173 Icelantic Shaman (Powder Review)

[fat yeti]

Me 5'8" 195 lbs
173 Icelantic Shaman mounted boot center w/px 15.
Powder skis I have owned or been on. Rossi Axioms, Line prophet 130, Praxis powder, Atomic Big Daddies, and a lot of others.
Location Snowbird Christmas day. (The best Christmas present my wife could have given me)
Until yesterday I had only skied the shaman in spring conditions. I was a bit hesitant especially leaving my line prophet 130 at home. My first run on these was in mineral basin; it had just opened and was some what tracked. When I dropped in I was amazed at how fast these things accelerated and came to the top of the powder and chopped up powder. I was impressed they are defiantly more stable then there size suggests. These things cut through the chopped up snow like it was not even there. On my second run I got a fairly clean run on old lady. I got these up to speed and they just kept going, even in the short length they wanted speed. Tight trees are were these shine they turn on command and due to the shape the tails don’t hook up very smooth through out the turn, they also stay true when you point them The tip does not want to dive even when you lean forward it just stays afloat. These skis are also fun on the groomers it just turns and fast and digs into the soft groomers. The big tip takes some getting used to and requires a slightly wider stance. I did not ski these in bumps other than those on top of the Cirque traverse. The only thing I would change about these skis is give them more tail about 5-6mm would be great or instead of a full twin make it a flat tail or a 1/4 of the twin it has. I would not mount it forward to gain more tail if you look at the shape of the ski the mounting point lies in the middle of the skis shape (I hope that makes sense). These skis also have great bases and edges ran over some rocks and only ended up with some small scratches. These things also attract attention in he lift/tram line people are curious or I had one skier who thinks he's a bad ass snicker at my skis and gave me some odd looks. Over all I really like these skis I will have a tough time deciding between these and my prophets on powder days. Both skis are fun and ski powder differently. If you see me up at the bird and you have a 305mm boot just ask I probably will let you take a spin, on them. If you get a chance to demo these this season take them for a spin.

[Mani_UT]

Me 5'8" 195 lbs
173 Icelantic Shaman ...These things also attract attention in he lift/tram line people are curious or I had one skier who thinks he's a bad ass snicker at my skis and gave me some odd looks. .

Yup definitely saw you in the tram. These skis look so short it's amazing how everyone who tries them is so pleasantly surprised by them. I'll have to try some day. The tip sure looked huge.

.
.
...And no it wasn't me who snickered at them. I have a hard enough time staying on my own skis

[mtsprings]

Interesting to hear about the shaman’s performance in powder, it is what I was expecting. I had a chance to demo a pair last week but it was just on firm groomers.

Taking three runs I received several comments about the skis shape & graphics.

I have been debating over what to mount up with some hammerheads for my tele powder boards, a pair shamans or sumos(175). Each week I change my mind and recently had been set on the sumo. I love volkl and can get a great deal on last year’s sumos but I have been intrigued with the shaman and now you have me thinking again.

Looking at the shape you can tell what they are designed to do. I think that shape would make it an easy board to turn when teleing, even with the width under boot and I love the graphics.

What did the "bad ass" think he was snickering at? Those are some sweet boards.

[fat yeti]

I found out that the guy who snickered at me is actualy a cool guy. Another mag (cpjslc) I am friends with told me he's cool guy and cpjslc said if he did not know me might have given me the same look with those skis. I just thought it was funny I may have done the same if I had not been on this ski before they are short but they are so much fun. I am looking forward to skiing them Saturday if the storm come through. I think a lot of people on this board would like them if they tried them and if they made it in a 185+ I think it would be a big hit here.

[Core Shot]

Me 5'8" 195 lbs
173 Icelantic Shaman mounted boot center w/px 15.



The only thing I would change about these skis is give them more tail about 5-6mm would be great or instead of a full twin make it a flat tail or a 1/4 of the twin it has. I would not mount it forward to gain more tail if you look at the shape of the ski the mounting point lies in the middle of the skis shape (I hope that makes sense). .

