Most Overlooked Skis of the 2015/2016 Season

[MrFox]

So I do have several pounds on you. I'm 6'1" 180 lbs and fairly athletic. The 186 cm version is perfect for me, but I haven't heard much from our smaller customers.

 

[MrFox]

Thanks "skibob" and "jersey skier" for your experiences on the Motive 95. Other than what I have picked up from Scott/Dawgcatching's great reviews, anyone have additional experiences comparing the Motive 95Ti and/or Ranger 98 to the Kastle FX94 that was discontinued in 2015?

Matt, I own both the FX94 186 cm and the Motive 95 186 cm. I have the FX94's mounted up with the Adrenalin 13 backcountry binding, otherwise a perfect comparison.

The FX94's are a fantastic ski, and have the edge on soft groomers/through choppy snow, they built power so well, and are fantastically smooth. The Motive 95's are a bit more versatile however, they do just a touch better in deep and/or heavy snow, the early rise helps them float just a little bit better. The Motive has a slightly more "progressive" (read: forward) mount point than the Kastle's, and the Kastle's are a little more damp than the Motives. The Motives are also a little more torsionally stiff than the Kastle, so slightly earlier edge engagement. Motives are also just a bit more "energetic" than the FX94's.

Honestly, I love both skis, they're both a little different, it depends what you're looking for. Hope that helped, and let me know what other questions you have.

 

[ski-ra]

Oh boy, where do I start?

Nordica NRGy80
...
I am sure I can come up with another 8-10

As you might guess due to my recent birthday gift...would the NRGy 90 or 100's be in that "another 8-10". I say this because I can't say I've ever seen anyone skiing on any NRGy model and because there seemed to be lot's of both the 90 & 100's in all of my LSS's (I'm not sure they stocked the 80's).

 

[MattD]

Oh boy, where do I start?

Nordica NRGy80
Blizzard Latigo
Scott Black Majic
Head iSpeed
Dynastar PowerTrack 84
Kastle LX82
Armada Invictus 89Ti
Head Monster 83
Salomon Q-Lab
Line Supernatural 92

I am sure I can come up with another 8-10

I finally had a chance to demo a bunch of skis Thursday. Included in the list were the Monster 83 & 88, and the Invictus 89 Ti. While conditions did not provided a good, varied set of all-mountain-type scenarios (mainly groomed snow), I was very impressed with these skis, although they are different in approach. While not an acurate comparison methodology, just hand flexing the Monster vs. Invictus showed a major difference ... Invictus has a much softer-bending front section than Monster ... tail as well, but more marked difference to me in the front section. That might lead one to believe the Monster would be tough to bend for a lighter weight skier or one that has more of a finesse approach than power ... in fact, some of the reviews out there online tout the Monster as an aggressive skier's ski.

While there is no doubt it can handle an aggressive approach and was easily the fastest of the skis I demo'd, I think those characterizations might lead one to believe the Monsters are for experts only. I did not get that feel on the hill ... the Monsters were amazingly approachable and compliant, in my view. They can absolutely bring it when you want to push them hard, but they do not balk at turning in a less aggressive fashion. Candidly, these skis had a strange ability to "disappear" under your feet ... you just did what you wanted to do and they let you do it. True, sometimes you were skiing at much faster speeds than you might on other skis, but I guess that's just part of the performance envelope.

On the flip-side, when flexing the Invictus 89 Ti and just holding it in the shop, it felt a lot less substantial than the Monster to me. That led me to believe it might not be as strong or stable on the hill. When actually skiing on them, however, they held up quite well, which belied the feel in the shop. I guess the construction with titanal helps in that regard. They were definitely not running as fast as the Monsters, but held up well to various turn shapes and speeds, and really had a "fun" feel to them without being noodles at all. Will they have a lower speed limit than the Monsters? Sure. Will a heavyweight prefer the Monsters? Likely. For most, however, these are some really capable and fun skis!

My only observation about approach with these 2 skis is that I found the Invictus more amenable to a "simply roll the ankles" approach to turning ... they respond immediately. The Monsters seem to like (but not "need") a more aggressive approach to turn initiation ... they just scream "more". Great skis, both ... just 2 different approaches to the task.

Now my question ... since I did not get the chance to try these out in much ungroomed, crud and bumps, what experiences have folks had in these conditions with either/both of these skis? Would love some input there.

Also, how different is the Invictus 95ti (or the new 2017) in feel and nimbleness from the 89ti? Might be tempted to go that route for an Eastern "better snow", crud, glade-type ski to complement my 77 waisted frontsider.

