Comparison Review Demo Day at Loveland, tested 10 pairs of skis

[kimmyt]

I used to ski a 168 Kiku (before they added rocker to it) which was probably my biggest ski. It was a lot of work, but I was a weaker skier then. I decided I wanted something a little less burly in the trees, which is why I moved down to the TST in a 165 even though it was slightly on the short side (I probably would have aimed for something around 168/169 with rocker) but I just never found something I liked enough. It worked well for a while and I was going through pregnancies and post pregnancies so it was nice to have a short easy ski to ride, but I knew that ultimately I should be on something high 160s and low 170s. I wanted to try the Trace 98 in a 172 but they didn't have it with them. I did ski the Nina at a 168, which was where I want to be too. I don't think I want to go too much higher than low 170s though.

I do agree that its hard to tell if its the length I liked or the ski itself, but given that in the past I have tried other skis in the low 170s and not been as head over heels, I'm thinking its a bit of both but also that the ski is just a good fit for me.

Typo editing for clarification! (cant seem to edit the original)

 

[ski otter 2]

I wonder if this would be a place to put stuff from the Keystone/Ski&Golf demo day?

It's not as big a demo, so probably fewer people went to it. If you went to the Keystone demo day, you might post here too.


Dec. 2nd, 2017, Saturday.

It was a bluebird, groomer day, on two WROD runs, one blue and one green, top to bottom on the frontside. It got springlike warm by noon, slushy, still icy in the shade, skied off and bumped up by afternoon. All and all, not a bad day to demo.

And such a day offered a great reality check to the previous powder and soft snow demo at Loveland.

1. 185 Enforcer 110. r 18.5 @ 185. 140-110-129. ($850) 1 run.

On groomers, not so great. Yes, it carves, doesn't flap, but meh; it's feel is like an Enforcer 100 gone soft somehow.
Still, I'd like to try it in powder. A no, for now.

2. Again, 184 Faction C.T. 2.0, for the second time. r 16 @178. 135-102-135. 2035 gm/ski. (c. $650 currently.) 2 runs.

Reality check: I had to try this ski on an "old snow" day, just to see. On groomers, it was still a very good, playful but good-on-edge ski - but no longer a wow, for me. (I'm into gs race skis on groomers, though.) For me, this would be primarily a "soft snow" ski, and an occasional "change up" all over the mountain. It got better on the second run. It was good in bumps. Maybe a "yes" on "old snow" days, not sure.

3. 182 Dynastar x106, also for the second time. r 17 @ 182. 123-106-139. 2000 gm/ski ( c. $700 currently.) 2 runs.

Another reality check: On groomers, not as great as on a soft snow day, but still very good: I was happy to be on this ski on such a day, and in the bumps and slush that developed. Great edge and carve. It still had a "wow" factor, for me.

This ski again felt slightly heavy, but then I adjusted, and it just felt damp and stable, any size turn carve, including very tight. The x106 is also primarily a soft snow or even crud ski, at its best - primarily because of the width: it does not hold an edge like a great much narrower ski might. But it would work as a one ski quiver, as the Dynastar rep said he was doing on this ski. It is easy and effortless, surprisingly very forgiving, to me. It's not twitchy, like some potentially tight-turning skis are. But it gives something up to some of the very best frontside biased skis on groomers and on ice.

Note: The slightly "heavy" feel of this ski both days - given its light weight - leads me to suspect that this demo ski has a machine tune that is slightly rail high, thus the heavy feel, along with the extra "railed" feel to the edge. I may be wrong here, but the ski did feel, as demoed both times, like hand-flattening it a bit would make that heaviness go away (for instance, at Racer's Edge or Pup's Glide Shop in Breck, or at home). The downside would be that its edge might feel a bit more normal, for even a race ski, as opposed to so dialed in.

4. Volkl RTM 186. r 18 @ 177. 132-86-114. 3266 gm (c. $1100 currently.) Titanal layers. 2 runs.

What a great frontside ski. Probably not quite as good in bumps as the RTM 84, but a better carver, a medium to longer turn size, at least. A reality check, for sure, on what a great frontside-biased, all Mountain ski is like. Just about as much fun, for me, as a gs race ski. A delight.

5. 183.4 Black Crows Orb 91. r 18 @ 178. 122-91-109. 1840 gm/ski (c. $700 currently.) 2 runs.

