Help Needed: First pair of skis!?

[alyssamh]

Hey all, I'm trying to make the decision on my first pair of skis and I'm finding it harder than I thought! I've been skiing for about 8 years but just never invested in my own pair and I'm so excited to finally be able to. I narrowed it down to these pairs:

2014 K2 Superbright 90
2015 Rossignol Temptation 84 (or 88)
2015 Volkl Yumi

I consider myself intermediate-advanced: I can ski harder slopes but prefer to take it easy and relaxed and really enjoy my time going down the mountain. I basically just want skis that will be FUN to ride, but that also aren't just for beginners, like the rentals I've always used. On the other hand, I don't want a pair that would be for experts, as some of the skis I looked at said they were (should I be concerned about the K2's for that reason?). I mainly ski on groomed slopes (East Coast), but would like a pair of skis that can be good on powder as well if I take them out West, hence the reason why I've got my sights set on all-mountain skis. If anyone can give me more insight on any of these skis it would be much appreciated!!

 

[Jilly]

I've only skied the Rossi and the 84 would be a good choice. The 88 might be too stiff at this point and I wouldn't want it as my only ski. It's not that great on our eastern hardpack. I never get to demo volkl or k2 so can't help with those.

And as always. ..can you demo or have you demo'd any?

 

[marzNC]

Hey all, I'm trying to make the decision on my first pair of skis and I'm finding it harder than I thought! I've been skiing for about 8 years but just never invested in my own pair and I'm so excited to finally be able to. I narrowed it down to these pairs:

2014 K2 Superbright 90
2015 Rossignol Temptation 84 (or 88)
2015 Volkl Yumi

I consider myself intermediate-advanced: I can ski harder slopes but prefer to take it easy and relaxed and really enjoy my time going down the mountain. I basically just want skis that will be FUN to ride, but that also aren't just for beginners, like the rentals I've always used. On the other hand, I don't want a pair that would be for experts, as some of the skis I looked at said they were (should I be concerned about the K2's for that reason?). I mainly ski on groomed slopes (East Coast), but would like a pair of skis that can be good on powder as well if I take them out West, hence the reason why I've got my sights set on all-mountain skis. If anyone can give me more insight on any of these skis it would be much appreciated!!

How many days did you ski in the past years? Northeast vs. west?

Although I've skied my Black Pearls in the northeast the last couple seasons, if I lived there I be more likely to buy something in the 75-85 range underfoot. I just got a deal on the Head Absolut Joy, 78 underfoot, that I will use in the Mid-Atlantic and northeast. I'm an older advanced skier, petite. I have much preferred Rossi over Volkl in general during demo days.

 

[mustski]

Welcome to the forum and congrats on that first ski purchase. It is super exciting to buy skis! I am a Volkl fan myself, but have read that the Yumi is not well suited for Eastern icy conditions. Of those three, probably the Rossi would be the best choice. If you ski a lot of days in the East and only a handful out west, it might be best to expand your list to include some front side carvers. I live in California and both my daily drivers are all mountain because I get changing conditions throughout the day (ice/super solid corduroy at first chair, softening early, crud before noon, and slush after lunch). When I travel, I take one of those - but truthfully neither of them is great in powder over 10 inches. If I get lucky (rare!) and the powder is deep - than I rent powder skis. It's more important to be really happy with your daily tool than to try to find the one ski that will do it all. There really isn't one.

 

[surfsnowgirl]

I ski in the Northeast and currently have an 87 underfoot all mountain ski that is great all around but perfect for changing conditions throughout the day or if we have a bit of powder. I am currently on the hunt for a front side ski around 80 underfoot with some metal in it for those days when its flat out icy and hard pack all day long. I have the Yumi but despite it having vertical sidewalls its likely never going to see an icy day. I plan to bring it out on softer snow days when I don't need a stiff ski with metal in it.

I'd demo if you can because a ski can be great on paper but you won't know if you truly resonate with the ski until you are on it. I typically know within 2 minutes of skiing off the chair if the ski and I will be friends. Demoing is awesome and highly recommended.