 

[Philpug]

Matt, both the Invictus and the Monster collections have much different personalities both on snow and off. I did find the Armada's to be more playful in the ungroomed, crud and bumps where the Monsters want to decimate those conditions. Is either better? no, but more ones skiing style and preference. I do think the Monsters are superior for the groomers and firm conditions.

I didn't ski the 96Ti but I did ski the new 99Ti which was a blast and again very playful and still railed with the best. I don't think that Armada is going after Head with these skis but the 99Ti does give the Enforcer a run for its money.

 

[Swede]

Salomon Xride 8.8 FS. Roumered to be a tough guy, ex racer, step on the pedal type of ski, but I'd say it is easy to ski and very agreeable. Extemely confident building thanks to stability, precision and its feedback to the driver. Very versataile--like a GS race ski on hardpack and a killer in sh*t f**k conditions. Ok in powder too.

 

[dawgcatching]

There you go, @dawgcatching is stocking them, GRAB them.
Brahma's not selling for you? Might be the PNW, we can't keep them on the racks down here.

They eventually did sell, just after this post! Weird. Got a huge rush of Blizzard orders, it was like people weren't even looking to buy until they figured stuff was on sale. What isn't selling is the Monster series from Head, which is every bit as good.

 

[dawgcatching]

The Ski is great, but I have never seen a pair on the hill outside of a test event. Seems like a great ski in that Head Rock n' Roll, Nordica Soul Rider mould.

 

[MattD]

What isn't selling is the Monster series from Head, which is every bit as good.

As mentioned in my comments from my own demo, I think many of the reviews out there are doing these skis a disservice. Here are just a few excerpts I found from 3-4 different online reviews of the Monster (primarily 88 model)

• Ripe for a strong skier; Not for the faint of heart
• Experts only
• Has to be forced into short swing turns
• Felt heavy
• Heavier, commanding guys will likely prefer the freight-train experience more
• Like a five-ton truck, it’s solid and able to bash and blast through the craziest gibbery terrain
• The ski feels heavy in trees and bumps, but powerful through the crud

And there are plenty of similar comments in other reviews. I am not a heavyweight at all, and I am way more of a finesse, non-expert, mere mortal skier than an aggressive ripper. I did not find the Monsters (83 & 88) at all difficult to ski. I did NOT have the opportunity to try them in bumps, or much ungroomed (other than small sections of dust on refrozen/ice/crust), so can't speak to the feel in those conditions.

Not sure if my experience was unusual, but I think this is one of those skis that CAN be skied hard, aggressively and by heavyweights, but certainly does not NEED to be ... shouldn't that fit lots of different types of skiers???

 

[dawgcatching]

I

As mentioned in my comments from my own demo, I think many of the reviews out there are doing these skis a disservice. Here are just a few excerpts I found from 3-4 different online reviews of the Monster (primarily 88 model)

• Ripe for a strong skier; Not for the faint of heart
• Experts only
• Has to be forced into short swing turns
• Felt heavy
• Heavier, commanding guys will likely prefer the freight-train experience more
• Like a five-ton truck, it’s solid and able to bash and blast through the craziest gibbery terrain
• The ski feels heavy in trees and bumps, but powerful through the crud

And there are plenty of similar comments in other reviews. I am not a heavyweight at all, and I am way more of a finesse, non-expert, mere mortal skier than an aggressive ripper. I did not find the Monsters (83 & 88) at all difficult to ski. I did NOT have the opportunity to try them in bumps, or much ungroomed (other than small sections of dust on refrozen/ice/crust), so can't speak to the feel in those conditions.

Not sure if my experience was unusual, but I think this is one of those skis that CAN be skied hard, aggressively and by heavyweights, but certainly does not NEED to be ... shouldn't that fit lots of different types of skiers???

I concur. At 155-160lbs, I am certainly no heavyweight, and they never felt demanding over 2 days of steep, mostly bump skiing at Copper. Certainly, they can be skied by a big guy, but the friends that Pro-ordered them from me are all smaller guys, my size, and loved them. When I skied them last spring at the industry demos, they were one of the friendlier 88mm skis, by far. They feel "stiff' on the wall, but online reviews are notoriously poor; maybe they just flexed them on the wall and called it a day? I was talking to a ski "reviewer" on the lift once, who works for backcountry; she said that 90% of her "reviews" are made up, just regurgitated copy of what she is told to say. This site is going to have a lot more "useful" information; there is little incentive for people to post untrue or made-up crap, unlike an online ski mag with paid-for ads. We use the 88 as one of our demos, and not a single customer has come back and told us it was a lot of ski, or too much ski. Most of our renters are 3-5 day a year types, we get more "vacationers that ski" vs "skiers on vacation". I certainly would hear about it being a lot of ski, if it were in fact a lot of ski.

