I recently demoed the SuperShape at 165cm in Utah. The conditions were hard groomed and hardpack. I am 6'2" and weigh 200lbs. You may wonder why I didn't opt for the 170 (I am kicking myself that I didn't at least go back and swap out) It was day 4, my legs were tired, and I had to walk down two flights of stairs to get to them so I whimped out. I was psyched out by the reviews I had read noting the need for great technical skill so I erred on the short side.
I have been skiing for 5 years, I am 51, I ski everything pretty well except bumps, (it happens but it ain't pretty) I usually ski Head IM 75, for this trip I had some 72's.
The supershapes felt a little too short right away. They just felt too squirrelly at slow speed until I got used to them. They were great at speed and really wanted to run fast. The were absolutely solid at speed while carving. They were lively and quick and required paying attention. I was skiing with my kids so, I had to keep slowing them down and checking my speed. As I said, it was day 4 and this was tiring me out. I would like to ride them with fresh legs and long enough to get more aquainted with them and in a situation where I could let them run. I personally suspect that I would prefer the 170; we'll have to see. These do require energy to get out of them what they were built for. For me, that could be a great excuse to get into better shape. They are fun!