Head XRC or Atomic Izor or ???? for me...whaddaya think?

[Billy Dee NJ]

Here?s my dilemma and looking for any thoughts/advice from you seasoned gear heads/pmts'ers.

This will be my 4th full ski season coming up and I?ll humbly say I?m a solid intermediate (perhaps a 6 or 7) at this point and have spent about 95% of my time on groomed slopes. Not necessarily interested in speed as much as being able to make tight turns when I need to and not flop around in cruddy conditions when they do appear. I'm really starting to like the steeps too if it ain't icy.
I?ll ski almost any marked trails including all blues and some easier but not all groomed blacks. Have minimal powder experience but just enough to be hooked and want to ski it when it's there. Not yet interested in bumps.

I?m 5?8, 180lbs and the only set I?ve ever owned are 2002 Atomic Betacarv 9.18's 160cm, appx 104/64/94 mm and 18m side cut which now have about 60-70 days on them.
I?m sure I?ll still always spend more time on groomed and probably ski 50/50 between the East and West for a total of around 25-30 days a year. I also feel the need to get in some new skis ASAP and don't really want to wait until I get the chance to demo more.

I did get to demo some fatter skis last April at Killington (Metron M9?s 119/74/105 and 12.5m side cut in the 164 length) liked them but they just seemed too extreme of a difference from what I've been skiing. But I did appreciate the ability to float better and plow thru crud and heavier snow.

I?ve done a bit of research and starting to focus in on:
*Head XRC (500 or 800 models)
*Atomic Izor 9.7

Neither of those seem nearly as drastic of a change from my current skis as the Metron M9's were but give me more platform to float on. I feel the need to transition to a more expert all-mountain ski eventually but don't feel I'm there yet, so am looking for something to bridge that gap for a season or two.

To summarize a bit:
? (I?m pretty sure) I need a slightly fatter and stiffer? ski
? (I know) I need the ability to handle Eastern ice and Western groomed and on occasion powder
? (I want) to spend appx $500 or less with bindings
? (I?m pretty convinced) I want Head or Atomic but willing to consider something else

Sorry for being so long-winded, thanks for listening!
Billy D

[rbrooks]

Wild Bill--

Good to hear from you.

My $.02 worth--

Ebay has a bundle of new last years Head skis up for auction, usually for way less than $500 with bindings. I skied on XRC1100's last year at Sol Vista-I think the 500's and 800's are too limp for you. Since I'll be chasing after you, I recommend 1100's or iM70's--they'll both bust through crud and carve in the morning.

Oh, Colin and Sharon are going to be at Sol Vista; Michale says he wants to ski with us one afternoon at Winter Park.

See you there.

Randy

[Hobbit]

Hi Bill,

Good to hear from you. Don't even think about Atomic. After I've got Head skis, I'll never buy Atomics again (you know I have 9.18, R11 and ReX). You can't go wrong with either i.xrc 800 or i.xrc 1100. They are really cheap on e-bay. The seller I would trust to buy from is "therasin", he has both 800 and 1100 listed right now. I've dealt with this guy before and he is very reliable.

Let me know when you are planning to come to Colorado and we'll ski togeter.

[Max_501]

I have Atomics and Heads and I enjoy them both but my Atomic Metron B5s are my favorites at the moment.

For what its worth, I skied the XRC 1100 and I'm not so sure that it qualifies as an intermediate ski. Its a great ski but it feels like and advanced to expert ski to me.

[Billy Dee NJ]

Hey Hobbit....he/she/it lives!
Done with Atomic huh?
Yeah, I'm leaning towards Head but now I'm thinking perhaps I should go for one of the Monster line. Like the 72 or 70. There seem to be good deals on last years 70 available, about $400 with bindings from Therasin.
I bought my current ski's from him 3 years ago.
That ski (the 70) is slightly wider than I have now and seems like a decent transition ski for me. Will give me a bit more platform for occasional powder and seems like it would be more stable in crud.

The XRC 1100's do seem a bit much. I know the Tall Texan likes em but not sure if they're right for a shorter Jersey guy like me. I think the 800's are still in the running though.

I do think that the Metron's I demo'd were definitely "too turny" for me.

Thanks fellas, keep it comin.

