Wates 78 for Intermediate/Advanced skier?

[adamh]

Do you think the Watea 78 is a good choice for an east coast skier as my first real pair? I'm probably on the border of intermediate/advance capabilities and am hoping to go a lot more than usual and improve this year. I am a 6 feet, 185 pounds male.

Also, what size would you recommend if yes? 174?

 

[gmcunni]

Hey Adam, i'm not a knowledge gear guy but i don't think that ski is a bad choice. I've never skied Watea before but lots of people here have and like them. My only thought is they might be a bit on the skinny side (but that really depends on the type of skiing you enjoy most). I ski a 84mm ski after skiing on 77mm for many years. i like the added width in all but the most firm conditions.

5' 7" @ 200 lbs and i ski a 170. I demoed a 176 ski yesterday and didn't notice the difference at all, i think 174 would be good for you.

 

[adamh]

Thanks GM. I pretty much stay on the groomers for the most part. I guess i'd say i'm more of an aggressive recreational skier. I wouldn't rule out expanding my horizons though.

 

[adamh]

After looking around it looks like a lot of people also enjoyed the Blizzard 8.1 and the Dynastar Legend 8k. Any thoughts on these compared to the Watea 78/84? Thanks in advance guys and gals.

 

[gmcunni]

i was going to suggest finding a demo day at a mountain near you but our list of demos doesn't show much for the remainder of the season.

http://forums.alpinezone.com/showthread.php?t=82588

 

[adamh]

Yeah, I missed the boat on those unfortunately. I'm almost ready to just take some good advice and run with it.

 

[bigbog]

After looking around it looks like a lot of people also enjoyed the Blizzard 8.1 and the Dynastar Legend 8k. Any thoughts on these compared to the Watea 78/84? Thanks in advance guys and gals.

Fwiw.(not quite the scientific edge adamh...but here goes..).
I'm ~180lbs I really didn't find the 84s had much edgehold on hardpack the morning in late March that I demoed them a few seasons ago...and I tried to give them time to hookup too. Their tip to tail flex is obviously nice for softer snow. I suppose the 78s would have a little better chance on the hardpack...y/n? Haven't skied the 8.1 but its reviews = really good ..reviews sound like a stiffer ski, like most Blizzards. The 8000...everyone can give a few words to...imho a pretty good middle-of-the-road(not literally) ski...a little light in edgegrip on hardpack(my $.01), but a ski most anyone can pick up on the fly and it'll work on the EC.

$.01

 

[Greg]

The older 8K sucks on hard pack. I can't speak on the 2008+ models, but my 07's rule in any type of soft snow and are very good in the bumps. At 185 you can probably jump up to the high 170's in terms of length. Go shorter (no shorter than ~172 though) for bumps or trees. I'm 170 lbs and like a mid 170's length ski.

 

[WJenness]

Fwiw.(not quite the scientific edge adamh...but here goes..).
I'm ~180lbs I really didn't find the 84s had much edgehold on hardpack the morning in late March that I demoed them a few seasons ago...and I tried to give them time to hookup too. Their tip to tail flex is obviously nice for softer snow. I suppose the 78s would have a little better chance on the hardpack...y/n? Haven't skied the 8.1 but its reviews = really good ..reviews sound like a stiffer ski, like most Blizzards. The 8000...everyone can give a few words to...imho a pretty good middle-of-the-road(not literally) ski...a little light in edgegrip on hardpack(my $.01), but a ski most anyone can pick up on the fly and it'll work on the EC.

$.01

I'm a big dude too (6'4", 250Lbs (before adding ski gear)), I ski the Watea 84 in a 184cm... I think it holds an edge quite well...

On everything but the iciest of the icy days, I'm very happy on this ski.

For the super icy days... I'll stick to the rip sticks that I just bought from wa-loaf...

-w

 

[riverc0il]

Do you think the Watea 78 is a good choice for an east coast skier as my first real pair? I'm probably on the border of intermediate/advance capabilities and am hoping to go a lot more than usual and improve this year. I am a 6 feet, 185 pounds male.

Also, what size would you recommend if yes? 174?

What type of ski conditions do you primarily ski? Are you working towards anything technically? Where do you see yourself in three years?

The Watea series is damn fine. I ski the 94 currently and love it. For your height, weight, and level, the 174 would likely be fine. I would recommend this ski for something that enjoys skiing the entire mountain. If you ski only groomers, you are looking in the wrong category. You'll find the Legend 8k (only available used now--my primary go to ski for non-powder natural non-groomed) well suited to natural snow but terrible on hard pack and scrapped conditions.

