The long ski thread - Skis > 190: XW Lab 198 Review

[nexus6]

POST YOUR LONG SKI REVIEW, RANTS, NEWS etc here:

Seems like over the last few years every ones been making all their skis shorter and shorter, but this year there's been a few nice longer models out. After demoing skis on Sunday I realized that there's just no substitute for the smooth ride and grip of a nice long running length.

So I'm starting this short skis suck thread to talk about those long beasts.

The demo shop only had most of the skis I tried in 183-188 sizes, which all felt slow and choppy with no acceleration. Then they brought out the Salomon X-Wing Lab 198

Salomon X-Wing Lab 198 (only length): 140x107x121, RADIUS:
35.8m, Wood/Carbon Core

Me: 6'1",225#. Where: Mt Hood Meadows - 4"-6" of good cut up fresh over hardpack.

Review:

This skis is the big black successor to the AK Rocket. After all those short skis I was a little intimidated by a ski that was taller than I am. Ski felt average weight for it's size. Cap construction, but not surprising from Solomon.

I didn't get to spend much time with them since my legs where shot by the end of the day. First I played in the wind lips at the top of One Bowl over to Two Bowl. These skis seem medium stiff flex, but very even from tip to tail, so they rolled over the bumpy wind lips nicely. Felt oh so nice and stable landing a little drop over a natural tabletop. The smooth acceleration and glide was so nice after all those short skis.

Next was my favorite line down the skier left of Two Bowl. Turn initiation was way easier than I though it was going to be on these big stick. Once on edge it felt like it was on rails. With the tip to tail taper you could smear the end of the turn so easy which is feeling missing from a lot of the skis I tried. Felt like I could vary the radius at will. Ski definitely had that supple Solomon feel, smooth without being dead. Gripped nicely without chatter when I bottomed out and hit hardpack.

After the roll over I straight lined it onto the run out to Three Bowl. I've never felt stability like this straight running through choppy powder. I think these things could give me the balls to straight run Two Bowl from the top rather than 1/2 way down like I've done before.

Three bowl started off with some nice untracked for a few turns, but rapidly turned to soft bumps. While I wouldn't want to take on a bump run on these they could be skidded ok, and absorbed the shocks nicely.

Then it was onto the groomer runout to the lift, where they railed just fine, maybe a little loose feeling in the tail, but who cares.

Overall these were just the ticket, they glided like a long ski, but felt much shorter in snapping off turns if needed. Didn't feel like they would kick your ass if you got lazy either, just a super smooth ride. 95% sure I'm going to get a pair.

[voiron]

i really like my xw 198's too. they ski long when you need it, but also short when you need it. i'd say they'd be great for a one ski quiver.

[IrieRon]

This is probably neither here nor there, but I remember when I finally switched from long straight skis to fatties (my first-ever non-skinny ski was an Igneous FFL), I was like, these would be even more betterer if they were like 205's or 210's.

Everyone was like, "Hey old-school loser, now you just need width, not length; they'll never make a 200 cm ski again. You should ski a 178 now because of all the surface area." I bit my tongue and plotted my ice-cold revenge.



Now my dream ski is a 205 Praxis. Seriously Keith, MAKE IT!

[voiron]

i grew up skiing 205's, 210's etc. for me i prefer length. if you gave me a 185 @ 110mm waist and a 200 @ 85mm waist. i'd go with the 200cm. the surface area must be relative? there's something about being able to see the tip out there that i like. i'm 6'1" so if i have a ski too short and some goggles with poor down vision, i can't see any ski.

[flyby]

i grew up skiing 205's, 210's etc. for me i prefer length. if you gave me a 185 @ 110mm waist and a 200 @ 85mm waist. i'd go with the 200cm. the surface area must be relative? there's something about being able to see the tip out there that i like. i'm 6'1" so if i have a ski too short and some goggles with poor down vision, i can't see any ski.

Yeah, when I went from 193's (flat tail) to fatter 180's, I was skidding out everywhere.
Long skis truck, short skis suck.

[dre66]

longer length = more edge contact = more stability in your turn especially when hauling ass.
as far as i know surface area gives you stability when you aren't turning, in powder, or when landing drops. on groomers, or any crud / broken pow, longer skis will probably give you more stability than shorter fatter ones.
why do you think racers still ski on long skinny skis?

[Chugachjed]

I skied my buddies 183 mantra's yesterday backcountry and hated it. My old rossi 191's suck, my old 200 AK Rockets are the ticket although way soft they ride anything.

[link1]

AT 6'4" and around 240, I never bought into the short ski trend. Currently on the 194 LPs and before that two sets of 198 G4s. I demoed the XXL in 194 this year and will probably try to pick up a pair at the end of the year, unless something else comes along.

[leroy jenkins]

I see a lot of people on short skis with a lot of sidecut making these perfectly carved ten foot turns down every run. For me, its not that hard to throw/schmear a big ski around to make it behave at slower speeds, but there is absolutely nothing you can do to make short turny skis feel at all stable at speed. Who cares if you have to hop turn every once in while instead of making that "perfect" turn at five miles an hour.

[nexus6]

Picked up my XW Lab's with Dukes last week. What a fun ski, not demanding at all! First thing I noticed after a little time on them was that the boot center mounting position is pretty far forward, but with the length they're still really stable. With the forward mount you can really snap off short turns if needs be, even going from long to short without worrying about washing out.

