Coalition Snow Bliss and Sweet Salvation (S<O>S)

[volklgirl]

Bliss (Park and pipe) Abyss (Powder) Sweet Salvation (S<O>S) (All Mtn)

A note on all Coalition Snow skis - Dimension for each ski vary by length, so the dimensions given in my reviews are appropriate only for the length of the ski tested.

Bliss 168 cm (112-83-112, rocker-camber-rocker, mounted with Griffon demos on the mark) - True twin tip park and pipe ski:
Not sure exactly what to think of these yet. The length shouldn't be THAT much too short for me, yet they feel like skiing around on snowblades. They were super fun whipping off short turns in piled up powder bumps, and they were fairly stable in long turns on soft snow, but I kept feeling like I needed tons of tip pressure to keep them from squiggling around. Mounted on the mark, the bindings look like they're truly center mounted on the ski, so maybe that's my issue with them. I going to keep playing with binding position and will update my review accordingly.

Sweet Salvation 173 cm (129-105-119, rocker-camber-rocker, mounted with Griffon demos on the mark) - All mountain ski:
This is one stiff ski, and I love them!! The tip and tail rocker makes them super maneuverable in the later afternoon powder piles while the camber underfoot keeps them glued to the scratchy groomed ice underneath. Totally confidence inspiring for me, even when skiing cautiously while nursing a sprained knee. They allowed me to attack the piles of crud from the very first run! I could see the ridgy ripples and bumps under the new snow but the SOS just gobbled them up and I didn't feel them at all. Like the Bliss, the on-the-line mount puts the bindings WAY forward of anything else we have, and I did have the tails hang up a few times, so I'm going to play with the binding position on these as well, and in the meantime, Id suggest anyone purchasing these to mount at least 1-2 cms back. Those living on the ice coast may also want to have the side edge bevels reset to 3 degrees to give them the ice bite they're capable of.

 

[mustski]

Thanks for the review. I've been mega curious about these skis and wish I could have an opportunity to demo them!

 

[volklgirl]

Thanks for the review. I've been mega curious about these skis and wish I could have an opportunity to demo them!

Check out their website and go to the DEMOS tab - they will hook you right up!

 

[contesstant]

OK, so these skis are definitely burlier you'd say? Can you compare them to anything? I mean, Volkl are known for being pretty burly and you describe these as stiff, so I'm thinking they'd be way too much ski for me to enjoy. But, the graphics are very nice

 

[volklgirl]

Strong, speedy, heavier skiers will get the most out of the SOS, but I wouldn't hesitate to have you try them, or put you on the Bliss.

I put DH on the SOS today and he said they handled everything he gave them easily. He gave them both a thumbs-up AND a mitten clap and said he would not hesitate to own them in the 180 (if they weren't women's skis, of course). Rock solid and bulletproof were the adjectives he used. Oh, and I left the toe pieces set for my boots, so he was a bit behind center when he tried them.

 

[Serafina]

Bliss 168 cm (112-83-112, rocker-camber-rocker, mounted with Griffon demos on the mark) - True twin tip park and pipe ski:
Not sure exactly what to think of these yet. The length shouldn't be THAT much too short for me, yet they feel like skiing around on snowblades. They were super fun whipping off short turns in piled up powder bumps, and they were fairly stable in long turns on soft snow, but I kept feeling like I needed tons of tip pressure to keep them from squiggling around. Mounted on the mark, the bindings look like they're truly center mounted on the ski, so maybe that's my issue with them. I going to keep playing with binding position and will update my review accordingly.

IIRC, you and I are of a similar size, and unless you've got a very burly twin tip, 168 is going to be too short. That's why my Rossi S3s are on the chopping block right now - at 168, they're just too short for me to ride them at my normal skiing speed without feeling like they're squiggly. If I were to buy them right now, I'd probably go for something a lot closer to a 180, even though my "standard" length is 168-172, depending on the ski. Some of it is how they're measured, too, because I also have a pair of "168" K2 Kung Fujas (another mid-fat twin tip) that is clearly much longer than the S3s (and behaves like they're longer, underfoot, too). The Kung Fujas are also a beefier ski than the S3s, and hold up to being pressured.

