Ken Jones Demo Day @ Loon 12/7/18

[contesstant]

Yes I bought them in 161, found a good deal on 2018s. Turn radius @161 is 13.5. I actually have old 2015 BPs, they were my first “real” skis (haha) but I think I outgrew them at 152. I didn’t listen to the shop guy who said 159 would’ve been better for me, but I still had 3 good seasons on them. So then I tried the 2018 in both 152 and 159 and didn’t like either so concluded it wasn’t a length issue. I know they are also different skis than they used to be.

Shoot, @contesstant since you’re saying how good the Secret is in some pow, I’m wishing I would’ve tried it! Do you have Santa Ana with metal? If so, curious to see how you think they compare to the Secret when you take them out!

I own the pre-metal Santa Ana 100 in a 169 for powder days and only powder days. They are a lot of length for me to negotiate tight spaces with, but they are a HOOT in untracked and are super fun when I have room to let them go a little.

I remember thinking the SA 93 with metal was a bit sluggish feeling to me last year, just kind of heavy and damp, but still a nice ski overall. Just wasn't sure how I'd like it in tight spaces. And I felt like I wanted more than the 161 but less than the 169. I'm funny about lengths and 163 is truly my happy length, which ironically, the Secret is.

 

[lisamamot]

I own the pre-metal Santa Ana 100 in a 169 for powder days and only powder days. They are a lot of length for me to negotiate tight spaces with, but they are a HOOT in untracked and are super fun when I have room to let them go a little.

I remember thinking the SA 93 with metal was a bit sluggish feeling to me last year, just kind of heavy and damp, but still a nice ski overall. Just wasn't sure how I'd like it in tight spaces. And I felt like I wanted more than the 161 but less than the 169. I'm funny about lengths and 163 is truly my happy length, which ironically, the Secret is.

I have the pre-metal Santa Ana 100 in a 177 - I echo your sentiments - that is a long ski for me but they are surprisingly nimble and easy to ski; that said, in tight quarters they are a lot for me to get around. I agonized over length on these....in the end the Santa Ana lengths are a tough choice for me as well - 169 is short, 177 a bit long.

 

[MissySki]

Isn't it fun to start figuring all this stuff out?!
I'm struggling in the same kind of snow, but am getting the hang of it more and more thanks to how many storms we've had this season. For me, it's letting the skis "run" down the hill just a millisecond longer, with just a wee bit of tipping. Voila! They will slice when you do that.

I'm so glad you love those Sheevas! Funny, I think I'm going to sell mine, because I don't care for how they ski in untracked powder! I'm sure it's a balance issue and how I initiate turns in powder, but regardless, untracked is something I can find on many days here even after a storm, and I need my daily drivers to handle it comfortably for me.

As for the extra space from the heel lifts--Skisailor's idea of duct tape on the boot sole is good, or you might go see a fitter and ask about adding foam to the liners in that area. It could come down to being lifted a bit higher in the boot (as she also alluded to) or taking the volume up from the top, which will keep you where you are in relation to the cuff.

One thing I've learned from SO (we bicker about stuff quite a bit, he's very VERY opinionated, as one would expect from someone who has been in the biz full time for 30 years) but at times, I think his opinions don't work for me. Well, one thing he has said over and over is, "if you put padding inside the boot, you need to put it equally on both sides, or it WILL throw you out of alignment/balance inside the boot." So, if you pad around the ankle, pad around both sides. If you pad over the instep, pad over both sides, if you pad the cuff, pad both sides, etc. I am finding he is pretty spot-on with this. So, if you pad the instep area/top of the ankle, make sure it's even across both sides.

It does sound like the heel lifts were causing more issues than fixing. It's nice to have the quads tell us when we are in the back seat, and be able to fix it, vs. being stuck there no matter what--I know that feeling too well!!

Yes, I am hoping to continue moving in a positive direction without doing crazy boot things. Would be great if adding tape or a shim underneath and maybe some padding at the instep if necessary would do the trick.. fingers crossed! I do think it makes sense to do the same thing on both sides if possible, I’ve never had much luck doing it the other way in the past, so I’ll try and keep that in mind this time! I do 100% appreciate being able to stand up more though, it’s really frustrating when you can’t correct something because your anatomy with the boot isn’t allowing a particular movement!

Interesting on the Sheeva 9! I felt like they were fine in the crud, my issues were definitely driver error.. Felt like I was really working against the snow rather than finding any efficient way of skiing it until I scaled it back to the lesser snow amounts where I could bust through or use the smaller piles effectively for turning outside of the crud. I also had a lot of fear.. once I’d get some speed going it’d feel easier, but then a little voice in my head would be like ah you’re going too fast how are you going to manage a quick stop in this heavy snow if needed?!?! Or ah what happens if one leg goes here and one goes there and you injure yourself when you’re leaving for Aspen in a week?!? I’m always more apprehensive in those conditions because I’m not comfortable in them, but not usually to the extent that it really got in my head so much. Oh well, better luck next time I guess lol.

