Last winter I had the chance to test the Q7.8, same length, and felt extremely safe and confident on it. How would you describe the difference between the 7.8 vs the 9.8? Is there any remarkable at all?
The carbon plates vs. the steel plates in the revoshock system is the biggest difference. The 9.8 is smoother, heftier, and less springy than the 7.8. I don't think the performance is that much difference, it's more in how the ski feels and reacts to the snow--quicker and more agile in the 7.8, smoother and more powerful in the 9.8
Hi, how do you compare Atomic Q9.8 against the HEAD e-Rally? I have been looking for both the skies and in doubt which to buy. Is the more cost off about 250 $ worth spending on the Q9.8 against e-Rally ? And if so, would you recommend to choose a shorter length Q9.8 instead off the normal length (Iam 189 cm. and 95 kg.)
The Rally has some more energy to it while the Atomic feels like it wants to make one specific type of carved turn. I like the agility and pop out of the Rally. I'd go shorter on skis like this.
Great introduction! I'm about to buy a new pair of skis. The Head Supershape e-Rally, Atomic Q9 and Q9.8 are under my consideration. But I'm not sure which one to choose. I have never had skis wider than 78mm under my foot and am not really sure, if it's easier to turn or control the skies with 84mm. I'm 175cm, 75kg and live in areas, where the pist conditions get bad afternoon. What would you recommend plz?
When you go wider, you do remove some quickness, but if you find yourself in choppier snow conditions, even the degraded groomers in the afternoon, you do benefit from the wider platform. I say go wider and give it a shot--more confidence and balance. Q9.8 is an awesome ski, and would go a bit shorter with the 166 to make up for the width.
@Der.Prinz.Eisenherz, which ski did you decide for eventually? I am in sitting in the same boat, torn between Q9 and Q9.8, about the same height and weight as you. Did you follow the advice and go for the Q9.8 in 166cm?
@@wysius1 I went for the e-Rally 156cm. Just because I found a sensational offer around x-mas times, which saved me a few hundred Euros. The e-Rally got some slalom genes in it so, I decided to get a shorter one. But I don't regret the choice at all. Have been skiing them for about 10 days. It's given me lots of confidence and most importantly, I could improve my skills from day one. Meanwhile, I met a few skiers with the Q9 and asked them about their own experiences. The most interesting thing was, none of them was really super excited. Indeed, the most common comment was: we don't feel any difference at all! That's why I started to believe that there are not really that much differences btw. the Head and Atomic. At least not for an advanced skier. Maybe at higher levels like experts. Btw, my brother got the same body type and ski level as me. He went for the e-Magnum and was also super excited. Maybe you give them a try too.
Hi! Im currently skiing a 2017 atomic vantage 90cti 176. I love them but they are getting worn out. Do you think this 9.8 in 181 could be a good replacement? Im 31 191 cm tall and 105kg.
Hey, I am currently using atomic x7 168cm (I am 188cm tall) and I like short and medium curving. Would you suggest buying this as an upgrade and will it suite my style or would you recommend something else? Thanks
The Q9.8 sounds great due to the mix of width underfoot and shorter radius. It's a bit wider than the X7, but you're getting more versatility and soft snow performance as a result.
Hi, how do you compare this against the deacon 84? As the Deacon 84 has a rocker do you think riding the q9 a little bit shorter: Deacon 177 cm vs Q9 173 cm ? I am 1.83 and 100 kg
The Q9 feels more like a dedicated race carver with a lot of power and edge grip. Deacon 84 is more versatile and all-mountain oriented. If you're spending most of your time on trail and in a carved turn, the Atomic is more planted and confident.
Last winter I had the chance to test the Q7.8, same length, and felt extremely safe and confident on it. How would you describe the difference between the 7.8 vs the 9.8? Is there any remarkable at all?
