Question: Aura -vs- Celebrity?

[Severine]

I realize these are not exactly the same category of skis, other than both being wider, but has anybody skied both the Volkl Auras and Line Celebrities and can provide a comparison of them?

I bought Celebrities this past fall (without demoing) and had been considering the Aura before that as my fatter ski, thanks to volklgirl's brainwashing back at A-basin in May , but went with the Celebs because I was able to find such a great deal on them. I'm now curious if anyone has a side-by-side comparison of them. Anyone?

I should add that: a) it's unlikely I'd be using these anywhere but East Coast any time soon; b) I'm not really loving my Celebrities. I'm not sure if it's because I had them flat-mounted and I'm not ready for that, because I have little fresh snow experience, or what. I'm 5'5" and way too much (regained all the weight I lost :()... over 190 lbs... so the 165 length should be fine for me, but they feel too long. Then again, maybe I'm just not skilled enough for them yet? :shrug: Who knows? I was going to possibly hold on to the Celebs until next season, but with that Aura deal, I'm thinking of selling them to get the Auras... just wondering if anyone can chime in who has skied both.

 

[ZealouslyB]

I haven't skied both.... but I just got some Celebs this year and I love, love, LOVE them!!! In Maine they've been great in all the snow we've had, even in lots of crud. So easy to turn, but if I want to really power them they respond- and fast!!! The only downfall I've found to mine is that they're a bit chattery on ice, but then again that's not what they're meant for (doesn't matter, cuz we've barely had any!!!)

I can imagine that out west in the powder they wouldn't float nearly as well as the Auras. I bet they're like the Celebs on steroids..... same great qualities but amplified.

 

[ski now work later]

Sev, you should ask Vanhoskier, she owns both. I love my Auras, but use them on pow and deeper soft snow days only when they shine. I think a carver like your Roxy is probably the "go to" ski for most days here in the Northeast. If you do travel out west or do get out for the occasional pow day though, the Auras are a lot of fun.

 

[vanhoskier]

This is a thread meant just for me! I have both pairs of skis, and love them both. They have similarities and differences. I'll try to summarize them here:

Celebrities: 90 mm waist, true twin tip, but an all-mountain twin, not a park twin.

Auras - 94 mm waist, flat (but rounded) tail, all-mountain ski.

Both skis shine in powder and crud and therefore are a great western ski. However, I'm mostly an Eastern skier, so why do I like both?

The Celebrities are a little damper than the Auras, but that doesn't mean they don't have rebound energy. They do...it's just not has "in your face" as the Auras. They like the catch air, I use them on jumps and love the solid feel they give me on landings. Despite some divas' comments about ice chatter, I feel they give a pretty good grip on hardback, as long as they are kept tuned. I think the key to skiing these (as with any twin) is to keep ones weight more centered. You do not need as much forward pressure as you do on a traditional shape ski. If you exert too much forward pressure, the ski will wash out or skid on you. So you need to play with weight distribution to find the sweet spot...and once you do, it's fun fun fun! They love speed and are stable, but not as fast as a groomer ski. They'll do park tricks like a park ski, but they are stiffer than a park ski. Carving is fun, and they'll handle turns of varying radii.

The Aura is a more hard-charging ski than the Celebrity. Ski it improperly and it will spank you. The rebound on this ski is great, but it can tire you out, especially if you are sore or injured (as I am right now. :() But, ski it right, and it gives big grins. It loves big GS turns, but you can "feather" the edges in tight spots for quick maneuvers. It grips pretty darn well for a fatter ski, but all that width with the titanium in it can be overkill on groomers. It is more energetic than the Celebrity, but the Celebrity is like an old friend that treats you well time after time, even if you're tired.

As far as length goes, the interesting thing is that my 172 Celebrities are the same length as my 177 Auras. (I weigh 165 lbs). I do think that some women ski too short, and thus experience "chatter" because of this, not necessarily because of the ski.