 

[contesstant]

Yes, I am hoping to continue moving in a positive direction without doing crazy boot things. Would be great if adding tape or a shim underneath and maybe some padding at the instep if necessary would do the trick.. fingers crossed! I do think it makes sense to do the same thing on both sides if possible, I’ve never had much luck doing it the other way in the past, so I’ll try and keep that in mind this time! I do 100% appreciate being able to stand up more though, it’s really frustrating when you can’t correct something because your anatomy with the boot isn’t allowing a particular movement!

Interesting on the Sheeva 9! I felt like they were fine in the crud, my issues were definitely driver error.. Felt like I was really working against the snow rather than finding any efficient way of skiing it until I scaled it back to the lesser snow amounts where I could bust through or use the smaller piles effectively for turning outside of the crud. I also had a lot of fear.. once I’d get some speed going it’d feel easier, but then a little voice in my head would be like ah you’re going too fast how are you going to manage a quick stop in this heavy snow if needed?!?! Or ah what happens if one leg goes here and one goes there and you injure yourself when you’re leaving for Aspen in a week?!? I’m always more apprehensive in those conditions because I’m not comfortable in them, but not usually to the extent that it really got in my head so much. Oh well, better luck next time I guess lol.

Did you crawl into my head? LOL! I do the exact same thing. It's getting better, though.
The Sheevas were fine in crud, the 9s ski longer than the 10s but I just could not get them to smear in powder, and I like to smear quite a bit. The tails just wanted to go straight. I'd blame the tune, but they were tuned, then re-tuned because I whined to BF, and it still happened.

Do you have Booster straps on your boots? If not, get some! They are SO nice. I have been tightening mine even more as of late and WOW! More control than ever.

 

[MissySki]

Did you crawl into my head? LOL! I do the exact same thing. It's getting better, though.
The Sheevas were fine in crud, the 9s ski longer than the 10s but I just could not get them to smear in powder, and I like to smear quite a bit. The tails just wanted to go straight. I'd blame the tune, but they were tuned, then re-tuned because I whined to BF, and it still happened.

Do you have Booster straps on your boots? If not, get some! They are SO nice. I have been tightening mine even more as of late and WOW! More control than ever.

Hmm that will be interesting to see for me as well when it’s untracked powder if I’m on the Sheevas because I like to smear as well. That’s one thing I really love about the Black Crows, though that didn’t help me out much on this occassion!

I don’t have Booster Straps on my current boots, but do on an older pair. I’ve been thinking about transfering them over or just getting some new one as well actually. Which do you have? I think I remember them coming in a couple of different flexes or “strengths”?

 

[Powgirl]

Thank you for this thread! I am looking to buy new skis , and the Sheeva 9 has been on my radar...I'm also eyeing the new k2 Mindbender...

 

[santacruz skier]

Love all the comparisons! Thanks everyone! Need to try all three plus the newer Santa Ana 100 !

 

[santacruz skier]

Really would like to ski with all of you.... Maybe next season at Diva West.....wherever that may be.

 

[contesstant]

Hmm that will be interesting to see for me as well when it’s untracked powder if I’m on the Sheevas because I like to smear as well. That’s one thing I really love about the Black Crows, though that didn’t help me out much on this occassion!

I don’t have Booster Straps on my current boots, but do on an older pair. I’ve been thinking about transfering them over or just getting some new one as well actually. Which do you have? I think I remember them coming in a couple of different flexes or “strengths”?

Just move the old ones to the new boots. They last forever. I have the not-race-ones. I have no idea what they are called. I just know they work!

And @Powgirl, I'm probably going to sell my 9s. So, if you demo and like, they are literally brand new with about 1.5 days on them!

 

[Powgirl]

Just move the old ones to the new boots. They last forever. I have the not-race-ones. I have no idea what they are called. I just know they work!

And @Powgirl, I'm probably going to sell my 9s. So, if you demo and like, they are literally brand new with about 1.5 days on them!

I'm interested!!

 

[MissySki]

Just move the old ones to the new boots. They last forever. I have the not-race-ones. I have no idea what they are called. I just know they work

Mine are definitely the non-race ones as well, I’ll have to move them!

 

[contesstant]

I'm interested!!

