"Dmitry" wrote in message
news:6TNmd.519261$mD.364208@attbi_s02...

"Mary Malmros" wrote

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.

I have SX:9, so I know what the difference with SX:11 is. The titanium
rods in the B-profile in SX:11, carbon fiber in SX:9, and the base in
SX:11 is better than on 9. SX:11 is mighty stiff.

I'm curious as to how it compares with other skicross offerings: head
xrc, dynastar skicross 10, etc. I'll be able to compare with head - a
friend has one in the same size as my SX:9 (170).
,

Ah Yes, the most valued advice of a self admitted one day skier.
talk about a blowhard novice.
so in the couple days you've skied. please tell us about the flex in the
other 2000 skies on the market.