With the skis you have listed, it seems the Rossi Temptation 84 would do the job. Jilly knows her Rossi's.

 

[DeweySki]

Hi @alyssamh !

I haven't tried any of the skis you mentioned (so take my opinion with a grain of salt!). Like mustski, I am a West Coast skier so my driver is 95 underfoot. One of the skis I tried and loved in the 85 underfoot range is the Atomic Affinity Storm. I didn't purchase it yet, and would mostly use it early season, but it's still on my radar if a good deal comes up. The Affinity line from Atomic also has a few other skis smaller underfoot.

Since you are looking at K2s, have you looked into the Potion line? (or is this the same as the Superbright?) They seem to get good reviews. Also my BFF has the Temptation 88 as her daily driver out west and loves it. Another woman we ski with who is an East Coast transplant skis the 84 out here and seems to do okay in a variety of situations. The Temptation seems to be a well-loved ski all around.

 

[NZfarmgirl]

The Superbright likes soft snow and is quite soft itself, I don't think it will be a great ski for firm east coast conditions.
I would recommend a ski between 78and 84 wide, not wider at this stage. Have you thought about renting performance skis for a while this coming season, rather than the basic rentals? Then you could try a few different skis out and perhaps buy skis mid season when the first sales hit rather than full price. You will spend a bit more on renting but be able to make a better choice. There are many different feeling skis and everyone skis differently.
We can give you a short list but you are best to try them yourself.

 

[MaineSkiLady]

Welcome, and much luck in your search! The general advice here is to try to locate a resort-wide manufacturers’ demo day (not sure if we’ve had an annual list). This is far more cost-effective than renting high-performance demos from a ski shop, although that’s an option (many will let you change out skis up to 3 times in one day/for one fee).

These demo days can be a bit on the hectic side - but it really doesn’t take that long to determine whether a particular ski meshes with your skiing style and preferences. What you *think* sounds right for you “on paper” may in fact turn out to be no-go. Additionally, your height/weight will affect how you flex the ski (and at what length)(among other factors, such as technique) and how well that flex pattern works for you.

Even if you have to travel a bit to one of these demo days, it could well be worth it in ultimate cost savings of the ski. Skis can be sold - but it’s best to get it right the first time.

I am an all-mountain ski fan as well. Just remember that in the eastern scope of skiing - with 1 being boilerplate ice and 10 being boot to knee deep powder (rare), all-mountain ski configuration will give you best performance in the 3-7 conditions range. (I still call this “covering several bases.”) 80-85 waist width will do hard snow with good technique - but never as well as a dedicated ice carver. Nor will it handle crud or powder as well as a 95+. Get a ski that will work best for where you spend the majority of your ski days and the conditions you most frequently encounter.

The right ski will put an instant smile on your face. And keep it there. Trust your smile.

 

[alyssamh]

Thanks to everyone that has responded! You've all helped a ton. While the idea of demoing skis sounds like it would help a lot, I think I'd rather buy a pair now while there's some really great summer savings sales. And I think I've done enough research and all of your comments have helped to point me in the direction of the Rossignol Temptation 84's! I'm already so excited to get them. I found them for a great deal ($390 for skis with bindings already mounted) - the bindings are Saphir 110. Will those be good? I noticed on the Rossi website that those are the bindings they suggest for these particular skis but my knowledge on bindings is very minimal so I wanted to make sure with all of you!

 

[Jilly]

You say the bindings are mounted, but the skis are new? Could be a system binding so you have no choice there. Don't forget that even thought the bindings are mounted, you need to get to a shop to have them adjust for your boots. Make sure you know your weight, height and skiing ability.

And I hope you ordered a proper length. The Temptation series is 30% rocker. So just for comparison. My Rossi Attraxion 8's a carver are 154. My Temptation 88's are 162. Go about 10 cm longer than any carver you might have been on. I'm 5'4, too heavy right now!

 

[surfsnowgirl]

When I ordered my Volkl Violas from Ski essentials they were brand new and when they came in the mail there were 2 boxes; one box for the bindings and the other box had the skis. I thought all skis that are new with system bindings came this way?

