reasonable performance on piste.
I am 183cm tall, weigh 78kg, advanced intermediate skier. Time is usually spent about 50/50 on piste and off piste in resort. I am also planning to use for some touring too (got a trip to Lyngen coming up in April and like to do the odd day tour).
I've been looking for skis that are between 90-100mm underfoot (probably closer to 100) to get the balance between enough float but something that can still carve reasonably, and also not too heavy for touring. Some rocker but not too much. The plan is to mount fritschi freeride bindings from my current skis, with a view to upgrading to the fritschi tecton when this comes out next season.
I'm currently looking at the Dynastar Cham 97 and Fischer Ranger 98 as these seem to be the best suited to my needs and have good reviews. Have also looked at Volka Mantras and Atomic Vantage 100 but these are both a little bit heavier so would be harder work on the up. Does anyone have experience of these skis or any others that might do the job?
Thanks in advance.
I'm looking to upgrade my skis and am after some advice. The budget only stretches to one pair so I am looking for something that will be good for off piste and touring but also have reasonable performance on piste.
I am 183cm tall, weigh 78kg, advanced intermediate skier. Time is usually spent about 50/50 on piste and off piste in resort. I am also planning to use for some touring too (got a trip to Lyngen coming up in April and like to do the odd day tour).
I've been looking for skis that are between 90-100mm underfoot (probably closer to 100) to get the balance between enough float but something that can still carve reasonably, and also not too heavy for touring. Some rocker but not too much. The plan is to mount fritschi freeride bindings from my current skis, with a view to upgrading to the fritschi tecton when this comes out next season.
I'm currently looking at the Dynastar Cham 97 and Fischer Ranger 98 as these seem to be the best suited to my needs and have good reviews. Have also looked at Volka Mantras and Atomic Vantage 100 but these are both a little bit heavier so would be harder work on the up. Does anyone have experience of these skis or any others that might do the job?
Thanks in advance.
1
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
I've used the Cham 97 for piste, off piste and a bit of touring (max 3 hours per day). It's a very good all round ski from hard or even icy piste to variable off piste. It's obviously heavy compared to a touring ski so there's no way I'd use it for a real touring trip but for a few hundred feet here and there it's OK. (used Look XM touring binding)
I've used the Cham 97 for piste, off piste and a bit of touring (max 3 hours per day). It's a very good all round ski from hard or even icy piste to variable off piste. It's obviously heavy compared to a touring ski so there's no way I'd use it for a real touring trip but for a few hundred feet here and there it's OK. (used Look XM touring binding)
In reply to Postmanpat:
Hmmm. I was about to reply about what an excellent choice the Cham 97 would be! When it originally appeared there were two versions; the Cham 97 and the Cham 97 HM which was considerably lighter and aimed at touring. I'm used to the HMs and remember nearly dropping a pair of the normal ones when handed them - even with Dynafits on. They now seem to have rolled them into one version but it's only a couple of hundred grammes heavier than the original HM, from memory.
So, in reply to the OP, I'd still have the Dynastars on my list but maybe check on Postmanpat's point and compare the weights before writing them off as too heavy for touring.
Hmmm. I was about to reply about what an excellent choice the Cham 97 would be! When it originally appeared there were two versions; the Cham 97 and the Cham 97 HM which was considerably lighter and aimed at touring. I'm used to the HMs and remember nearly dropping a pair of the normal ones when handed them - even with Dynafits on. They now seem to have rolled them into one version but it's only a couple of hundred grammes heavier than the original HM, from memory.
So, in reply to the OP, I'd still have the Dynastars on my list but maybe check on Postmanpat's point and compare the weights before writing them off as too heavy for touring.
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
Good choice! All those skis would do the job admirably.
Also consider:
Black Crows Chamox
Zag Ubac
Avoid:
Fischer Hannibal's
Remember although you may weigh 78 Kg, you will be carrying quite a few extra kgs of kit therefor a more robust ski will get you through the crap
Good choice! All those skis would do the job admirably.
Also consider:
Black Crows Chamox
Zag Ubac
Avoid:
Fischer Hannibal's
Remember although you may weigh 78 Kg, you will be carrying quite a few extra kgs of kit therefor a more robust ski will get you through the crap
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
I have a 1 ski set up. Rossi Soul 7s (original in 180, should have gone 188) and Marker F12. Has been used for family piste holidays, off piste and day touring. Would happy use it for multi day tours despite obviously being heavier than a dedicated touring rig.
Soul 7s
Piste - Obvious limitations as they are wife but side cut allows them to actually be quite fun carvers, though getting over the top edge can be a challenge. Very icy posted or high speeds obviously emphasises their lack of stiffness but they are capabale enough
Off-piste - Total playful joy in powder though again, at high speeds they start to suffer. For up to medium speeds, playful skiing and trees they are ace. Light tip and tail, easy to initiate turn but will hook up if careless in less than ideal snow. Not sastrugi charger but not really a priority.
Touring - perfectly fine. Obviously they struggle on a steep icy skin track but good technique overcome some of this. A minimal side cut ski would obviously be better but would make it less of an all rounder. Thoroughly enjoyable in descent but funky snow makes you work harder than a slugger ski would, better than a floppy skinny touring ski though obviously.
