madskier6
Member
I posted the below message at EpicSki.com but also want to see what my fellow AZers think about this subject.
I apologize in advance for the long post but I'm looking for some advice on a new mid fat ski for me. I'm especially interested in the Metron B5 and M11 because of all I've read and heard about them. I can only afford one ski for my quiver at this time because I also have to pay for equipment and lift tickets for my wife and 4 children.
My basic info:
42 years old, 5' 10'' 200 lbs. I've been skiing for 37 + years, am a level 8 or 9 skier who loves to ski powder, glades and steeps. I'm good in the bumps but its not my terrain of first choice. Since I ski in the East, however, most of the challenging runs on the mountain have bumps so the ski I buy has to do reasonably well in bumps. I like short, slalom-like turns and usually ski along the sides of trails where the softer snow is. I do like going fast (GS turns) at times, but short turns and powder float are more important to me.
I'm currently skiing on 2001-2002 Dynastar Ski Cross 66 (Auto Drive) which I like but I blew out an edge trying to ride a rail and these babies are now my rock skis. I've now learned to stay away from rails and boxes.
Last weekend at Sugarbush North (Mount Ellen), I demoed the following skis:
Nordica Hot Rod Top Fuel - 170
Nordica Hot Rod Nitrous - 178
Volkl AC4 Unlimited - 170
Rossignol B2 (this year's model) - 174 (I think)
The conditions were excellent powder and packed powder (at least for the East). There was at least 8 inches of fresh powder from last Friday's Eastern storm. There were some bare spots but generally the base was pretty solid. I skied on trails with various conditions including groomers, bumps and powder runs.
My favorite of the bunch was the AC4 by far. It handled steep bump runs with ease, floated in the powder to my liking and also carved real well on the groomers. In short, it satisfied all my most important needs/requirements.
I liked the Nordicas also but not as much as the AC4s. The Top Fuel was a little too stiff for me but it still is an excellent ski. I liked the Nitrous better than the Top Fuel but they only had a 178 for me to try so it felt a little long for me. I believe skis closer to 170 are better for my height, weight and skiing preferences, especially for skiing in the East. The AC4 just seemed better for me compared to the Nitrous: turned easier in the bumps and on steeps and also floated better in the pow. I'm wondering though if I would like the Nitrous more than I did if I had skied the 170s.
I also liked the Rossi B2s but not as much as the AC4s. They just weren't as lively for me although they were easier than the Top Fuels to turn quickly, which I prefer.
Therefore, my order of preference for these 4 skis is as follows:
1) Volkl AC4
2) Nordica Nitrous
3) Rossignol B2
4) Nordica Top Fuel
I'm dying to try the Metron B5 and M11 before I buy. I plan on demoing both of them. Unfortunately, Atomic did not have a rep at the Sugarbush Demo Day. I've read all about the Metrons on the Internet and elsewhere and am very intrigued by them. I've gotten advice from ski shop people who after hearing about my skiing preferences tell me "you have to try them, they are a brand new mold of ski rendering all others obsolete." I think that may be going a little too far but they clearly are revolutionary. Here are my questions:
1. How do the B5s and/or M11 compare to the AC4s? I've read some of the reviews on this issue but am curious about people's impressions given my characteristics and skiing preferences.
2. It seems that the M11s may be better for me because while I am an aggressive skier, I'm not in great physical shape and I've heard the B5s are more physically demanding. Your thoughts on this aspect?
3. I want to demo the Nordica Nitrous in 170 to see if I would like them better than the 178s I tried. The 178 Nitrous seemed harder to turn than I like which I think may have something to do with their longer length. Will there be that much difference in my experience for only 8 cm?
4. How do the Dynastar 8000 and 8800 compare to the AC4 and the Metrons? I've heard good things about these skis and I like my current Dynastars. I know Dynastars are generally lighter and livelier than other skis but since I really like the AC4s are these too light and lively?
5. Are there any other skis you would recommend that I demo? I don't want to go crazy demoing everything but I can only afford one pair of skis and want to make the right decision. I'm tempted to try the Volkl Mantras and Atomic Sweet Daddys but am wondering if those powder skis are too limited for primarily Eastern skiing.
I understand the golden rule of all ski selection advice: DEMO, DEMO, DEMO. I have and will demo before I buy but am interested in your collective experience and wisdom based on my circumstances. Your advice will help me determine what and how much more to demo before I buy. Many thanks in advance for your advice!