I looked around online for an explanation for this sizing discrepancy, and best I could find is that there's not a standard approach to measuring twin-tips - some measure it tip to tail (which Rossi seems to have done with the S3), some measure the portion of the ski that's in contact with the snow (which is closer to what K2 seems to have done with the Kung Fuja).

 

[volklgirl]

IIRC, you and I are of a similar size, and unless you've got a very burly twin tip, 168 is going to be too short.

Wholeheartedly agree - but the guys in the shop were hand flexing both pairs when they arrived and were all amazed at how stiff they were for "women's skis". However, I didn't get these for me (or I would, indeed, have ordered the 180) - I got them as demos for other women. As an ambassador for the brand this year, that is my job. That said, though, I demoed a bunch of skis in the 165-170 range at the spring demo days, and none of them had this seriously short feel. I should be able to get back on them this week with the bindings shifted back some, so I'm really curious to see how that goes, especially given DH's response to the SOS when mounted a bit behind the mark.

Besides the two measurement styles you mentioned above, there are also companies that measure tip-to-tail on a straight line (like through where the binding would be, aka Cord Length), while others measure tip-to-tail along the bottom of the ski along the curves.

 

[volklgirl]

Here's an odd tidbit - using the stated lengths and rocker percentages for both skis, the contact length for the 173 SOS is almost 1 cm shorter than the contact length for the 168 Bliss. Curiouser and curiouser!

 

[mustski]

Check out their website and go to the DEMOS tab - they will hook you right up!

Nope. There is nothing local - it's Tahoe only and I rarely ski there and definitely not his season.

 

[Serafina]

Here's an odd tidbit - using the stated lengths and rocker percentages for both skis, the contact length for the 173 SOS is almost 1 cm shorter than the contact length for the 168 Bliss. Curiouser and curiouser!

This makes my head hurt.

 

[volklgirl]

Nope. There is nothing local - it's Tahoe only and I rarely ski there and definitely not his season.

Did you actually contact them?

This makes my head hurt.

Doesn't it just????

So, today, I got back out on the S<O>S with the bindings set 1 cm back from the mark. That seemed to be the ticket for me and they rocked it even in the dust on rock-hard crust we had tonight. I really can't wait to get these into some softer snow!

Geeze....Some reviewer I am. Sheesh. You need information!
Me: 50 yr old heavyweight, ex PSIA Level 2 certified instructor, ex 2 times a week beer league and NASTAR racer, turned freeskier with a love of speed, trees, powder, and junky snow. Lange XT 100 boots with heel lifts.

 

[mustski]

Did you actually contact them?

Using their demo page - yes. However, they have not responded, and really, the place I ski is quite small so I don't actually expect them to bring demos my way!

 

[Jenny]

So, today was fun! We headed up to Crystal Mountain, MI with friends and met up with @volklgirl while there, so we could take a few runs together and also so I could try out these skis.

Me - 5'9", around 140-145 lbs. I describe myself to instructors as an almost 8, or a barely 8, and haven't really gotten any disagreement after class is over. I am not overly aggressive. Conditions were sort of firm, but not cement, and the snow was kind of heavy. Places that looked scraped off actually were softer than I expected.

Anyway, I had a great time on the SOS! They're much wider and probably on the stiffer end of anything I've tried before. First run down was on a blue, and I was a little tentative. Was mainly focusing on whether I could get them up on edge or not, and if I noticed a lag time doing so. VG encouraged me to just give them whatever I had so I did. They definitely responded well, and I felt so stable on them. Didn't get thrown about by the bumps/piles/ridges that I came across at all.

In fact, I was so absolutely OK with the feel and how well they stuck to the snow that after a few more trial runs on a black run I did the Gorge, which may not really be much to some people but was huge for me. I think it's because I used to look at it when I first skied and think that nobody but a crazy lunatic would go down that thing, and now I is one of those crazy lunatics! And it was easy. My my, how I've grown.

