Low intermediate skier - 2020 Atomic/K2/Line skis I demo'd on the weekend

[fgor]

I was going to post this as a reply to my other thread but thought it might deserve its own thread. I think I'm a low intermediate skier (confidently skiing NZ blue runs, still improving turn shape, stance, etc etc...).

Background on me: I'm 5'3/160cm and ~53kg/115-120lb. My current skis are old Salomon Origins Crystal 151cm. I ski in New Zealand which I'm told is comparable to US east coast conditions - tendency to be icy/hardpack, not so much powder.



Atomic Cloud 9 (150cm) - maybe I needed to try these in a longer length? They were ok, I didn't find them vastly more enjoyable than my current skis. I found them maybe a tad squirrely and didn't feel super stable. When I returned them and said "they were fine..." the demo guy suggested trying them in a longer length, but then immediately suggested instead trying a different ski. So I then tried:


Atomic Vantage 86 (157cm) - I got to do quite a few runs on these. They were a nice ski, definitely a large improvement over my current ski. I didn't find them as forgiving as the Dynastar Legend 84 to being in the back seat, or as responsive when I weighted the tips as the Head Total Joy, sort of in between. I'd be happy enough to own these. My own skis felt very chattery in comparison when I jumped back on them afterwards.


K2 Mindbender 88Ti Alliance (156cm) - I think the K2 Luv line might be gone? They didn't have any that i saw. I found these personally a little stiff for me - by the end of my second run I was able to make them turn well, but it felt like a lot of work. Wasn't fun for me. I'm sure a more aggressive/advanced skier might like them


K2 Mindbender 85 Alliance (163cm) - they didn't have these in a shorter length. I found them ok. Still an improvement on the 88Ti but perhaps a bit too long for me? They were fine to ski, still an improvement on my current skis but nothing special to me. It would be interesting to try these in a shorter length though. It was interesting to me that I can ski on a ski that long though, given my current skis are 151cm.


Line Pandora 84 (158cm) - the K2/Line (turns out the companies are related - it was the same demo/salesperson handling both) handed me this ski after I'd tried the other two, as an "in between" ski. Apparently not as stiff as the 88Ti but more stiff than the 85. I actually enjoyed this ski the most out of the 3! I could get it on edge nicely and do some nice rounded turns with this ski. It's probably a contender. I think it's the cheapest of my "possible contender" skis. It also has the prettiest topsheet of anything I've tried

So far the skis I've liked have been: Dynastar Legend 84 156cm, Head Total Joy 153cm, Atomic Vantage 86 157cm, Line Pandora 84 158cm. "thanks but no thanks" skis: Atomic Cloud 9 150cm (could be too short), K2 Mindbender 88Ti 156cm, K2 Mindbender 85 163cm (could be too long).

Unfortunately Blizzard isn't doing demos at my local field on any weekends in July, they may have dates in August but nothing confirmed yet. I can't make it up on any weekdays in the next month so trying out the much-lauded Black Pearls will have to wait. Might see Volkl up there soon though. I'd love to see Dynastar and Head again as well - I'd like to give those skis I liked so much a second try, as I think my skiing has already improved a little since I demo'd them.

 

[marzNC]

Thanks for the report!

K2 Mindbender 88Ti Alliance (156cm) - I think the K2 Luv line might be gone? They didn't have any that i saw. I found these personally a little stiff for me - by the end of my second run I was able to make them turn well, but it felt like a lot of work. Wasn't fun for me. I'm sure a more aggressive/advanced skier might like them

Yep, the K2 Mindbender line is replacing the Luv line. Going from 72 underfoot to 88 is quite a jump. So that's a factor too.

So far the skis I've liked have been: Dynastar Legend 84 156cm, Head Total Joy 153cm, Atomic Vantage 86 157cm, Line Pandora 84 158cm. "thanks but no thanks" skis: Atomic Cloud 9 150cm (could be too short), K2 Mindbender 88Ti 156cm, K2 Mindbender 85 163cm (could be too long).

Certainly sounds like you are getting a good sense of what length is most appropriate for you.

Did they have ski under 80 underfoot besides the Cloud 9?