I apologize in advance for the long post but I'm looking for some advice on a new mid fat ski for me. I'm especially interested in the Metron B5 and M11 because of all I've read and heard about them. I can only afford one ski for my quiver at this time because I also have to pay for equipment and lift tickets for my wife and 4 children.
My basic info:
42 years old, 5' 10'' 200 lbs. I've been skiing for 37 + years, am a level 8 or 9 skier who loves to ski powder, glades and steeps. I'm good in the bumps but its not my terrain of first choice. Since I ski in the East, however, most of the challenging runs on the mountain have bumps so the ski I buy has to do reasonably well in bumps. I like short, slalom-like turns and usually ski along the sides of trails where the softer snow is. I do like going fast (GS turns) at times, but short turns and powder float are more important to me.
I'm currently skiing on 2001-2002 Dynastar Ski Cross 66 (Auto Drive) which I like but I blew out an edge trying to ride a rail and these babies are now my rock skis. I've now learned to stay away from rails and boxes.
Last weekend at Sugarbush North (Mount Ellen), I demoed the following skis:
Nordica Hot Rod Top Fuel - 170
Nordica Hot Rod Nitrous - 178
Volkl AC4 Unlimited - 170
Rossignol B2 (this year's model) - 174 (I think)
The conditions were excellent powder and packed powder (at least for the East). There was at least 8 inches of fresh powder from last Friday's Eastern storm. There were some bare spots but generally the base was pretty solid. I skied on trails with various conditions including groomers, bumps and powder runs.
My favorite of the bunch was the AC4 by far. It handled steep bump runs with ease, floated in the powder to my liking and also carved real well on the groomers. In short, it satisfied all my most important needs/requirements.
I liked the Nordicas also but not as much as the AC4s. The Top Fuel was a little too stiff for me but it still is an excellent ski. I liked the Nitrous better than the Top Fuel but they only had a 178 for me to try so it felt a little long for me. I believe skis closer to 170 are better for my height, weight and skiing preferences, especially for skiing in the East. The AC4 just seemed better for me compared to the Nitrous: turned easier in the bumps and on steeps and also floated better in the pow. I'm wondering though if I would like the Nitrous more than I did if I had skied the 170s.
I also liked the Rossi B2s but not as much as the AC4s. They just weren't as lively for me although they were easier than the Top Fuels to turn quickly, which I prefer.
Therefore, my order of preference for these 4 skis is as follows:
1) Volkl AC4
2) Nordica Nitrous
3) Rossignol B2
4) Nordica Top Fuel
I'm dying to try the Metron B5 and M11 before I buy. I plan on demoing both of them. Unfortunately, Atomic did not have a rep at the Sugarbush Demo Day. I've read all about the Metrons on the Internet and elsewhere and am very intrigued by them. I've gotten advice from ski shop people who after hearing about my skiing preferences tell me "you have to try them, they are a brand new mold of ski rendering all others obsolete." I think that may be going a little too far but they clearly are revolutionary. Here are my questions:
1. How do the B5s and/or M11 compare to the AC4s? I've read some of the reviews on this issue but am curious about people's impressions given my characteristics and skiing preferences.
2. It seems that the M11s may be better for me because while I am an aggressive skier, I'm not in great physical shape and I've heard the B5s are more physically demanding. Your thoughts on this aspect?
3. I want to demo the Nordica Nitrous in 170 to see if I would like them better than the 178s I tried. The 178 Nitrous seemed harder to turn than I like which I think may have something to do with their longer length. Will there be that much difference in my experience for only 8 cm?
4. How do the Dynastar 8000 and 8800 compare to the AC4 and the Metrons? I've heard good things about these skis and I like my current Dynastars. I know Dynastars are generally lighter and livelier than other skis but since I really like the AC4s are these too light and lively?
5. Are there any other skis you would recommend that I demo? I don't want to go crazy demoing everything but I can only afford one pair of skis and want to make the right decision. I'm tempted to try the Volkl Mantras and Atomic Sweet Daddys but am wondering if those powder skis are too limited for primarily Eastern skiing.
I understand the golden rule of all ski selection advice: DEMO, DEMO, DEMO. I have and will demo before I buy but am interested in your collective experience and wisdom based on my circumstances. Your advice will help me determine what and how much more to demo before I buy. Many thanks in advance for your advice!
