Question: Fischer Koa 84 or Volkl Kenja? Or something else?

[carac1214]

First, I'm new to the forum, so I hope I'm not covering old ground--and thanks for having me!

I'm an intermediate-advanced skiier; I've been skiing for years, but I only get to go a couple of weeks a year at Christmastime. For the last 10 years, I've been skiing on some fairly crummy old Rossignols that came from the bargain rack when I got them, and it's really time to upgrade. For the past few years, I've been trying to get out to the backside of the mountain with my husband, so I'd like an all-mountain ski that I could grow into, but that would still perform on the frontside.

My husband skis on Fischer Watea 84s and loves them, so he thought I'd like the female version, the Koa. I've noticed, though, that the Volkl Kenjas get stellar reviews. Are they comparable skis? Is one better than the other? I should add, I guess, that I'm 5' 5'', weigh about 110, and that, while I consider myself fairly competent (I'll try anything!) I'm not totally aggressive or a speed lover or anything. And, of course, is there another option I should consider?

And I'm not going to demo! I can't in Houston, and I'd like to get something on sale online, rather than at rack room prices in Summit County at Christmas. I figure anything I get will be better than what I have now!

Thank you so much in advance for any advice, ski ladies!

Cara

 

[ski diva]

That's a toughie; those are both fabulous skis. In a case like that, it may just come down to which ones you can get the best deal on in the size you want. I love them both. Good luck and keep us posted!

 

[Skisailor]

It's so hard to give you a good reply because what any person likes in a ski is such an individual taste. That's why demo-ing is so important.

So take this for what it's worth (which is probably not alot! :D) - I've skied the Fischer Watea 84 and the Kenja (on the same day in the same conditions) and I liked the Kenja much better - hands down. I haven't been on the Koa, but the Watea felt somewhat sluggish and clumsy to me. Not sure if it was a bad tune, but I just did not have a good ride on them at all - and it was in some really nice conditions at Bridger Bowl - about 6 inches of light fluffy powder. Doesn't get better than that! The Kenjas, by contrast, were light and nimble, but also provided a very stable and powerful ride through the chopped up powder. I think they're an extremely versatile ski.

I'm heavier than you and I don't think I should have had any trouble driving the Wateas, but they just kinda sat there . . .

 

[ski diva]

Yep, individual taste is right!

I've skied the Koa 84's, and thought they were great. I'm not sure how they differ from the Wateas, aside from the fact that they're women's skis and the Wateas aren't. Anyone here know?

 

[BackCountryGirl]

I haven't tried either, but I wouldn't have put them in the same category. Aren't the Koas rockered? I think the Kenjas probably are a bit stiffer a ski and a bit less forgiving; probably can handle speed a bit better. I just bought the Kenjas, without demoing. I don't think demoing is all that important and by reading reviews and product descriptions, you can make a pretty inormed choice. It's the archer, not the arrow.

 

[Celestron2000]

I just purchased the Rossi S3Ws for this type of thing.
From what I've seen it's a ski that can handle frontside and powder, is forgiving enough for an intermediate, but enough ski for someone who is truely advanced. So far it's getting really good reviews and you don't have to worry you'll grow out of it.
Of course I haven't actually tried them yet...

 

[MaineSkiLady]

I did demo the KOA last season and will echo what Skisailor said about the Wateas: I found them to be sluggish, and I just couldn’t figure out why (they were brand new, never-skied demos, factory tune). Traded them for a pair of Atomics (Seventh Heaven, now badged “Affinity”)...and took off.

If you have to do a “cold” purchase, I think the Kenja would - based on what I’ve read, i.e., never anything negative - be a better choice. We have a lightweight member here who has done well on them. The lightweight aspect, which I share with you, presents its own set of challenges: being able to properly flex the ski and exert sufficient pressure control at lower speeds (not going Mach Schnell), in the absence of being Super-Jock. It’s physics. Can’t change that.

Aside: I find this contrast curious. Food for future poll?

It's so hard to give you a good reply because what any person likes in a ski is such an individual taste. That's why demo-ing is so important.

I don't think demoing is all that important and by reading reviews and product descriptions, you can make a pretty informed choice.

 

[Stowski]

I vote for dem-oing. I hated some of the skis that on paper seemed perfect for me. Just my 2 cents.

 

[ssm949]

I have been pleasantly surprised by the performance of the Volkl Kenja. I purchased it as my AT ski but found that I enjoyed it all over the mountain and frequently over my Volkl Aurora. Overall ... the Kenja is a fabulous ski and incredibly light weight for its power!

 

[MaineSkiLady]

In reconsidering this:

I'd like to get something on sale online,

I think that could well be a tall order. I've not seen anything for less than $599 lately, and the 156 (presumably the length you'd want?) is hard to find at all, at any price. Seems to be in high demand! Volkls don't tend to get bargain-priced anyway, especially this model, which has shot to the top of the list in several reviews of WS all-mountain. I don't know...could be a hard hunt.

But tons of luck. This ski is obviously a major winner. Could well be worth the extra $!

 

[B.E.G.]

I can only weigh in on the Kenja as that's what I have. I haven't demoed any Fischer skis since my shop didn't carry them.

I bought my Kenjas without a demo and I've really loved them. I was a beginning to intermediate skier last season when I got them so I actually learned on the Kenjas (not something I'd recommend - I was just being stubborn but fortunately it worked out for me). Like you, I'm also lightweight - I'm 5'1" and ~100 lbs. and ski the 156.

