Shortlist of tree-run skis

[Trasselkalle]

I'm trying to compose a list of skis to demo before I pull the trigger and need some help. I haven't been living in a country with snow the last 5 years, but now that I'm in a skiable country again I'm looking for something to replace my old Salomon X-Screams.

Where I do most of my skiing here in Sweden, we typically have significantly windpacked snow that you inevitably run into some for parts of any run. Once you're into the woods, our trees are very tight but the snow is typically much better (and deeper) making me spend the majority of my time here. I also like skiing moguls, but haven't yet been on skis I had a problem with for bumps, so unless the ski is horrid in bumps I should be ok. Ideally, I stick to couloirs and trees and like it more the steeper it is.

Fischer Watea 101 (or possibly Scott Santiago Pure - almost the same ski, but 188 instead) and Fischer Watea 94 have been received very well in Swedish conditions. Just looking at those two, will the 94s be significantly more nimble than the 101s? I'm sort of torn between aiming for something ideal for very varied quality of deep snow and something that is as nimble as possible, but still a fat ski. Skiing-wise, I can be aggressive if needed, but favor the less muscular approach to skiing. I'm 6 feet tall and 165-175 lbs.

Thus, what I'm trying to figure out first of all is:
1) Will 95-ish options like the Mantra, Monster 88 (I know... just 88mm) and Watea 94s have so much more to offer in the trees (even though the snow is much better and deeper there), than the Gotama, Santiago Pure and Watea 101, or will the wider skis be so much better than the others in the worse snow that what the lose in nimbleness is easily made up for?
2) I'm leaning towards making the Wateas the first two to demo, but since it's a loooong drive to different places that have demos available, I would be happy to hear if you for instance feel that the stiffer Mantras would be a hotter alternative than the Wateas in the given conditions, etc.

Cheers,
Carl

UPDATE: Considering how difficult it appears for anyone to answer my core question and compare two different width skis of similar builds, maybe someone has experience with other brands than Fischer? It's the principal answer, more than brand experience, that I'm after (although I'm still open for experience and suggestions on that too). I'm not sure if for instance the Mantra and Gotama are as like each other as the Watea 94 and 101, but you get my point I'm sure. (I'm adding this to the OP for the quick-browsers to find more easily.)

[Sparwood Dave]

Hi Carl
I also wanted a powder ski that was quick for the trees (the best powder is always in the trees) I bought the Line Prophet 100; a ski that is both wide and very nimble. Search TG for reviews and you'll see. Here's one to get you started.

http://tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=111492
Dave

[leroy jenkins]

1. Fatter skis are more nimble in pow than skinnier skis.

2. All the information you seek is already out there. Maybe instead of starting a worthless thread you should be a bit less lazy, a bit more self sufficient, and search for it.

EDIT: I'll throw you a bone, if this is a quiver ski then get something fatter with a rockered tip. It will rule the windcrust and the trees.

[Toadman]

Add the Dynastar XXL 187 to the list. Seriously.

[Trasselkalle]

Dave - I've looked at those only briefly, since they are a bit hard to find in Sweden (especially for demo). As it turns out, it may be that I go to the Alps instead for demo since a friend of mine has some interest in doing the same, so I'll try to get hold of the Prophets for demo also. Heck, worst case scenario is that I go over to visit friends in COL and pick some skis up there. The $ is cheap as heck right now anyhow. I'll see what I can do closer than that first though...

Leroy Jenkins - thanks, but lazy wouldn't be what I am if you knew about the 40+ hours I've put into searching not just this forum but a ton other sources (including French, German and Swedish). The problem is that there hasn't been anyone specifically comparing performance in tight trees and couloirs of those two widths/skis, in particular in relation to how well they measure up in less than ideal powder, to form any kind of arguments on what they prefer and why. It wasn't until I clearly could see this that I posted, and if I was a smarta$$, I might wish that you wouldn't assume that an answer was out there already if you didn't look to verify it yourself first. Since I'm not (truly - I mean that), all I can say is that I was as surprised as you (likely is) that this type of info wasn't readily available already. That's why I spend all those hours looking at four different languages for this info. There is simply not much (if any) mentioned in reviews how they do in terrain that demands frequent changes in tempo, such as tight/rocky runs and tree-runs. In regards to if this is a quiver ski - no, it's not. It's just that I very, very seldom ski anything else than those conditions. Sure, I have a couple of other pairs still, but I know that I've only taken those out in the conditions I like to ski in anyhow.

Toadman - really? I thought for sure they would be much too bulky for me, since I'm more of a technique/balance skier than a powerhouse. I'd love it if you were right, though, so I'll have to try them out also.

[addict]

Although not for me, reverse camber skis might be an option in trees. They do tend to pivot very fast.