I dunno.
I had last years 160 mounted at +2 and loved them.
I now have a pair of 173 and can't figure out where to mount them, but am certain it will be forward of center.

Tip to boot center was 56.7% of overall length for the 160
But it is 57.5% for the 173.
They moved the mounting point back on the 173 version.

When I was at +2 for the 160, that was at 55.4% back from the tip.

I am seriously thinking +2 again for mounting the 173.
That would put me at 56.4% from tip to boot center, which is where the old 160 boot center was.
So, I was not sure if I should ge even further forward than +2

[fat yeti]

I rode these on boot center last year and liked them at the point, and after skiing them in the powder I loved it but it would be nice to try it at plus 2 for a bit more tail. Core Shot if you have not been on the 173 they are great I have been on both the 161s were great but the 173 are better for steeper longer runs and are more stable. I hope next year they have there other skis in longer lengths.

[fat yeti]

I have now had two more days on these. The more I skis these the more I like them. New Years eve at Snowbird was incridble the upper moutian had been closed the day before so it was untracked that morning. When I got to Snowbird I started the day on my prophet 130, however they just had the factory wax job and they were slow, realy slow. So I swithced to the Shamans and did not regret it once. These skis were great they just kept going and love the powder and choped up powder as well and the groomers at the bottom of the moutian are easy to ski with these. The only down side is I wish they had more tail for stability at speed and for back seat landings. I also rode these today and though they handled the crud incredible well. On firm groomers they are ok but you need to put preasure on both edges and keep forward. Over all I have been very impresed with these skis I love how they ski and work with my style of skiing. I will be skiing these more than I thought I would this year.

[Core Shot]

Got some time on the 173 finally.

One pair is mounted Dukes +2cm and felt awesome.
Much stiffer and more burly than the 160.
Much more stable at speed - tuns of fun.
Not nearly as manuverable in tight tight trees, but still lots of fun there as well. I think I will keep my dyanafit 160 shaman combo for EC backcountry (oftentimes the descent is only a 4 to 5 foot wide hiking trail, and the 160 are so playful you can bebop and turn in such a narrow corridor. Will keep the 173 for inbounds/sidecountry EC pow days.
Didnt notice the short tail, but maybe that's cuz I'm +2cm on the mount.

Also skied a pair of 173 Shamans mounted with Bdel 01 tele bindings.
Holy shit was that a blast. I have never been able to tele powder so well and so quick turning.
I may do a lot more tele than ever before now that I have that setup in the quiver.

Overall a great ski.

[pechelman]

either of you guys measuring the effective edges on the 160 and 173?

[fat yeti]

I have not yet I will try to this weekend. Glad you like yours Core Shot. How do they do in the pow at + 2. I know mine mounted on the line do not want to dive at all. I may sell the prophets these are that good.

[mtsprings]

Also skied a pair of 173 Shamans mounted with Bdel 01 tele bindings.
Holy shit was that a blast. I have never been able to tele powder so well and so quick turning.
Overall a great ski.

You made up my mind! It will be the Shamans with Hammerheads!

[Core Shot]

I have not yet I will try to this weekend. Glad you like yours Core Shot. How do they do in the pow at + 2. I know mine mounted on the line do not want to dive at all. I may sell the prophets these are that good.

THere is zero issue with tip dive at +2. You could go +4 before you might dive those things. Only downside of being +2 is being ahead of the hardpack curve sidecut radius, but then if you mount ont he line you have no tails.

Check my math post above (I know its uber geeky, but I was trying to compare where I was mounted on the 160 with where the new centerline was on the 173). It turns out that they moved the boot center line back on the 173 compared to the 160.

MTSprings - be forewarned that although I have been part time teleing for almost 20 years I never really was able to tele powder very well. It was always a struggle, relaxing just as I stuffed a tip and went ass over teakettle. But then again, I never really had a tele powder ski.
These cheater sticks made tele powder effortless. I felt like it was unpossible to stuff a tip. That let me relax and enjoy the ride. They also are so short that quick move turns were effortless. They also carved a nice turn on the hardpack.
Tele boots were mounted on the rec pinline for the largest boots and felt great (I was hesitant to go forward for tele like I did for alpine mount - esp with an active binding with regular stiff cartridges)
Interestingly, they have 3 pinlines depending on your boot size. I mounted on the largest (most forward) one for my 28.5 boot.