Sev, you have to clarify why you're not loving your Celebrities. You don't want to get Auras and not love them for the same reason. It may be just the feel of a fatter ski on hardpack. It's a feeling some aren't used to...I've been skiing fatter twintips for years now and have gotten used to it, so no longer count that sensation as a disadvantage.

If you do decide to try Auras, you absolutely need to get the 170's. Volkls ski short. They will not be much longer, if any, than the Celebs you have. And a wide ski like this should be skied at that length. They are not too long for you. Because both skis may be stiffer than your other skis (Roxy's? Probably so, because Roxy's are a softer ski) then they will "feel" long. The first time I skied my Celebrities, I had just gone from a much softer twin tip, and the Celebs felt very stiff and very long. After a day on them, that feeling went away.

If you are skiing primarily hardpack here in the East, the Celebs nor the Auras will not be your ski. A carver ski will. The Celebs and Auras are for softer snow conditions, or for times of new snowfall (or snowblow!) Even just a few inches of fresh stuff makes nice conditions for both skis.

I'm taking my Celebrities out West with me. There are 2 reasons I've chosen them over my Auras: 1) They are more forgiving and for multiple days of skiiing, they will be friendlier; 2) My 177 Auras are no longer made, therefore will be very difficult to replace if they are damaged or lost. The Celebs are more easily replaceable should something happen to them.

The only reason I own both is that I received a serendipitous email from a ski shop in Arizona telling me they had a pair of 177 Auras, new in plastic, for sale. I have no idea how this shop got my email address. I had posted on this forum that I'd love a pair of the "wood-look" Auras in a 177, but I couldn't find them. Until that email. So, it seemed it was meant to be and I bought them. But they haven't displaced my Celebrities as I feared they might....BOTH skis still get a from me.

 

[Severine]

Aha! Just the kind of review I was hoping for! :D

For hardpack, general cruising days, I stick to my 162 Roxy Joyriders. They're fantastic for those conditions. I also have 165 Dynastar Marie Martinod Pro Twin Tips (I always forget which model this is the equivalent of; She's Trouble, IIRC) that were the only ski I used for the majority of last season. The Joyriders are 74mm waist; the Maries are 78mm waist. I bought the Celebs (and considered the Auras) for those rare fresher snow days. I've only taken the Celebs out in fresher snow (I say fresher because by the time I got there, it wasn't powder; more tracked out pushed around piles of fresh snow that was ungroomed) on intermediate, normally groomed trails at my local mountain. There's something about the feel of the Celebs that gets me in a defensive stance when I'm on them. I end up way in the backseat, which doesn't happen on the Maries. I struggle with turning them, though part of that may be due to lack of ungroomed snow-skiing ability (though I had far less problems when switching to the Joyriders in the same snow conditions...go figure). I do not have these problems with the Maries; not sure if it's the extra width that's throwing me off or that the Celebs feel like they want to go much faster since they're so light of a ski. The last potential issue is the binding mounting. SnowflakeADK bought her Celebs around the same time I did and is of similar skiing ability. She recently had her shop re-evaluate her skis since she was having similar problems and they decided to adjust the bindings angle (IIRC) to be more similar to her carving ski. I, on the other hand, had my Rossignol Saphir 120 Pro WB bindings mounted flat (removed the lifter plates they came with). I'm thinking that that might be the problem right there; the Maries are mounted normally with Look NX10 bindings (lifter plates were left on).

The whole thing is kind of silly since I so rarely get to ski fresh snow. But I like having the right tool for the job, and I want to learn. It's sounding like right now, the Celebs may be better simply because they'll punish me less for bad form.

 

[vanhoskier]

Hmmmm.....maybe a lifter plate on the binding might help you. Mine are mounted with Rossi Freestyle bindings, which are flat. No lift. However, I've been used to this setup. You may want to go back to your shop and ask questions about this. Other than being a little longer and stiffer than your other skis, they still should be easy to turn.

 

[Severine]

If I can't get used to them, I think that's the next move.

