Carbon vs. non-Carbon skis

[Bill22]

What speed and line length do the benefits of a carbon ski become obvious?

 

When comparing the Radar Senate vs. Senate Carbon or HO Coefficient X vs. Superlite X, is it worth the extra money if you’re at -15@30mph? Do the non-carbon model ride the same at slower speeds and 15off?

 

I am looking at these skis and have read the reviews.

 

[eleeski]

Carbon skis are the cheap ones. Boron fibers!

 

I recommend the carbon ski at any level. If money is the issue, I'd choose a used carbon ski over a new glass ski. I can't specifically address your options. When I side by side tested the Monza vs the System 8, I loved the Monza and could barely make a pass on the System 8. Same mold, different construction.

 

The modern top end skis are great at pretty much any level once you are seriously skiing the course. Getting up and learning the feel of skiing is fine on any ski.

 

Get quality bindings.

 

Eric

[Drago]

I think carbon is awesome, however, buschene ran consistantly near world records on a "little bit of carbon" Connelly F1

[Bill22]

Thanks @eleeski.

 

1 thumbs up for Carbon.

[6balls]

When GOODE went carbon and I was riding D3, competitors on the dock would always talk about how light their ski was as if that was the big deal. They would scoff at my RCX. My thinking was well..."you are in double high wraps and I'm a RTP, negating any weight savings on the carbon". There has to be benefit beyond the weight factor. These benefits, however, are beyond my tiny brain.

I like the RTM carbon construction on my current Razor not b/c it's light, but it performs the way I want it to and I have at least some assurance that it won't lose it's designed flex characteristics as quickly making it a better investment.

 

[h2odawg79]

@Bill22, IMHO when used for long line and slower speed, most of the time a non Carbon ski will perform optimally. (Especially when factoring Bang for the Buck...) A non Carbon Ski will usually be More foregiving, predictable and stable in open water or marginal water conditions. Having more of a dampening effect.

 

WTS, a carbon Ski will usually be a quicker reacting Ski. Which can produce a faster ski. But, this will come to some degree at the expense of forgivness and stability.

 

If given the choice, I would 1st consider Budget, experience and personal objective.

i.e saved $$$ may be better spent on Fuel and Coaching.

 

Ones experience and present ability can have a huge impact on progression and the need to (or not to) buy another ski sooner then later.

 

One may have goals of primarily skiing 34mph in the Course on shortline and another may have the objective of primarily ripping the Open water...

 

The Senate "C" would be an awesome Ski to get, if Skiing the Course Primarily and the reg. Senate would be a better all around Ski. However, @ 30 mph the Radar Theory would be optimum. (it has Carbon and is a bargain for slower speeds...)

 

Good Luck!

[MJE]

I agree with h20dawg79. Having skiied the senate and senateC, I preferred the regular senate at longer line lengths.

[Bill22]

@h2odawg79, I just got a portable course and hope not to be at slow speeds for long. For the past few years I have only been able to ski the course at fun events or paid coaching (total 5-10 sets per year).

 

This year the plan is to get the portable course in as much as possible, hit some open water, enter 4-5 fun events and get some more coaching.

[Volker]

6balls, weight matters, but main thing is WHERE the weight is. It should not be at far front or back of a ski.

[LeSkiAvantTout]

Carbon's where it's at. Why should a free skier use an inferior product? D3 X3 will suit anyone who can deep water start, imagine Connelly Carbon V likewise.

[h2odawg79]

@LeSkiAvantTout, Agreed, Carbon is awesome.

 

But, the answer is partially "Bang for the Buck" and partially the Skiers "ability level". IMHO, the best Bang for the Buck starts with matching the Skier to a Ski that will best match his/her current ability level AND that will also allow them to progress as efficiently as possible to the next level. If this Ski is a Carbon Ski, then so be it.

 

Slower tow speeds indicate the need for a Ski designed with more Stability and forgiveness. This will normally be a Wider Ski, (w/more surface area) a softer flex with very user friendly side cuts and bevels. This will more often be found in a lower budget Ski designed to optimize/enhance this level of Skier. Many of the lower level Skis have "some" Carbon these days.

 

I think Progression is key. But, no need to get the Buggy ahead of the Horse....

 

 

[Bill22]

Sounds like it does not matter much to the grassroots level skier. One is lighter and would be better after you progress up the line. The other is heavier but more flexible making it more forgiving and could help you progress faster.

 

The ironic thing is if the fiberglass ski is forgiving and helps you progress up the line, then you’re going to want a carbon ski. :)

 

I will say, I have felt the pain of being on a ski that was above my skill level and too long! That was a nightmare.