Marker F12 - picked over the Fritschis as they ski far better (none of the slop) and skill tour well. Picked over Dynafit as chasing kids around a resort and having to get in and out of them a lot I couldn't face the Dynafiddles again.
Basically, I'm really happy with my set up. A bit jack if all trades master of mine but allows me to just take one set on holiday and I can do what I want depending on conditions.
(For info, paired with Scarpa Freedom SL boots)
I have a 1 ski set up. Rossi Soul 7s (original in 180, should have gone 188) and Marker F12. Has been used for family piste holidays, off piste and day touring. Would happy use it for multi day tours despite obviously being heavier than a dedicated touring rig.
Soul 7s
Piste - Obvious limitations as they are wife but side cut allows them to actually be quite fun carvers, though getting over the top edge can be a challenge. Very icy posted or high speeds obviously emphasises their lack of stiffness but they are capabale enough
Off-piste - Total playful joy in powder though again, at high speeds they start to suffer. For up to medium speeds, playful skiing and trees they are ace. Light tip and tail, easy to initiate turn but will hook up if careless in less than ideal snow. Not sastrugi charger but not really a priority.
Touring - perfectly fine. Obviously they struggle on a steep icy skin track but good technique overcome some of this. A minimal side cut ski would obviously be better but would make it less of an all rounder. Thoroughly enjoyable in descent but funky snow makes you work harder than a slugger ski would, better than a floppy skinny touring ski though obviously.
Marker F12 - picked over the Fritschis as they ski far better (none of the slop) and skill tour well. Picked over Dynafit as chasing kids around a resort and having to get in and out of them a lot I couldn't face the Dynafiddles again.
Basically, I'm really happy with my set up. A bit jack if all trades master of mine but allows me to just take one set on holiday and I can do what I want depending on conditions.
(For info, paired with Scarpa Freedom SL boots)
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
Were I on the market, I'd get the Black Crows Corvus Freebird, in 18something as I'm small, old and all that.
Stiff enough the handle hardback conditions and speed. Wide enough to float in the lightest Utah blower (with enough speed ). And light enough for actual touring.
Remember, unless over 50% of your skiing is solely earned you should prioritize on other aspects. Sure, the misery stix'es are fun going up... but when you'd wish to clock big turns on a big open field in crud... well the misery stix is just that.
Were I on the market, I'd get the Black Crows Corvus Freebird, in 18something as I'm small, old and all that.
Stiff enough the handle hardback conditions and speed. Wide enough to float in the lightest Utah blower (with enough speed ). And light enough for actual touring.
Remember, unless over 50% of your skiing is solely earned you should prioritize on other aspects. Sure, the misery stix'es are fun going up... but when you'd wish to clock big turns on a big open field in crud... well the misery stix is just that.
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
I've got Atomic Vantage 95s and really like them. I haven't toured on them but I would for tours where I was prioritising the downs i.e. not massive ups. They're relatively light for a ski of that sort I think.
I've got Atomic Vantage 95s and really like them. I haven't toured on them but I would for tours where I was prioritising the downs i.e. not massive ups. They're relatively light for a ski of that sort I think.
In reply to AdrianC / edwardsbbrown / Postmanpat :
I primarily ski tour / ski mountaineer, with a minimum of piste days. I have two pairs in my quiver - Movement Response X (super-light touring ski) with Dynafit Radical ST bindings, and Dynastar Cham 2.0 107mm with Radical ST 2 bindings. While the Movement setup is the lightest by some margin, I hardly ever use them now - only when the Chams are out of action for whatever reason. For the fun of the downhill, it's worth taking a little bit of a hit for some extra weight, and I just love the 107s. They are not super-heavy by a long stretch (and hey, you just get used to it i.e. fitter and stronger, for touring) and are just so much fun to ski. I'll buy another pair when these ones are too rock-scarred to continue (I'm verging on 'the philosopher's bases' at the moment).
The Cham 2.0 97mm also gets spoken of very highly. If you want a similar-shaped ski, but in a lighter still frame, look at the Dynastar Mythic. Friends who have those love them, and say they are broadly similar in feel to the Cham, just with the usual downsides that lightweight skis have in variable snow.
I primarily ski tour / ski mountaineer, with a minimum of piste days. I have two pairs in my quiver - Movement Response X (super-light touring ski) with Dynafit Radical ST bindings, and Dynastar Cham 2.0 107mm with Radical ST 2 bindings. While the Movement setup is the lightest by some margin, I hardly ever use them now - only when the Chams are out of action for whatever reason. For the fun of the downhill, it's worth taking a little bit of a hit for some extra weight, and I just love the 107s. They are not super-heavy by a long stretch (and hey, you just get used to it i.e. fitter and stronger, for touring) and are just so much fun to ski. I'll buy another pair when these ones are too rock-scarred to continue (I'm verging on 'the philosopher's bases' at the moment).
The Cham 2.0 97mm also gets spoken of very highly. If you want a similar-shaped ski, but in a lighter still frame, look at the Dynastar Mythic. Friends who have those love them, and say they are broadly similar in feel to the Cham, just with the usual downsides that lightweight skis have in variable snow.
