The Never-Ending Stöckli Discussion

[David Chaus]

I asked Stockli as well but they have not responded. I wonder if there are any reps out there?

@LindseyB is a Stockli rep.

 

[Philpug]

You're right about the 95. My bad. But Ske Essentials says there is still tip rocker and a snapshot from the Stockli website confirms that. Still curious why it's now shorter though. Maybe it's just more efficient & cost effective to use the same length as the 95.

I prefer the term "extended tip profile" in this case.

 

[David]

I prefer the term "extended tip profile" in this case.

Mybolder model has a definate tip rocker. Did they reduce it over the years?

 

[LindseyB]

Mybolder model has a definate tip rocker. Did they reduce it over the years?

Yes, the rocker on the 88 has been reduced. It is barely in the category of "early rise" if even that. The result is fastest edge response. The ski comes around much sooner. I thought it wouldn't make that much of a difference, but it is very apparent.

 

[David]

Yes, the rocker on the 88 has been reduced. It is barely in the category of "early rise" if even that. The result is fastest edge response. The ski comes around much sooner. I thought it wouldn't make that much of a difference, but it is very apparent.

Interesting, thanks! How does less early rise effect the ski in softer snow or more importantly chopped up crud where I really like my older 88's?

 

[LindseyB]

Interesting, thanks! How does less early rise effect the ski in softer snow or more importantly chopped up crud where I really like my older 88's?

The less rise when tipped gets the edge over faster, but when running at low angles or flat to the snow it's such a small difference that it doesn't seem to me to be a difference in chop and soft snow, but I haven't skied the red and grey 88 top sheet in 6 years so I haven't done a side by side comparison.
For soft snow the biggest factor for flotation is the 14mm drop from the 128mm tip to the 114mm tail.

 

[Tony S]

Yes, the rocker on the 88 has been reduced. It is barely in the category of "early rise" if even that. The result is fastest edge response. The ski comes around much sooner. I thought it wouldn't make that much of a difference, but it is very apparent.

Interesting, thanks! How does less early rise effect the ski in softer snow or more importantly chopped up crud where I really like my older 88's?

It is a surprising change for a ski in an "all mountain" line. After all, skiers looking for the most responsive groomer performance already have the Montero and the Laser lines to choose from. I suspect this is a bow to how most buyers are actually using the ski, but I, for one, think the beauty of an 88 is its "middle path" or "generalist" capabilities. I wouldn't want to see the Stormrider become another wide carver.

 

[LindseyB]

It is a surprising change for a ski in an "all mountain" line. After all, skiers looking for the most responsive groomer performance already have the Montero and the Laser lines to choose from. I suspect this is a bow to how most buyers are actually using the ski, but I, for one, think the beauty of an 88 is its "middle path" or "generalist" capabilities. I wouldn't want to see the Stormrider become another wide carver.

The 88 rocker was reduced 2 years ago. It hasn't changed in shaping since. I guess we will see for 23/24. I think it will stay as a true middle-ground all-mountain tool.

 

[David]

The less rise when tipped gets the edge over faster, but when running at low angles or flat to the snow it's such a small difference that it doesn't seem to me to be a difference in chop and soft snow, but I haven't skied the red and grey 88 top sheet in 6 years so I haven't done a side by side comparison.
For soft snow the biggest factor for flotation is the 14mm drop from the 128mm tip to the 114mm tail.

If I do replace my 88's what are your thoughts on going with the the current 95's instead? Is there much difference other than the width? Demoing either has been difficult to find...

 

[tromano]

It is a surprising change for a ski in an "all mountain" line. After all, skiers looking for the most responsive groomer performance already have the Montero and the Laser lines to choose from. I suspect this is a bow to how most buyers are actually using the ski, but I, for one, think the beauty of an 88 is its "middle path" or "generalist" capabilities. I wouldn't want to see the Stormrider become another wide carver.

It feels like for the 18X lengths I am demoing, the versatile 8X AM skis have gone down market. Targeted for intermed and advanced skiers these days. It also seems to me that the 8X AM intermediate/advanced skis ski much better than the expert skis off trail and in gnar expert terrain; than the expert skis do.