 

[alyssamh]

The picture shows the bindings on the skis, but maybe that's just for show? In the specs all it says is that bindings are included. Not sure if that means they're simply shipped with the skis or are already attached. As for size, I'm debating between the 162 and 170. I'm 5'10" so for my height I would think the 170, but I'm below average weight at 130 lbs and don't ski extremely fast or aggressively so for that reason I would think the 162... I think back to rental skis and I always felt awkward on skis that were too long and would return them to get ones that were a bit shorter. For that reason I think I'm leaning towards the 162 but do you think that would be too short? Particularly for these Rossi's?

 

[marzNC]

The picture shows the bindings on the skis, but maybe that's just for show? In the specs all it says is that bindings are included. Not sure if that means they're simply shipped with the skis or are already attached. As for size, I'm debating between the 162 and 170. I'm 5'10" so for my height I would think the 170, but I'm below average weight at 130 lbs and don't ski extremely fast or aggressively so for that reason I would think the 162... I think back to rental skis and I always felt awkward on skis that were too long and would return them to get ones that were a bit shorter. For that reason I think I'm leaning towards the 162 but do you think that would be too short? Particularly for these Rossi's?

For reference, I'm 5'0", 120 lbs. I'm an advanced skier now but was an intermediate 10 years ago when I started buying good skis. Now I get around 150 long for carvers, about 160 for all-mountain, and as long as 166 for powder skis with a lot of tip rocker. 162 sounds way too short.

 

[mustski]

The picture shows the bindings on the skis, but maybe that's just for show? In the specs all it says is that bindings are included. Not sure if that means they're simply shipped with the skis or are already attached. As for size, I'm debating between the 162 and 170. I'm 5'10" so for my height I would think the 170, but I'm below average weight at 130 lbs and don't ski extremely fast or aggressively so for that reason I would think the 162... I think back to rental skis and I always felt awkward on skis that were too long and would return them to get ones that were a bit shorter. For that reason I think I'm leaning towards the 162 but do you think that would be too short? Particularly for these Rossi's?

The bindings on the skis may be demo bindings if these skis were originally intended to be demos. I bought my Auras brand new with demo bindings mounted. Demo bindings are fine so don't worry about it either way. With the "rocker, camber,rocker" profile the 170 will ski the same as a traditional ski at 162. Basically rocker in the tip and tale means less ski edge is touching the snow. You would be smarter to go ahead and go with the 170. After you ski your own ski for awhile, you may find yourself getting a bit more aggressive . Also, since you will be skiing a higher end ski than a rental, I think you will find the 170 very user friendly.

 

[MaineSkiLady]

If this is the deal here:
https://www.skis.com/Rossignol-Temp...hir-110-Bindings-2015/351607P,default,pd.html
(I got same e-mail from this site today)
Then, no, the bindings are not mounted. What the skis have is a mounting plate (which adds weight - I don't know how much) to which the bindings are attached (several pictures @ link). So the package will have to be finished at a ski shop - because your boot sole length will determine binding placement, and forward pressure has to be set based on your physical specs and (perceived) skiing ability (measured in "levels").

The binding itself is quality and fine - as is the ski. Is it a screaming deal -- well, depends on one's definition. This is about as much as I'd pay for a combination, and you'll have to pay again (how much depends on where you live - range averages $40) for the mounting.

Length - agree with above posts on 170, based on rocker of this model and total contact edge length of ski. 162 is what I would get, and I underweigh you by 20#. (And am no expert.) Washing out a 162 would quickly become a disappointment to you.

Reasonably good deal on a Rossi package - as long as you understand that you'll have to shoulder an additional cost.

 

[Jilly]

So it's a system binding.

All that matter's is your getting a great deal!

 

[surfsnowgirl]

In the past I think I've paid $30 or so to have new bindings mounted to the skis they came with.

 

[Jilly]

With a system binding there is no drilling, so shouldn't be too much.

 

[MaineSkiLady]

I hope for her sake. If mega-urban, they tend to overcharge.

 

[alyssamh]

Thank you all for your help! I'm sure I'll be able to find somewhere where I live that can mount the binding for reasonably cheap. Can't wait to get my new skis