Surprise ski of the demo. I wanted to stay on this ski longer. It's the first Black Crows ski I've liked so much (others, that I can remember, in past years: Atris, Corvus). This is a wing-ding ski. For now, my favorite of the demo season, so far, fickle as I now seem to be. This ski is intuitive, natural, a great carver. Playful, yet potentially an edge rider fast or slow, and in this longer length, a good charger, though it will do bumps just fine, well even. Or just lounge around as needed. Five stars, on this "old snow" day.

I had no idea.

Rather than wanting to buy these suckers as soon as I am able, however, I want to try these on a softer snow day also, to give them an equal chance to the Legend x106s. But for now, I found the Orbs more intuitive, and ones I'd want to ski a lot. seemingly.

A note here: I've noticed that Blistergear in its new gear magazine equates the shorter 178 Orb version to the new Volkl Kendo, calling the two very close in performance, with the Orb having slightly less of a hooky tendency in bumps. These two were second (Orb) and third (Kendo) to the top in bumps, on the comparison Blistergear lists that seem to be mostly in the mag rather than online. (The 178 Orb would probably be slightly better in this regard than "my" 183.4, not sure.)

Still, it was kind of a "blah" Blister review.

I suspect they didn't try the longer 183.4 version I was on. What a sleeper, for me.

6. 175 Black Crows Vertis 85, r 15 @ 175. 128-85-111. "All mountain rocker." (c.$660 currently.) 1 run.

A clumsy ski, for me. Like a poorly synced early K2 Rictor 90 prototype, maybe. It skidded. It held an edge fitfully. It careened down the slope almost hopping like a rabbit at times, in tight places. Not my cup of tea.

What a contrast to the Orb.

 

[mikel]

Thanks for the info on the Enforcer. I guess maybe that explains the 10 for float by Freeskier? I'm considering taking another stab at the Kore 105 along with the new RMU 106 this weekend. Wish there was better snow and more opened at WP.

Not sure why I'm wanting a 1 O something so bad but I do. Sure wish @Cyrus Schenck would make the 104 in a 178. Then it would be a no brainier for me. So far the DPS Alchemist 106 is still my favorite. The only problem is I haven't skied any of them in conditions that I actually want one for.

 

[Ken_R]

Thanks for the info on the Enforcer. I guess maybe that explains the 10 for float by Freeskier? I'm considering taking another stab at the Kore 105 along with the new RMU 106 this weekend. Wish there was better snow and more opened at WP.

Not sure why I'm wanting a 1 O something so bad but I do. Sure wish @Cyrus Schenck would make the 104 in a 178. Then it would be a no brainier for me. So far the DPS Alchemist 106 is still my favorite. The only problem is I haven't skied any of them in conditions that I actually want one for.

Once it finally starts snowing you will know why you want one

Most of last season I used my 112mm wide skis. Got the 88's for no new snow in days days. But, a 1ohsomething works great even on no new snow days mid season. Right now its man made groomer season still so its hard to think of a wider OSQ and a 1oh might not make much sense but the time will come, hopefully soon.

 

[mike_m]

Sorry, but too few of the skis reviewed at Keystone were appropriate for the hardpack available at testing. Every ski over 88mm at the waist is designed and optimized for soft or chopped-up snow over six inches deep. Testing fatter skis on hardpack is like testing snow tires on a racetrack in 90 degree weather and complaining that the tires aren't responsive and wash out in the corners. They'll get around the track, but none will show what they can really do in such conditions.

When I did the Loveland demos in November, skier after skier was testing 98- to 120mm-waisted skis on boilerplate and trying to decide which ski to buy as their everyday, go-to ski. This despite the fact that 80% of their runs this year will be on groomers, firm snow, perhaps bumps, and maybe 10 days of powder or crud. The skis optimized for the conditions the vast majority of people ski are 78 to 84 in the waist (most men) or 72 to 80 (most women). Going fatter and less effective makes no sense to me. Why not use the right tool for the job and enjoy it more?

 

[ski otter 2]

It was half and half, strictly speaking.

I'd mostly still agree with you, in very general terms. My own usual "old snow," more versatile ski is 80 width, for example.