[Hobbit]

I think you'll be best with i.xrc 800. It is after all an i.c 160 with the new top sheet.
I think that i.c 160 is what Harald recommended for intermidiates like us.
I don't think i.m 70 is as nice and flexible as i.xrc 800, but it's only my opinion.

[Billy Dee NJ]

I think you'll be best with i.xrc 800. It is after all an i.c 160 with the new top sheet. I think that i.c 160 is what Harald recommended for intermidiates like us. I don't think i.m 70 is as nice and flexible as i.xrc 800, but it's only my opinion.

Hobbit, do you think the iXRC800's will give me enough platform to float on and bust thru crud, at least compared to my 9.18's?
BTW, did you move to Summit County?

[John Mason]

1200xrc's are not a 'floater' ski in crud but a cross between a race slalom and race GS ski. I don't know about the 800's though. 1200xrc-wc on groomers is a blast though.

Hobbit bought a condo in silverthorne. Greg - you still have your place down in Denver though?

For Hobbit to say he prefer's head over atomic is the null hypothosis as he used to love his Atomics.

[Billy Dee NJ]

1200xrc's are not a 'floater' ski in crud but a cross between a race slalom and race GS ski.

John, I realize they (xrc 800's) are definitely NOT a powder ski by any stretch but just hoping that they'd float a little better than my 9.18's.

[Hobbit]

Bill,

I don't think you'll get much more float out of i.xrc 800 compared to your 9.18 Atomics. I believe it's 67mm waist vs. 65 mm waist. I believe same is true even for i.m 70. They will definitely float better but IMHO it still is not a powder ski. If you want a powder ski than go for it. I don't think you can have one ski which does it all. I ski i.c 300 on groomers and I llove it. It is so soft compared to Atomics and in the meantime it holds the edge way better. On the powder days I ski ReX which is 84mm in waist. This one makes a difference.

So i.xrc 800 in my opinion will be the ski you use most and you will like it. If you want a powder ski just get yourself another pair.

I did not move to the mountains, but got a little condo so that I can beat the traffic on the powder days and don't drive from/to Denver at all (just call a sick day ).

[Max_501]

If you have a chance you should demo the IM72 and the IM77. I'm a Metron fan all the way (and chose the B5 over the IM77) because I like slalom turns, but the monsters rock through crud and perform great on groomed as well.

[Billy Dee NJ]

Thanks to you all for responding, it's much appreciated!

Ok, I'm narrowing down my search to one of these 3 in either the 163 or 170 length, still undecided there. (5'8, 180lbs, level 6 or so skier)

1-Head iXRC-800 (116/65/101 and 14.5m)
2-Head iM-72 Monster (117/72/102 and 15.3m)
3-Head iM-70 Monster (112/69/101 and 15.5m)

My assumptions at this point:
*All three will put a just little bit more platform under my feet compared to the current Atomic 9.18's in a 160 length (104/64/94). (But will "shovel height" negate that with the Monsters?)
*2 of the 3 are a bit higher than my initial price target but I can probably work with that. I'm assuming 2006 model cost but will consider 2005 models also.
*The Monsters seem to be more Western-friendly than the XRC. I expect my 25 or so ski days to be 50-50 East/West again this year.

I'm thinking the ski with the best balance of price and conditions flexibility between these 3 is the iM-70.

Make sense?

[Max_501]

The XRC 800 is unlikely to give you any more float then the Atomics you are on. The IM70 will give you more and the IM72 even a bit more (not only is it wider under foot but the tip is wider as well).

Head classifies the IM72 as 50% groomed and 50% off the groomed which seems to be what you are after.

[Billy Dee NJ]

Bill, I don't think you'll get much more float out of i.xrc 800 compared to your 9.18 Atomics. So i.xrc 800 in my opinion will be the ski you use most and you will like it. If you want a powder ski just get yourself another pair.

Greg, You've skied with me as has Randy. Would you recommend I move to the 170 length and just be done with it? Or the 163?

I'm narrowed down in choice now to the iXRC 800 or the iM 70.
Thanks

[Billy Dee NJ]

is what Harald recommended for intermidiates like us.

Hey Greg....if YOU are an intermediate......I'm just barely past novice level. Give me a break! You are a damn good skier so just deal with it!