2014 Dynastar Outland 80 XT and Head Supershape Titan
Mar 18, 2014 19:11:17 GMT -7
JimRatliff likes this
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 19:11:17 GMT -7
Recently at Lake Louise I rented/demoed a couple of 80mm skis -- the 2014 Dynastar Outland 80 XT and the 2014 Head SS Titan. Conditions were firm groomers, some scraped off icy patches, and soft crud in the off-piste. Lots of snow in the days prior meant conditions were excellent.
About me: 6'2"; 225 lbs; strong skier but no expert; ski the whole mountain; skills improving steadily in all terrain.
Other skis in quiver, past and present: 2009 Head SS Speed; 2010 Fischer P-9; 2008 Dynastar Mythic Rider; 2008 Nordica Mach 3; 2012 Dynastar Sultan 94
Dynastar Outland 80 XT - 184 cm, 126/80/110, 15 m radius, early rise tip and tail
This is a slightly softer model in the Outland 80 series; there is also a Pro model which is stiffer, and which I actually wanted to try, but was not available. At least the XT gave me an idea of how the skis would handle, and it was pretty impressive.
(Note: I skied this for about 5 or 6 runs)
Pros:
- excellent edge hold on hard snow and icy patches; quite torsionally stiff.
- light feel on the snow; light underfoot.
- very flick-able and easy to maneuver.
- handled firm groomers surprisingly well, considering the light weight.
- VERY stable at speed; absorbed a lot of chatter and vibration....impressive.
- easy to do all turn shapes, but preferred med. to long turns.
- forgiveness was very high; an easy ski which was undemanding and not the least tiring, but surprisingly high performance ceiling.
Cons:
- too light for a guy my size, as the skis just got tossed around in the crud; stability on groomers was excellent, but not so much in crud and broken snow -- my Mythics are the best crud skis I have ever been on, followed by the Sultans, so the bar is set rather high for that parameter.
- I really missed having a flat tail on the groomers; the early rise tail on this ski was noticeable, and I didn't care for it (but this is just personal preference).
Overall a really impressive ski, which would well suit someone, say, <180 lbs. For heavier guys, the Pro model would be brilliant. This ski would be very versatile for east or west, as it could do almost everything well. Edge hold was great, and the calm at speed made me want to ski it faster. I really liked it, but it is just too light and soft for me. And I would prefer a flat tail.
Head Supershape Titan - 177 cm, 134/81/112, 15.5 m radius, ERA 3.0 S early rise tip
I flexed this in the shop next to a SS Magnum, and was surprised to find it to be slightly softer than the Mag, and softer longitudinally than my normal preference. I had expected it to be rather planky and stiff, given some of the comments to this effect re. past models of the Titan. Tail stiffness seemed moderate; rebound supple and powerful. "Hmmmm....let's try it and chuck it about for the afternoon". I'm glad I did, as this ski was a blast.
(Note: I skied this from about 11:00 until the lifts closed, with a break for lunch)
Pros:
- quite torsionally stiff, which meant it really wanted to hold an edge and rail turns on groomers; it was hard to drift this ski (could have been the tune, as many rental shops put almost no base bevel on their skis), but the upside was the superb edge hold.
- high stability at speed; calm and quiet, but not dead.
- could do any turn shape with aplomb, esp. short turns; I found myself cranking out short turns again and again on narrow runs and traverses, and I normally never do short turns unless I have to; this ski just made them super-easy, as can be imagined with all that sidecut; med. and long turns were equally fun, stable and smooth.
- solid feel, heavier than the Outland, but not overly heavy; just right for a guy my size.
- edge grip on firm groomers, steeps, icy patches, was excellent; this surprised me as I had expected a ski that was so pliable longitudinally to have some issues here, but the torsional stiffness was there in spades and the grip was unwavering; very impressive...they never let go.
- forgiveness was OK; somewhat demanding due to the torsional stiffness and always-on edge grip, but well balanced by the longitudinal compliance...nicely done.
Cons:
While all that sidecut made those short turns so much fun, the drawback to it was how the skis handled off-piste soft snow and crud. That is, those wide tips were really grabby in soft snow, would hook up in an unpredictable and aggressive way, and made handling in that snow a challenge. This trait is a deal-breaker for me, as it really limits the versatility of this ski.
As a general comment, I'm not sure what Head was thinking when they designed their new Supershape line, but some of those models really do have honking big shovels -- ie. Titan @ 134 mm, Rally @ 131 mm; Magnum @ 129 mm. Maybe I'm behind the times, but there are shovels that wide on our 88 mm and 94 mm waisted skis -- eg. my Sultan 94's have a 132mm shovel; and my wife's Mya 9 (93mm waist) has a 131 mm shovel. So, what's up with the Supershapes? I can see the advantage for absorbing rough snow and for a bit of float in the off-piste, but the trade-off is not worth it in my mind. The shovels just seem disproportionately and unnecessarily fat.
Also, it seems the sidecut profile seems not quite dialed yet. The sidecut starts very near the tip, and I'm sure that contributes to the hookiness in soft snow.
