Atomic Theory Question

AlpineZone

Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 104
  1. #1

    Atomic Theory Question

    Been thinking about these skis a lot recently. Demoed them last Spring and they were a lot of fun. But they have a bit of overlap with my Watea 94's. Skied the Watea's last weekend and they just felt kinda heavy slow, probably just because I've been mostly on skinnier shorter stuff all season due to the conditions. They felt much better once I got into the powder, but the mixed ice and pow bumps were kinda a struggle before I got my legs going.

    My Wateas have Dukes on them. And even though I have never used them for it I still have aspirations of doing some backcountry.

    So the question is do I:
    1. Do nothing, the Wateas are fine and I should save my money.
    2. Buy the Atomics, put the Dukes on them? Unload the Wateas. I'm assuming I can use skins on these.
    3. Buy the Atomics, get some new bindings and keep the Wateas as a BC set-up.

    Whatever hits the fan will not be distributed evenly.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by wa-loaf View Post
    Skied the Watea's last weekend and they just felt kinda heavy slow, probably just because I've been mostly on skinnier shorter stuff all season due to the conditions. They felt much better once I got into the powder, but the mixed ice and pow bumps were kinda a struggle before I got my legs going.
    How can you be sure that you wouldn't feel the same way on the Theory's this year?

  3. #3
    The Theory felt much lighter and has a rocker tip to it that the Watea doesn't. It felt playful (but not skittish) while the Watea is very solid. I might do something if I see a really good price, but I'll probably hold off another year. Just working this out in public. lol
    Whatever hits the fan will not be distributed evenly.

  4. #4
    Did the Wateas feel heavy last year?

    I guess my point is, if this heavy feeling just came about because you've been on carving skis most of this season, than comparing the Theory from last year to the Watea this year doesn't really work.

    BTW, I am interested in your opinion because I'm looking to upgrade my skis after this year, and these are two of the skis I've researched.

  5. #5
    My Watea's are from 3 seasons ago so don't have the powder hull or any rocker on them. I haven't skied this or last seasons Watea's. I think I need to add the Blizzard Bonifide to the list. That's gotten kick-ass reviews, but I haven't skied it.
    Whatever hits the fan will not be distributed evenly.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Southington, CT
    Posts
    9,792
    Buy them!
    2009/2010 - 28

    2009 mtb-19 rides- 113.58 miles

    2008/09 - 33

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by o3jeff View Post
    Buy them!
    Any opinion on the Bonifide?
    Whatever hits the fan will not be distributed evenly.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by wa-loaf View Post
    Been thinking about these skis a lot recently. Demoed them last Spring and they were a lot of fun. But they have a bit of overlap with my Watea 94's. Skied the Watea's last weekend and they just felt kinda heavy slow, probably just because I've been mostly on skinnier shorter stuff all season due to the conditions. They felt much better once I got into the powder, but the mixed ice and pow bumps were kinda a struggle before I got my legs going.

    My Wateas have Dukes on them. And even though I have never used them for it I still have aspirations of doing some backcountry.

    So the question is do I:
    1. Do nothing, the Wateas are fine and I should save my money.
    2. Buy the Atomics, put the Dukes on them? Unload the Wateas. I'm assuming I can use skins on these.
    3. Buy the Atomics, get some new bindings and keep the Wateas as a BC set-up.
    My opinion, the Watea is outdated. I know it sounds odd that a 3 y/o ski is outdated but many of us (me included) fell for the fat when we should have waited for fat rocker. I had a Rossi B4 with traditional camber that was 94 underfoot. It never came close to the fun I have on my Rossi S7. Even though the S7 is 117 underfoot it floats, flexes and carves super easy in the powder plus skis very short to turn on a dime in tight trees. I kept the B4 as a rock ski and dumped it a month later realizing I'd never ski it again. I'll bet the Watea will suffer a similar fate should you save it.

    If you've already got a groomer ski (Progressor 9+?) you don't need another on piste carver. Go fat, go rocker and go back country!
    Quiver:
    Rossignol Experience 88 - 172cm (All Mountain)
    Rossignol 9SL - 161 (SL carver)
    Rossignol WC GS - 181cm (GS carver)
    Rossignol Z10 - 162cm (Bumps, crud & park)
    Rossignol Super 7 - 180cm (Powder)

  9. #9
    My buddy demo'd Theorys recently and loved them. you should buy them.
    shit happens, wear a helmet.

    2016/17
    MT Snow - 12.30 1.7 1.29 2.4 2.11
    Attitash - 2.17
    Black MTN - 2.18
    Wildcat - 2.19
    Eldora - 4.7
    Snowmass - 4.10
    Aspen - 4.11

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Cheese View Post
    If you've already got a groomer ski (Progressor 9+?) you don't need another on piste carver. Go fat, go rocker and go back country!
    Ha, I've also got a Salomon Enduro 84 that's been my main driver this season with the Progressor reserved just for race nights.

    I'm demoing some race skis Thursday night too, thinking I might want something longer for the Great Race. I don't think buying two sets of skis this spring is in the cards ... really shouldn't even be buying any ...
    Whatever hits the fan will not be distributed evenly.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:18 PM.