The carbon plates vs. the steel plates in the revoshock system is the biggest difference. The 9.8 is smoother, heftier, and less springy than the 7.8. I don't think the performance is that much difference, it's more in how the ski feels and reacts to the snow--quicker and more agile in the 7.8, smoother and more powerful in the 9.8
@@SkiEssentials Bob, Jeff, thank you so much!
Hi, how do you compare Atomic Q9.8 against the HEAD e-Rally? I have been looking for both the skies and in doubt which to buy. Is the more cost off about 250 $ worth spending on the Q9.8 against e-Rally ? And if so, would you recommend to choose a shorter length Q9.8 instead off the normal length (Iam 189 cm. and 95 kg.)
The Rally has some more energy to it while the Atomic feels like it wants to make one specific type of carved turn. I like the agility and pop out of the Rally. I'd go shorter on skis like this.
Great introduction! I'm about to buy a new pair of skis. The Head Supershape e-Rally, Atomic Q9 and Q9.8 are under my consideration. But I'm not sure which one to choose. I have never had skis wider than 78mm under my foot and am not really sure, if it's easier to turn or control the skies with 84mm. I'm 175cm, 75kg and live in areas, where the pist conditions get bad afternoon. What would you recommend plz?
When you go wider, you do remove some quickness, but if you find yourself in choppier snow conditions, even the degraded groomers in the afternoon, you do benefit from the wider platform. I say go wider and give it a shot--more confidence and balance. Q9.8 is an awesome ski, and would go a bit shorter with the 166 to make up for the width.
@Der.Prinz.Eisenherz, which ski did you decide for eventually? I am in sitting in the same boat, torn between Q9 and Q9.8, about the same height and weight as you. Did you follow the advice and go for the Q9.8 in 166cm?
@@wysius1 I went for the e-Rally 156cm. Just because I found a sensational offer around x-mas times, which saved me a few hundred Euros. The e-Rally got some slalom genes in it so, I decided to get a shorter one. But I don't regret the choice at all. Have been skiing them for about 10 days. It's given me lots of confidence and most importantly, I could improve my skills from day one. Meanwhile, I met a few skiers with the Q9 and asked them about their own experiences. The most interesting thing was, none of them was really super excited. Indeed, the most common comment was: we don't feel any difference at all! That's why I started to believe that there are not really that much differences btw. the Head and Atomic. At least not for an advanced skier. Maybe at higher levels like experts. Btw, my brother got the same body type and ski level as me. He went for the e-Magnum and was also super excited. Maybe you give them a try too.
Hi!
Im currently skiing a 2017 atomic vantage 90cti 176. I love them but they are getting worn out. Do you think this 9.8 in 181 could be a good replacement? Im 31 191 cm tall and 105kg.
It's a bit more front side oriented, but if you spend most of your time on trail then it's a great replacement! I'd say the 181 is the way to go.
ATOMIC REDSTER Q6 ? (Binding M12 GW)
Is it useful for curving?
Yup! It's a bit lower of a build than the 9.8, but the 6 is just fine for more moderate skiing.
@@SkiEssentials Whats the best skis for slalom carving?
@@Wabey-sabey www.skiessentials.com/2024-ski-test/skis/2024-rossignol-hero-master-st
Hey, I am currently using atomic x7 168cm (I am 188cm tall) and I like short and medium curving. Would you suggest buying this as an upgrade and will it suite my style or would you recommend something else? Thanks
The Q9.8 sounds great due to the mix of width underfoot and shorter radius. It's a bit wider than the X7, but you're getting more versatility and soft snow performance as a result.
@@SkiEssentials thanks a lot for response! Do you recommend this one as the best or S9 or something else? Thank you again!
Hi, how do you compare this against the deacon 84? As the Deacon 84 has a rocker do you think riding the q9 a little bit shorter: Deacon 177 cm vs Q9 173 cm ? I am 1.83 and 100 kg
The Q9 feels more like a dedicated race carver with a lot of power and edge grip. Deacon 84 is more versatile and all-mountain oriented. If you're spending most of your time on trail and in a carved turn, the Atomic is more planted and confident.