Dmitry wrote:

"rosco" wrote


SX series for all mountain recreational use e.g. SX9, SX11

Thanks, Walt. I never knew their number system.


I missed the initial post, but SX is definitely not a recreational
ski. As Atomic likes to write in their marketing blobs, SX:11 is
the ski the '02 x-games were won in skicross, so they're a full-on
race ski. SX:9 and 7 may be recreational, but definitely not 11.

That doesn't mean they can't be used for recreation I guess

Depends on your type of recreation. My favorite "recreational" ski is
the Beta Race 9.12, which was Atomic's World Cup slalom ski in '02 IIRC.
If I had the money for it, I'd have a pair of SL:11s for the same
purpose.

Most people you see on the SX:11 aren't using them for any kind of
competition; they just want a high-performance ski. What I've heard is
that the SX:11 is the SL:11 with a slightly non-FIS-compliant sidecut.
The difference between 7, 9, 11 in Atomics is basically
stiffness/beefiness/construction. The lower the number, the more
forgiving the ski; the higher the number, the bossier the ski. From
having skied a bunch of Atomics, I know where I like to be on their flex
scale, but I think it's best to ski on at least one pair (probably the
9) to get a reference point, rather than relying on a verbal description.

--
Mary Malmros
Some days you're the windshield, other days you're the bug.