• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Thread Starter
TS
Philpug

Philpug

Notorious P.U.G.
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
42,624
Location
Reno, eNVy
That's the second time you asked that question in this thread. :roflmao: Maybe it will get more traction this time.
And it was answered in post 27. I chose to include the MX74
 

ski otter 2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
2,920
Location
Front Range, Colorado
My faves in this segment that fit the bill as a short radius carver that will work well in bumps:
  • Blossom White Out
  • Stöckli Laser AX
  • Stöckli Laser AR
I own two of these (Whiteout and AX) and have demoed the AR in different years. The AX is looser, the Ar is more precise, and the White Out is in between but different: it has a big, wide almost spatula tip. That tip handles crud and soft snow, including in bumps, much better than a ski with that narrow a waist might. The Whiteout is also really great at body separation, fall line carving turns - the body still in the fall line and from the hips down doing the carving. It's a cheater at doing such turns.

To me, the AR is a bit too precise for easy bumping, though for carved bumping I found it swell.

And now, another "Groundhog Day" like return, I'm afraid.
(Sorry, apologies to the Popular Wisdom here, but....) I have a possibly contrarian view on the AX lengths myself. For an expert or well advanced skier of average size who likes to charge on edge at times, and skis less in steep mogul fields, or moguls in tight trees, please try the AX 182/183 before you buy. I and others prefer it, by a lot.

The AX 175 is looser when wanted, precise when wanted, admittedly better in bumps; but with a problem: its rebound doesn't quite fit its carve/flex, so that whole process is telescoped, so to speak, into a shorter space or time - quicker. An extra boost. Very fun though. (I believe a similar description of the 175 AX was given in an earlier thread by the Stockli rep himself, by the way - except he said it better, as I recall, and more thoroughly.)

The AX 182/183s are a different critter. My 183 is maybe my favorite ski, or close (for me, moved forward on demo bindings to +2 cm. or +2.5 or even +3 cm.), while my 175 (on the line or close) is not, fine ski that it is.

If you want to take the AX into steep, uniform bump fields regularly, and ditto with steep, tight, moguled up trees a few days after the storm, then get the 175.

But if you like to freeride on edge, fast or medium, relaxed or driving, ride the rails on mild and/or non-uniform bump fields and relatively unbumped up steeps, in addition to groomers, then the 183 is tops, for some (including both me and my favorite skiing buddy, both of us on matching 183s, though with different bindings and fore/aft mount points).

Many people say get the 175 still, because it retains most of the stability of the longer ski, with more versatility. Yes, but it loses the amazing smoothness, and the dialed in stable ride with that, and the way the ski's carve is synched with its flex and with its rebound so well.

Some also say a really heavy/big/powerful guy may be needed for the 182/183. But I'm only 150 lbs/5'10" and still old on a good day (though my AX buddy is c. 185 lbs/5'9" and younger, moved forward on his only +1 to +2 at most maybe). So clearly on the smaller, finesse side works too.

Finally, if you are a charger now and then (and also have the mentioned preferences in terrain), the 183 is up there with the very best charger skis on up to 3-4" at least of powder. (While for me, the Whiteout is good for 6" or so, with lots of crud.)

And, man, is the AX great on the one or two slope early and late season days: two of my first four were on it.
 

Tony S

I have a confusion to make ...
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
12,619
Location
Maine
ride the rails on mild and/or non-uniform bump fields and relatively unbumped up steeps
if you are a charger now and then (and also have the mentioned preferences in terrain)
I don't think we even HAVE that terrain in the east. So it's not a matter of whether I prefer it.

I think you can only get that kind of terrain if you have very light traffic over a very big area (i.e., not a narrow - by western standards - trail cut through our dense all-covering forest with trees all 18" apart).
 

Jeronimo

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Posts
933
Location
Maine
Can I get someones opinion who's been on the 174cm Cassiar A79's? I picked up a pair of them for myself but the Mrs is quite interested in them as well. Would I be hamstringing the fun factor/performance of them by slapping a demo binding on them that could fit both our boots?

We could just buy her a pair of the 167's but lets just say her build is not on the petit side of women (and she can flex a boot) who currently skis a 172 pair of Renoun Earharts, and she much prefers the 172 length over her older 164 Salomons.
 

