Volkl Attiva Auroras vs. Scott Sheelas

[AlliOops]

I need some advice on the Volkl Auroras. Has anyone demo'd these skis yet? I am deciding between the Auroras and the Scott Sheelas. These are two different skies, but I can't afford both. I like to rip up groomers and play off piste a bit too when East Coast conditions permit. I am advanced/expert, and really want a ski that I can take to the powder on those epic days. Both skies are fatter than my old Atomic Beta Carvs, so I am sure to feel a huge difference in stability on the crud. I want to order the skis in advance, so I am really trying to rely on word of mouth and advice from my fellow ladies.
Let me know if you have any views on either of these skis, good or bad.

Thanks!

 

[ski diva]

Welcome to the forum!

I'm an east coast skier, and I've tried the Volkl Auroras. In fact, I posted a review about it, and here's what I said:

Aurora: Oh. My. God. This is a new ski for next season, and let me put it this way: I know what alllllllll the Divas are going to want! A fantastic ski. Features their new "Wide Ride System;" the internal Power Transmission (iPT) binding interface is built into the ski body and slides into position on the ski's inside rails. The rep says this gives it a rounder flex pattern. Whatever. 112-85-129, 14.7 m. I loved it. Great in the big turns, smooth, stable, and can really hold an edge.

Can't say about the Scott's because I've never tried them, but I'd love to hear from anyone who has.

 

[AlliOops]

This is basically the review I have been seeing. Just very impressive. What size did you try? I am 5'7, 142 pounds. Currently, I ski on 160's, but was considering the Volkls in 156. Any thoughts?

And thanks for the welcome! It is great to be here : )

 

[ski diva]

I can't remember the size I tried, but I'm smaller than you (5'1" and 110 lbs), and I know it wasn't less than 156. I can't recall the sizes they come in, but I think you should go longer.

 

[Robyn]

Oh, I wouldn't go any shorter. I'm 5'5" although heavier than you but I ski 167 in my all mountain and just bought 177 for powder skis. I don't plan on going any shorter even when I do get closer to your weight.

 

[AlliOops]

The next size up for the Aurora is 163, which I am comfortable with as well. I had planned to go up to a 165/168 for my new skis, but am getting cold feet. I have never skied on anything longer than 160, and I have fears of not being able to manuever my huge skis and having my tips caught up in the glades!

 

[oragejuice]

Get the 163, you'll like it. I have the same fear of longer skis... but 163 for you is easy.

 

[AlliOops]

Thanks Oragejuice, I think the 163s are the way to go. I am still interested in the Scott Sheelas as well, but Scott has not produced many skis and I don't think nearly as many people have demo'd them vs. the high number of people that have tried the Auroras. I may just go for the Auroras this season, and try to get my hands on a pair of Scotts to demo. This way, when 2010 rolls around I'll be ready!

If anyone else has thoughts on the Sheela's please share it!!!

Thanks Divas! xxx.