Have you looked at the Turn Radius for the skis you liked? For the ones you didn't? Even for the same width, there is a range of Turn Radius possible. Fair to say that skis with a Turn Radius over 14 are a litter harder to turn than those with a Turn Radius of 12. There is a relationship between Turn Radius and length. Often it's only given for a mid-range length.

 

[Belgiangirl]

I was going to post this as a reply to my other thread but thought it might deserve its own thread. I think I'm a low intermediate skier (confidently skiing NZ blue runs, still improving turn shape, stance, etc etc...).

Background on me: I'm 5'3/160cm and ~53kg/115-120lb. My current skis are old Salomon Origins Crystal 151cm. I ski in New Zealand which I'm told is comparable to US east coast conditions - tendency to be icy/hardpack, not so much powder.


View attachment 10976
Atomic Cloud 9 (150cm) - maybe I needed to try these in a longer length? They were ok, I didn't find them vastly more enjoyable than my current skis. I found them maybe a tad squirrely and didn't feel super stable. When I returned them and said "they were fine..." the demo guy suggested trying them in a longer length, but then immediately suggested instead trying a different ski. So I then tried:

View attachment 10977
Atomic Vantage 86 (157cm) - I got to do quite a few runs on these. They were a nice ski, definitely a large improvement over my current ski. I didn't find them as forgiving as the Dynastar Legend 84 to being in the back seat, or as responsive when I weighted the tips as the Head Total Joy, sort of in between. I'd be happy enough to own these. My own skis felt very chattery in comparison when I jumped back on them afterwards.

View attachment 10979
K2 Mindbender 88Ti Alliance (156cm) - I think the K2 Luv line might be gone? They didn't have any that i saw. I found these personally a little stiff for me - by the end of my second run I was able to make them turn well, but it felt like a lot of work. Wasn't fun for me. I'm sure a more aggressive/advanced skier might like them

View attachment 10978
K2 Mindbender 85 Alliance (163cm) - they didn't have these in a shorter length. I found them ok. Still an improvement on the 88Ti but perhaps a bit too long for me? They were fine to ski, still an improvement on my current skis but nothing special to me. It would be interesting to try these in a shorter length though. It was interesting to me that I can ski on a ski that long though, given my current skis are 151cm.

View attachment 10980
Line Pandora 84 (158cm) - the K2/Line (turns out the companies are related - it was the same demo/salesperson handling both) handed me this ski after I'd tried the other two, as an "in between" ski. Apparently not as stiff as the 88Ti but more stiff than the 85. I actually enjoyed this ski the most out of the 3! I could get it on edge nicely and do some nice rounded turns with this ski. It's probably a contender. I think it's the cheapest of my "possible contender" skis. It also has the prettiest topsheet of anything I've tried

So far the skis I've liked have been: Dynastar Legend 84 156cm, Head Total Joy 153cm, Atomic Vantage 86 157cm, Line Pandora 84 158cm. "thanks but no thanks" skis: Atomic Cloud 9 150cm (could be too short), K2 Mindbender 88Ti 156cm, K2 Mindbender 85 163cm (could be too long).

Unfortunately Blizzard isn't doing demos at my local field on any weekends in July, they may have dates in August but nothing confirmed yet. I can't make it up on any weekdays in the next month so trying out the much-lauded Black Pearls will have to wait. Might see Volkl up there soon though. I'd love to see Dynastar and Head again as well - I'd like to give those skis I liked so much a second try, as I think my skiing has already improved a little since I demo'd them.

Nice reviews! Definitely try to get on the Black Pearls and if you can test Volkl, the new Yumi (and maybe the Kenja). If you can find any deals on 2019 models, I don't think the construction of the Line Pandora changed for 2020, you might be able to find an even better deal that way. They do make some very very pretty topsheets

 

[liquidfeet]

What marzNC said. Look at sub-80 waist width skis, and pay attention to Turn Radius for the length you like. Shorter turn radius makes shorter turns more easily. Making round short turns will be your goal as you build skills. It's nice to have a ski that helps you out a bit.

 

[fgor]

Yeah, I'm interested in trying out the Black Pearls as it sounds like they're very popular! Looks like it won't be for a while though. Next weekend I should be able to try out C6 skis - it's a NZ company, one of my friends has some skis (the Apollo) from them and loves them. I know Volkl is coming up at some point in the next couple of weeks but I don't know if it'll be on a weekend or not...