Post edited at 22:03
1
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
My set up and cant find any issues other than weight!
Super bomber tourer and unreal performance on piste and even in the park is -
Line Sir Francis Bacon
Salomon guardian binding
Salomon quest touring boots
BD skins
BD expedition iii poles
As i say - bomber!!
Cheers
My set up and cant find any issues other than weight!
Super bomber tourer and unreal performance on piste and even in the park is -
Line Sir Francis Bacon
Salomon guardian binding
Salomon quest touring boots
BD skins
BD expedition iii poles
As i say - bomber!!
Cheers
In reply to James Jackson:
I would agree with that. I borrowed a pair of Movement skis for a day tour last month, and while they were very light I thought some of that advantage was negated in the uphills by the effort needed to push the wide profile through the snow. They were juddery pushing through new powder onto a harder base, and they had no 'bounce'. It was a relief to get my own Dynastars back the next day.
I would agree with that. I borrowed a pair of Movement skis for a day tour last month, and while they were very light I thought some of that advantage was negated in the uphills by the effort needed to push the wide profile through the snow. They were juddery pushing through new powder onto a harder base, and they had no 'bounce'. It was a relief to get my own Dynastars back the next day.
In reply to John2:
^^^
Soft skis are really nice in say blower pow and tight trees...
Not so much, if it is even slightly cruddy, hard or you want to amp up on the speed.
Same goes with turn radii. Too tight (sub 20m, although I prefer in the high 20s personally) and the ski will feel twitchy, plus you can always make the ski turn quicker than the turn radii but applying force to flex them (either brute force, speed or both).
Small turn radii soft skis are nice, if you prefer guido-turns:
http://offpistemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/tracks729.jpg
And stiffer, longer turn radii skis are nice for real turns:
http://www.peteoswald.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/P8200110.jpg
^^^
Soft skis are really nice in say blower pow and tight trees...
Not so much, if it is even slightly cruddy, hard or you want to amp up on the speed.
Same goes with turn radii. Too tight (sub 20m, although I prefer in the high 20s personally) and the ski will feel twitchy, plus you can always make the ski turn quicker than the turn radii but applying force to flex them (either brute force, speed or both).
Small turn radii soft skis are nice, if you prefer guido-turns:
http://offpistemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/tracks729.jpg
And stiffer, longer turn radii skis are nice for real turns:
http://www.peteoswald.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/P8200110.jpg
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
I have Mantras, very good ski...I do tour with them, but they are on the heavy side for that, but I keep fit, and have used them on 4000m peaks.
I am not keen on lightweight skis and technical bindings, but that's personal preference...they are generally rubbish on icy/hard snow, and a pain in the arse generally....
I have Mantras, very good ski...I do tour with them, but they are on the heavy side for that, but I keep fit, and have used them on 4000m peaks.
I am not keen on lightweight skis and technical bindings, but that's personal preference...they are generally rubbish on icy/hard snow, and a pain in the arse generally....
Post edited at 09:08
In reply to AdrianC:
.
Just to clarify, for up to about 1000m of uphill a day the Cham 97s are probably OK if you're fit, and they cover all the bases for the downhill stuff. It's a personal choice but if I were doing any more uphill than that I'd feel the need to to save energy y by converting to a lightweight touring ski. But I'm getting old!
.
> So, in reply to the OP, I'd still have the Dynastars on my list but maybe check on Postmanpat's point and compare the weights before writing them off as too heavy for touring.
>Just to clarify, for up to about 1000m of uphill a day the Cham 97s are probably OK if you're fit, and they cover all the bases for the downhill stuff. It's a personal choice but if I were doing any more uphill than that I'd feel the need to to save energy y by converting to a lightweight touring ski. But I'm getting old!
In reply to HeMa:
This also comes down to one's own personal skiing style, and the kind of things one skis. I tend to seek out couloirs etc, where a twitchy ski can be rather handy. The Chams have an 18m radius, so it's no GS ski, but they do enjoy charging too. The thing I really like is how easy it is to slarve them around in tight terrain, yet engage the edge when I need it.
With the Movements, they have the best edge hold of any ski I've been on, but as mentioned above do lack the 'bounce' and cutting ability of a heavier ski. That said, if I am on piste I tend to take them over the Chams as they ski a lot more like a traditional ski edge-to-edge and can go very fast...
> Same goes with turn radii. Too tight (sub 20m, although I prefer in the high 20s personally) and the ski will feel twitchy, plus you can always make the ski turn quicker than the turn radii but applying force to flex them (either brute force, speed or both).
This also comes down to one's own personal skiing style, and the kind of things one skis. I tend to seek out couloirs etc, where a twitchy ski can be rather handy. The Chams have an 18m radius, so it's no GS ski, but they do enjoy charging too. The thing I really like is how easy it is to slarve them around in tight terrain, yet engage the edge when I need it.
With the Movements, they have the best edge hold of any ski I've been on, but as mentioned above do lack the 'bounce' and cutting ability of a heavier ski. That said, if I am on piste I tend to take them over the Chams as they ski a lot more like a traditional ski edge-to-edge and can go very fast...