Beyond a certain point, though, this is not much use to me, at least personally, on a demo day: when exploring what's new with current skis designed by Volkl, Atomic, Nordica, Head - or Pep Fujas with K2, Candide T. with Faction, or those two Austrian Freeskiers who created Black Crows - just as examples. Or with the local guys who make their own designed skis around here in Colorado or elsewhere (Moment, ON3P, Liberty, Fat-ypus, Meier, etc.). Folks, including myself, are able to extrapolate about skis in ways they need to, you see. With lots of welcome surprises.

I have to be interested in what a ski can really do, including for myself, not what just numbers tell me, given the current creativity with skis. It's them, not me who are making such "outside the box" skis, you see. Just one instance: Sean Pettit's skis, the Shreditor 102 and Pettitor 120, can both kill groomers (when mounted right, at the right lengths) - in their own way as much fun as a current FIS/WC GS race ski or a top sub 90 more versatile ski, or anything in between, in my experience.

In this case, the balance of successive demos on lots of soft snow (Loveland) and on "old snow" (Keystone), rounded out what I could figure out about several skis I demoed at both places. I hope there are others who could get more of a sense of these generally soft snow skis from both reviews.

And I just had a sense that trying out the Enforcer 110 at the beginning of a good groomer day (not even close to "boilerplate," as yet) would tell me much of what I wanted to know about that ski, given there are other Enforcers I've tried.

 

[ski otter 2]

Once it finally starts snowing you will know why you want one

Most of last season I used my 112mm wide skis. Got the 88's for no new snow in days days. But, a 1ohsomething works great even on no new snow days mid season. Right now its man made groomer season still so its hard to think of a wider OSQ and a 1oh might not make much sense but the time will come, hopefully soon.

I've maybe said it before, and I'll say it again: the Moment Deathwish 112s and the Head Monster 88s: (as I suspect) whatta wonderful two ski quiver!!!!!

 

[Ken_R]

I've maybe said it before, and I'll say it again: the Moment Deathwish 112s and the Head Monster 88s: (as I suspect) whatta wonderful two ski quiver!!!!!

Thx! Yea!
I really love the Monster series now. The 98 was also superb. so so good. I want to try the 108 now!

The BMX 105 felt like an excellent resort ski as well in 181cm.

The Moment is just a very very versatile ski. Its great in untracked powder and trees but can really rail smoother runs and grip icy steeps but still crush it in the crud. Not as easy to ski (in the 190cm length) as the Kastle or the Dynastar X106's but still a somewhat friendly ski for me. The versatility I think comes from the minimal sidecut (27m?) and the even medium-stiff flex. So one can mod turn shape just by flexing it more or less. Its really cool. The Blizzard Rustler 11 in 192cm reminded me a bit of it.

 

[Monique]

When I did the Loveland demos in November, skier after skier was testing 98- to 120mm-waisted skis on boilerplate and trying to decide which ski to buy as their everyday, go-to ski. This despite the fact that 80% of their runs this year will be on groomers, firm snow, perhaps bumps, and maybe 10 days of powder or crud. The skis optimized for the conditions the vast majority of people ski are 78 to 84 in the waist (most men) or 72 to 80 (most women). Going fatter and less effective makes no sense to me. Why not use the right tool for the job and enjoy it more?

Wait, why do you think 80% of my runs will be groomers and only 10 will be powder or crud? Are you extrapolating from the weather so far?

In general, I would assume most of the people demoing skis are pretty proficient. There's no reason to assume that a motivated and proficient Colorado skier is skiing groomers most of the time.

 

[Jim McDonald]

Personally, I prefer to demo a ski in the conditions it wasn't made for.
I'm pretty confident a Monster 88, for example, can ski hardpack. I'd like to know how it handles 12" of fresh.
Likewise, I'd want to know how a Bibby Pro or a GPO handles that steep, icy groomer, because I figure powder won't be a problem.
But I am a bit strange...

 

[Philpug]

Sorry, but too few of the skis reviewed at Keystone were appropriate for the hardpack available at testing.

A few years ago, all the ski tests we went to all had zero new snow and were zoomer groomers and we decided there was no reason to test powder skis, there was just not the conditions for them so we wrote that in our Testers Choice reviews that year. While we chose not to test them, others still did, from the lift you could see skiers, good ones skiing down with 115mm wide skis on the groomers. When there were so many other skis to be tested, why were they on skis that were ill designed for the condtions? We asked some of these skiers, they said well. thats what we were told to test for the shop, thats what we will be carrying. What are you going to tell the customer when they come in looking for a powder ski, "Duuuuude, these kill it on the hard pack..." I would then ask what about X's new 80mm frontside ski. They would reply, well, we are not carrying that brand. I would ask, isn't it good to know what else is out in the market place and what your customers might be looking at? Or that, hey, thats a killer ski, maybe we SHOULD carry it.

