Stocki SC or MX?

[Rachel614]

Nice thanks for the info!!! I feel like my mind ended 85’s are almost good enough in this powder but def holding me back. Would love to try a wider pair… interesting about the resale factor, I still am trying to figure out the major differences between them all.

I'm on the SC in 149, 5'5", 135# with system binding that apparently acts abit like a race plate. It holds me at my modest speed limit of 30-32mph and is also very fun and maneuverable in firm bumps and trees. Mine have a 0.5/3 tune. Most would say too short and too sharp, but they are working for me. I'm not a racer and never was, and always want the option of dipping into bumps and trees. I bought them as my "New England ski" but enjoyed them at Steamboat during DivaWest and last May in Mammoth, so they are more than a groomer/ice ski. I demoed the MX once at 158. It struck me as “similar” to SC 149, but there was not a great variety of terrain to push them on. FWIW, reviews of SC including by men (do they count?) remark on versatility, ie works in bumps, slush, etc. I’d agree and this is not always truefor a carving ski.

There may be better resale value on SC than MX. I thought if SC149 really is too short I would resell and buy longer, but I haven’t found that limitation.

Just bought 2022 Nela88/160 from @VickiK and they are working great in softer/deeper snow, no idea the tune. Also could be short for my stats but so far they’ve been fun, just floaty enough, and stable

 

[Midlifeaddiction]

I agree with nopoleskier that you should get what you demo'd and loved. I am 5'5" 121 lbs and got the SC in 156 cm. I demo'd them right after demoing the MX in 149 cm (I knew they'd be too short but the Stockli folks insisted I try them) and then 158 cm (or whatever that next size is). I was blown away by the SC vs the MX and ended up buying the SC a few weeks later. A friend of mine fell for the MX on another demo day. She's your height and went with the 158 cm. She bought them the following week and is really happy with them. If you can demo both, that would of course be ideal, but if you can't, I would go with the SC in the size you loved. If you're pretty lightweight I'd consider going for the 149 SC, as I can't imagine anyone calling an SC in their approximate size squirrelly.

Update: I am having a lot of trouble with my tails washing out. Don’t think I have this issue as much with my linger wider all mountain skis. So rethinking everything: my angulation, I am very much over my skis at turn initiation, so having my stance adjusted, but can’t stop thinking I should have gotten the 156’s. I think my COM is not right and I am used to driving a longer ski. I am not 95 lbs, lol. I am 128. The rep pushed me to get the shorter size saying as an older skier it was better. One of the trainers at my mountain thought I should have gotten the 156. I have never skied such a high performance ski except like 1o yrs ago, I purchased a used Fisher RC4 but I wasn’t skiing at this high of a level at the time. I am going to go back to the rep. I was not sble to demo the 146 because no one stocks that short size.

 

[snoWYmonkey]

I am sorry you are having issues with the skis. What dies washing out mean for you? Do you normally make carved or skidded turns on your wider skis? 90 per cent of the skier tracks I see in Jackson are skidded turns. I can do both on my SCs but they do need quite a bit of input for the carved turns. I hope you get your dialed. My 163s like the covid 20# weight gain a lot. Easier to flex now...lol

 

[Trailside Trixie]

My shop has the SC in my size (163) to demo. I've skied this ski before and didn't like them. They felt squirrely amd I just didn't feel comfortable on them. That was a few years ago and I've gotten a lot better so I'd like to give them another go.