sizing questions and Head Wild Thangs/Monster 82s

[skieast21]

Hi Ski Divas,

I am new to the forum, but have been searching around for the past few weeks looking for info from you all on Head Wild Thangs. Seems as though experience with these skis is limited to demos...does anyone own them?? I am trying to decide what length to get. I have skied both the 150 and 161 and am leaning toward the 161.

As with all skis, there are benefits and drawbacks to both of the sizes. Still, if I am capable of skiing the 161 won't there be more benefits than drawbacks?? I am 5ft 2in, almost 5ft 3in, and 105-110lbs.

What have people's experiences been with the Wild Thangs, if any? Do they seem to ski short or long (hard for me to judge since I haven't been skiing in a while)? I am hoping maybe someone owns them and has spent more than a few runs on them and can provide an opinion.

I understand that many of you have skied the Monster 82s...unfortunately, I haven't found a demo place with them small enough for me...any thoughts on if I could ski a Monster 82 in a 161 or would it be too much ski (I can't find a 150 anywhere)? How do the two models compare? I've heard that they have significantly softened the 82 since last year.

Sorry that was such a long post! Looking forward to any input from you all. Thank you in advance!

 

[dloveski]

what type of conditions/location will you be skiing in the most?

what type of skier are you?

 

[skieast21]

Will be skiing in eastern conditions, from hardpack/ice to whatever powder we might get...I haven't done a lot of woods skiing, but would like to do more. For more grip on the hardpack I lean towards the 161 and it would have more float, though who knows if we'll get any powder again like we did at the beginning of this season for a while :-) Then again, the 150s would be more maneuverable in the woods. Most common conditions that I will be in will probably be hardpack and then the loose/softer snow that gets pushed around during the day as people ski through. I would think that the 161s would plow through things a bit better, so I am conflicted, haha!

I am not totally sure what type of skier I am...I feel as though I am pretty aggressive especially for my size, but I don't like skiing bumps and can't do them very well...I can ski blues, blacks without moguls, have a little trouble right now with turn initiation (or so I am told, though I can carve the rest of the turn and come out of it well). I have been out of the alpine ski loop because I have been racing nordic and have only skied three times this year so far so I feel like I am a little rusty (though I also see this as a benefit because I am not really set in my ways at this point and could adjust technique with the size ski I get?!?)

 

[SnowHot]

This from the Speed Limit thread:

Not to hijack this thread, but I just posted a thread looking for info about the Head Wild Thangs so I am curious as to what size you were skiing and what you usually ski, SnowHot?? Do you think that going longer would have helped to "get the extra umph" or do you think it's inherent to the ski?? Thank you for your help.

I have wondered about sort of maxing out a ski and if that would happen with me and the 150...multiple friends have encouraged me to get the 161 wild thang because they feel that if I got the 150 I would soon want the longer ski, but I am unsure if I would have the capabilities to really use up all that ski has because I am petite.

I skied the Wild Thank in a 161.
This was one of the skis Whiteroom set me up with when my skis didn't make it to Stowe for ESA.
Make no mistake.........This is/was an awesome ski and I really enjoyed it. The only area that it didn't excel was for speed. It never left me feeling unstable, it offered me opportunities to play in the bumps and improve technique. I found it to be nimble, and playful, but never had a chance to see how it did on ice or hardpack with the exception of the ice marbles under the gondola At Stowe, which was not something this ski liked, but then nothing skis ice marbles well.

Well, that's not true. The Elan Wave spice blows the ice marbles away and makes you feel invincible, but then it doesn't handle moguls well, and wouldn't have provided the grins that the wild thang did in other areas.

Your question was, would added length offer more umph?
Its possible, but I'm not sure it would. I think this skis purpose is to play and lend stability to "throwin it down" but will not likely be a ski for speed. Just not its purpose.

I wouldn't make this my only ski but would happily add it to my quiver.

 

[skieast21]

Thank you, SnowHot...and thank you for moving the post so it wasn't confusing...I felt bad about posting there, but I wanted to jump on the fact that you had recently skied the wild thang. :-)

 

[SnowHot]

Thank you, SnowHot...and thank you for moving the post so it wasn't confusing...I felt bad about posting there, but I wanted to jump on the fact that you had recently skied the wild thang. :-)

That was perfectly fine to post there. Sometimes we need a poke to wake up and read something else.

do you have other skis to compliment the Wild Thang or will it be your only ski?

 

[skieast21]

It would be my only ski...when I demoed several skis at Stratton, my favorites were the Volkl Tierra and the Head Wild Thang if that helps any. The Tierra is just so expensive!

 

[SnowHot]

It would be my only ski...when I demoed several skis at Stratton, my favorites were the Volkl Tierra and the Head Wild Thang if that helps any. The Tierra is just so expensive!

Between the two skis, I'd say the Wild Thang will be least likely to hold you back. If you're not going to be ski racing, you'll be fine.

As I stated, they never got unstable at speed. You will really enjoy these.

If you don't have a shop in mind to buy from, as I always encourage buying local if you can, Contact Mike At Skiershop in Stowe Vermont. He is extremely helpful and will treat you well.

 

[skieast21]

Thank you for the suggestions, SnowHot...I also see that you are familiar with the Elan line (and welcome anyone else to chime in)...how do you think the Magfire 10 (152 cm at 10.6 radius 125/75/109) or 12 (152cm at 11.9 radius 126/82/109) would compare to a Wild Thang (161 at 15.4 radius 121/81/107)...I know they are different dimensions and certainly different sidecut radii but that is kind of why I am considering them...I tend to like to make smaller turns, but I want something that is midfat and will plow through stuff when needed, but I also am hoping to get out into the woods more than I previously have so am looking for that maneuverability.

My thinking is that maybe something like the Mag 12 would be good smaller, like the 152 to be maneuverable, but still grip on hardpack pretty well due to its construction and radius, and then have the width to be good plowing through stuff and handling powder. Versus the Wild Thang which doesn't have as much shape and has the bigger radius, but that I would probably ski longer?? I am thinking that the Mags would be stiffer and then maybe too long for me in the 160s?

Any thoughts from anyone? I am aware of the mag spice and wave spice skis, but, honestly, I can't stand the graphics, I guess I am boring and traditional (Of course the Wild Thang graphics bug me, too, but I know that there is not option of getting the Monster 82s in a 150 which is what I really would have loved to do)

I am not sure if I am way off base thinking that these skis could be used for similar purposes as all mtn/freeride skis....???
Thank you for the help, I love reading all the posts from everyone and from women!!!