 

[johnnyvw]

Sounds like our local Buckmans. Very few skis under 90mm. And exactly one pair that would be considered groomer oriented (a pair of Atomics).

 

[kimmyt]

When I did the Loveland demos in November, skier after skier was testing 98- to 120mm-waisted skis on boilerplate and trying to decide which ski to buy as their everyday, go-to ski. This despite the fact that 80% of their runs this year will be on groomers, firm snow, perhaps bumps, and maybe 10 days of powder or crud. The skis optimized for the conditions the vast majority of people ski are 78 to 84 in the waist (most men) or 72 to 80 (most women). Going fatter and less effective makes no sense to me. Why not use the right tool for the job and enjoy it more?

Wait, are you talking about the demo day at Lland this year? Because, were we at a different ski resort? It was definitely not boilerplate. In fact, I'm not sure I've ever actually seen true boilerplate in my years at CO resorts.

 

[KingGrump]

In general, I would assume most of the people demoing skis are pretty proficient.

Long ago, when I was teaching my son to cross the street here in NYC. The most important line I have for him regarding drivers was "Son, even in NYC, you can depend on the kindness of strangers. On the other hand, if you depend on the competence of strangers. You'll dead in no time."

Perhaps we have differing standards.

 

[ski otter 2]

As folks may have described above, the Christy's Loveland November demo this year had just gotten 2" (day before) plus 12" (night before), a powder demo day - so that was a chance to try out various skis in very quickly deteriorating but at first great powder/chop/crud/soft snow. I assume the "Boilerplate" reference was from past years.

Unfortunately, or maybe fortunately, there are only three inexpensive, multi-brand demos in Colorado each year along the Front Range: so many skis, so little time. Like most skiers, I'm not in the ski business with unlimited free access to demo skis. I gotta watch my dollars and still ski the boards that seem they might be of interest, when I can, imperfectly.

Wait, why do you think 80% of my runs will be groomers and only 10 will be powder or crud? Are you extrapolating from the weather so far?

In general, I would assume most of the people demoing skis are pretty proficient. There's no reason to assume that a motivated and proficient Colorado skier is skiing groomers most of the time.

I agree with this, though I love to ski groomers on gs race skis. I recognized many of the demo skiers at Loveland, a pretty seasoned crew. (But who knows about that Keystone riff raff - who knows what they might do?) Every ski day (over 100+ each year these days, knock on wood), I'm with similar folks up there who are pretty sophisticated about their skiing, who seek out varied conditions and resort powder days in handfuls - very ingeniously, often. It's common for such folk to get 30 to 70 or so resort powder days each year out of a 100 to 180 or so days total for them; and to habituate themselves to alternate terrains: some on moguls, some in trees, some up on ridges, or on open wind blown steeps. This is Colorado, after all. And we like super skis! Often ones that are narrow, and often ones that are wide!!! On all sorts of slopes!

By the way, I learned enough about that notoriously inappropriate wide ski, the Enforcer 110, to have a good idea why lots of good powder skiers around here who have demoed it in different conditions aren't excited by it, except maybe in a longer length; but might be in the Enforcer Pro 115 (?).

 

[Philpug]

In general, I would assume most of the people demoing skis are pretty proficient.

You would be wrong. You would be surprised how many "testers" are at the Industry ski test at Copper that don't know their BSL let alone thier binding settings.

 

[Ken_R]

By the way, I learned enough about that notoriously inappropriate wide ski, the Enforcer 110, to have a good idea why lots of good powder skiers around here who have demoed it in different conditions aren't excited by it, except maybe in a longer length; but might be in the Enforcer Pro 115 (?).

I for one did not love that ski. Its a good ski but It did not wow me. At least that was my first impression.

You would be wrong. You would be surprised how many "testers" are at the Industry ski test at Copper that don't know their BSL let alone thier binding settings.

