Melbourne.
Member
Alright so, I'm thinking about buying a new pair of Armada Alpha 1 skis. I heard there heavy and don't really carve to well, I just wanted to get a bigger audience's opinion on them and how good they are in the park.
Armada Alpha 1 skiis
- Thread starter Melbourne.
- Start date
j.saaaarela
Active member
I loved my alphas. They carve fine, they just have a bigger turn radius than some others. Going up a size because of the tip/tail rocker also explains a larger turn radius for how short the ski actually rides (if that makes sense... having trouble saying what i mean here).
They weren't particularly heavy either. Again, going up a size could account for the skis feeling heavier. The bindings you choose will also affect how heavy they'll feel. I had Griffons on mine and they rode really light.
They were pretty stiff though, at least compared to a Scratch, a Salomon Dumont from 09, and a Scimitar. They weren't unbearably stiff though.
They weren't particularly heavy either. Again, going up a size could account for the skis feeling heavier. The bindings you choose will also affect how heavy they'll feel. I had Griffons on mine and they rode really light.
They were pretty stiff though, at least compared to a Scratch, a Salomon Dumont from 09, and a Scimitar. They weren't unbearably stiff though.
CarrotSteeze
Member
I ride the Armada Halo which is a slightly softer ski than the Alpha 1, my skis were light as hell till i stuck some look pivots on em haha, armadas skis are known to be real light, plus next years alpha 1's are bigger so some added weight but man are they sick as hell my ski shop let me see em and feel them, caress them, touch them...anyway yea I love my halos, im sure ull love the Alpha 1's goodluck!
Kreech
Active member
I don't know what you're talking about; alpha 1s have the shortest turning radius of almost any (adult) ski on the market. Their longest length, a 182, has around a 15m turning radius, and their shortest length (170) is around 12m! This is because the dimensions are similar to those of a regular ski, but the early taper brings the forward and rearward contact points much closer to the center of the ski - the tip and tail dimensions aren't made smaller in proportion to the amount they're moved toward the center, so they're proportionally larger compared to the skis' center than most skis, making them want to carve super tight turns. Also, a skis' rocker profile has nothing to do with it's turning radius; the radius is determined by the sidecut profile combined with the skis' length. To the OP, alphas are known to be some of the lightest skis on the market. Not only is their actual weight extremely light, but they have a super low swing weight because 1) more of the skis' weight is concentrated towards the center of the ski than a traditional ski, so the tips and tails feel proportionally lighter in relation to the total weight of the ski than your average park ski. 2) the ar50 construction uses a cap in the tips and tails, further reducing weight.
j.saaaarela
Active member
At least in my experience, skis like the Scratch and Dumont made shorter turns much easier than the Alpha. That's just personal experience with only a few other skis to compare with, so I could see how it could be less accurate.
I don't think I said anything about rocker profile affecting turn radius, unless I said something about going up a size because of the rocker. In that case obviously, the longer ski will have longer turning radius.
Anyway, the alphas are a great ski. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another pair if needed.
I don't think I said anything about rocker profile affecting turn radius, unless I said something about going up a size because of the rocker. In that case obviously, the longer ski will have longer turning radius.
Anyway, the alphas are a great ski. I wouldn't hesitate to buy another pair if needed.