In reply to Postmanpat:
I've done 1500 to 2500m days with heavier skis than Cham 97s... And I'm far from being fit, nor young.
> Just to clarify, for up to about 1000m of uphill a day the Cham 97s are probably OK if you're fit, and they cover all the bases for the downhill stuff. It's a personal choice but if I were doing any more uphill than that I'd feel the need to to save energy y by converting to a lightweight touring ski. But I'm getting old!
I've done 1500 to 2500m days with heavier skis than Cham 97s... And I'm far from being fit, nor young.
In reply to HeMa:
You may just be better at it than me!!
> I've done 1500 to 2500m days with heavier skis than Cham 97s... And I'm far from being fit, nor young.
You may just be better at it than me!!
In reply to Postmanpat:
Or I cheat and do them tours in Norway... so start from sealevel.
The few 1500m days I've done in Cham without really acclimatizing nearly killed me. Not to mention riding the last tram up Argentiere and then going at Mach Looney non stop all the way down. Bad snow cover on the lower portion made things really interesting, as did doing tele turns the whole way...
Or I cheat and do them tours in Norway... so start from sealevel.
The few 1500m days I've done in Cham without really acclimatizing nearly killed me. Not to mention riding the last tram up Argentiere and then going at Mach Looney non stop all the way down. Bad snow cover on the lower portion made things really interesting, as did doing tele turns the whole way...
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
Ski section of this http://www.alpine-guides.com/ski/insider-knowledge-ski/ski-touring-equipmen... (bottom of page) worth a read if not already seen.
Ski section of this http://www.alpine-guides.com/ski/insider-knowledge-ski/ski-touring-equipmen... (bottom of page) worth a read if not already seen.
In reply to vscott:
One word of warning if thinking about the Mythics.. (someone further up the thread mentioned them). A mate is on his second pair in 2 seasons . The first pair went back after 3-4 weeks skiing after they seemed to loose what camber (and pop) they had. Seemed there was a bad batch and Dynastar took it on the chin. Second pair (this years' model) have gone exactly the same way in less time. So those will doubtless also be going back to Dynastar via BackcountryUK.
I'm sure they're lovely skis (in fact he still really likes them, even with them going flat), but I don't think I could personally handle the hassle. I've not heard of any similar issues with the Chams or the cheaper Mythics so it may just be limited to the full carbon version of the Mythics.
One word of warning if thinking about the Mythics.. (someone further up the thread mentioned them). A mate is on his second pair in 2 seasons . The first pair went back after 3-4 weeks skiing after they seemed to loose what camber (and pop) they had. Seemed there was a bad batch and Dynastar took it on the chin. Second pair (this years' model) have gone exactly the same way in less time. So those will doubtless also be going back to Dynastar via BackcountryUK.
I'm sure they're lovely skis (in fact he still really likes them, even with them going flat), but I don't think I could personally handle the hassle. I've not heard of any similar issues with the Chams or the cheaper Mythics so it may just be limited to the full carbon version of the Mythics.
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
Cham 97s are very popular but they didn't click with me as I don't enjoy tip rockers. I've just got Whitedot R 98s which seem a great all rounder to me. I've only had one day on them so far. Although 20m radius a slight camber and flexible enough to carve and be very nimble on piste. Ok in the crud but not heavy and stiff enough to really blast through it (my WD Preachers are better for that but can be harder work on piste and not great tourers). Check out the reviews on th R.98s and see what you think
Cham 97s are very popular but they didn't click with me as I don't enjoy tip rockers. I've just got Whitedot R 98s which seem a great all rounder to me. I've only had one day on them so far. Although 20m radius a slight camber and flexible enough to carve and be very nimble on piste. Ok in the crud but not heavy and stiff enough to really blast through it (my WD Preachers are better for that but can be harder work on piste and not great tourers). Check out the reviews on th R.98s and see what you think
In reply to kevin stephens:
You see a lot of Whitedot skis around the Scottish hills so they are definitely a popular choice.
You see a lot of Whitedot skis around the Scottish hills so they are definitely a popular choice.
In reply to James Jackson:
Mainly 'cause they're a british brand...
Same reason black crows and dynastars are popular in Cham...
Mainly 'cause they're a british brand...
Same reason black crows and dynastars are popular in Cham...
1
In reply to James Jackson:
Get R98s. They're great. Try and get a deal on some Carbonlites. If I had to choose one ski I'd keep those. The bases look cool when you go fast: https://www.instagram.com/p/BD2RulaF1oD/
Get R98s. They're great. Try and get a deal on some Carbonlites. If I had to choose one ski I'd keep those. The bases look cool when you go fast: https://www.instagram.com/p/BD2RulaF1oD/
In reply to HeMa:
I hear ya'. I buck the trend by rocking the Chamonix skis in Scotland!
> Mainly 'cause they're a british brand...Same reason black crows and dynastars are popular in Cham...