Ski has a nice rebound to too it, too, which actually made soft bumps really easy to ski. Maching bumpy groomers did suck however, quite a bit of tip flap, but that's not what I got this ski for.

Did a short tour and found they were excellent, they're fairly light and with that much skin area the grip is amazing. Although, I had some problems getting both the front and rear attachments of the BD STS skins to stay put. Front loop was barely wide enough and the rear clip kept slipping off the twin tip. Someone really needs to come out with a better rear skin clip for twins. Also, the skins were barely long enough and were one notch from end on the STS strap.

[nexus6]

I skied my buddies 183 mantra's yesterday backcountry and hated it. My old rossi 191's suck, my old 200 AK Rockets are the ticket although way soft they ride anything.

I have to second that on 183 Mantra's. Demo'd those and to me they felt like stubby wide planks that just wanted to be pivoted back and forth rather than set on edge and smeared in the pow. To each their own though.

[squatch]

Threadjack:

Long skis I want to try/own:

198 Zag H112 Adrides
197 Volkl Katanas
201 Stocklis

The xwing labs always seemed kinda meh to me because of the soft flex and tons of taper...basically they seemed too pow-specific.

P.S. a 205 Praxis would be unreal and I would buy one assuming I could get them for $600 or less. You hear that, Keith?

[IrieRon]

P.S. a 205 Praxis would be unreal and I would buy one assuming I could get them for $600 or less. You hear that, Keith?

Bump for Keith and/or someone who knows Keith

[trees4me]

Did a short tour and found they were excellent, they're fairly light and with that much skin area the grip is amazing. Although, I had some problems getting both the front and rear attachments of the BD STS skins to stay put. Front loop was barely wide enough and the rear clip kept slipping off the twin tip. Someone really needs to come out with a better rear skin clip for twins. Also, the skins were barely long enough and were one notch from end on the STS strap.

Yeah, that's touring with long skis is a problem. I toured the last 4 years on 198 Rex. Even back then I couldn't get a skin long enough to have a tail attachment, but then again I've done fine without one...

I've been searching for a couple years for a replacement, but I haven't found anything that seems just right... Legend Pros and XXLs are heavy, Movement Goliaths are short (191)

I'm still dazed and confused by the lack of longer options... are there really no good skiers out there that would be happier on something around 200?

[altasnowbirdripper]

The XWing Lab is one of the most missunderstood skis out there. It skis so much easier than most think it would and could make a one ski quiver for any skier at resorts in the rockies & out west. They are a blast!

[altasnowbirdripper]

Bump for Keith and/or someone who knows Keith

BUMP BUMP - Even a 200cm Praxis would really ROCK!

[JeffreyJim]

5th'd The 195 skis like I THOUGHT the 185 would ski. My 125 lbs girlfriend could rock a 185 praxis in pow and be just fine.

205 would be so money on big lines....But I'm not giving up my 95s anytime soon...

[HitMe]

Horses for courses, but I agree length is something special. My longest ski right now is the 193 Sanouk which if anything proves a longish ski can be fun, quick and easy handling.

I would like to try the Katana, but at my 150lbs I seriously wonder if I'm really best off with the 197 or need to step down to the not-belong-to-this-club-190 lenght.

Edit: Check out the classic 198 G41 on my avatar.

[robnow]

Legend Pros and XXLs are heavy, Movement Goliaths are short (191)

Really, if you are considering XXLs, Goliaths aren't any shorter. We may be talking a couple cm difference in tip-tail length, but effective edge/running length are the same I believe (164 cm) so don't be fooled by the 191 number especially considering most other skis are adding a few cms due to a bit of twin where the Goliath has none.

[johannus]

long ski good. more metal.

[the_clizz]

the reason that there are fewer long skis out there is because most of the people who ski cannot handle the length. if you were a big company catering to the masses, you could make so much more money off of skis that the majority can use--i.e. shorter skis with heavy sidecut. but its nice to see teh big sticks coming back for those who crave them

[dynodonkeyaltabird]

Now my dream ski is a 205 Praxis. Seriously Keith, MAKE IT!

P.S. a 205 Praxis would be unreal and I would buy one assuming I could get them for $600 or less. You hear that, Keith?

so, now these coveted 205cm praxis pows exist! did you fellas purchase?

[squatch]

so, now these coveted 205cm praxis pows exist! did you fellas purchase?

yessir!!!

[klauss]

Just picked up a pair of the 198 XW Labs lightly used on Seattle craigslist this weekend when I was going to Crystal Mountain for my first time. Even came with 916 binders which I was happy about.

Skis are great, better than I expected. Very easy to manipulate for a 198 non rockered ski and the long tail has a good feel to it. I also bought Rossignol SC 108s in a 185 recently and would say these 198s are a friendlier ski, but can still go to top speeds.

After sking the Rossignol 185s I was thanking myself for not getting the 195s, but the XWs in a 198 were just right.

Crystal is a great mountain and wish it was closer to home.

Footage is not the best, but here is the first run on em.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqmkc3ZsKbc"]YouTube- 1st Day at Crystal_1st Run on 198 XW Labs (older skis).wmv[/ame]