[mtsprings]

MTSprings - be forewarned that although I have been part time teleing for almost 20 years I never really was able to tele powder very well. It was always a struggle, relaxing just as I stuffed a tip and went ass over teakettle. But then again, I never really had a tele powder ski.
These cheater sticks made tele powder effortless. I felt like it was unpossible to stuff a tip. That let me relax and enjoy the ride. They also are so short that quick move turns were effortless. They also carved a nice turn on the hardpack.
Tele boots were mounted on the rec pinline for the largest boots and felt great (I was hesitant to go forward for tele like I did for alpine mount - esp with an active binding with regular stiff cartridges)
Interestingly, they have 3 pinlines depending on your boot size. I mounted on the largest (most forward) one for my 28.5 boot.

Core Shot, Thanks for the input. I just sat down to ask you where you mounted the bindings and my questions were already answered.
This will be my first tele powder setup. I hope I get to have a bunch of days on them. Thanks again.

[ego7man]

thats interesting that they do so well on the powder because i had a pair of nomads and they were great carvers super stiff and held an edge great but when i got into the powder it was very rough they just wouldn't float

[Core Shot]

thats interesting that they do so well on the powder because i had a pair of nomads and they were great carvers super stiff and held an edge great but when i got into the powder it was very rough they just wouldn't float

Shaman is an extreme pintail shape= Tip is much wider than tail.

It gives wicked tip float - you just can't stuff the tip. That gives a lot of room for error for a short ski.

Nomads, Scouts, etc., when so short are not so front balanced. You can go over the bars on the more traditional shaped icelantic skis since they are so short.

YMMV

[mattinak]

Do you think its versitile enough to be a one ski Quiver?

[fat yeti]

I wold not want these as a one ski quiver, they get kicked around a bit as the snow get chopper due to the big tip. Also if it gets too icey they dont like to bit into the snow. Great ski just not a one trick ponney.

[hhski]

I finally dove in a bought a pair. I went with the 173. Im 5.6 160lbs and a level 9 skier. My main ski is a 177 Mantra. The first thing I noticed with these at Soli was they ripped on the groomed. Didnt get them out on the icy stuff but for me they were a pow specific ski. The float is great never got the tips to dive but in really deep stuff I did need to get back a little. The only caveat in the crudded up stuff is no indecisive turning you need to commit to the turn and go. I know the Icelantic guys push the shorter length but the 173s are so quick in the trees I wouldnt give up the extra float for the increased quickness. Im setting up an AT kit and the tips are just too wide for hiking IMO Im going to use my old Mantras or the bro 174. One quiver ski? Depends on what you do. BC only no. Resort 80-90% good snow not alot of ice yes. Ideal no my thought part of a 2 ski quiver.

[tadz89]

Hi, my first post on here.

I found this thread searching for the Shamans of Google.

I used to live in and still ride in Chamonix. This year I have skied Chamonix, Treble Cone - NZ, Hakuba-JP, and now i am spending March till June in Salt Lake City.

Until recently I was sold on the 186 Black Crows Navis. However I spotted, but didn't get to ride, the Icelantic Shamans - the ones with the Eye - at the Alta demo day. The awesome graphics and shape really sparked my interest.

In August I am going for my CSIA 3 so id say im a pretty solid skier, I like charging the deep stuff as much as technical short turns in the icy crud on my slalom skis.
I have ridden gotamas for the past five years or so - the Black, Red and Gold Buddha - with old white Diamir Freerides, I love these skis, and I have skied them to death.

So my questions are...

I gather the Shamans are sick in pow and at carving but would you trust your life to the edges holding when on an icy 45/50 degree Glacier Rond or Les Courtes or in narrow couloirs? Are they too cumbersome to tour on (I am fine with my goats)? Has anyone tried them with Freeride + bindings?


Cheers!
Toby