I hear ya'. I buck the trend by rocking the Chamonix skis in Scotland!
iIn reply to edwardsbbrown:
I've spent the last 3 years on DPS Wailer 112s (the carbon version) with Dynafit Beasts. I don't ski much resort stuff other than to get to lift served off-piste and to gain height for tours. If I was doing it again, I'd probably do the Wailer 99s with a lighter binding (Radical etc). My 112s have done several weeks in Whistler and Engelberg as well as a 3 week ski touring expedition to Greenland, plus a few odd trips to resorts and I love skiing on them, they totally changed my skiing (for the better) and I'd buy another pain tomorrow.
I've spent the last 3 years on DPS Wailer 112s (the carbon version) with Dynafit Beasts. I don't ski much resort stuff other than to get to lift served off-piste and to gain height for tours. If I was doing it again, I'd probably do the Wailer 99s with a lighter binding (Radical etc). My 112s have done several weeks in Whistler and Engelberg as well as a 3 week ski touring expedition to Greenland, plus a few odd trips to resorts and I love skiing on them, they totally changed my skiing (for the better) and I'd buy another pain tomorrow.
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
You could consider either the Dynafit Dhaulagiri or Meteorite. Both have solid downhill performance and the Dhaulagiri particularly is crazy light. The salomon QST 99 could be a good option as well. It carved amazingly for a wider ski and the tip/tail rocker gives nice float in powder.
You could consider either the Dynafit Dhaulagiri or Meteorite. Both have solid downhill performance and the Dhaulagiri particularly is crazy light. The salomon QST 99 could be a good option as well. It carved amazingly for a wider ski and the tip/tail rocker gives nice float in powder.
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
+1 for the whitedot R98 carbonlites.
They are a great all-round freeride, touring & ski mountaineering ski.
The carbon construction keeps the swing weight really low so they can be thrown around effortlessly and are nice & light for the uphills. The tip rocker makes light work of variable snow, crud & windslab as well as ensuring that the tip will never dive. The stiffness in the mid section & high torsional stiffness gives great hard snow edge hold for a ski of this width whilst the tail shape can either lock in to the turn or smear as required. And their longish radius gives excellent stability on drops & high speed run outs. Plus they suit equally well alpine, touring or telemark bindings
+1 for the whitedot R98 carbonlites.
They are a great all-round freeride, touring & ski mountaineering ski.
The carbon construction keeps the swing weight really low so they can be thrown around effortlessly and are nice & light for the uphills. The tip rocker makes light work of variable snow, crud & windslab as well as ensuring that the tip will never dive. The stiffness in the mid section & high torsional stiffness gives great hard snow edge hold for a ski of this width whilst the tail shape can either lock in to the turn or smear as required. And their longish radius gives excellent stability on drops & high speed run outs. Plus they suit equally well alpine, touring or telemark bindings
1
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
I've had a pair of Trab Ripido's which have been excellent for touring and piste, what is of course important is that you can get them at Ski Bartlett on sale for £203 - bargain !
I've had a pair of Trab Ripido's which have been excellent for touring and piste, what is of course important is that you can get them at Ski Bartlett on sale for £203 - bargain !
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
Cham 97 2.0 fantastic skis on and off piste and not too heavy for touring
Cham 97 2.0 fantastic skis on and off piste and not too heavy for touring
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
I tested the Cham 97 recently and was quite impressed by weight and performance both on and off piste in a range of snow. The guy in the shop said people love them or hate them but that few had a middling opinion.
I also had a go on Black Crows Camox Freebirds.... They were solid and predictable but definitely on the stiff side. Good in crud but I actually preferred the Salomon QST 99.... Great on piste with a bit more of a softer float off piste.
I would be keen to hear opinions on the Blizzard Zero G 95. Another fantastically light offering which sounds like it is stiff and avoids chatter.
I tested the Cham 97 recently and was quite impressed by weight and performance both on and off piste in a range of snow. The guy in the shop said people love them or hate them but that few had a middling opinion.
I also had a go on Black Crows Camox Freebirds.... They were solid and predictable but definitely on the stiff side. Good in crud but I actually preferred the Salomon QST 99.... Great on piste with a bit more of a softer float off piste.
I would be keen to hear opinions on the Blizzard Zero G 95. Another fantastically light offering which sounds like it is stiff and avoids chatter.
Post edited at 18:23
In reply to Kimberley:
Ripidos are great skis but very different from the kind of thing the OP is talking about.
> I've had a pair of Trab Ripido's which have been excellent for touring and piste, what is of course important is that you can get them at Ski Bartlett on sale for £203 - bargain !
Ripidos are great skis but very different from the kind of thing the OP is talking about.
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
I've got the Zero G 85, and demoed the 95s: surprisingly good for such a light ski, but they still clatter on crud etc, they just won't have the weight to bust through much. They're also a little bit hooky on turns releasing the tail, but this may be because the tail has no rocker, which I like for touring.
Even the 85s ski pretty good in powder, and I've really enjoyed getting used to a narrower ski than the 100-110 I've generally been skiing before.
And the weight, particularly with a Kreuzspitze GT binding, is amazing.
My skiing profile is very different to the OP though, probably 80% backcountry, and I would t recommend the Zero G for their requirements.
I've got the Zero G 85, and demoed the 95s: surprisingly good for such a light ski, but they still clatter on crud etc, they just won't have the weight to bust through much. They're also a little bit hooky on turns releasing the tail, but this may be because the tail has no rocker, which I like for touring.