[fat yeti]

Icelantic shaman is a great tree powder ski, and next years 184 still has a short turning radius, I love my 173 shamns for trees but cant wait to step on the 184s

[Trasselkalle]

Fat Yeti - duly noted and thanks - I'll see what I can do to find a demo for that also. Addict - I've never been on reverse camber skis actually, and hadn't even considered that as a possible option since it's going to be my main pair. I'll look into that further, though, thanks. Call me conservative, but I remain somewhat sceptical about liking reverse camber. I should try some out before I make up my mind, however - that's absolutely true.

Returning to my core question in the OP (since that hasn't been replied to yet): Anyone with experience of both the Watea 101 and 94 that can help me out? The comparison is especially interesting since the 94 is AFAIK essentially the same ski as the 101, but just with less waist. Thus, it would be awesome to hear word on how they compare in tight runs when terrain forces turns on you rather than being allowed to turn whenever it is that you want to yourself, since such a comparison isn't answered in anything I've found here or at other forums.

[ill-advised strategy]

best ski I've ever skied for tight trees and soft snow is the fatypus alotta. huge float + predictable/forgiving/quick = money for tight trees.

[Trasselkalle]

Wow - those are monsters, YetiMan! Never seen them in the EU though. If I end up in COL, I'll try to check them out. So, is one-footed down moguls the only way to get down the bumps (j/k)? Those are some insane looking skis (in a good way). How long do you ski yours, and what size are you?

EDIT: Man they love that monster in Freeskier Magazine! I'm still shaking my head looking at them in astonishment.

[ill-advised strategy]

some more detail here:
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...ad.php?t=71317

[Trasselkalle]

Thanks - reading that same thread as you post

[StuntCok]

PM Gear BROckers are light and nimble and would be good in the crappy wind affected snow as well. These are my new quiver killer for everything other than park and groomers.

[XXX-er]

for what you are specificaly talking I would get something <100mm underfoot (so powder ready)

that is pretty stiff ... not a noodle with good side cut(turns tight & well)

go at or possibly 10cm down from the mfgers recommendation on your weight or you would normaly ski depending on if you wana still go fast,choosing a stiffer ski will help some if you go 10cm shorter

verdicts or sugar daddies I know would work but thats alll I have skied in a not skinny board ... just my opinion

[Spyderjon]

Trasslekalle, you can demo the 08/09 Icelantic range plus the 08/09 ranges from High Society, VIST, Amplid, Elan, Liberty, Faction, Black Crows, Radical & Zag at Val Thorens on Mon 21st & Tues 22nd April. Should be something from that offering that should do ya. PM me your eamil address if you can make it & I'll send you the details.

[Trasselkalle]

Thanks Spyderjon. Unfortunately, I'm in Ireland that entire week on a work-related thing.

StuntCok - it's a shame how hard the BROs are to get hold of here. I've only ever seen one person ski them and that was an English speaking person, so he might have brought his with him. I've sent out some questions to some friends I have at various ski resorts that I know can help dig things out, if at all available.

XXX-er - 90-100 is what I've been expecting to find appropriate. Since I'm not a powerskiier, it's likely that that something a tad softer (without, as you say, being a noodle) than what I for instance know of the Legend Pro's. I understand the XXL's that I received an earlier tip for is actually perceived by some as a more easy-going ski due to the softer tip (although my two friends who have them still feel that the more power they apply to that ski, the better it skis). In terms of length, I'll have to see what's available when I demo. It's fairly likely that I go for something I've actually been able to ski over something that is promising, but possibly better in a different length. In all honesty, I think a serious test of skis needs to be done over at least a weeks time, so I'll probably try to stay conservative and only go for something I've actually tried as they all would likely feel much better after a weeks riding or so (i.e. when I'm more used to the ski). I have done some lighter competitions in GS and slalom when I was a teenager, and sort of got my high-speed dose out of me then. Now, it's much more about getting down where few others can that intrigues me, so while I personally don't mind going fast - the skis will likely not see many 11s (except when there is no other way down...) or super G turns on wide open spaces. Thanks for you comments.

[ill-advised strategy]

after reading your last post I would think you might like the pocket rocket if you could find a pair that's still got some life. I always liked that ski in tight spots because it was really really light, had an extremely low swing weight, was soft, had decent float, and was generally really predictable and forgiving.

[funkendrenchman]

The 179 AK Maden is very quick in the trees.

[Trasselkalle]

Yieks - my shortlist is becoming a long list! Thanks guys. Since I'm Swedish, I just have to test our own Hendryx skis as well. Too bad I just missed their demo in &#197;re this weekend, but that shouldn't be a problem to set up somewhere else. This whole deal about mounting duckstance seems too odd to work, but it won't cost me to check it out so I might as well. I saw you had your eyes on them a while ago, YetiMan - would have been awesome to hear a comparison with your own monsters who are equally strange (and thus super interesting to test).