Reviews say the 88 is a lot of ski, but the Mantra is easy and forgiving?

 

[MattD]

I certainly would hear about it being a lot of ski, if it were in fact a lot of ski.

Reviews say the 88 is a lot of ski, but the Mantra is easy and forgiving?

Have not been on the Mantra, but I did demo the Brahma, Experience 88 and Invictus 89Ti during the same day as the Monster 88 & 83. Lots of great skis here, but here are a few comparative comments from a non-expert:

- Experience 88 was immediately easy to ski, requiring no "getting adjusted" period. I felt it had a bit more tip and tail width than I prefer ... just more "noticeable" at all times than the other skis.
- Brahma is another great ski, and probably an easy choice for many. Compared to the Monster 88, I just felt the Brahma balked more at being pushed into shorteer radius turns.
- Invictus 89 Ti, as noted in post above, MUCH softer tip and tail when hand flexing, still capable, responded to more subtle feet/ankle movements, playful, not as much top end performance.

Have you had similar reactions, or similar comments from customers comparing these skis?

I am really intrigued about the lack of market demand for the Monsters. I think it is a real compliment when a ski seems to "disappear beneath your boots" and just allow you to ski without having to think much about how the ski will react. That's the feel I had on the Monsters ... albeit at higher speeds than on other skis!

 

[Myles]

I just finished a two day demo of some Monster 83s (177) and I have to say that they are a very enjoyable and fun ski and, as has been stated here, underrated. I was expecting a very stiff demanding ski, but found them in many ways similar to my 7 year old Head Peaks, but stiffer and more stable at speed, and with a greater ability to deal with crud. As people here have noted, they can go fast, and the first couple of runs I was not quite prepared for how much speed I was carrying because they feel so smooth and stable under foot (the comment, 'disappear beneath your boots' rings true), resulting in some 'air', which was a lot of fun. But, at the same time, they are very easy to control, carve well (much of the first day was spent skiing solid ice), and are also quite manageable at slow speeds (noted while skiing with my six year old in the afternoon). The second day was spent skiing in mashed potatoes, and the Monsters really shone here as well. No deflection at all, they just tracked through the crud as if it wasn't even there. Other than a review of the Monsters I read by Dawgcatching on EpicSki the other week, and some kind words for the Monsters on RealSkiers, no one seems to have much love for this ski or to appreciate how much fun and playful it is.

 

[dawgcatching]

I just finished a two day demo of some Monster 83s (177) and I have to say that they are a very enjoyable and fun ski and, as has been stated here, underrated. I was expecting a very stiff demanding ski, but found them in many ways similar to my 7 year old Head Peaks, but stiffer and more stable at speed, and with a greater ability to deal with crud. As people here have noted, they can go fast, and the first couple of runs I was not quite prepared for how much speed I was carrying because they feel so smooth and stable under foot (the comment, 'disappear beneath your boots' rings true), resulting in some 'air', which was a lot of fun. But, at the same time, they are very easy to control, carve well (much of the first day was spent skiing solid ice), and are also quite manageable at slow speeds (noted while skiing with my six year old in the afternoon). The second day was spent skiing in mashed potatoes, and the Monsters really shone here as well. No deflection at all, they just tracked through the crud as if it wasn't even there. Other than a review of the Monsters I read by Dawgcatching on EpicSki the other week, and some kind words for the Monsters on RealSkiers, no one seems to have much love for this ski or to appreciate how much fun and playful it is.

It seems that some skis are a bit of a mystery in the wider realm. I figured that as the customer-based reviews on the internet gained traction over the years, and "paid advertisements" for reviews in low-grade ski magazines fell by the wayside, certain skis that were "under the radar" would really catch fire among a certain segment seeking out a superior ski that doesn't have a "follow the herd" mentality. This was certainly the case of the original Monster iM88 10 years ago: an incredible ski that was under the radar initially. I was very impressed and did a well-read review, as did a few others, and sales of that ski took off.

These days however, a great ski like the Monster 88, or even better example, the Fischer Motive 95ti; gets rave reviews across the board, from many independent sources, yet nobody in the wider world cares. I can't grasp why these skis would not get traction, when other, mediocre models, seem to sell.

