On the hunt for a soft tipped carving capable 84 to 90 inch waist ski for steeps and bumps

[sashak]

Definitely consider the Atomic Maven 93C! They are exactly what you described. They are new to me but I'm already loving them. Playful, easy, excellent holding edge for groomers, really fun on bumps, slice through crud, and lighter.

 

[ski diva]

Definitely consider the Atomic Maven 93C! They are exactly what you described. They are new to me but I'm already loving them. Playful, easy, excellent holding edge for groomers, really fun on bumps, slice through crud, and lighter.

I skied the Atomic Maven 93 yesterday and loved it. Highly recommend.

 

[coldthrill]

Now those are fun skis! They are still in storage. The snow is not firm enough and I am not needing to ski fast quite yet. I bought my SCs specifically to outski 2 groomer carving students. They are such fast and dependable skis. But a ton of work in big choppy bumps.

I did experience a bit of that "work" with a rare-this-year and gorgeous, decent snowfall on Monday. I don't know if I need anything wider than the SCs, as long as I stick to the East Coast, that is. I looked into the Ranger on Ski Essentials and am definitely intrigued. They sound amazing. I really hope you love them!

 

[sashak]

I skied the Atomic Maven 93 yesterday and loved it. Highly recommend.

Yay! Curious as always.... If you also liked the Maven 93, which of those top listed skis would be the 2nd in the quiver? Lol, it just never ends.

 

[sashak]

A huge shout out to all the Divas for their input! It was fun, but frustrating as so few skis are available to demo in the 90 and under range where I live. Since demoing did me no favors this past go around, I did more research online and hopefully my gut is serving me what I need and envision.

I just bought skis, round two for the 22-23 season. Fischer Rangers 90 underfoot at 170cm length coming home, hopefully for good until they become rock skis. Sounds like a capable bump/soft carver, that can take some off piste. Perfect ski for teaching those little bit of all conditions lessons I hope.

I look forward to hearing your experience with the Ranger as well!

 

[Susan L]

Stockli Nela 88

 

[bitoffluff]

Ooh, slight hijack as I'm pretty much looking for similar (edge hold on a playful ski) just a touch narrower - ideally high 70s / low 80s width. Really interested in the atomic Maven 86c but a bit wider than i was aiming for, and edge hold on near ice is important for me. Nopoleskier - have you had these on icy steep pitches and if so how did the edge hold? I was thinking I might need metal for edge hold, but great if not as I'm not keen on the weight that comes with it.

 

[contesstant]

I'm not a fan of the Maven. They are exhausting (to me) because they don't absorb much energy--just transfer it all to the legs and body. And I skied the 86 version with ti in it. I just skied them last week, FWIW, after skiing 3 widths of the 2024 Salomon Stance which was a really, really nice ski.

 

[contesstant]

Ooh, slight hijack as I'm pretty much looking for similar (edge hold on a playful ski) just a touch narrower - ideally high 70s / low 80s width. Really interested in the atomic Maven 86c but a bit wider than i was aiming for, and edge hold on near ice is important for me. Nopoleskier - have you had these on icy steep pitches and if so how did the edge hold? I was thinking I might need metal for edge hold, but great if not as I'm not keen on the weight that comes with it.

Sooo to answer more, I bought a pair of Rossignol Experience 82ti W, and I love them more every time I ski them. They are smooooooth but can turn on a dime. I bought them a tad long, too, in a 167. This was after demoing them last year in that length. They are not light though, but I have found that weight does not always translate into harder to ski...at all. In fact, there's something about heavier skis that feel really planted on the snow. They'd be lighter if I had not gotten them with the system bindings. I can't speak to how they'd be on ice, as we've not had any here for two months. But I have no doubts they'll do just fine at 82 under foot with two sheets of titanal.

 

[ski diva]

I'm not a fan of the Maven. They are exhausting (to me) because they don't absorb much energy--just transfer it all to the legs and body. And I skied the 86 version with ti in it. I just skied them last week, FWIW, after skiing 3 widths of the 2024 Salomon Stance which was a really, really nice ski.

Yep, the Salomon Stance is a really nice ski. Which width did you get?

 

[contesstant]

Yep, the Salomon Stance is a really nice ski. Which width did you get?

I skied the 88, 94, and 84. They all felt very similar. If I were to buy a pair, I'd probably get the 88, although the 84 had me giggling because I really do like narrower skis.

 

[ski diva]

I skied the 88, 94, and 84. They all felt very similar. If I were to buy a pair, I'd probably get the 88, although the 84 had me giggling because I really do like narrower skis.

I skied the 84 and liked them quite a bit.

 

[coldthrill]

Sooo to answer more, I bought a pair of Rossignol Experience 82ti W, and I love them more every time I ski them. They are smooooooth but can turn on a dime. I bought them a tad long, too, in a 167. This was after demoing them last year in that length. They are not light though, but I have found that weight does not always translate into harder to ski...at all. In fact, there's something about heavier skis that feel really planted on the snow. They'd be lighter if I had not gotten them with the system bindings. I can't speak to how they'd be on ice, as we've not had any here for two months. But I have no doubts they'll do just fine at 82 under foot with two sheets of titanal.