I never noticed the tails at all, and this was also the first time I've skied something with a tail rocker, so I was kind of wondering if I'd feel like they skidded out from under me. I also didn't have them hook/catch at all.

I was kind of worried that my skis would be scary after being on these, because I'm still having the tips wandering issue I've talked about before. That didn't happen (whew!) but mine definitely feel less substantial now. After we were done we compared length, stiffness, etc. between them and one thing really jumped out. The bindings on the SOS are like 2-3 inches further toward the center of the ski than mine. So that was interesting. Also, VG said the edge on the SOS was tuned to 1/3 and I have no idea what mine are. So I think I'm going to ask questions at our local shop, and see what I can learn.

To summarize, I liked them a lot. They were fun, stable, and confidence building. But I'm also not absolutely sure they're right for me because I like to be able to be lazy now and then, and they might not let me do that. I'm already making plans to meet up and try them again, though!

 

[volklgirl]

@Jenny -Watching you drop into the Gorge (repeatedly!!) on the S<o>S was awesome, especially knowing how apprehensive you've been in the past. You totally owned it ! I agree with you about being able to relax and just be lazy on them, though. They pretty much want you to be "on" all the time. I'm wondering if this will ease some as they get skied more and "break in".


I've now had 4 women (and 1 man) on the S<o>S, all coming from other skis in the 70-85 waist width range. They've all been rather tentative about the waist width, yet have universally liked the ski after realizing that they need to 1) be up to speed to be fun, and 2) really stand out on steeper terrain and in cruddy/deeper conditions. The combination of stiffness, underfoot camber, and tip and tail rocker makes them grippy on the groomers and steep stuff while remaining fun and swivelly in the crud, bumps, and powder.

@mustski - they're going to be doing some traveling demo days, so you may want to contact them to see if they can come to an area near you. You should be able to keep up with their travel plans on their web page, or on their FB page.

 

[Jenny]

Aw, thanks! DH wants to try them next time we ski together . . .

 

[volklgirl]

Aw, thanks! DH wants to try them next time we ski together . . .

absolutely!!

 

[mustski]

@Jenny

@mustski - they're going to be doing some traveling demo days, so you may want to contact them to see if they can come to an area near you. You should be able to keep up with their travel plans on their web page, or on their FB page.

I did. They said no plans for BB this year. If I knew more than 3 or 4 local female skiers, I would have volunteered for an ambassador position. The truth is that I just don't know any female skiers. It's the reason I joined this forum.

 

[cheerrabbit]

I just wanted to point out as I was scanning Loveland events page that Coalition is having a demo day on February 6th. So if anyone in CO wants to demo...
I'm going to try really hard to go that day.
https://skiloveland.com/events/
https://skiloveland.com/events/?cid=mc-6bea5a7e02f8f5e2945b6f6b1bbf9266&mc_id=251

Edit to add that they are doing several demos in CO:
https://www.facebook.com/events/566871813487489/
Feb. 3 Breckenridge
Feb. 4 Keystone
Feb. 5 Arapahoe Basin
Feb. 6 Loveland Ski Area
Feb. 7 Vail Resort

 

[volklgirl]

Tonight I managed to confirm that the 1 cm back position is definitely where I am most comfortable on the S<O>S. I skied them on center on Saturday and just felt slightly "off" and a bit awkward. I moved them back as far as I could (just 1 cm for my 276 BSL), and found the magic on them again tonight. Just a heads-up for anyone planning to demo them that you may want to play with the binding position for best performance.

 

[vagabunda79]

I'm thinking of getting a pair of the SOS or the Abyss. This seems like a great company! And they're having a kickstarter campaign right now that will get you a pair of either ski for $500. I'm 5'11" and a pretty aggressive skier, but not an expert per se. I've been skiing the Volkl Gotamas for year and would get a pair oft the Aura's if they made them in my length. Do these feel similar at all to the Aura? Thanks!