lisamamot
Angel Diva
Skier stats: 5'9"/140#. Low advanced in everything but bumps and lots of powder. I'll get down the bumps in one piece, but it won't be pretty and I silently complain the whole way. I adore powder, but my technique needs lots of practice which is hard to get in New England.
Conditions on demo day: A bit of packed and loose powder covering your usual scrape base of frozen white. A few rocks/gravel to dodge as well as a tuft of grass here and there, but for the most part I was impressed with the coverage. A few inches of loose snow on the edges to play in.
Trails: Same type of run each time - starts out green, then to a blue. I made a point to seek out some scraped off areas so I could test edge hold. There was one trail where seeking was not necessary, and we only took that once.
Type of skis i skied: I am looking for a New England new snow/trees/crud/take west ski for my daughter and me, so that is what I focused on skiing. I have the Atomic Elysian, but we want to add another ski that may cover other bases too. Since she and I have very similar stats and BSL we get to share. The new ski may end up being mine and she may ski the Elysian...or we may swap around.
Skis I skied, in the order in which I skied
Atomic Vantage 95 c w - 169. Unchanged from 2016. Going in, this was a no-brainer for me. I own and adore the 2015 Atomic Elysian 168, and although there are significant construction differences I was pretty confident this would be a contender. I skied this as my first demo of the day, and actually my first run of the season. I was rusty, but the Vantage 95 is the type of ski that says "that's ok" instead of throwing you off because you are unworthy. It was stable, smooth, nice edge hold, easy to ski; I agree with what I have read - it is a jack of all trades, master of none. Compared to my Elysian they lost the fun factor, but added in a bit more all around/hard snow competency. Surprisingly I don't think I would keep this on my list - not because it wouldn't suffice, but just because I was more taken with others.
Nordica Santa Ana 93 - 169 (comes in a 177), new for this year. OMG, this ski deserves every smiley happy emoji you can throw at it. Fun, fun, turny, stable, playful - a complete blast. Did I say turny??? I have never been on a ski with this short of a turn radius and I am completely sold...did I say FUN? It has no metal, and really no metal feel, but somehow they managed to make this ski super stable and also woo-hoo-skier-girl-grin-worthy at the same time. Tip flap? Yes, of course - in a ski with 25% rocker in the front that is unavoidable - just don't look down since you will not feel it. It had nice edge grip, but I imagine it would suffer a bit in super icy conditions or in lots of crud. That said, all I wanted, in addition to not getting off of it, was to find some powder and trees. The 169 was perfectly stable for me, but I really did feel like I could go longer here and not feel overwhelmed. I have never said this about a ski, and going in the idea of the 177 scared the pants off me, but I so want to ski this in the 177. This may not be the ski I get right now, but I am going to demo that 177, and then wait for an end of season tall girl bonus deal. @MissySki snagged it after me. She may be able to provide some additional insight, but we both loved it. In terms of top sheet, it has more pink/purple than I would personally want, but it really is beautiful. I should have taken a pic as it matched MissySki's color scheme perfectly.
K2 Pinnacle 95 170 (men's version of the Fulluvit 95; in the women's it also comes in a 177). The women's Fulluvit has changed from 2016 - it is now 95 underfoot instead of 98, and has a re-enforced perimeter that I believe increases the edge hold, so I expect it is a bit more hard snow worthy than the 2016. The longest Fulluvit they had was the 163, so I opted for the men's version; rep stated it is different than the women's...he had no details to share on what the differences are though other than "probably stiffer". This ski was a really cool combination of a solid, super stable, damp ski with great edge grip and an incredibly short turn radius (14m in the 170?!), while also being coupled with that big surfy tip that just made you smile and want to find some powder. These qualities seem mutually exclusive, but there they were. The way it skis makes me think it has great crud busting potential - I purposefully found a few chicken head/death cookies and it scoffed. I am actively looking to demo the women's Fulluvit 95 as just a little less dampness may have hit all my marks. Even without skiing the women's version, this has made my potential ski list - I would even be tempted to do a deal on the 2016 Fulluvit 98 ti...even if it is less hard snow worthy I believe it would still fit our bill; I cannot imagine being disappointed. @vanhoskier has the Fulluvit 98 ti, and I hear she rocked it at Jay last year! Even though this ski comes in a 177, I did not feel like I wanted to up-size on this one.
Rossignol Sky 7 HD W - 170 (comes in a 178). At 98mm under foot this was the widest ski I was on. Coming off the Pinnacle this definitely felt less damp and solid, but that does not mean it is not stable. I have not been on many Rossis, and I would put the Temptation/Experience 88 in the "most hyped ski you have hated category"; just dead feeling to me. I have not skied the Saffron or Savory, but I expected it to ski similar to the men's Soul 7, which I have not skied, but heard a lot about from my nephew. It was fun, turny with that short turn radius, pretty stable, and held a fine edge. I was on this ski when we went down the one and done trail - as we approached I had that "oh sh*t" thought flitter through my head, and I expected to skitter in those conditions, but surprisingly it did fine; it would certainly suffer on icy days, but that isn't what it was built for. I can totally see this being a fun all around ski out west or a New England soft snow, trees, or powder day ski. For me, the Santa Ana 93 (although narrower under foot) would win this competition hands down though. While the Sky 7 was fun, in a fun competition the Santa Ana 93 is a thoroughbred in the pony race; no competition. I am not intimidated by the idea of trying the 178 in this, but I did not feel like I needed it. Oh, for those that are not into pink, the tip is coral, which was a relief for me, lol....would match my shell pants perfectly.
