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

Tony Storaro

Glorified Tobogganer
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Mar 2, 2020
Posts
7,803
Location
Europe
You may not need one of each size, certainly debatable, so it’s being frugal to just get one size.

For everyday use and if you can only have one pair my vote goes to the 172. Not the same crazy high top speed as the 180 but more manageable and friendly.
 

SBrown

So much better than a pro
Skier
Contributor
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 8, 2015
Posts
7,846
Location
Colorado
I made the mistake of putting my wife on my AX's last year, and every time I show her candidate skis so I can get them back, she points at the AX and says "THAT ONE". So if anyone has some in a shorty (sub168) length they are looking to part with for a good price, let me know....

They aren’t necessarily a “good” price, but if you have some other skis to trade in, it makes it a good price. I recently traded four pairs for the Monteros! I never ever would have bought those otherwise … I could have sold skis on my own, but I don’t think I would have gotten as much as I did from Powder7. The hassle factor for sure would have been greater.
 

Scotty I.

I only care about the graphics
Skier
Joined
Nov 8, 2016
Posts
502
Location
Evergreen, Colorado

They aren’t necessarily a “good” price, but if you have some other skis to trade in, it makes it a good price. I recently traded four pairs for the Monteros! I never ever would have bought those otherwise … I could have sold skis on my own, but I don’t think I would have gotten as much as I did from Powder7. The hassle factor for sure would have been greater.
I was seriously considering doing exactly what you did in getting the Monteros at Powder 7. However I already have a pair of AX's that have one day on them. Powder 7 was going to give me $700 for them, but then it was going to cost me another $700 for the Monteros. From what I have heard and read, the Lasers and the Monteros are pretty similar from a performance and feel standpoint. Plus I needed (wanted) carving skis, so I ended up trading in two other pairs of used skis for a new pair of Head Magnums. No $$$'s out of pocket. Time will tell if it was the right decision. I'll be interested to hear what you think of the Monteros.
 

DocGKR

Stuck at work...
Skier
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Posts
1,689
Location
Palo Alto, California
The SC is an extraordinarily versatile sport carver which performs well within a wide speed envelope. It can go slow with the family or speed-up for fast on-piste arcs--it has a higher speed limit than the AX or AR, but does NOT have the stability at speed of a true a race ski or even a race inspired sport carver like the WRT-ST or Head e.Race.
 

Dos-Equis

Getting on the lift
Skier
Joined
Jul 30, 2019
Posts
219
Location
Washington DC
I own the SC in 170 and it does very well at slow speeds. You can do easy mellow carving without a problem. The other aspect that surprised me was how easy it is to break the tails free. To me, I find it easier to smear on them than my lighter and more rockered navigators.

while they certainly go fast, I found myself wanting a little bit more. That may be a product of the length for me (5’10 200 lbs).

dockgkr, your comment worries me a bit because I bought a pair of 175 ARs hoping to get some more stability and versatility.
 

DocGKR

Stuck at work...
Skier
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Posts
1,689
Location
Palo Alto, California
True on-piste carving skis are typically 70mm or so in width or less. The wider you get beyond 70mm, the less capable the ski will be at carving on hard surfaces, although the wider skis will be more adaptable to other conditions. Soft snow--heck you can carve on a 98mm All Mountain ski, but get on a hard, icy, or injected surface, you'll likely do a lot better on boards that are less than 70mm in width with a good sharp tune.

The SC is a 72mm wide Sport Carver while the AR is an 83mm on-piste biased All Mountain ski; different purposes with varied design parameters, although both ski well for what they are intended and both are reasonably versatile.
 

Seldomski

All words are made up
Skier
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Posts
3,051
Location
'mericuh
dockgkr, your comment worries me a bit because I bought a pair of 175 ARs hoping to get some more stability and versatility.
If you are thinking more stability/versatility in variable/softer snow, then yes, the ARs are better than SC in that department. AR is a better crud buster than the SC or AX.
 

LindseyB

Stöckli
Industry Insider
Manufacturer
Joined
Jan 14, 2019
Posts
402
Location
SLC
How does the SC compare to the CX in feel? Anyone get on both?
@Tony Storaro @anders_nor @LindseyB @DocGKR

I'm POSSIBLY looking for a <70mm carver that is more playful than hard charging with good grip.
Sc is more variety, the CX is shorter turn bias.

I think the SC is our most versatile non-free ride ski. With the right binding and aggressive tune it is a fun tech ski. It will load for rebound if you press on it, but doesn't make you load it if you don't want to. I've never had a problem with it at speed. I just press on it harder than a more robust flex (I.E. WRT) and it takes the abuse happily.

If I am working on technique I reach for the SC. If I'm working on fast variety shorter turns without being stuck in slalom land, I reach for he CX.

My wife and sister-in-law love the SC the most. The CX is my brother's favorite ski.
 

Wendy

Resurrecting the Oxford comma
Admin
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2016
Posts
4,905
Location
Santa Fe, New Mexico
From the Stockli line up?
Ever considered the Laser MX? From what I hear these are fantastic ladies' carvers.
They sound awesome. But the longest length is 163 or 164 and at 5’10” (178cm) and 168lb (77kg)) would that be too short? Or would I just have a short radius turn ski which would be fun?
 

Sponsor

Staff online

Top