They are stiffer and they're going to require either weight or some really good strong leg muscles to flex but they are FUN to ski. I also demoed a bunch of other skis last season, both before and after my purchase (Head Great One and Every One, Rossi S80W, Volkl Luna and Estrella, K2 Free Luv, K2 Lotta Luv, K2 Payback). My favorites after the Kenja were the K2s (I liked the Free Luv - non-rockered version from the previous year) as a fun, zippy ski for groomers, and I liked the Lottas though they weren't as "fun" as my Kenjas. They were quite a bit damper though and quite comfortable to ski.

If you get the Kenjas without bindings, I would look into getting a light binding as well. The Lottas were killing my knees at the end of the day, whereas on my Kenjas, I have a very light binding on it which helps I think!

 

[Cheryl]

I see you demoed the Volkl Estrella. They are near the top of my list but haven't found much about them. I consider myself an advanced skier. Looking for speed to haul my fat butt down the hill and beat my Dad. What did you think of them? Why did they get eliminated from your choice? I found a deal on last years model but I'm trying to hold off rushing out and purchasing without more knowledge. Thanks.

 

[marzNC]

Cara,

Welcome! What have you skied on besides your old Rossi skis? Do you usually ski Summit Country? I like my Rossi Attraxion 8's for all-mountain because of the large shovel. At 5'0", 115 pounds, the large shovel lets me handle powder up to 6-10 inches before I feel the need to rent something wider out west. Would like to check out some Temptations at some point.

What's the status of your boots?

 

[Cheryl]

I only get to ski in Michigan so I am looking for something great on groomed hills, we don't see any real powder around here. The Temptations 78 and Rossignol Attraxion 6 are pretty strong on my list still.

 

[NZfarmgirl]

Cara, I have both those skis.
I was in your exact situation last year May 11 (Southern Hemisphere season) I didn't want to wait to demo and was trying to choose between the KOA and the KENJA and K2 Lotta love.
My stats: 168 cms - 63 kgs, (i think about 5'7 125p?) 39 yrs, advanced skier, (2 seasons ago would have said intermediate/advanced) fairly aggressive, like to go fast. Love carving up a groomer but spend heaps of time off piste too. Bumps etc (-no trees here) No experience in deep powder, some experience soft snow, smaller falls 20 cms etc, loads of ice, hardpack, crud, slush experience. Ski less than 20 days per year. New Zealand south island, variable conditions.

Reviews of the Kenja put me off a little last year. Some people said "they wanted to control me rather than me skiing the ski". I didn't know if I was going to handle them, So I bought the Koa 84 159. I had a good year on them getting used to the extra width compared to the rentals I'd been on. I wasn't good at carving then and took a while to get that sorted. They were nice and light, but I found them a bit soft or something, I felt that I got knocked around in crud and lumps and wasn't feeling hugely confident with my skiing off piste. It may have just been me though. I was quite happy to carry on with them as they were fine.

This year in July I decided to demo the Kenja's 163 out of curiosity, and with a huge grin, realised that 'fine' wasn't enough for me.
I like the way the Kenja's make me ski faster, I feel more confident on them which helps me to have the correct stance and attitude in the rough stuff. If I crank them up on purpose, I sometimes say to them "Hey wait up girls!" but really it's my responsibility to reign them in and I CAN, they make me concentrate and ski better. -I just find them more fun!
However I have recommended the Koa's to someone else who sounded like they were a very gentle skier. They are a great ski as SKIDIVA says.
I'm sure I will still ski mine, but they are set up for my 13yr old daughter's boots just now.

I put a friend who is not aggressive on the Kenja- she loved them.

I haven't tried either, but I wouldn't have put them in the same category. Aren't the Koas rockered? I think the Kenjas probably are a bit stiffer a ski and a bit less forgiving; probably can handle speed a bit better. I just bought the Kenjas, without demoing. I don't think demoing is all that important and by reading reviews and product descriptions, you can make a pretty inormed choice. It's the archer, not the arrow.

Both skis have tip rocker, both have very similar dimensions, both are light, KOA very flexable, Kenja has less flex, They are made from different materials which makes them feel very different.
Kenja is more stabile at speed.


In regards to the demo/not demo vote, -I will always demo in future!

 

[B.E.G.]

The lightweight aspect, which I share with you, presents its own set of challenges: being able to properly flex the ski and exert sufficient pressure control at lower speeds (not going Mach Schnell), in the absence of being Super-Jock. It’s physics. Can’t change that.

I missed this the first time I replied (a year ago??), and I agree. As a light skier, I really liked my Kenjas when I was in great ski shape (and in great shape generally), and despite lack of weight, I had muscle to push the skis around. I found out last season, when I didn't get to ski much at all and was definitely not in as good a shape, how tiring the Kenjas could be. I didn't have the muscle power to flex the skis, and I also didn't have weight to fall back on, and it made for really tiring skiing. This season will hopefully be better (more snow! more ski buddies! more ski trips!) but considering I still won't be skiing every weekend, I made the decision to sell the Kenjas in favor of a softer ski.

So that's my experience, FWIW. At least a year or so ago, my love for the Kenjas was pretty well known here :P I still love them and the edge hold is just amazing, and they did pretty much everything I wanted them to do (except help me navigate bumps!), but I did let go of them. So long story not so short, weight and/or fitness does play a factor, especially with a stiff ski!

Edit: I had the 2011 non-rockered Kenjas, and I'm 5'1", 105.