Even the 85s ski pretty good in powder, and I've really enjoyed getting used to a narrower ski than the 100-110 I've generally been skiing before.
And the weight, particularly with a Kreuzspitze GT binding, is amazing.
My skiing profile is very different to the OP though, probably 80% backcountry, and I would t recommend the Zero G for their requirements.
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
Hi all, thanks for all the advice, great range of opinions there.
As I said in the original post, this ski will be used for resort skiing probably more than touring so I am after something that will ski well on and off the piste and accept that this means a slightly heavier ski than a dedicated touring ski. From what I understand, 1600-1800g seems a good compromise.
Currently the Cham seems like the best option, partly as it available pretty cheaply. The whitest r98 looks great but is a lot more pricey. Does anyone have experience of the scott super guide? Has been recommended to me on another forum. Seems to be a bit lighter than the cham but with similar dimensions.
The other consideration is ski length. The cham for example comes in 178s and 184s. I am 183cm and 78kg. I am currently skiing on 176 scott neos and wonder if I might find the 184 unwieldy, particularly for kick turns and moguls. Any thoughts?
Thanks for the advice, much appreciated.
Hi all, thanks for all the advice, great range of opinions there.
As I said in the original post, this ski will be used for resort skiing probably more than touring so I am after something that will ski well on and off the piste and accept that this means a slightly heavier ski than a dedicated touring ski. From what I understand, 1600-1800g seems a good compromise.
Currently the Cham seems like the best option, partly as it available pretty cheaply. The whitest r98 looks great but is a lot more pricey. Does anyone have experience of the scott super guide? Has been recommended to me on another forum. Seems to be a bit lighter than the cham but with similar dimensions.
The other consideration is ski length. The cham for example comes in 178s and 184s. I am 183cm and 78kg. I am currently skiing on 176 scott neos and wonder if I might find the 184 unwieldy, particularly for kick turns and moguls. Any thoughts?
Thanks for the advice, much appreciated.
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
Hannibals are made of balsa wood and glue. I had a pair of Hannibals this time last year and managed to delaminate them less than a week. Fischer held their hands up and admitted fault. Ekosport the seller were not so quick in processing the refund. Never ever again.
Now riding on Zag Rocks 184 cm. Solid for a big fella.
> What are your objections to the Hannibals? Seem to get good reviews.
Hannibals are made of balsa wood and glue. I had a pair of Hannibals this time last year and managed to delaminate them less than a week. Fischer held their hands up and admitted fault. Ekosport the seller were not so quick in processing the refund. Never ever again.
Now riding on Zag Rocks 184 cm. Solid for a big fella.
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
They ski shorter than their given length due to the size of the rocker. They are also super-manoeuvrable so don't feel as long as they could. I'm 190cm tall and ski the 189cm Chams, and they are spot on.
I reminded myself how much fun they are by having a good charge around Glenshee yesterday - brings a grin to my face!
> I am currently skiing on 176 scott neos and wonder if I might find the 184 unwieldy, particularly for kick turns and moguls. Any thoughts?Thanks for the advice, much appreciated.
They ski shorter than their given length due to the size of the rocker. They are also super-manoeuvrable so don't feel as long as they could. I'm 190cm tall and ski the 189cm Chams, and they are spot on.
I reminded myself how much fun they are by having a good charge around Glenshee yesterday - brings a grin to my face!
Post edited at 19:53
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
You reckon? Sure you're not thinking about the old ones (which did have horrible, horrible graphics!). I think these look OK:
http://www.dynastar.com/en-gb/product/cham-20-97
You reckon? Sure you're not thinking about the old ones (which did have horrible, horrible graphics!). I think these look OK:
http://www.dynastar.com/en-gb/product/cham-20-97
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
Short skis suck, and long skis truck...
189 or what ever is the correct length for ya.
I'm small (70kg and 174), and my small skis are 180s. Liftserved, I'll be generally rockin' high 180s to mid 195cm.
> The other consideration is ski length.
Short skis suck, and long skis truck...
> The cham for example comes in 178s and 184s. I am 183cm and 78kg.
189 or what ever is the correct length for ya.
I'm small (70kg and 174), and my small skis are 180s. Liftserved, I'll be generally rockin' high 180s to mid 195cm.
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
My boyfriend has the Scott Superguides (95) and thinks they are great. They seem to ski very well for a light ski but given that touring isn't your main focus then you are probably better off with something a bit heavier. I tried out the Whitedot R98 and they were great, there were some good deals on the website for previous years' graphics. The R98 used to be called something else (maybe Ranger) and they had to change it due to a copyright issue so they sold off the old stock. You might be lucky and pick up a bargain but I haven't looked since the end of last year.
Neither of us like the Cham 97's. They seem to chatter a lot on the hard pack due to the massive rocker at the front and they ski pretty short. My main issue is that 166 is too small and 172 a bit long.
I'd go for something around 3kg or slightly over for the pair if you want to ski mainly in resort - too light and they aren't fun to ski. Definitely aim for something in the 95-105 range for what you want, fun in powder and off piste, OK on piste and manageable for touring. Good reviews on the skiclubuk site of various options.