 

[Monique]

Long ago, when I was teaching my son to cross the street here in NYC. The most important line I have for him regarding drivers was "Son, even in NYC, you can depend on the kindness of strangers. On the other hand, if you depend on the competence of strangers. You'll dead in no time."

Perhaps we have differing standards.

You would be wrong. You would be surprised how many "testers" are at the Industry ski test at Copper that don't know their BSL let alone thier binding settings.

Okay fine ... but I still think the assumption that everyone out there for demo day will be skiing mostly groomers is ... misguided. See @ski otter 2 's post above.

 

[ski otter 2]

Well, here we go again.

Another demo day today, Sunday, the Bentgate demo day at Loveland, lotsa brands & reps, lotsa skis - mostly "inappropriate" widths, according to many on this website, apparently. It's a doggone shame, because, as far as I could tell, there were no skis under 85 or so there, and few under 90. And yet there were many incredible skis for such a day, really fun on "old snow" groomers, off piste bumps and trees, and steep bump runs, that haven't seen new snow since Friday. I didn't take out a pair of skis I didn't like a lot the whole day, all but one "inappropriate," unavoidably. And it was such a day.

Mostly 3 runs per ski this time, 7 or 8 skis, mostly Black Crows and DPS.

Correction: whatever Black Crow skis I demoed a few years ago, liked but wasn't coveting - it wasn't the Corvus, as I stated above it probably was. I skied the Corvus 183 today 3 runs ("inappropriate" @ 109), and it was a typical big mountain ski, very similar to my Fatypus D-Senders, except with very slight rocker tip and tail (mine have none). It felt like my D-Senders too, except the rocker made it playful: you could slarve the things, instead of just ski them square and centered, like mine: and like mine, the things have no speed limit, don't fear crud, and just kill it. I went looking for trouble with those skis, but couldn't find it. (But, of course, they really shine in difficult, rough, crud conditions - the dang things felt almost exactly like mine that way, though not quite as tank-like because of the rocker.)

With my D Senders last year, there were two days with hard crust between layers of powder that to varying degrees had refrozen also. Almost no one was skiing the off piste slopes because of this, and those that were skied cautiously and for the most part slowly. I found I could charge at will.

Back to the demo, DPS sure has gotten its thing together, especially with the Alchemists (their cutting edge $ ski) yet also the Foundations (their attempt to have mercy on us poor buyers, with price tags at c. $799 instead of c. $1350 for the Alchemists.) In their booth the reps were very excited about both skis, especially the Alchemists, and also their new wax, PHANTOM, which they are making plans to distribute and promote even now, as they prototype test the stuff.

i demoed a pair of 186 Foundation Cassiars 95 (primary green) that had been treated with Phantom and was a prototype for that. It felt like any other good wax job, fast. And a single treatment permeates the entire base, surface to bottom, permanently, lasting through base grinds and everything else. One time, permanent. Currently the retail cost is around $100 per pair of skis. I can only say it works as a wax that had been on the skis for five days of skiing so far.

 

[Ken_R]

I was at Loveland today as well. I will post full reviews (with photos this time!) later but overall it was not a good day for demoing skis at all (specially compared to the demo day that started this thread). Only firm groomers and firm messy bumps on offer today.

The surprise of the day was the Phantom (wax/coating). I felt the fastest glide (on a Foundation Cassiar 95 185cm) of all the skis I demoed including my own skis which had a wax job 5 ski days ago. So I am sold if it keeps that feel day after day.

Really enjoyed the Blizzard Bonafide 187cm's (no surprise since I knew they would handle firm conditions well, still has that nice GS feel) but also the Rustler 10's in 188cm. Wow. Awesome ski. If it handled today's groomers it can handle anything. Fun fun ski that still has a lot of edge hold when needed. Impressive for a oneohsomething. Its a must buy ski for me for those looking for a OSQ ski for Colorado for advanced and expert terrain.

The DPS skis still impressed me with their capability in a wide range of conditions even though they are super light. Even the Wailer 99 Alchemist. Not my first choice of skis for use exclusively in a ski resort (with the exception of the Cassiar 95) but work well there anyway.

The Corvus and the Orb were good easy skis for me but nothing special. Would love to try them both in longer lengths and the Corvus in soft snow (it felt like it would be really good off trail).

My Monster 88 184cm's really crushed it today but was surprised how similar the Bonafide 187cm's felt to them. The new bones have a more precise front end than the 16'-17' model. Very nice.