Volkl Kenja vs Aura and differences between new & old Kenjas?

[greengirl]

Hi! I'm brand new here but have lurked a bit in the past and love this forum! Hello, everyone!

I'm a 48 yo, 5'7", 135-lb solid advanced skier with a bad back, and ski usually in Colorado and Wyoming, with occasional jaunts to Montana and Utah. I ski a combo of small/soft bumps, back side junk/ungroomed, groomed, and of course powder when I can catch it. When my back is cooperating, I venture to the back and/or attack the bigger bumps. When my back isn't feeling so hot, I stay on groomed and do mini bumps. So, basically, I'm looking for an all-mountain ski.

Has anyone skied both the Volkl Kenja and Aura? I demo'd the Kenja for a few days a year ago on the front side of Vail and LOVED it. I can't remember if it was the 2015 or 2016 model. It was the funnest ski I've ever skied on! It was simply FUN (poppy, bouncy). I especially appreciated how easy it was to maneuver in the bumps and how it was just overall easy to control (even with my back) and (did I say?) FUN. I felt super stable even at higher speeds and couldn't find anything to complain about at all. It's actually the first ski I've enjoyed so much. I felt like I was dancing.
I didn't, however, ski on the back side where the conditions can get more challenging.

I'm almost ready to buy, but am now wondering about the Aura. Does it ski similarly to the Kenja? What are the major similarities and differences?

My main concern is whether the Kenja offers enough flotation for deeper powder days and whether it performs well in sticky, chunky mashed potatoes and the stuff you can encounter on the back side.

Also, if you have any experience between the newer and older Kenjas -- say 2015, 2016, 2017 -- I would love to hear your input.

I think my perfect ski would be the Kenja with a little more float for deeper snow, but only if it otherwise performed exactly the same way as the Kenja (asking a lot? ).

Thank you!

 

[santacruz skier]

Not to throw a wrench into the loop, but I have an older Kenja (non rockered) from 2011 I think..... I also have the Blizzard Samba 2014 model and think the Sambas are a lot more fun in the conditions you're describing. Kenjas are good on groomed, but when I get in serious chopped up Sierra cement, not as good as the Sambas. That being said, I'm going to demo the NOrdica Santa Ana 100 this week in tahoe.

 

[santacruz skier]

@mustski has the Aura's I think..

 

[mustski]

I have the previous version of the Aura with camber and early rise tip. I believe this is similar to the current version of the Kenja (Albeit wider at 96). The newer version of the Aura is flat, no camber with tip and tail rocker. Between the old and new Kenja, I would definitely pick the newer model. In my opinion it's a better ski. Neither version will help in powder over 8" though they won't hinder you either. It's just not a powder ski. I have not tried the newer version of the Aura so I can't speak to it. The version I have is very versatile though I kind of suck at bumps so I can't rate the ski there.

 

[bounceswoosh]

No opinions on the skis, but welcome, @greengirl !

 

[SnowHot]

The amount of rocker in the new Kenja is minimal, but the construction and shape of the new Kenja makes it a little more nimble and playful, without losing its edge to slay the groomers.

@santacruz skier is right about the Samba. Its super fun in all the conditions you're talking about.

 

[greengirl]

Thanks, everyone, for your input!

 

[snow cat]

Just a brief thought on the new vs old Kenja since I just demoed the 2017 Kenja at Aspen during the Diva West. Personally, the new 2017 Kenjas felt a touch more sluggish/heavier than the older version (I have 2014 one). Potentially due to wider width underfoot or maybe because of the heavier demo binding. But everything else (dampness, etc.) felt similar. I personally prefer the older version and didn't think the 2017 version is more nimble or playful.

I take Kenja almost anywhere in any condition and have taken it to icy hardpack, backside/bowls, ungroomed, trees, soft and slushy bumps. However, I do like to take out wider skis if it's more than 6-8" of new snow and I think softer skis may be more fun in the (hard/icy/large) bumps than Kenjas though it can handle them.

 

[greengirl]

snow cat, I had the same experience. I skied the new Kenjas at Beaver Creek this past weekend both pre- and post- a 10" dumpage. To me, they were less poppy and fun than the ones I tried last year. They were still great, but I didn't feel the same delight I did last year.

I also imagined that I'd want a wider ski in deeper snow, although they were fine in the light fluff we got over the weekend. I'd still like to test them out in more challenging conditions.