Volkl 2017 Aura v Kenja v 90Eights

[Allison Goldberg]

So, I have been skiing on Volkl Auras since 2010, and they have been through it. It's time for a new pair.

I am on a fairly tight budget, but I want a great ski. I am 46, 5'3" small-framed woman, and I ski pretty hard in all sorts of terrain and conditions, and I ski in Tahoe throughout the winter and spring. I am strong, but I definitely have knees that have been a bit testy lately. I like to ski powder whenever possible; love tree skiing, nd also love to go fast. I like stability.

I can only afford to buy one pair.

I have read up on a lot of choices and went into a couple shops. Now I am all confused.

I was figuring my go-to would be a new pair of Auras, but one shop steered me instead to the Kenjas.

The other shop steered me over to 90Eights, which I supposedly am demo-ing tomorrow.

I may also demo Blizzard Sambas and Salomon Lumens.

I have the opportunity to buy the demos after I use them. They come with bindings, and the whole thing winds up much cheaper than new skis. Is it foolish to buy well-taken-care-of demos? Should I just buy online? Should I wait even later into the season for a price drop? Seems like stuff is selling out!

Lastly, my old skis are 156's. I have become more advanced over the years that I bought them. Should I stick to that length, or go a bit longer?

Any and all suggestions welcome.

 

[luliski]

I bought used demo skis at Squaw about 5 years ago, and they were fine. The only thing I ended up not liking about them was that they were heavy. I think they were heavy skis to begin with, and the demo binding made them even heavier. The demo skis sold out quickly; I remember it took me a few days to decide and when I went back, they were out of my first choice.

I demoed Auras last year, but I thought they were a little tiring to ski all day. But you've been skiing them and like them, right? I also demoed the Kenjas, and the Auras are much better in powder. I really liked the Sambas! I thought they were very stable at speed. I think the Lumens are a softer ski, mostly just for powder (if it's the one I'm thinking of).

There is one shop at Squaw where they really like the 90Eights, is that where you're demoing?

 

[mustski]

Welcome! I love buying new gear but, whew, it can be a daunting task. As a Volkl fan, let me help a bit. The Auras you are skiing are pre-rocker technology. Rocker was a game changer in the ski industry. I for one love it! It feels like power steering and makes the skis more turny. Go here to read more about the technology: https://www.theskidiva.com/forums/index.php?threads/what-you-need-to-know-about-rocker.13078/

The current year Kenjas are a very versatile ski and loved by a lot of women. They have rocker in the tip and tail which reduces the edge that contacts the snow. Most women go one size up. The Kenjas are a good all mountain ski and will serve well except in powder. I believe the stiffness should be about the same as your current Auras. I could be wrong, but the Kenjas are considered a stiff ski.

The 90-eights have a similar rocker profile, but are a more flexible ski with a wider waist. I haven't tried them myself but the reports have been very positive. They will perform better in powder than the Kenas and should perform just as well on piste. They are reputed to be good with short snappy turns and, since they are softer, should be good in bumps as well. Again, go up one size so you have enough edge on the snow.

For reference, I skied the Volkl AC3 (carver) in a 156. My Volkl Aura with tip rocker only is a 163 and my Volkl One - tip and tail rocker - is a 166. I am 5'2" and 135 lbs.

The technology is quite different. Take your time and demo a few different skis to see what you personally prefer. Have fun and let us know what you decide!

 

[Pequenita]

"Testy knees" and "small-framed" would lead me to replacing demo bindings with something lighter.

 

[santacruz skier]

"Testy knees" and "small-framed" would lead me to replacing demo bindings with something lighter.

I totally agree. Have always swapped out demo bindings... in the Sambas the difference was 6 lbs I was told.

 

[Allison Goldberg]

I bought used demo skis at Squaw about 5 years ago, and they were fine. The only thing I ended up not liking about them was that they were heavy. I think they were heavy skis to begin with, and the demo binding made them even heavier. The demo skis sold out quickly; I remember it took me a few days to decide and when I went back, they were out of my first choice.