Sent you a PM :D

 

[MissySki]

Both. The 10s are a hoot in untracked, the 9s, I can't figure them out. But, the 10s are too short for deep untracked I am finding. So, I've been skiing my Santa Ana 100s (My Sheeva 10s are also for sale.)
The metal in the 9s extends about an inch or more further on both tip and tail than it does in the 10s, which technically makes them a bit stiffer. It's possible the 9s just don't release the tail as easily (that's what it's been feeling like) as I like a ski to let me ski like a dork in powder if necessary.

I even had BF redo the edges on them just to make sure, since he tunes everything before I take them out to ski.

I am actually getting some Volkl Secrets, as I skied those for two days at Targhee in the biggest mixed bag of conditions (except ice/hard pack, but they're Volkls, soo) and they were AWESOME. Even in a foot of fresh, they were an absolute delight. Now, I need to move some skis!

@contesstant can you remind me if your Santa Ana 100 is the version with or without metal? And which length? I finally got on the newest version yesterday, they are usually never at the demos I’ve done so I was excited, and wow were they fun! The sizing was weird for me though as my sweet spot is usually mid 160s and these are 161 or 169.. I tried the 161, and actually didn’t feel like they skied too short for me (must have been the width and construction?? They felt heavy to carry, but not at all to ski), at least on the soft groomers I really opened them up and they were stable as could be, also a blast in some soft bumps. Got on edge way easier than expected too, and again wow stable I felt confident on them. I should have tried the 169 as well but this was my last ski demo of the day and time got away from me a bit as it was just so beautiful out, should have planned better lol!! Just seems like it might be a lot of ski for me in the 169 if it’s not an actual powder day, but then in powder the 161 could be way too short to float me? Anyway, what a fun ski either way.

I also got to try the new Santa Ana 88, and the 93 with metal since I’ve only been on the pre-metal version. Both were really fun and stable on the firmer morning conditions because I took them out first thing whe. It was colder and snowing a bit in the morning before the sun lopped out and softened everything up, but I still like my Sheeva 9 better for the category they’d fill for me. The 100 really shined for me more than I thought, happened to line up well with some springy conditions so that probably helped.

 

[contesstant]

@contesstant can you remind me if your Santa Ana 100 is the version with or without metal? And which length? I finally got on the newest version yesterday, they are usually never at the demos I’ve done so I was excited, and wow were they fun! The sizing was weird for me though as my sweet spot is usually mid 160s and these are 161 or 169.. I tried the 161, and actually didn’t feel like they skied too short for me (must have been the width and construction?? They felt heavy to carry, but not at all to ski), at least on the soft groomers I really opened them up and they were stable as could be, also a blast in some soft bumps. Got on edge way easier than expected too, and again wow stable I felt confident on them. I should have tried the 169 as well but this was my last ski demo of the day and time got away from me a bit as it was just so beautiful out, should have planned better lol!! Just seems like it might be a lot of ski for me in the 169 if it’s not an actual powder day, but then in powder the 161 could be way too short to float me? Anyway, what a fun ski either way.

I also got to try the new Santa Ana 88, and the 93 with metal since I’ve only been on the pre-metal version. Both were really fun and stable on the firmer morning conditions because I took them out first thing whe. It was colder and snowing a bit in the morning before the sun lopped out and softened everything up, but I still like my Sheeva 9 better for the category they’d fill for me. The 100 really shined for me more than I thought, happened to line up well with some springy conditions so that probably helped.

I have the ligher version of the 100s. I am also kind of in between sizes on the 93 and 100. I also did not ski either one in the 161, and have always been curious if I'd like them better (I kind of doubt it.) The 165 SA 88 is soooo fun for me!

Funny, since I got the Boot Doc tongues foamed two weeks ago, I skied the Sheeva 9s and found them MUCH more agreeable overall, even in untracked! I still prefer the SA 88s so the Sheevas are still for sale, BUT the Sheeva 10s I am keeping, as they are fun in deeper, soft crud. I'm debating mounting the SA 100s with tech bindings next year and using them as a touring ski, since they are so light.

I think the SA 88 will become a favorite of east coasters, and well, us gals out west who prefer a "narrower" all-mountain ski.

 

[MissySki]

I have the ligher version of the 100s. I am also kind of in between sizes on the 93 and 100. I also did not ski either one in the 161, and have always been curious if I'd like them better (I kind of doubt it.) The 165 SA 88 is soooo fun for me!

Funny, since I got the Boot Doc tongues foamed two weeks ago, I skied the Sheeva 9s and found them MUCH more agreeable overall, even in untracked! I still prefer the SA 88s so the Sheevas are still for sale, BUT the Sheeva 10s I am keeping, as they are fun in deeper, soft crud. I'm debating mounting the SA 100s with tech bindings next year and using them as a touring ski, since they are so light.