My boyfriend has the Scott Superguides (95) and thinks they are great. They seem to ski very well for a light ski but given that touring isn't your main focus then you are probably better off with something a bit heavier. I tried out the Whitedot R98 and they were great, there were some good deals on the website for previous years' graphics. The R98 used to be called something else (maybe Ranger) and they had to change it due to a copyright issue so they sold off the old stock. You might be lucky and pick up a bargain but I haven't looked since the end of last year.
Neither of us like the Cham 97's. They seem to chatter a lot on the hard pack due to the massive rocker at the front and they ski pretty short. My main issue is that 166 is too small and 172 a bit long.
I'd go for something around 3kg or slightly over for the pair if you want to ski mainly in resort - too light and they aren't fun to ski. Definitely aim for something in the 95-105 range for what you want, fun in powder and off piste, OK on piste and manageable for touring. Good reviews on the skiclubuk site of various options.
In reply to spragglerock
I get put off the Scotts with the holes in the tip which makes me think they must be flimsy.
Post edited at 16:45
In reply to spragglerocks:
I have some of these for touring; I used them on-piste in hard icy conditions at Grand Montets at New Year, they were absolutely great.
A quite light & stiff ski that skis shorter than the nominal length.
Last year's model is going for £250pr or so at the moment.
I'd be happy to use them as my only skis
> My boyfriend has the Scott Superguides (95) and thinks they are great.
I have some of these for touring; I used them on-piste in hard icy conditions at Grand Montets at New Year, they were absolutely great.
A quite light & stiff ski that skis shorter than the nominal length.
Last year's model is going for £250pr or so at the moment.
I'd be happy to use them as my only skis
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
You must be colour blind ! And they show up really well if you were to lose one
You must be colour blind ! And they show up really well if you were to lose one
1
In reply to rocksol:
Think the ones I tried were blue and predominantly black.... Presumably 2015 model.
Think the ones I tried were blue and predominantly black.... Presumably 2015 model.
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
They had some at Bergzeit - just checked, looks like they're gone now sorry
They had some at Bergzeit - just checked, looks like they're gone now sorry
In reply to James Jackson:
Following this discussion with interest. What bindings would you get to complement Cham 97s? For someone with close to zero interest in piste skiing.
Following this discussion with interest. What bindings would you get to complement Cham 97s? For someone with close to zero interest in piste skiing.
In reply to planetmarshall:
Tech bindings...
Pick your poison, they all have their pro's and cons.
For what it is worth, my pick was Beast 16.
Tech bindings...
Pick your poison, they all have their pro's and cons.
For what it is worth, my pick was Beast 16.
In reply to planetmarshall:
Agree with HeMa. I don't go hucking off silly things, so I have no need for the Beast. I have Radical ST 2.0s on mine, and they are great for just about everything (except jumping off big cliffs). I ski them aggressively, and happily use them in exposed terrain, and have never had any problems. Note that, unless it's changed since it first came out, the Beast doesn't have a flat tour mode.
Agree with HeMa. I don't go hucking off silly things, so I have no need for the Beast. I have Radical ST 2.0s on mine, and they are great for just about everything (except jumping off big cliffs). I ski them aggressively, and happily use them in exposed terrain, and have never had any problems. Note that, unless it's changed since it first came out, the Beast doesn't have a flat tour mode.
Post edited at 19:29
In reply to earlsdonwhu:
Yep, and they would have been heavier than the Cham 2 (which essentially combined the Cham and Cham HM into one line of skis).
> Think the ones I tried were blue and predominantly black.... Presumably 2015 model.
Yep, and they would have been heavier than the Cham 2 (which essentially combined the Cham and Cham HM into one line of skis).
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
I have both Mantras and Cham. Mantras are fitted with Alpine bindings and work really well on all snow conditions, perhaps the nearest you can get to a one ski quiver using lifts, but I wouldn't want to lug them uphill. Chams are the high mountain version in 107, fitted with pin touring bindings. Great for soft snow but rattle and bounce on hard pistes. Long uphill stints are tiring, but they get you up for some fun descents.
Don't kid yourself that you can find one ski for all uses. Get one good pair for your main emphasis and pick up some cheap ex hire ones to complement them. You'll have more choice for total piste skis to carve around on, so invest heavily in the touring set up, which you can bring out on powder days and fit your needs for touring.
False economy to try and trim the good all round piste/powder skis down to an acceptable touring weight as you'll need to spend so much money on relatively fragile bindings.
Minimum two pairs of skis to be happy otherwise you'll be constantly frustrated. Set aside an amount of money and juggle the permutations between a wish list and end of season sale availability.
I have both Mantras and Cham. Mantras are fitted with Alpine bindings and work really well on all snow conditions, perhaps the nearest you can get to a one ski quiver using lifts, but I wouldn't want to lug them uphill. Chams are the high mountain version in 107, fitted with pin touring bindings. Great for soft snow but rattle and bounce on hard pistes. Long uphill stints are tiring, but they get you up for some fun descents.
Don't kid yourself that you can find one ski for all uses. Get one good pair for your main emphasis and pick up some cheap ex hire ones to complement them. You'll have more choice for total piste skis to carve around on, so invest heavily in the touring set up, which you can bring out on powder days and fit your needs for touring.