Thanks for your insight! I'm going to stick with the Celebs for now and live vicariously through you Aura girls. I'm not ready for them yet. :D

 

[ZealouslyB]

Aha! Just the kind of review I was hoping for! :D

There's something about the feel of the Celebs that gets me in a defensive stance when I'm on them. I end up way in the backseat, which doesn't happen on the Maries. I struggle with turning them, though part of that may be due to lack of ungroomed snow-skiing ability (though I had far less problems when switching to the Joyriders in the same snow conditions...go figure). I do not have these problems with the Maries; not sure if it's the extra width that's throwing me off or that the Celebs feel like they want to go much faster since they're so light of a ski.

I know what you mean! When I first got on them, it's like the ski told me where my stance needed to be..... don't fight it, try skiing with it, get used to where you have to be to keep the ski flat. And like vanho said-you don't have to be so far forward on them (a BIG adjustment for me, as a former racer!). I think that once you feel out the balance between backseat and centered, you'll have a ball on them!!! They really can be super easy to turn- don't give up on them!!! I too am bringing my Celebs out west for similar reasons and am excited to see how they perform in deeper snow.

 

[oragejuice]

Hmmmmmm. I think I'm going to be in the market for a pair of Celebs as soon as I have $ for them, need something softer/twin. Anyone selling?

 

[volklgirl]

Hmmmmm....I can't even imagine taking my Karmas out west over my Auras. Of course, the Karmas are veeeeerrrrryyyyy stiff.

 

[oragejuice]

This is a thread meant just for me! I have both pairs of skis, and love them both. They have similarities and differences. I'll try to summarize them here:

Celebrities: 90 mm waist, true twin tip, but an all-mountain twin, not a park twin.

Auras - 94 mm waist, flat (but rounded) tail, all-mountain ski.

Both skis shine in powder and crud and therefore are a great western ski. However, I'm mostly an Eastern skier, so why do I like both?

The Celebrities are a little damper than the Auras, but that doesn't mean they don't have rebound energy. They do...it's just not has "in your face" as the Auras. They like the catch air, I use them on jumps and love the solid feel they give me on landings. Despite some divas' comments about ice chatter, I feel they give a pretty good grip on hardback, as long as they are kept tuned. I think the key to skiing these (as with any twin) is to keep ones weight more centered. You do not need as much forward pressure as you do on a traditional shape ski. If you exert too much forward pressure, the ski will wash out or skid on you. So you need to play with weight distribution to find the sweet spot...and once you do, it's fun fun fun! They love speed and are stable, but not as fast as a groomer ski. They'll do park tricks like a park ski, but they are stiffer than a park ski. Carving is fun, and they'll handle turns of varying radii.

The Aura is a more hard-charging ski than the Celebrity. Ski it improperly and it will spank you. The rebound on this ski is great, but it can tire you out, especially if you are sore or injured (as I am right now. :() But, ski it right, and it gives big grins. It loves big GS turns, but you can "feather" the edges in tight spots for quick maneuvers. It grips pretty darn well for a fatter ski, but all that width with the titanium in it can be overkill on groomers. It is more energetic than the Celebrity, but the Celebrity is like an old friend that treats you well time after time, even if you're tired.

As far as length goes, the interesting thing is that my 172 Celebrities are the same length as my 177 Auras. (I weigh 165 lbs). I do think that some women ski too short, and thus experience "chatter" because of this, not necessarily because of the ski.

Sev, you have to clarify why you're not loving your Celebrities. You don't want to get Auras and not love them for the same reason. It may be just the feel of a fatter ski on hardpack. It's a feeling some aren't used to...I've been skiing fatter twintips for years now and have gotten used to it, so no longer count that sensation as a disadvantage.

If you do decide to try Auras, you absolutely need to get the 170's. Volkls ski short. They will not be much longer, if any, than the Celebs you have. And a wide ski like this should be skied at that length. They are not too long for you. Because both skis may be stiffer than your other skis (Roxy's? Probably so, because Roxy's are a softer ski) then they will "feel" long. The first time I skied my Celebrities, I had just gone from a much softer twin tip, and the Celebs felt very stiff and very long. After a day on them, that feeling went away.

