2 similar but different skis having tried both, I own the Sugars.
I'm comparing the 180 exploder to the 183 Sugar. Try them both if you can. I liked them both but they have very different feels
For me the Sugar was more fun. Its light while being wider/bigger, and has a bit more sidecut if I remember correctly so it still rails on the groomers. It is also very torsionally stiff which is something I think you can attribute to the Atomic construction.
Exploder might be a little more consistent in the pow/crud because of its less sidecut. I didn't get to ski deep stuff with the exploder but could imagine it being a nice, solid, predictable ski. Not sure you could surf it at high speed through the pow like I can the Sugar since its not as wide or long in the lengths I compared. Also wood core / traditional construction which I tend to like.
To me the Atomic construction is pretty sweet because it is torsionally very stiff while being lighter for the girth. Only thing one has to check is the longitudinal flex because if its too stiff it will buck you. For me the Sugar is great. It is a bit setup to tour with as I have been doing, but I don't see the exploder being any lighter.
I'm 5ft 9 and 160 give or take a few pounds. On the sugar's I'm skiing reasonably fast and making big turns. See Bullit's thread about his Big Daddy's for why I like them.
He who has the most fun wins!
Bookmarks