I demoed Auras last year, but I thought they were a little tiring to ski all day. But you've been skiing them and like them, right? I also demoed the Kenjas, and the Auras are much better in powder. I really liked the Sambas! I thought they were very stable at speed. I think the Lumens are a softer ski, mostly just for powder (if it's the one I'm thinking of).

There is one shop at Squaw where they really like the 90Eights, is that where you're demoing?

Were Auras tiring because they're heavy? Yes, I am concerned about heavier demo bindings.
And the shop that likes the 90Eights is Granite Chief in Truckee.

 

[Allison Goldberg]

Welcome! I love buying new gear but, whew, it can be a daunting task. As a Volkl fan, let me help a bit. The Auras you are skiing are pre-rocker technology. Rocker was a game changer in the ski industry. I for one love it! It feels like power steering and makes the skis more turny. Go here to read more about the technology: https://www.theskidiva.com/forums/index.php?threads/what-you-need-to-know-about-rocker.13078/

The current year Kenjas are a very versatile ski and loved by a lot of women. They have rocker in the tip and tail which reduces the edge that contacts the snow. Most women go one size up. The Kenjas are a good all mountain ski and will serve well except in powder. I believe the stiffness should be about the same as your current Auras. I could be wrong, but the Kenjas are considered a stiff ski.

The 90-eights have a similar rocker profile, but are a more flexible ski with a wider waist. I haven't tried them myself but the reports have been very positive. They will perform better in powder than the Kenas and should perform just as well on piste. They are reputed to be good with short snappy turns and, since they are softer, should be good in bumps as well. Again, go up one size so you have enough edge on the snow.

For reference, I skied the Volkl AC3 (carver) in a 156. My Volkl Aura with tip rocker only is a 163 and my Volkl One - tip and tail rocker - is a 166. I am 5'2" and 135 lbs.

The technology is quite different. Take your time and demo a few different skis to see what you personally prefer. Have fun and let us know what you decide!

 

[Allison Goldberg]

If Kenjas aren't great in powder, that'll be super limiting for me. So, tomorrow I am demo-ing the 90Eights. I will go back to requesting to try the 163 instead of the 156. Thanks for the tips. I want to save money, thus the idea of buying demos. But I don't want the heavy rental binding!

 

[contesstant]

The Kenjas are VERY stiff and require a lot of focus in powder or anything variable, particularly for us smaller gals. (I'm on Kenjas in my avatar--skied them all last season.)
Don't limit yourself to just one brand. There are a lot of REALLY great skis out there!
That being said, I found the 98s to be a lot of fun last spring, a little easier to turn and maneuver than the Kenjas.

Can you take out a variety of skis in the 90-100mm width range, or are you limited to one pair per day?

 

[luliski]

Were Auras tiring because they're heavy? Yes, I am concerned about heavier demo bindings.
And the shop that likes the 90Eights is Granite Chief in Truckee.

It might have been because I was skiing them in heavy Sierra snow. I know what you mean about getting more confused after learning about other skis. I bought skis this season (Head Great Joy) and I'm still confused, although I love my skis!

 

[Jilly]

They should give you a great deal on the Samba's, if you like them. Not really discontinued, but re-named.

 

[Allison Goldberg]

FYI, I skied in fairly treacherous conditions today: choppy and crusty, super white-out, and very wet and windy snow. Despite that, I really loved the Volkl 90Eights. Apparently, they are really replacing the Auras out there in the open marketplace.

I am going to test out the Salomon Lumens 99 tomorrow and see how those feel. Any opinions on those are welcome.

I am really torn about length. I like having control (who doesn't?), but I also like speed. So, I am torn between 156 & 163 for the Volkl 90Eights (I used 156 today). I am trying 159 Lumens tomorrow, and they have a new pair for sale, but only the 167's!!!

 

[contesstant]

FYI, I skied in fairly treacherous conditions today: choppy and crusty, super white-out, and very wet and windy snow. Despite that, I really loved the Volkl 90Eights. Apparently, they are really replacing the Auras out there in the open marketplace.