Btw, isn't the Salomon Gun supposed to be something of a Pocket Rocket replacement? I'm a bit worried about being knocked around in the windpacked on these too much, though, but what do I know (since I haven't tested them yet)?

[SiSt]

I&#180;m with funken on this one. Even the 189&#180;s are pretty nimble. Should be able to get some for cheap too...

[Trasselkalle]

Ok, SiSt - they are a bit hard to find at an initial look, but I'll check them out too. Thanks.

Considering how difficult it appears for anyone to answer my core question and compare two different width skis of similar builds, maybe someone has experience with other brands than Fischer? It's the principal answer, more than brand experience, that I'm after. I'm not sure if for instance the Mantra and Gotama are as like each other as the Watea 94 and 101, but you get my point I'm sure.

[tohee]

Trasselkalle; I'm the Fat-Ypus rep in Norway. As far as I know there is no Swedish rep. I have a pair of new D-Senders with a tiny chip in the top sheet on one of the skis that I can ship for NOK 3700,-, or a spotless pair for 4700,-Send me an e-mail to torstein@fat-ypus.no if you are interested.

[Trasselkalle]

Where in Norway are you located (Drammen as your profile says, or)? What length are they?

[Wes Mantooth]

I'm trying to compose a list of skis to demo before I pull the trigger and need some help. I haven't been living in a country with snow the last 5 years, but now that I'm in a skiable country again I'm looking for something to replace my old Salomon X-Screams.

Where I do most of my skiing here in Sweden, we typically have significantly windpacked snow that you inevitably run into some for parts of any run. Once you're into the woods, our trees are very tight but the snow is typically much better (and deeper) making me spend the majority of my time here. I also like skiing moguls, but haven't yet been on skis I had a problem with for bumps, so unless the ski is horrid in bumps I should be ok. Ideally, I stick to couloirs and trees and like it more the steeper it is.

Fischer Watea 101 (or possibly Scott Santiago Pure - almost the same ski, but 188 instead) and Fischer Watea 94 have been received very well in Swedish conditions. Just looking at those two, will the 94s be significantly more nimble than the 101s? I'm sort of torn between aiming for something ideal for very varied quality of deep snow and something that is as nimble as possible, but still a fat ski. Skiing-wise, I can be aggressive if needed, but favor the less muscular approach to skiing. I'm 6 feet tall and 165-175 lbs.

Thus, what I'm trying to figure out first of all is:
1) Will 95-ish options like the Mantra, Monster 88 (I know... just 88mm) and Watea 94s have so much more to offer in the trees (even though the snow is much better and deeper there), than the Gotama, Santiago Pure and Watea 101, or will the wider skis be so much better than the others in the worse snow that what the lose in nimbleness is easily made up for?
2) I'm leaning towards making the Wateas the first two to demo, but since it's a loooong drive to different places that have demos available, I would be happy to hear if you for instance feel that the stiffer Mantras would be a hotter alternative than the Wateas in the given conditions, etc.

Cheers,
Carl

UPDATE: Considering how difficult it appears for anyone to answer my core question and compare two different width skis of similar builds, maybe someone has experience with other brands than Fischer? It's the principal answer, more than brand experience, that I'm after (although I'm still open for experience and suggestions on that too). I'm not sure if for instance the Mantra and Gotama are as like each other as the Watea 94 and 101, but you get my point I'm sure. (I'm adding this to the OP for the quick-browsers to find more easily.)

For you non-swedish speakers I'll translate so you don't have to read his persuasive essay on skis.

I'm 6 ft tall and 175lbs. I need ski advice for something to replace my X-screams. Like everybody knows, snow in the trees is better so I want a ski for tight trees. I'm trying to boost my GNAR factor by saying I ski steep shit so I want a ski for that. Here's my list so far:
-Fischer Watea 94 or 101? Which one is more nimble
-Mantra or 90 ish waisted skis for tighter turning
-Goat or things around 100 underfoot for deeper snow( what are the downsides to each)

UPDATE: Nobody answered the question i didn't ask, so what are the cores and once again do I want 94 or 101??????????

[Imz]

I ski the Watea 101's as my everyday ski (Lake Tahoe). I've never had a problem getting them around. A 94 will of course be easier to turn.

They are an excellent single ski quiver choice.

I have a pair of original Big Daddies (110 underfoot) which used to be my day to days, but the 101's are almost as stable at speed, and a little more forgiving when I'm feeling lazy. Also comparatively much lighter than my Atomics. I'm 5'10, 158lbs, so you should be good on any of the choices mentioned.

In the spirit of Wes Mantooth:

Buy the 101's if you want to work a ski & understand how to move it with low effort. If this is the case, you will like it.

Buy a Pocket Rocket or equiv. if you'd like a forgiving playful ski which is good in most conditions.

Buy the RAX if you are an assclown.