 

[James]

It feels like for the 18X lengths I am demoing, the versatile 8X AM skis have gone down market. Targeted for intermed and advanced skiers these days. It also seems to me that the 8X AM intermediate/advanced skis ski much better than the expert skis off trail and in gnar expert terrain; than the expert skis do.

Hmmm…
Note to SkiTalk historians,- on page 182 we’ve moved into the first ever SAT/Jeopardy questions format.

Specifics might help?

 

[Tony S]

Hmmm…
Note to SkiTalk historians,- on page 182 we’ve moved into the first ever SAT/Jeopardy answers format.

Fixed it for you.

 

[tromano]

Hmmm…
Note to SkiTalk historians,- on page 182 we’ve moved into the first ever SAT/Jeopardy questions format.

Specifics might help?

Was thinking of how skis like the old dps cassiar series compare with lets say an sr88. One of these skis is designed with a focus on versatility, the other is not.

In the 8x width range freeride inspired skis, those more focused on versatility include things like a stance 84, kanjo, and mpro84/85 all of which seem to be sold as intermediate skis. Comparing a kanjo to a sr88, it seems lighter, softer and just more fun and easier to use in bumps, trees, and steep gnar terrain.

Its just an observation.

 

[Tricia]

If I do replace my 88's what are your thoughts on going with the the current 95's instead? Is there much difference other than the width? Demoing either has been difficult to find...

Is this a daily driver for Holland MI? I'd stick with the 88, but the 95's will be more versatile for trips out west and still do well on Michigan hills.

 

[Tony S]

It feels like for the 18X lengths I am demoing, the versatile 8X AM skis have gone down market. Targeted for intermed and advanced skiers these days. It also seems to me that the 8X AM intermediate/advanced skis ski much better than the expert skis off trail and in gnar expert terrain; than the expert skis do.

This is the inevitable result following a dozen years of media outlets like Ski Magazine touting 90mm models as "frontside" skis. (To be fair, not sure if the mag is setting the trend or just following it. Nuts either way.) It's a self-fulfilling prophecy: You have loads of people who never get off a groomer skiing these "all mountain" skis as their daily drivers. Of course the feedback loop is going to create a situation where ski makers are going to adjust the skis to be more and more like wide carvers.

 

[David]

Is this a daily driver for Holland MI? I'd stick with the 88, but the 95's will be more versatile for trips out west and still do well on Michigan hills.

It's been my daily driver in MI & the Rockies. I have a 77 carver and a 104 powder ski as well. In the spring the 104 isn't good in the morning ice so I pretty much just use the 88's. It looks like the 95 has a slightly shorter radius though which has got me wondering about it?

 

[tromano]

This is the inevitable result following a dozen years of media outlets like Ski Magazine touting 90mm models as "frontside" skis. (To be fair, not sure if the mag is setting the trend or just following it. Nuts either way.) It's a self-fulfilling prophecy: You have loads of people who never get off a groomer skiing these "all mountain" skis as their daily drivers. Of course the feedback loop is going to create a situation where ski makers are going to adjust the skis to be more and more like wide carvers.

Well it's certainly been successful. And I think also have redefined what an expert ski even is as well.

And it's really taken us to a weird place. I don't think this has really served the purpose that fat skis addressed 12 years ago. Which was more soft snow versatility and ease of use. Buying a turn in pow was the purpose. I wouldn't call a mantra m6 a crutch in pow.

Threads like the tail release and power vs finesse are kind of got me thinking along diverging tangents lately

 

[ski otter 2]

This is the inevitable result following a dozen years of media outlets like Ski Magazine touting 90mm models as "frontside" skis. (To be fair, not sure if the mag is setting the trend or just following it. Nuts either way.) It's a self-fulfilling prophecy: You have loads of people who never get off a groomer skiing these "all mountain" skis as their daily drivers. Of course the feedback loop is going to create a situation where ski makers are going to adjust the skis to be more and more like wide carvers.

There are so many different skis in these widths that to me it is hard to generalize accurately in the way you have, seemingly. There are indeed even 9x skis (in the mid to upper nineties plus) that are specifically optimized for groomer skiing, though they also can handle chop/crud well (and only are a "no" in powder because they are, frankly, less fun in powder, though almost equal with some of the wider models, in crud).