Andy Mink

Everyone loves spring skiing but not in January
Moderator
SkiTalk Tester
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
12,910
Location
Reno
Can I get someones opinion who's been on the 174cm Cassiar A79's? I picked up a pair of them for myself but the Mrs is quite interested in them as well. Would I be hamstringing the fun factor/performance of them by slapping a demo binding on them that could fit both our boots?

We could just buy her a pair of the 167's but lets just say her build is not on the petit side of women (and she can flex a boot) who currently skis a 172 pair of Renoun Earharts, and she much prefers the 172 length over her older 164 Salomons.
I've been on the Trainers with demos. Fun! You may lose a little but not much. The A79 is a full length ski with very little rise. The Earhart has more rise so skis shorter than its 172 length on the groomers.
 

Jeronimo

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Mar 31, 2020
Posts
933
Location
Maine
I've been on the Trainers with demos. Fun! You may lose a little but not much. The A79 is a full length ski with very little rise. The Earhart has more rise so skis shorter than its 172 length on the groomers.
That's a good point. Thank you. She might be better served by buying her own 167 length. I'm trying to push her into the Laser AX's so she can grow with them, but from what I read about these A79's (and the current deal on them) I keep thinking they would be a phenomenal teaching tool to help her master carving.
 

Andy Mink

Everyone loves spring skiing but not in January
Moderator
SkiTalk Tester
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
12,910
Location
Reno
Get them while you can since they're no longer in production. (Unfortunately)
 

ScottB

Making fresh tracks
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Posts
2,165
Location
Gloucester, MA
I have never noticed a difference in bindings on a skis performance, unless you are talking race plate. There probably is some discernable difference if you put a different one on each foot, but if you want to mount the DPS with adjustable bindings go for it. I have skied a shift binding with my toe set for the wrong boot and had 1/2" of vertical play in the toe. I didn't come out of the binding, but I did notice my skis felt very vague and not precise all morning. Checked it at lunch and figured it out and corrected. Skis felt much better after that. Point is, as long as the binding holds you in solid, differences will be pretty minor. Stand height or distance off the ski can be felt, but again, not a drastic thing.
 

Tony S

I have a confusion to make ...
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
12,619
Location
Maine
Can I get someones opinion who's been on the 174cm Cassiar A79's? I picked up a pair of them for myself but the Mrs is quite interested in them as well. Would I be hamstringing the fun factor/performance of them by slapping a demo binding on them that could fit both our boots?

We could just buy her a pair of the 167's but lets just say her build is not on the petit side of women (and she can flex a boot) who currently skis a 172 pair of Renoun Earharts, and she much prefers the 172 length over her older 164 Salomons.
I've been on the Trainers with demos. Fun! You may lose a little but not much. The A79 is a full length ski with very little rise. The Earhart has more rise so skis shorter than its 172 length on the groomers.
The A79 does not have significant rise, that's true. But it's also true that it skis short for a slalom-style ski. So, while I would normally ski a 155 or 160cm actual slalom ski, the 167 A79 is the right length for me, while the 160 is too short. YMMV.
 

James

Out There
Instructor
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Posts
24,433
I go with a plate on any model with "Laser" in the name. All others are mounted flat.
Marker Piston?
I have never noticed a difference in bindings on a skis performance, unless you are talking race plate. There probably is some discernable difference if you put a different one on each foot, but if you want to mount the DPS with adjustable bindings go for it. I have skied a shift binding with my toe set for the wrong boot and had 1/2" of vertical play in the toe. I didn't come out of the binding, but I did notice my skis felt very vague and not precise all morning. Checked it at lunch and figured it out and corrected. Skis felt much better after that. Point is, as long as the binding holds you in solid, differences will be pretty minor. Stand height or distance off the ski can be felt, but again, not a drastic thing.
Did you plate that 183 AX?
 

Tony S

I have a confusion to make ...
Skier
Team Gathermeister
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
12,619
Location
Maine
I have a mix of Tyrolia Speedplate+, Head RP WCR 14, Head RDX, and Fischer Curv Booster plates on my Stöckli Lasers.
So you have at least four pairs of Lasers.
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top