I am going to test out the Salomon Lumens 99 tomorrow and see how those feel. Any opinions on those are welcome.

I am really torn about length. I like having control (who doesn't?), but I also like speed. So, I am torn between 156 & 163 for the Volkl 90Eights (I used 156 today). I am trying 159 Lumens tomorrow, and they have a new pair for sale, but only the 167's!!!

I'm of the mindset that if you demoed a particular length, and loved that length, then go with that length. (Particularly in what sounds like REALLY challenging conditions!) If they felt awesome for you in those conditions, you are on the right track.

 

[Allison Goldberg]

I'm of the mindset that if you demoed a particular length, and loved that length, then go with that length. (Particularly in what sounds like REALLY challenging conditions!) If they felt awesome for you in those conditions, you are on the right track.

It's hard to say, but my only thought is that they felt a tad slow. I thought that perhaps length would buy me some speed.

 

[mustski]

FYI, I skied in fairly treacherous conditions today: choppy and crusty, super white-out, and very wet and windy snow. Despite that, I really loved the Volkl 90Eights. Apparently, they are really replacing the Auras out there in the open marketplace.

I am going to test out the Salomon Lumens 99 tomorrow and see how those feel. Any opinions on those are welcome.

I am really torn about length. I like having control (who doesn't?), but I also like speed. So, I am torn between 156 & 163 for the Volkl 90Eights (I used 156 today). I am trying 159 Lumens tomorrow, and they have a new pair for sale, but only the 167's!!!

You will also want the additional length in deep powder. It's not just about width; length matters. The 163 in the Volk 90 eights are the same virtual length as the 2010 Aura in 156 - you are not going up a size.

Of course, you never stated your weight and that effects everything. Are you a super light weight?

 

[luliski]

FYI, I skied in fairly treacherous conditions today: choppy and crusty, super white-out, and very wet and windy snow. Despite that, I really loved the Volkl 90Eights. Apparently, they are really replacing the Auras out there in the open marketplace.

I am going to test out the Salomon Lumens 99 tomorrow and see how those feel. Any opinions on those are welcome.

I am really torn about length. I like having control (who doesn't?), but I also like speed. So, I am torn between 156 & 163 for the Volkl 90Eights (I used 156 today). I am trying 159 Lumens tomorrow, and they have a new pair for sale, but only the 167's!!!

Did you get a chance to try them on any harder snow? The stability at speed is what sold me on going back to a longer ski.

 

[contesstant]

I'll be interested in hearing your thoughts on the Lumens. I have never liked them, nor the Lux. To me, they feel short and jittery and are not fun on anything icy or scraped off.

If you're pretty certain you want the 90Eights, then maybe you can get out on the longer pair to make sure? I demoed them in a very long length last season (170) on mostly groomers and they were easy at that length. You will trade off maneuverability in trees, as you probably know.

 

[Allison Goldberg]

They should give you a great deal on the Samba's, if you like them. Not really discontinued, but re-named.

I am trying Sambas tomorrow, and I loved loved the Lumens today.

 

[Allison Goldberg]

Did you get a chance to try them on any harder snow? The stability at speed is what sold me on going back to a longer ski.

I hear you. I think 159 is about right for me. I loved the Lumens today. That said, I want to try the 90Eights in a 163 rather than the 156 I tried.

 

[Allison Goldberg]

I'll be interested in hearing your thoughts on the Lumens. I have never liked them, nor the Lux. To me, they feel short and jittery and are not fun on anything icy or scraped off.

If you're pretty certain you want the 90Eights, then maybe you can get out on the longer pair to make sure? I demoed them in a very long length last season (170) on mostly groomers and they were easy at that length. You will trade off maneuverability in trees, as you probably know.

You will also want the additional length in deep powder. It's not just about width; length matters. The 163 in the Volk 90 eights are the same virtual length as the 2010 Aura in 156 - you are not going up a size.

Of course, you never stated your weight and that effects everything. Are you a super light weight?

I happen to be 120 pounds, so fairly slim. But I like the length.

I really loved the Lumens, actually.