Lithium Vapor vs Lithium Senate

[Billbert]

Thinking about a new ski. Currently on a 69 Alloy Senate. Love the ski, it's mix of stability and speed are a good match for me and my hack level skiing.

 

Tried a friend's lithium senate and couldn't believe the difference. Now I am thinking of an upgrade.

 

I am 95% open water, 15 off, 32

to 34. mph. Wondering if I should bother with another senate or just start looking for a lithium vapor. Is there much of a jump between the two for a guy that will never reach eithers full potential but has enough change in his pocket not to care?

 

Also wondering about lengths. I am about 205 and was considering dropping down to the 67 senate or a 68 vapor. What are your thoughts on this.

 

Part of me wants a change part of me wants to stay within my comfort range and just move up to a lithium build 69 senate.

 

Thanks!

[Wayne]

What year senate are you on currently? What year lithium senate/vapor are you looking at for your upgrade?

[TallSkinnyGuy]

What were the differences you noticed with the lithium vs alloy Senate?

[Billbert]

Currently on a 2014 Senate looking at 2017 models.

 

I found that the lithium felt identical to the alloy until you started to push it. Easy and forgiving. Once you started to get a bit aggressive it seamed much faster, more acceleration and wide noticeably easier and with less effort than the alloy.

 

The lithium I rode was a 2016 model and I swapped my boots over. They were set up as close to identical as you could get and rode back to back. I was hoping not to notice much of a difference.....so much for that, here I am contemplating my next ski.

[gregy]

2017 Senate is going to the 2016 vapor shape but wider. Should be really nice. I went from 2015 to 2016 Vapor, both 67". The 2016 feels bigger and is easier to get up on. I'm thinking a 2017 Senate 67" should work good for you. Or 68" Vapor but I think you would be very happy with the Senate.

[Waternut]

Can't really make that decision for you. However, I will say that with you skiing 32mph in the course, you need to make sure you aren't on the upper limit of the weight range especially with the vapor. Minimum recommended speed for the Vapor is 32mph so if you ski that speed or slower in the course and you're at orabove the recommended weight limit, it's going to be a handful and you may never progress.

[paco]

Go with a 67" senate or at least try one, I'm 200 lb and am on a 2015 senate graphite. I'd guess a 68" vapor will likely be about the right size in that model. Sorry, I have no input on the vapor, but I'd love to try one! I'm just getting into 34mph on the course and love my senate!

[Wayne]

For what you do I would probably stick with the Senate. Going to a 2017 I would have a hard time choosing if the lithium would be worth it over the graphite (again based on your use). Even if you went with a longer Vapor (since it's narrower) the senate will be easier to ski on (forgiving and just less effort overall).

[Texas6]

I would argue that minimum recommended speed on the Vapor just isn't true. My 13 year old son rode his vapor from 28mph @ 15off to 34 @ 32 off in one summer. It worked very well at all speeds.

[Billbert]

AHHHHH too many voices of reason to ignore. I should probably stick with the senate. @Wayne flat out nailed it with the forgiving and less effort comment. I probably wont be able to resist the lithium version, assuming I can find one (dealers around here aren't as keen on stocking them as they figure most folks willing to shell out extra for them will likely just bump up to the vapor).

 

Still have to decide on the length. My weight has always seamed to put me at the transition between a 67 and 69, I have always gone with the 69 and have always been happy with the decision yet part of me always thinks maybe a 67 when it comes time to refresh the ski.

[A_B]

My impression of the newer 2015 and 2016 Vapors, is that they ski larger than the older models. I think they must be slightly wider up front, as they were a lot easier on deepwater starts than before. Tried a 2015 68": and 69.5" Vapor and the 68" was plenty of ski for deepwater starts at 250-260 range, and turned much sharper.

 

At 205, the 68" Vapor would be perfect, at speeds down to 28 mph in my estimate.

 

I have never really agreed with the theory of buying a medium ski for a medium skier. Why let the ski hold you back? Higher end skis hold edge better and can make it easier to progress. Back in the day, sometimes the top skis were pretty stiff and fast, but didn't turn too well, so you needed to be a little more skilled to ride them effectively. New top end skis today are softer and hold edge and turn by themselves a lot of times.

 

 

[gregy]

I was looking a boat the other day and went down to 30mph. It felt fine. I'm 170lb on a 67" lithium vapor. I missed a deep water start every now then on the 2015 but the 2016 is for some reason easier.

[TallSkinnyGuy]

@A_B I am a 15-offer working on consistency at 34mph and I found my 2014 Connelly Prophecy to simply be to nimble and fast for me. I found it difficult to work on the fundamentals I need to develop when I had to concentrate so much on just staying on top of the ski. I switched to a Senate this season and greatly appreciated the increased stability and forgiveness it offered. Helped me relax more and be able to think more about fundamentals and thereby increased my confidence. Therefore, I feel like the high end ski was holding me back and making it harder for me to progress. Other skiers with greater athletic talent than I have may have a different experience, though.

[A_B]

as always, try before you buy.

 

My own personal training program for guys and gals that ski with me is to have them shorten up to 28 off and drop speed so they can see/feel exactly what is wrong and where. Skiers can get away with too many sins at 15 off and think they are skiing well just because they make a full pass. The real sauce starts at 28 off, and if you can run it at 28 mph, then the fundamentals are there to run it at speed. Higher end skis won't hold you up in this exercise.

 

I think the Senate is a great ski, (I ride a 69 Lithium), but if I could, I would be on a 68" Vapor.

 

[Bill22]

@TallSkinnyGuy aren't you comparing apples and oranges? Vapor vs Senate would be apples vs apples. Your talking about a Prophecy vs a Senate.

[TallSkinnyGuy]

@Bill22 I am comparing mid-level skis with high-level skis, which may not be relevant if the Prophecy is substantially less stable and forgiving than the Vapor. I also skied the Connelly V for a season before skiing the Prophecy. The V felt very similar to the Senate (very stable and forgiving), so from that experience and from what I have heard from others with more experience on high-end skis such as the Vapor and Prophecy I made an assumption that top-of-the-line skis are more similar to each other across brands in terms of stability and forgiveness and that mid-level skis are also more similar to each other across brands in stability and forgiveness.

[gregy]

I almost bailed on the 2016 Vapor because I was having problems with my offside overturning. Thanks to all the support here on BOS along with @brooks and @Chris Rossi I was able to correct it and the correction was counter-intuitive to what I was thinking. I kinda wonder If I had the same support with other skis I might still be on one of them.

[Chris Rossi]

I would go 68 Vapor. This would give you two options to ski on in your quiver. The Vapor is a blast to ride, turns on a dime, holds maximum angle, and is lightning fast. While the target audience for the ski is 34-36 mph, it works well at all speeds. It is very supportive and efficient on the water.

 

Chris

[Billbert]

Thanks for all the comments guys. Not much closer to a decision but I have all winter to think about it. After considering @Chris Rossi comments above the vapor is edging ahead. I do this for fun and the vapor does sound like it would be a blast to play with, especially having the senate to fall back on if need be.

 

Thanks again!