Dynastar Cham 2.0 97 - 172 (I skied the men's, but rep stated it is identical to women's; women's top sheet is blue instead of black). This was on my list to try and it skied how I expected it to - no disappointment here. Caveat, I was a little tired at this point since we did not stop for lunch, but it seemed to ski somewhere in between the K2 Pinnacle and the Rossignol Sky 7. Perhaps this is what the K2 Fulluvit skis like? Solid and stable, but with that big surfy tip and short turn radius I bet it would be a blast in deeper snow. I cannot say why, but I am more intrigued by the idea of skiing the K2 Fulluvit than this. It seemed a little heavier than I expected, but perhaps that was binding. I would need to ski them both in succession to verify this and to also be able to articulate why. Top sheet for men and women both is boring but doable.
Dynastar Mythic 97 - 172 (this is a lightened Cham 97, unisex ski). Rep suggested I ski this after the Cham 97; it is what he uses for his backcountry setup. Exact same shape as the Cham 97, but they replaced fiberglass with carbon to create a super lightweight ski. It skis with the same flavor as the Cham 97, but feels distinctly lighter, more playful and a little poppy. Loses some of that crud busting ability, but I can totally see this as a backcountry ski. The black and gold top sheet made me wonder what they were thinking - I guess they were thinking unisex. That said, it would not make me happy looking down. I like to be happy.
Atomic Vantage 90 ctiw 169 - I demoed this as a potential replacement for my DD's Dynastar Exclusive Legend Eden should we do that some day. Also, I just wanted to try it. No disappointment here. Solid, fun, held a great edge. Nothing bad to say about this at all and I liked it far more than the Vantage 95 c w. Yes, this ski has metal, but it does not ski like a heavy, stiff metal ski. I cannot say how stable it would be screaming down hard pack, but it gave no indication that it would not handle itself well. This could be a fantastic east or west all mountain front ski and it is definitely on the list for a replacement ski. Top sheet is a color scheme of blue that I generally like - I wasn't wowed but it would be fine. I really wanted to compare this to the Armada Invicta 87 ti to this ski, but the demo length gods let me down. See below.
continued in next post....I am apparently long winded and keep offending the 1000 character post limit!
Conditions on demo day: A bit of packed and loose powder covering your usual scrape base of frozen white. A few rocks/gravel to dodge as well as a tuft of grass here and there, but for the most part I was impressed with the coverage. A few inches of loose snow on the edges to play in.
Trails: Same type of run each time - starts out green, then to a blue. I made a point to seek out some scraped off areas so I could test edge hold. There was one trail where seeking was not necessary, and we only took that once.
Type of skis i skied: I am looking for a New England new snow/trees/crud/take west ski for my daughter and me, so that is what I focused on skiing. I have the Atomic Elysian, but we want to add another ski that may cover other bases too. Since she and I have very similar stats and BSL we get to share. The new ski may end up being mine and she may ski the Elysian...or we may swap around.
Skis I skied, in the order in which I skied
Atomic Vantage 95 c w - 169. Unchanged from 2016. Going in, this was a no-brainer for me. I own and adore the 2015 Atomic Elysian 168, and although there are significant construction differences I was pretty confident this would be a contender. I skied this as my first demo of the day, and actually my first run of the season. I was rusty, but the Vantage 95 is the type of ski that says "that's ok" instead of throwing you off because you are unworthy. It was stable, smooth, nice edge hold, easy to ski; I agree with what I have read - it is a jack of all trades, master of none. Compared to my Elysian they lost the fun factor, but added in a bit more all around/hard snow competency. Surprisingly I don't think I would keep this on my list - not because it wouldn't suffice, but just because I was more taken with others.
Nordica Santa Ana 93 - 169 (comes in a 177), new for this year. OMG, this ski deserves every smiley happy emoji you can throw at it. Fun, fun, turny, stable, playful - a complete blast. Did I say turny??? I have never been on a ski with this short of a turn radius and I am completely sold...did I say FUN? It has no metal, and really no metal feel, but somehow they managed to make this ski super stable and also woo-hoo-skier-girl-grin-worthy at the same time. Tip flap? Yes, of course - in a ski with 25% rocker in the front that is unavoidable - just don't look down since you will not feel it. It had nice edge grip, but I imagine it would suffer a bit in super icy conditions or in lots of crud. That said, all I wanted, in addition to not getting off of it, was to find some powder and trees. The 169 was perfectly stable for me, but I really did feel like I could go longer here and not feel overwhelmed. I have never said this about a ski, and going in the idea of the 177 scared the pants off me, but I so want to ski this in the 177. This may not be the ski I get right now, but I am going to demo that 177, and then wait for an end of season tall girl bonus deal. @MissySki snagged it after me. She may be able to provide some additional insight, but we both loved it. In terms of top sheet, it has more pink/purple than I would personally want, but it really is beautiful. I should have taken a pic as it matched MissySki's color scheme perfectly.