False economy to try and trim the good all round piste/powder skis down to an acceptable touring weight as you'll need to spend so much money on relatively fragile bindings.
Minimum two pairs of skis to be happy otherwise you'll be constantly frustrated. Set aside an amount of money and juggle the permutations between a wish list and end of season sale availability.
In reply to James Jackson:
So current Cham 97's are 3.4kg for a pair versus Superguides at 2.6kg for a pair.
I thought the only difference this year on the Scott's were the graphics, they were New last year.
Still think the Scott's might be a bit light given your focus on lift served off piste/piste but they do ski well for a light ski.
Maybe the OP should go and hire some and see how you get on.
So current Cham 97's are 3.4kg for a pair versus Superguides at 2.6kg for a pair.
I thought the only difference this year on the Scott's were the graphics, they were New last year.
Still think the Scott's might be a bit light given your focus on lift served off piste/piste but they do ski well for a light ski.
Maybe the OP should go and hire some and see how you get on.
Post edited at 08:28
In reply to Stairclimber:
Quiver killers to share bindings between skis can ease the cost of multiple skis and the hassle of flying with them
> False economy to try and trim the good all round piste/powder skis down to an acceptable touring weight as you'll need to spend so much money on relatively fragile bindings. Minimum two pairs of skis to be happy otherwise you'll be constantly frustrated. Set aside an amount of money and juggle the permutations between a wish list and end of season sale availability.
Quiver killers to share bindings between skis can ease the cost of multiple skis and the hassle of flying with them
In reply to Stairclimber:
Things that you fit if you are a tight bast+rd and you want your binding screws to pull out of your skis...
> What are quiver killers?
Things that you fit if you are a tight bast+rd and you want your binding screws to pull out of your skis...
Post edited at 22:25
1
4
In reply to Jim 1003:
Sorry to say, that you fvcked up the mount... It ain't the inserts that were the culprit, but who ever botched up the mount...
> ... you want your binding screws to pull out of your skis...
Sorry to say, that you fvcked up the mount... It ain't the inserts that were the culprit, but who ever botched up the mount...
3
In reply to Jim 1003:
Has that actually happened to you?
Does being tight mean being able to get 3 pairs of skis in one bag?
Has that actually happened to you?
Does being tight mean being able to get 3 pairs of skis in one bag?
Post edited at 07:29
In reply to Jim 1003:
Quiver Killers are threaded inserts for ski binding mounting holes that once installed & with the bindings screws exchanged for M5 machine screws, allow the bindings to be removed/reinstalled as often as you like - just like snowboard bindings.
The inserts are made from non rusting stainless steel & have a closed end to give a water tight seal to the skis core. The coarse outer thread grips the skis core whilst the fine rolled inner thread gives the M5 bindings screws a metal to metal fixing to the ski, all of which combines to give a mount that's over 40% stronger than a conventional binding mount.
According to the Piste Office website...and he's fitted thousands.
Quiver Killers are threaded inserts for ski binding mounting holes that once installed & with the bindings screws exchanged for M5 machine screws, allow the bindings to be removed/reinstalled as often as you like - just like snowboard bindings.
The inserts are made from non rusting stainless steel & have a closed end to give a water tight seal to the skis core. The coarse outer thread grips the skis core whilst the fine rolled inner thread gives the M5 bindings screws a metal to metal fixing to the ski, all of which combines to give a mount that's over 40% stronger than a conventional binding mount.
According to the Piste Office website...and he's fitted thousands.
1
In reply to kevin stephens: update on the Whitedot R.98 skis, although designed for touring they are proving to be brilliant all rounder. Very nimble on a wide range of piste conditions including ice (hold an edge well) bumps, short and long turns. Great off piste in crusty conditions and spring snow. Haven't tried deep fresh snow yet but hopefully a dump on the way for next week. The skis have Dynafit Radical 2 bindings which have also been great (after a few days practice to get my eye in), releasing when the need to and not when they don't. Depending on how they do in the next powder dump I may even sell my other skis.
In reply to kevin stephens:
I skied a pair of White Dot R108 for a week this year. Just hard packed stuff. Need to try them in soft snow but they were fun in probably the worst conditions for them. 26 m radius means you do tend to go fairly quick when carving.
I skied a pair of White Dot R108 for a week this year. Just hard packed stuff. Need to try them in soft snow but they were fun in probably the worst conditions for them. 26 m radius means you do tend to go fairly quick when carving.
In reply to edwardsbbrown:
Hello,
I have the black diamond carbon aspect with marker F12 tour bindings and it works amazingly well
I don't think they make the carbon aspect any more but they have been replaced with the helio, would definitely be worth checking them both out
if you can still get the carbon aspect you might get them at a good price
http://eu.blackdiamondequipment.com/en_GB/skis
Hello,
I have the black diamond carbon aspect with marker F12 tour bindings and it works amazingly well
I don't think they make the carbon aspect any more but they have been replaced with the helio, would definitely be worth checking them both out
if you can still get the carbon aspect you might get them at a good price
http://eu.blackdiamondequipment.com/en_GB/skis
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...