Did they have ski under 80 underfoot besides the Cloud 9?

Have you looked at the Turn Radius for the skis you liked? For the ones you didn't? Even for the same width, there is a range of Turn Radius possible. Fair to say that skis with a Turn Radius over 14 are a litter harder to turn than those with a Turn Radius of 12. There is a relationship between Turn Radius and length. Often it's only given for a mid-range length.

What marzNC said. Look at sub-80 waist width skis, and pay attention to Turn Radius for the length you like. Shorter turn radius makes shorter turns more easily. Making round short turns will be your goal as you build skills. It's nice to have a ski that helps you out a bit.

So far the Cloud 9 are the only sub-80 width skis I've been offered, so I guess companies are pushing the all-mountain widths more. I know Head had some sub-80 Joy skis as well so if I see them back again I'll look at trying some out. I assumed I'd want a sub-80 ski because I want to be able to do short turns, but some of the mid-80s skis I've tried have been much easier to turn than my current 72mm (!!) width ski so I'm not really sure what to make of waist width anymore!

Looks like my current skis have a turn radius of 12m @ 151cm (the length I have). I've collated the turn radii of the skis I've tried, in rough order of preference:
Head Total Joy - 13.6m @ 163cm (but I tried it @153cm - don't know how that changes the radius)
Dynastar Legend W84 - 12m @ 156cm
Line Pandora 84 - 13m @ 158cm
Atomic Vantage 86 C W - 16.1 @ 157cm (what a bizarre outlier)
K2 Mindbender 85 Alliance - 12.1m @ 163cm
Atomic Cloud 9 - 13.4m @ 157cm (tried it @150cm)
K2 Mindbender 88Ti Alliance - 14.7m @ 163cm (tried it @156cm)

 

[marzNC]

Looks like my current skis have a turn radius of 12m @ 151cm (the length I have). I've collated the turn radii of the skis I've tried, in rough order of preference:
Head Total Joy - 13.6m @ 163cm (but I tried it @153cm - don't know how that changes the radius)
Dynastar Legend W84 - 12m @ 156cm
Line Pandora 84 - 13m @ 158cm
Atomic Vantage 86 C W - 16.1 @ 157cm (what a bizarre outlier)
K2 Mindbender 85 Alliance - 12.1m @ 163cm
Atomic Cloud 9 - 13.4m @ 157cm (tried it @150cm)
K2 Mindbender 88Ti Alliance - 14.7m @ 163cm (tried it @156cm)

Yep . . . length, width underfoot . . . just the starting point for stats about a given ski model. Demo'ing is the best way to know whether a pair of skis are fun for you, as opposed making an informed guess just from reading reviews by other women. Even if the reviewer is about your size and ability level.

I picked up a booklet at a ski show a few years ago that had all the stats for each model. That was when I started to think about the relationship between length and turn radius. It's mostly a function of physics, meaning mechanics. In general, a shorter length has a smaller Turn Radius. That means a petite skier will have to work harder or have better technique in order to make short turns with skis that are longer than optimal. Note that the company made recommendations for length based on weight, not height.

2017 Rossignol Temptation

Temptation 88, 135/88/124
172cm, R15.0m, 140+ lbs
164cm, R13.0m, 120-139 lbs
156cm, R12.0m, 100-119 lbs

Temptation 84, 133/84/120
170cm, R14.0m, 150+ lbs
162cm, R13.0m, 130-149 lbs
154cm, R11.0m, 110-129 lbs
146cm, R10.0m, 90-109 lbs

When I rent demo skis that are over 164cm, they are wide skis designed for powder skiing. Don't need a tight Turn Radius for a powder day. Fat skis also tend to have a lot of tip and tail rocker, so the actual length of the edge that's on the snow at all times is much less than for a narrow carver or even an all-mountain ski with a "flat tail." That's the design aspect of skis.

The other factor is materials. My simplistic view is that materials are related to the "stiffness" of skis, although design (shape) is related too. You may see reviews that mention having "metal" in skis versus no metal. Skis with metal are typically stiffer.