Too bad, as this ski was otherwise a ton of fun on firm snow. It totally tired me out, not because it was overly demanding, but because I was having so much fun that I was skiing with more confidence and energy than normal. If only they made it in a 182, and fixed that huge shovel, then I would be sold.
***********
Hope you all enjoy the reviews.
Cheers!
About me: 6'2"; 225 lbs; strong skier but no expert; ski the whole mountain; skills improving steadily in all terrain.
Other skis in quiver, past and present: 2009 Head SS Speed; 2010 Fischer P-9; 2008 Dynastar Mythic Rider; 2008 Nordica Mach 3; 2012 Dynastar Sultan 94
Dynastar Outland 80 XT - 184 cm, 126/80/110, 15 m radius, early rise tip and tail
This is a slightly softer model in the Outland 80 series; there is also a Pro model which is stiffer, and which I actually wanted to try, but was not available. At least the XT gave me an idea of how the skis would handle, and it was pretty impressive.
(Note: I skied this for about 5 or 6 runs)
Pros:
- excellent edge hold on hard snow and icy patches; quite torsionally stiff.
- light feel on the snow; light underfoot.
- very flick-able and easy to maneuver.
- handled firm groomers surprisingly well, considering the light weight.
- VERY stable at speed; absorbed a lot of chatter and vibration....impressive.
- easy to do all turn shapes, but preferred med. to long turns.
- forgiveness was very high; an easy ski which was undemanding and not the least tiring, but surprisingly high performance ceiling.
Cons:
- too light for a guy my size, as the skis just got tossed around in the crud; stability on groomers was excellent, but not so much in crud and broken snow -- my Mythics are the best crud skis I have ever been on, followed by the Sultans, so the bar is set rather high for that parameter.
- I really missed having a flat tail on the groomers; the early rise tail on this ski was noticeable, and I didn't care for it (but this is just personal preference).
Overall a really impressive ski, which would well suit someone, say, <180 lbs. For heavier guys, the Pro model would be brilliant. This ski would be very versatile for east or west, as it could do almost everything well. Edge hold was great, and the calm at speed made me want to ski it faster. I really liked it, but it is just too light and soft for me. And I would prefer a flat tail.
Head Supershape Titan - 177 cm, 134/81/112, 15.5 m radius, ERA 3.0 S early rise tip
I flexed this in the shop next to a SS Magnum, and was surprised to find it to be slightly softer than the Mag, and softer longitudinally than my normal preference. I had expected it to be rather planky and stiff, given some of the comments to this effect re. past models of the Titan. Tail stiffness seemed moderate; rebound supple and powerful. "Hmmmm....let's try it and chuck it about for the afternoon". I'm glad I did, as this ski was a blast.
(Note: I skied this from about 11:00 until the lifts closed, with a break for lunch)
Pros:
- quite torsionally stiff, which meant it really wanted to hold an edge and rail turns on groomers; it was hard to drift this ski (could have been the tune, as many rental shops put almost no base bevel on their skis), but the upside was the superb edge hold.
- high stability at speed; calm and quiet, but not dead.
- could do any turn shape with aplomb, esp. short turns; I found myself cranking out short turns again and again on narrow runs and traverses, and I normally never do short turns unless I have to; this ski just made them super-easy, as can be imagined with all that sidecut; med. and long turns were equally fun, stable and smooth.
- solid feel, heavier than the Outland, but not overly heavy; just right for a guy my size.
- edge grip on firm groomers, steeps, icy patches, was excellent; this surprised me as I had expected a ski that was so pliable longitudinally to have some issues here, but the torsional stiffness was there in spades and the grip was unwavering; very impressive...they never let go.
- forgiveness was OK; somewhat demanding due to the torsional stiffness and always-on edge grip, but well balanced by the longitudinal compliance...nicely done.
Cons:
While all that sidecut made those short turns so much fun, the drawback to it was how the skis handled off-piste soft snow and crud. That is, those wide tips were really grabby in soft snow, would hook up in an unpredictable and aggressive way, and made handling in that snow a challenge. This trait is a deal-breaker for me, as it really limits the versatility of this ski.
As a general comment, I'm not sure what Head was thinking when they designed their new Supershape line, but some of those models really do have honking big shovels -- ie. Titan @ 134 mm, Rally @ 131 mm; Magnum @ 129 mm. Maybe I'm behind the times, but there are shovels that wide on our 88 mm and 94 mm waisted skis -- eg. my Sultan 94's have a 132mm shovel; and my wife's Mya 9 (93mm waist) has a 131 mm shovel. So, what's up with the Supershapes? I can see the advantage for absorbing rough snow and for a bit of float in the off-piste, but the trade-off is not worth it in my mind. The shovels just seem disproportionately and unnecessarily fat.
Also, it seems the sidecut profile seems not quite dialed yet. The sidecut starts very near the tip, and I'm sure that contributes to the hookiness in soft snow.
Too bad, as this ski was otherwise a ton of fun on firm snow. It totally tired me out, not because it was overly demanding, but because I was having so much fun that I was skiing with more confidence and energy than normal. If only they made it in a 182, and fixed that huge shovel, then I would be sold.
***********
Hope you all enjoy the reviews.
Cheers!