I think the SA 88 will become a favorite of east coasters, and well, us gals out west who prefer a "narrower" all-mountain ski.

I’d mostly worry about losing the manueverability for tight spaces going to the 169 for me I guess. According to the Nordica site, the turn radius is 13.5 for the 161 and 15.5 for the 169. Since I’m a smaller turn gal, that was likely a large part of what I liked, especially in the bumps. Though 15.5 is still way tighter than some skis I have in shorter length. I believe @lisamamot has mentioned the maneuverability being a little troublesome in tight spots with her Santa Anas occassiinally. Lisa, which length do you have? I assume the 177 (if the legth options were the same for the premetal years). If so, I wonder if I’d feel the same about the 169 since I’m usually a size below you. Really wish they had a mid-160s length, I liked that size for the 88.

 

[contesstant]

I’d mostly worry about losing the manueverability for tight spaces going to the 169 for me I guess. According to the Nordica site, the turn radius is 13.5 for the 161 and 15.5 for the 169. Since I’m a smaller turn gal, that was likely a large part of what I liked, especially in the bumps. Though 15.5 is still way tighter than some skis I have in shorter length. I believe @lisamamot has mentioned the maneuverability being a little troublesome in tight spots with her Santa Anas occassiinally. Lisa, which length do you have? I assume the 177 (if the legth options were the same for the premetal years). If so, I wonder if I’d feel the same about the 169 since I’m usually a size below you. Really wish they had a mid-160s length, I liked that size for the 88.

Me too!

 

[MissySki]

This website shows 1:3 for Blizzards. Was curious on another pair of skis not too long ago, and stumbled upon that site. Not exactly sure what their credibility is, but they state, "This information is based upon factory published specs or the angles I've measure when prepping new skis. However the angles should always be checked before tuning any skis for the first time." So I would think that it's 1:3, but if you are going to sharpen them, maybe it's a good idea to get them checked prior to taking an edger to them.

So when at the Sunapee Ladies day yesterday, I got to speak to the Blizzard rep I normally see because of the demoes. Apparently I liked their skis a little too much back in December, before I even opened my mouth he was like “Hey, I know you!” Lol. Anyway, he confirmed the Sheeva 9 comes with a 2:1 from the factory. So glad I asked, I got some total misinformation from a local shop who confirmed that he spoke to his rep previously. He told me the base edge was 1.5 which sounded too weird to me, I told that to the rep yesterday and he was equally confused that this specific shop owner would say that. I have it in writing, and asked for confirmation that he did actually get the info from Blizzard, so very strange. But regardless, I’m super pleased because I have that side angle edge guide already so now I don’t have to be afraid of touching that part up myself.

 

[lisamamot]

I believe @lisamamot has mentioned the maneuverability being a little troublesome in tight spots with her Santa Anas occassiinally. Lisa, which length do you have? I assume the 177 (if the legth options were the same for the premetal years). If so, I wonder if I’d feel the same about the 169 since I’m usually a size below you.

Yes, I have the pre-metal Santa Ana 100 177. The 169 just felt too short with all that rocker, especially on groomers at speed. The length has been fantastic in wide open spaces, but tight trees (which I stink at anyway) were a big challenge on them. I wish Nordica would switch up their lengths a bit because I definitely struggle with Nordicas in that regard! The Sheeva 9 172 feels just right.

 

[MissySki]

Yes, I have the pre-metal Santa Ana 100 177. The 169 just felt too short with all that rocker, especially on groomers at speed. The length has been fantastic in wide open spaces, but tight trees (which I stink at anyway) were a big challenge on them. I wish Nordica would switch up their lengths a bit because I definitely struggle with Nordicas in that regard! The Sheeva 9 172 feels just right.

When you get to try the metal version, I’ll be intrested in whether you then think the 169 skis short still since I didn’t feel that way about the 161 and that surprised me since I was expecting them to and pushed them pretty hard. Felt rock solid.

@elemmac remind me which length(s) you ski, you have the 100 as well in both pre-metal and post-metal right?

 

[elemmac]

@elemmac remind me which length(s) you ski, you have the 100 as well in both pre-metal and post-metal right?

I have the 169 in both versions...I can easily see how you could ski a size shorter and think it’s plenty stable with the metal in it though. Adding the sheets of Titanial definitely beefed up the ski quite a bit, but it maintained it’s ease to ski, playfulness and maneuverability. Not sure if a 161 would get to a point that you would feel it’s too short...possibly once the ski breaks in.

I think you’d be just fine on the 169, but I don’t know if you would ever be unhappy with the 161 either.