Jump to content

 

Welcome to TheMalibuCrew!

As a guest, you are welcome to poke around and view the majority of the content that we have to offer, but in order to post, search, contact members, and get full use out of the website you will need to Register for an Account. It's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the TheMalibuCrew Family today!

Sign in to follow this  
coldwater-echelon

time to upgrade

Recommended Posts

coldwater-echelon

I'm looking at a new ski and would like any opinions or comments about what I should buy. The two choices are a 2005 HO vengeance 69" or a 2005 HO triumph 67" or 69". I weigh 185 lbs, usually ride 15 off @ 28 to 32 mph, and spend 1/2 my time free skiing and the other half in the course. I have ridden the vengeance before which is somewhat of a shaped ski. Hopefully some one on here has ridden these skis too. Any info or opinions would be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the guys in my group skis the Vengeance and he loves it. It's a little wider body ski. He is a 32 MPH skier and running 28 off. There's picture of him in my gallery in the Weekend Warrior pictures. He's the guy with the shorty suit and grey beard.

From what you have described, I think that would be a very comfortable ski for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
John M

Coldwater,

I may be able to add something because my family uses these skis.

I ski on a 2004 69" Vengeance and my 13 year old son skis on a 2006 65" Triumph. My 15 year old son skis a 67" CDX. I am 6'4 215, the younger boy is 5'10, 135# and the older boy is 6'3", 195#. Both boys are strong footers and skiers. We don't have a course on our lake but we ski aggressively at 15 or 22 off along the calm shore. We put 100 hours on the boat this summer.

My first comment is that a 69" ski seems too long for you. The younger boy was sharing the 67" CDX with his older brother and was struggling to turn. We bought him the 65" Triumph this summer and now he makes nice deep carved turns with the water breaking in front of the front boot and good posture. I think the difference was the correct ski length. The 69" is a pretty good length for me. The 67" CDX seems a little short for me.

The Triumph and Vengeance seem similar to me. Both skis have a similar appearance to the CDX but are slightly wider. The Vengeance is about 1/2" wider than the CDX. The Vengeance is an intermediate ski which is stable, turns slowly and provides for a nice carved turn. I removed the wing and the Vengeance ski turns quicker without it. The Triumph seems to perform much the same as the Vengeance.

Let me describe the CDX as a frame of reference. The CDX is a very quick ski which turns immediately. To me, the CDX feels unstable relative to the Vengeance. My older boy is aggressive and skis beautifully with the CDX. Deep carved turns at 22 off @ 34mph. As I improve, I hope to move to a longer CDX-type ski.

I summary, the Triumph and Vengeance are good skis for an intermediate + level skier. They do not perform like a CDX grade ski based on my observations. I think the most important thing is to get the right size ski.

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...