If you want a one ski quiver that can do it all and enjoy natural snow, bumps, trees, and some groomer mixed in (perhaps 50/50), I think the Watea 78 would serve you well.

 

[adamh]

River,

As of now, I ski pretty much strictly groomers. But I don't want to buy a ski that is going to limit what I can do in the future. I plan on skiing a lot this year and into the future, and hopefully improving and venturing into more technical terrain. But I would say the immediate future is pretty much groomers. Do you have any other suggestions?

 

[mlctvt]

I think a good ski might be what I just upgraded to from the Legend 8000s, the Dynastar Sultan 85.
Much better on the groomers, more stable at higher speeds than the 8000 but still good in the bumps and sightly wider too so better float in powder.
The reviews are very good on this ski and I liked it alot after demoing a bunch of skis a few weeks ago. I would have liked to demo the Fishers but they were't at Mount Snow's demo day.

 

[Edd]

Adam,

What are you looking to spend?

 

[adamh]

Up to $600-700?

 

[Edd]

That'll easily get you the Sultan 85 w/binding mentioned. I wasn't a fan when I demoed it but I'm in the minority. Definitely a versatile board that will hold a good edge and treat you ok off piste when ready.

I've skied the Watea 84 and wasn't thrilled with the edgehold personally (Sultan's is better) but good off-piste for sure. I've heard very good things about the 78 on groomers and it won't punish you off-trail.

The K2 Extreme's edgehold is no better than the Watea 84 but it's fun and versatile; skis the whole mountain competently and is cheap.

If you decide to stretch your budget just a bit you might want to demo the K2 Rictor or Volkl Kendo; newer versatile skis that are getting great reviews.

As a general guideline, if groomers are the priority with an eye towards off piste I'd keep the waist above 80.

 

[billski]

Yeah, I missed the boat on those unfortunately. I'm almost ready to just take some good advice and run with it.

Some on-mountain ski shops offer demos for a fairly reasonable fee. What's great about onslope is like a demo day, you can try several in one day. I have used them at wa-wa and Stowe ("Stowe Toys") Call first and see what they have.

 

[riverc0il]

River,

As of now, I ski pretty much strictly groomers. But I don't want to buy a ski that is going to limit what I can do in the future. I plan on skiing a lot this year and into the future, and hopefully improving and venturing into more technical terrain. But I would say the immediate future is pretty much groomers. Do you have any other suggestions?

This is going to be a pretty unpopular opinion but here it goes. I think you are looking at the wrong class of skis. If you are currently strictly groomers, you should get a performance carving ski, not an all mountain mid-fat. When I was a developing off piste ski, I skied a lower end recreational model of a race ski. I skied it in the bumps and natural snow and the very very limited amount of powder and tree skiing I did back then. I primarily skied hard pack and it worked, it didn't limit me from going onto natural snow but since I primarily skied hard pack the vast majority of the time, it suited me quite well.

There it is. Everyone else can flame away and say FATTER AND ROCKER FOR EVERYONE!!! But for someone on groomers almost all the time with potential for dabbling in natural snow, its the incorrect choice, IMO, to go with a mid-fat all mountain ski.

 

[gmcunni]

This is going to be a pretty unpopular opinion but here it goes. I think you are looking at the wrong class of skis. If you are currently strictly groomers, you should get a performance carving ski, not an all mountain mid-fat.

is there a particular ski or two you would recommend in this category for Adam to consider?

 

[Edd]

There it is. Everyone else can flame away and say FATTER AND ROCKER FOR EVERYONE!!!

All I'm saying is that he should buy these right away:

Don't mind the tip and tail flap on hardpack. That just means the ski is having fun!

 

[riverc0il]

is there a particular ski or two you would recommend in this category for Adam to consider?

Unfortunately, I am disconnected from what is available in this particular genre of skis right now as I have not paid attention to this segment of the market in some time.

Perhaps something like the Fischer Progressor 8? Not sure if that would be a bit "too much" for someone self labeling as "intermediate/advanced".

Its also hard to read a self labeled description and know for certain what ski to recommend. This is not directed against the OP but just a general statement.... some folks under rate their abilities, some rate right on, but many over rate based on the fact that they can survive black diamonds survival skiing style.