K2 Pinnacle 95 170 (men's version of the Fulluvit 95; in the women's it also comes in a 177). The women's Fulluvit has changed from 2016 - it is now 95 underfoot instead of 98, and has a re-enforced perimeter that I believe increases the edge hold, so I expect it is a bit more hard snow worthy than the 2016. The longest Fulluvit they had was the 163, so I opted for the men's version; rep stated it is different than the women's...he had no details to share on what the differences are though other than "probably stiffer". This ski was a really cool combination of a solid, super stable, damp ski with great edge grip and an incredibly short turn radius (14m in the 170?!), while also being coupled with that big surfy tip that just made you smile and want to find some powder. These qualities seem mutually exclusive, but there they were. The way it skis makes me think it has great crud busting potential - I purposefully found a few chicken head/death cookies and it scoffed. I am actively looking to demo the women's Fulluvit 95 as just a little less dampness may have hit all my marks. Even without skiing the women's version, this has made my potential ski list - I would even be tempted to do a deal on the 2016 Fulluvit 98 ti...even if it is less hard snow worthy I believe it would still fit our bill; I cannot imagine being disappointed. @vanhoskier has the Fulluvit 98 ti, and I hear she rocked it at Jay last year! Even though this ski comes in a 177, I did not feel like I wanted to up-size on this one.
Rossignol Sky 7 HD W - 170 (comes in a 178). At 98mm under foot this was the widest ski I was on. Coming off the Pinnacle this definitely felt less damp and solid, but that does not mean it is not stable. I have not been on many Rossis, and I would put the Temptation/Experience 88 in the "most hyped ski you have hated category"; just dead feeling to me. I have not skied the Saffron or Savory, but I expected it to ski similar to the men's Soul 7, which I have not skied, but heard a lot about from my nephew. It was fun, turny with that short turn radius, pretty stable, and held a fine edge. I was on this ski when we went down the one and done trail - as we approached I had that "oh sh*t" thought flitter through my head, and I expected to skitter in those conditions, but surprisingly it did fine; it would certainly suffer on icy days, but that isn't what it was built for. I can totally see this being a fun all around ski out west or a New England soft snow, trees, or powder day ski. For me, the Santa Ana 93 (although narrower under foot) would win this competition hands down though. While the Sky 7 was fun, in a fun competition the Santa Ana 93 is a thoroughbred in the pony race; no competition. I am not intimidated by the idea of trying the 178 in this, but I did not feel like I needed it. Oh, for those that are not into pink, the tip is coral, which was a relief for me, lol....would match my shell pants perfectly.
Dynastar Cham 2.0 97 - 172 (I skied the men's, but rep stated it is identical to women's; women's top sheet is blue instead of black). This was on my list to try and it skied how I expected it to - no disappointment here. Caveat, I was a little tired at this point since we did not stop for lunch, but it seemed to ski somewhere in between the K2 Pinnacle and the Rossignol Sky 7. Perhaps this is what the K2 Fulluvit skis like? Solid and stable, but with that big surfy tip and short turn radius I bet it would be a blast in deeper snow. I cannot say why, but I am more intrigued by the idea of skiing the K2 Fulluvit than this. It seemed a little heavier than I expected, but perhaps that was binding. I would need to ski them both in succession to verify this and to also be able to articulate why. Top sheet for men and women both is boring but doable.
Dynastar Mythic 97 - 172 (this is a lightened Cham 97, unisex ski). Rep suggested I ski this after the Cham 97; it is what he uses for his backcountry setup. Exact same shape as the Cham 97, but they replaced fiberglass with carbon to create a super lightweight ski. It skis with the same flavor as the Cham 97, but feels distinctly lighter, more playful and a little poppy. Loses some of that crud busting ability, but I can totally see this as a backcountry ski. The black and gold top sheet made me wonder what they were thinking - I guess they were thinking unisex. That said, it would not make me happy looking down. I like to be happy.
Atomic Vantage 90 ctiw 169 - I demoed this as a potential replacement for my DD's Dynastar Exclusive Legend Eden should we do that some day. Also, I just wanted to try it. No disappointment here. Solid, fun, held a great edge. Nothing bad to say about this at all and I liked it far more than the Vantage 95 c w. Yes, this ski has metal, but it does not ski like a heavy, stiff metal ski. I cannot say how stable it would be screaming down hard pack, but it gave no indication that it would not handle itself well. This could be a fantastic east or west all mountain front ski and it is definitely on the list for a replacement ski. Top sheet is a color scheme of blue that I generally like - I wasn't wowed but it would be fine. I really wanted to compare this to the Armada Invicta 87 ti to this ski, but the demo length gods let me down. See below.
continued in next post....I am apparently long winded and keep offending the 1000 character post limit!