That is exciting! You're pretty much describing my experience with my new Laser SCs. In demoing them, they felt super planted, which I attributed to their weight, yet also shockingly compliant. I couldn't find the binding setup I demoed (MC 12 with the Freeflex plate) anywhere in the U.S., which left me with the option of going with MC 11s or the SRT 12 binding with the Speedplate. In what felt like a rash decision, I went with the SRT 12. Like you, I like them more every time I ski them and am glad I went for the heftier binding. Have the Rossis replaced your Nelas, or do you use them both? I'm casually researching skis in the 85 to 90 range in case I find the SCs troublesome in crud and slop or get a hankering to go off-piste or into moguls. I do feel a bit ridiculous looking at other skis right after getting my dream pair, though, lol.

 

[contesstant]

That is exciting! You're pretty much describing my experience with my new Laser SCs. In demoing them, they felt super planted, which I attributed to their weight, yet also shockingly compliant. I couldn't find the binding setup I demoed (MC 12 with the Freeflex plate) anywhere in the U.S., which left me with the option of going with MC 11s or the SRT 12 binding with the Speedplate. In what felt like a rash decision, I went with the SRT 12. Like you, I like them more every time I ski them and am glad I went for the heftier binding. Have the Rossis replaced your Nelas, or do you use them both? I'm casually researching skis in the 85 to 90 range in case I find the SCs troublesome in crud and slop or get a hankering to go off-piste or into moguls. I do feel a bit ridiculous looking at other skis right after getting my dream pair, though, lol.

I wanted the SC but it's not in the budget this year. I am keeping the Nelas for now, but there is some overlap so I'm still trying to decide what I'm going to do.

 

[Soujan]

Armada Declivity is 92 mm wide

I picked up the Armada Reliance 82 Ti as my new daily driver.

 

[nopoleskier]

Ooh, slight hijack as I'm pretty much looking for similar (edge hold on a playful ski) just a touch narrower - ideally high 70s / low 80s width. Really interested in the atomic Maven 86c but a bit wider than i was aiming for, and edge hold on near ice is important for me. Nopoleskier - have you had these on icy steep pitches and if so how did the edge hold? I was thinking I might need metal for edge hold, but great if not as I'm not keen on the weight that comes with it.

yes the demo day was Eastern Frozen with some loose granular- hard as rock with ice. I found them to be excellent- demo day so they had a great tune on them I liked how forgiving and fun they were, I like poppy skis but I did not feel like my body was getting beat up, for me they were really easy to ski. I hope you can demo, I always say what one person loves, others may hate.

 

[WaterGirl]

I picked up the Armada Reliance 82 Ti as my new daily driver.

How are you liking this ski? I see that Powder 7 has a demo pair in the 'right' size for me -- I have the older version Victa ti 87 but I feel like I was between sizes - not enough ski. Thinking the Reliance 82 is a bit more piste oriented - with my current boot drama I need a ski with a demo binding.... thinking could sell the Victas and get the Reliance for about $100 difference.....

 

[Olesya Chornoguz]

@snoWYmonkey I got a chance to demo SR88 in 175 and didn't like them at all - they are too soft for me on the groomers. I was outskiing them and tips chattered if I tried to go with any speed. Could be that 175 cm is too short for me, not sure. Kendo was really fun in bumps and groomers, much damper and stiffer then SR88, but not punishing - very nice all-around ski. It had slightly hooky tips, not sure if it the tune or the ski.

I have decided I like my current quiver and will not be demoing much more probably at this point.

 

[Soujan]

How are you liking this ski? I see that Powder 7 has a demo pair in the 'right' size for me -- I have the older version Victa ti 87 but I feel like I was between sizes - not enough ski. Thinking the Reliance 82 is a bit more piste oriented - with my current boot drama I need a ski with a demo binding.... thinking could sell the Victas and get the Reliance for about $100 difference.....

I have to say I am loving them so far. They are light, easy to maneuver and the metal makes them stable and pretty damp. Last year I got the Head Total Joy and thought they were too damp for my tastes and did give me that "weeeee" factor I was looking for. Handled GS turns pretty well but I didn't feel like I was able lay deep tracks with them. Lack of side cut does make carving short turns harder but they still had good edge hold on ice. Took them on some soft snow at Stratton and they handled bumps like a champ. I'm far from being a bump expert and these skis made it pretty easy for me. Easy to wiggle ski. They also don't punish you if you get into the backseat. Not a lot of rocker to them nor do they have a lot of positive camber. Personally, I don't like a ski with a lot of rocker. I would say they are good at everything but don't really excel at any one thing (maybe bumps if I was a better bump skier).

I actually bought mine used from Powder7 in December.

 

[snoWYmonkey]

@Olesya Chornoguz Interesting as I found the stiffness just right when carving low angle and in bumps. Either way they, and lord only knows what, got me in the end. Took a very strange tumble from a stand still with skis weirdly tangled and now probably have a torn tendon in my hip. Not blaming the skis....but...have never in 21 years taken a tumble from a standstill starting to traverse to a turn woth skis stuck together. Definitely not keeping them. Probably user error but not my boards. Skied Kendos 10 years ago and found them too soft. Bet they've changed a ton!