Atomic Crimson Ti?

Anyone ride on these or demo them?  I was looking at the line prophet 90s or dynastar sultan 85s online.  Last night I went to get fitted for boots and got a really good deal on some 2012 178 Atomic Crimson Ti's.  Lots of reviews out there saying this is in the running for the eastern skiers one ski quiver.  Just curious if anyone has ridden them.

I would have loved to demo'd first, but couldn't pass these up.  The shop owner and several of the people that worked in the shop ride these too and were gushing about them in everything but deep powder.

Next on my list, although have not demo'd, know folks who own them, and luv them. Holds the edge, great in trees and bumps.    178 may be too long (unless you are much heavier then I am, 185 lbs.) I prefer around 172mm.   MUCH different ski than the Line 90s.  

Thanks Hoser.  I was going to go shorter but the guys at the shop all told me I should be on a minimum 178 in that ski.  They said the cambered rocker makes it ski shorter than it is.  I don't know how true that is.  This is my first pair of skis in about 8 years so I am pretty stoked.  I am a pretty big guy - 6'2" about 250 give or take a pound or two.  I don't think these will be too stiff with me on them:)

They said the edge hold is great and the width of the ski and the rocker make it good off piste too.  When the owner has his choice of skis to demo/ride and these are his go to sticks - well that kind of made the decision for me.

Edge hold on Atomic skis is unreal. I have owned rossi, k2. soloman but I love my Atomics. they rip the groomers and still can do the trees. I think you will be HAPPY

"I was going to go shorter but the guys at the shop all told me I should be on a minimum 178 in that ski.  They said the cambered rocker makes it ski shorter than it is.  I don't know how true that is.  This is my first pair of skis in about 8 years so I am pretty stoked.  I am a pretty big guy - 6'2" about 250 give or take a pound or two.  I don't think these will be too stiff with me on them:) "

Hey Dan;

I demo'd these last year and was very impressed. I though, being a person who spends most of my time off trail (A disclaimer for Aussie, so that I don't get chastised!), opted for the wider Savage Ti, so as to have even more fun.
The rocker does allow the ski to feel shorter, but I would advise to go with the 172 length, because they are an atomic, and they will not flinch on hard pack. I realize your size, but trust me on this one.
I have been extremely happy with these skis

I applaud you for actually taking the time to demo, as everyone is different, and the only way to truly tell if you like something is to try it for yourself.

My one ski for the past couple seasons has been the Atomic Nomad Blackeye.  I'm happy with it but wanted to go fatter to expand my quiver I think the waist on my Blackeye is 79.  I don't have much to compare it to but have had a ball - it was my first shaped ski after straight skis.  Spring slush was another area that I think was weak.

Shaman - I wish I could demo, but not going to have the chance.  I am very torn about the length.  I was thinking to go with the 172s but the owner of the shop was pretty adamant that I should go 178.  I could certainly call and see if I could get the shorter length.  What is the main advantage of the shorrter ski?  Easier to turn and get around in the trees?  What is the downside?  Not as stable at speed?  I don't know if they had the Savage in stock or not.  That looks like a pretty sweet ski too and it really isn't much bigger than the crimson.  I am thinking now maybe shorter and wider?  Hmmm.  Any other thoughts from the gallery?

D

They want to sell you the 178 because no one else is going to buy them. You will not have to worry about stability, you will give up before the ski does. The shorter ski does everything you mentioned, which equates to bigger smiles; which is the object, correct?
I should mention, it's not that the savage is better, it's just that i wanted a wider ski. I savage was not available to demo, so I did my "research" I demo'd the crimson

You will not be disappointed with the crimson, especially if you get the 172

Shaman you planted just enough of a seed of doubt.  The owner of the shop rides 178s and is probably 80 pounds less than me so I don't think he was trying to sell me a bill of goods (plus he gave me a great boot fitting).  I told him tonight that he could probably do more with those skis than I would know how to.  

I bought my last skis a size too big so I was gun shy with the 178s.  Shaman you nudged me in the right direction I think.  Unfortunately the shop didn't have 171's but I found a pair online.

It's all about the smiles Dan, you'll love the Crimson's

Darkside Shaman wrote

It's all about the smiles Dan, you'll love the Crimson's

I have close to 20 days on these skis this year (in Utah and NY) and I am pretty impressed.  I do get a little tip chatter sometimes at speed or if I am really grinding it on hardpack, but I think that is more a result of the tip rocker/thinness of the tips and tails than the ski becoming unstable.  As Shaman said, the edge hold is unbelievable.  I am scared to have them tuned as I don't want to mess with the factory sharpening:)  I had the tips/tails detuned when I first got them but other than that I haven't touched them.  I have been in some boney stuff and somehow haven't gotten dinged up yet.  Went into the Straightbrook trees this weekend and they rode really well.  Probably a little stiff for some, but for a big guy like me when you push you want the ski to push back and it does.

I had them "parked" next to a pair of 178s last weekend.  I am sure I could bomb it even faster on those puppies, but I am happy with the 171s.  I haven't been on lots of different skis, but this one seems to carve very well too.  You can push on it with confidence.

Ordered Atomic Crimson Ti 185cm with bindings for $599 on eBay.

My current pair of Hot Rod is moving to rock ski category.

Next Season should be epic

So the Atomic Crimson at 171 is a winner.
Anyone on the Rossi Experience 83s?    Looking at 168 (same theory as this thread,  keeping it shorter for the East).
Heard the E88s rock but not yet willing to go quite that wide (and have Line P90s for the Powder and/or Spring slush days)

A random gear review found me here :) Nice Harvey !!

I picked up Crimson Ti's last year and skied on them for the full season. I loved them for all mountain purposes, although my one complaint would be they do seem a little heavy. This is great for icy / choppy conditions but I felt they were a little slow on the turn.

Overall I'm very happy with them but I did feel like they were very good at everything but not necessarily excellent at anything. I guess that's the obvious trade off with an all mountain ski.

AlpineZone wrote

A random gear review found me here :) Nice Harvey !!

Welcome to NYSB Nick.

 6'-2" 250# and rockered? I think i would have  been unsure between 178's & 185's, not 171's...

So a brand new pair of redesigned 170 atomic crimsons are waiting for me at the shop. My fat ass overworked the bindings on my old pair last year and the folks at atomic were nice enough to give me a new pair. They are a little thinner this year (86 vs 88) and have some new feature under the binding system to give them more flex. I love the old setup but they were a little heavy. I also could have used a little more float on some of our powder days last year.  So, here is my decision/question (calling Shaman for advice).

1. Stick with the new atomics.

2. Sell the new atomics and get a new pair of flat atomic savages (from two years ago) for $330 and mount up the binding of my choosing.

The wife thinks I am crazy for considering selling the brand spanking new ones. I thought my old crimsons would have been perfect with a little more width and less weight (which I would get from the savage set up) plus I have $200 in cash in my pocket.

IMO go with the savage

How did I know you would say that:) I just needed the nudge. They are on the truck and on the way. Now I just have to figure out what bindings to put on them....