Since someone just mentioned a DPS ski (@tromano two posts back), two examples that come to mind are the two 9x (or nearly) Pagoda DPS 94 and 100 piste versions. (I think I got that right: there were so many different designations to these that just one of these - like the "piste" instead of "RP" or "C2" - meant a totally different behaving ski, seemed like.) Both these skis are appropriately optimized for groomers or groomers with mild crud or light fresh coating on them. In fact, these two, for me demoing, were incredible standouts at groomer carving that were really eye-opening: a new and improved category, defining a new kind of experience for such skis, at least for me; to wit, a ski that carves optimally, sort of in the very top group, at even that width, yet does it in a new way - incredibly easeful, more relaxed, more forgiving, and with the same or better results for a lot less effort and risk. It felt like as an old guy, I could have skied these two DPS skis for maybe 50% longer in a day before getting tired, no sweat. With high fun factor.

(Note: I'm not talking about really high edge angles, just regular, recreational, top groomer carving.)

 

[Jeronimo]

There are so many different skis in these widths that to me it is hard to generalize accurately in the way you have, seemingly. There are indeed even 9x skis (in the mid to upper nineties plus) that are specifically optimized for groomer skiing, though they also can handle chop/crud well (and only are a "no" in powder because they are, frankly, less fun in powder, though almost equal with some of the wider models, in crud).

Since someone just mentioned a DPS ski (@tromano two posts back), two examples that come to mind are the two 9x (or nearly) Pagoda DPS 94 and 100 piste versions. (I think I got that right: there were so many different designations to these that just one of these - like the "piste" instead of "RP" or "C2" - meant a totally different behaving ski, seemed like.) Both these skis are appropriately optimized for groomers or groomers with mild crud or light fresh coating on them. In fact, these two, for me demoing, were incredible standouts at groomer carving that were really eye-opening: a new and improved category, defining a new kind of experience for such skis, at least for me; to wit, a ski that carves optimally, sort of in the very top group, at even that width, yet does it in a new way - incredibly easeful, more relaxed, more forgiving, and with the same or better results for a lot less effort and risk. It felt like as an old guy, I could have skied these two DPS skis for maybe 50% longer in a day before getting tired, no sweat. With high fun factor.

(Note: I'm not talking about really high edge angles, just regular, recreational, top groomer carving.)

Man, the irony is strongly felt here. I own the Pagoda Piste 94's (with pivot 15's on them) as well as some Stockli Laser AR's and have the exact opposite perspective as you. I wanted so badly for the DPS skis to be a viable groomer zoomer because I like what DPS does with their tech and just their over all style, but they just didn't do it. I'm not rushing to get rid of them or anything, they'll serve their purpose on the right days since they're 94 at the waist, but edge hold/edge angle/flex was all disappointing to me. I would grab the AR's 10/10 times over them on any regular day out here in the Northeast. I certainly wouldn't call them a bad ski by any means, but if you read the skiessentials reviews of them there's one guy that gave them a relatively damning review, and while I chose to ignore it, I totally get what he was saying now.

...or maybe Stockli's are just that good.

 

[ski otter 2]

Hah! I think the main difference is that I'm in Colorado, front range, and you're in Maine, hardpan ice country.

My comments are accurate for packed powder, old snow groomers here from the first days of the season to the close.
But that same relaxed, easy carving quality to the Pagodas, for me, would doom them for back East old snow conditions, big time.

To me, a number of skis that are overkill here, are just right in the Northeast, for me also. I'd want, for example, an AR back there every time it was hardpan/ice; not many days back there have snow like what is every day routine here. And Eastern hardpan/ice is an almost nonexistent rarity here.

P.S. An added, but smaller factor is the bindings: I demoed on tall standard demos, heal high, and that additional height over traditional fixed bindings and the much lower Pivots emphasizes whatever carving on edge chops almost any ski has. By contrast, the Pivots are designed for off piste slarving, not carving - pivoting rather than increased edge control leverage of a heightened demo binding, that in effect has an extra 10 mm. of height roughly comparable to putting a race plate under a normal binding. The Pivots, in effect, minimize the carving ability of the ski, whereas the heighest demos maximize those capabilities. The difference, to me, is appreciable.