My theory: not enough skiers are skilled enough to tell the differences between a mediocre ski that is well marketed and an impressive ski that is under the radar. Therefore, the default option is to trust "a buddy's recommendation" or marketing literature over what they may or may not experience on a ski. Then again, if a skier doesn't notice a difference between 2 models, does it even matter?

 

[crgildart]

Everything in my quiver over 80mm was overlooked this season. Never saw more than 4-6 inches of fresh snow all season.

 

[ARL67]

Scott: like I stated at Epic about high-end audio in the "Kastle over-rated" thread ..... If one can't hear a difference, there is no differnce. Same goes with anything , such as wine tasting, cigars, scotch, etc. Either the "afficianados" care too much, or the masses too little, about the hobbies they pursue. Maybe the public can't appreciate the ski quality of the Monster or Motive, maybe because of brand loyalty, availabilty in their area, topsheet graphics, complacency, etc. Price certainly isn't the issue with the Monster or Motive.

Anyone who doesnt believe a dealer or reviewer who has tried / tested a magnitude of gear "knows something" the average Joe doesn't, has their head up their a*s. In all my hobbies, I seek out an afficianado whose taste is similar to mine, and heed what comes from their mouths / keyboards. Anyone I know who skis, I encourage them to checkout Pugski or Epic, and get educated from those with vastly more experience.

Even though I live in groomer-ville Ontario, I haven't seen any Monster or Motive on the slopes all season either.
The Monster can be had up here at sevaral sources, but Fischers non-frontside offerings seem M.I.A. up here over the last few years. I guess the ebbs & flows of brand hot-ness or not-ness.

 

[DanoT]

At the demo centre where I work everything is on sale and the Head Monster 88 and 98 are the slowest selling. We have one 184cm Latigo left at $340CDN, about $250US

 

[Paul S.]

I must be the only person skiing on the iSpeed this season. I have not seen another pair in the East nor at Keystone, CO or Powder Mtn., UT.

 

[dawgcatching]

Scott: like I stated at Epic about high-end audio in the "Kastle over-rated" thread ..... If one can't hear a difference, there is no differnce. Same goes with anything , such as wine tasting, cigars, scotch, etc. Either the "afficianados" care too much, or the masses too little, about the hobbies they pursue. Maybe the public can't appreciate the ski quality of the Monster or Motive, maybe because of brand loyalty, availabilty in their area, topsheet graphics, complacency, etc. Price certainly isn't the issue with the Monster or Motive.

Anyone who doesnt believe a dealer or reviewer who has tried / tested a magnitude of gear "knows something" the average Joe doesn't, has their head up their a*s. In all my hobbies, I seek out an afficianado whose taste is similar to mine, and heed what comes from their mouths / keyboards. Anyone I know who skis, I encourage them to checkout Pugski or Epic, and get educated from those with vastly more experience.

Even though I live in groomer-ville Ontario, I haven't seen any Monster or Motive on the slopes all season either.
The Monster can be had up here at sevaral sources, but Fischers non-frontside offerings seem M.I.A. up here over the last few years. I guess the ebbs & flows of brand hot-ness or not-ness.

Fanboys don't help either! Just look at the car world. Plenty of guys out there that say if it isn't a pure M car, it isn't a real BMW. As I recall, the 2002 was no M car, it was just a fun 2x2 coupe that was a riot on back roads. Nowadays, if you aren't packing 425hp in an $80k M4, you are just a poser...someone please make a real case that the M228i track package isn't 90% as much fun for 1/2 the price. Or that the new Miata isn't more fun to drive than both of those cars, but because it is inexpensive and doesn't do 0-60 sub 4 seconds, it isn't a "real" sports car.

I suppose the ski world suffers from the same fanboy-ish silliness. Too many identities wrapped up with being seen on a certain ski, in a certain car, instead of just being on what truly makes the person happy, not worrying about what others think.

 

[David Chaus]

I still really like my Rev 105's. Go ahead, belittle me for not having a trendy ski. However, they carve a better turn, short or long radius, than any other 95+ ski I've tried, and are great in bumps and mixed snow.

With a 16-17m side cut however, they are more turny than I want for deep snow or challenging crud.

 

[Ron]

scott what's your inventory Monsters? @dawgcatching

i still think that monster 88, in the 177 is a fantastic ski. I read the post above quoting the ski-rags testers comments which reminded me of the comments about the Kastle FX series. The monster is a great ski, fun nimble. It does benefit (imho) from moving the binding slightly forward. this makes the ski much more fun and responsive.


BTW- yes, I still love my Kastle FX85.