If you are skiing primarily hardpack here in the East, the Celebs nor the Auras will not be your ski. A carver ski will. The Celebs and Auras are for softer snow conditions, or for times of new snowfall (or snowblow!) Even just a few inches of fresh stuff makes nice conditions for both skis.

I'm taking my Celebrities out West with me. There are 2 reasons I've chosen them over my Auras: 1) They are more forgiving and for multiple days of skiiing, they will be friendlier; 2) My 177 Auras are no longer made, therefore will be very difficult to replace if they are damaged or lost. The Celebs are more easily replaceable should something happen to them.

The only reason I own both is that I received a serendipitous email from a ski shop in Arizona telling me they had a pair of 177 Auras, new in plastic, for sale. I have no idea how this shop got my email address. I had posted on this forum that I'd love a pair of the "wood-look" Auras in a 177, but I couldn't find them. Until that email. So, it seemed it was meant to be and I bought them. But they haven't displaced my Celebrities as I feared they might....BOTH skis still get a from me.

You said you went from a softer twin to the Celebs? The Mynx? I think I'm almost set on getting a pair of the Lines. If I hated the Mynx and love the Aura?

 

[ski now work later]

You said you went from a softer twin to the Celebs? The Mynx? I think I'm almost set on getting a pair of the Lines. If I hated the Mynx and love the Aura?

Vanho did have Mynx skis but they were too short for her so they are for sale. She also has Line park skis (I think the Anthem, symmetrical) and has those center mounted if you're interested in learning more about them.

 

[vanhoskier]

Yup, Oragejuice, you'd like the Celebs, I think. Or the Anthem. That's a fun ski......true center mount because it's exactly the same in tip and tail. If you have Auras as an all-mountain ski, I'd go with the Anthems for more of a park twist....you still can ski them all-mountain...they carve pretty darn well once you get used to the center stance.

Yes, I had the Mynx. Too soft. I don't mind a forgiving ski, there's a place for that, but these just got thrown around too much. Part of the problem was they were too short for me. They were fun in the park, though.

 

[pruzonjd]

aura versus line celebrity

Hi there. I'm trying to decide b/n the Volkl Aura vs the Line Celebrity. I tried the aura last season and loved it! But,..I can get a great deal on the celebrity at my local shop. I'm a solid skier who wants to dabble in deeper stuff/ backcountry. I'm 5'5 and 135 lbs. Any thoughts??

 

[ski diva]

Hi, pruzonjd! Welcome to TheSkiDiva.com!

There's been a LOT of talk on the forum about both the Line Celebs and the Auras. If you go to the top of the page, click on "search," and enter either one of those skis, you'll find loads of info. Here's a thread that even talks about both.

Hope this helps.

Best of luck in finding the ski that's right for you!

 

[pruzonjd]

help to dabble in backcountry

Hi there. Which ski (celebrity vs aura) will be better if I want to start some backcountry skiing? I loved the aura but got a great deal on celebrity...

 

[SnowHot]

Hi, pruzonjd! Welcome to TheSkiDiva.com!

There's been a LOT of talk on the forum about both the Line Celebs and the Auras. If you go to the top of the page, click on "search," and enter either one of those skis, you'll find loads of info. Here's a thread that even talks about both.

Hope this helps.

Best of luck in finding the ski that's right for you!

I merged the thread that SkiDiva linked in her post with yours pruzonjd, because the answers may be more forthcoming with the threads combined.

Oh and .....Welcome!!

 

[vanhoskier]

Keep in mind that this year's Celebrity uses a metal layer in the laminate, unlike in previous years. This will change the feel of the ski....I imagine it will feel more lively and have better edge hold. You may find that it actually feels similar to the Aura.

Either ski is great...it's a matter of personal preference.