If anyone would provide there opinion on the K2 Rictor vs the Dynastar Sultan 85 I would appreciate it.
I have demo'd the K2 Rictor and enjoyed it very much. It handled both hard pack and crud pretty well. Unfortunately, I did not have a powder day to try it in deep snow. I am looking for an all mountain ski that will also handle east coast conditions. I wanted to demo the Sultan 85 at Stowe this year but they were sold out. Given the off season prices on last years' equipment, I was thinking of purchasing new skis. Thus your opinion would be appreciated. Any other recommendations are also welcome.
Thanks!

I'm also interested in this topic. I got to ski the Dynastar Sultan 94 at the demo day at Whitetail and liked it better than some other options in the crud, but clearly there was nothing resembling powder there. I also skied the K2 Aftershock, which is an 86 waist, at Mad River Glen in powder. I was still happier with my 10-year-old, 68 waist, so clearly I haven't found the right ski yet.

Where have you been looking at clearances?

snowsmith the Rictor is more of a frontside on piste ski than the dynastar. Rictor has a slight earlyrise tip, Sultan is more of an all mountain ski w/tip and tail rise. What length are you looking at?

Sure about that? I thought it was conventional camber (may be changing next year.) At least the Sultan 94's I demo'ed this past year.

6th Sense Slicer are the tip/tail rise skis I demo'ed and loved.

UMM you're part right, no tail rocker, more tip rise than the K2 is all.

Thank you everyone for your responses. I demo'd the K2 Rictor with 167 length. It was fun a a steep partially groomed slope. But I was thinking I may need to go longer if I want some flotation in crud and powder. I am thinking 170+, however, I do not want to go back to a ski longer than say a 174.
From what I have read, the Sultan 85 has a small of rocker. I understand the 2012 version has a more substantial rocker. I have heard that the rocker tends to make the ski seem like a shorter ski. Then there is cost...I can buy the Sultan 85 for a few hundred less than the K2 Rictor. Thus $$$$ may be the deciding factor. Unfortunately, I was unable to demo the Sultan 85. I do not usually but a ski that I haven't demo'd.

Thus my quandry.

If you want to save the money i wouldn't be afraid to buy the Sultans.....but you might want wait and demo next seasons Sultan and maybe some Blizzards.

Rocker is for real.

Wider is better.

If you decide on the Rictor, what are your dimensions ?

Snowsmith,

Need way more info to give you some input.

Weight, height, fitness, where you ski, what you ski, how you ski (mellow, agressive, smooth, technical, etc.), skier level, what conditions/terrain/speed envelope you want the best performance on, what you're willing to sacrifice on.

Nowadays, pretty much all skis are very good, it's a matter of finding the right match between skier and ski.

JohnL - Snowsmith skier data:
Height: 5'9.5", Weight: 193, Age: 57
Condition: I am an engineer who sits at a desk 11 hours a day. I do not get enough excercise as a result.
Ski days per year: 25 -30
Location: Hidden Valley, Seven Springs and Wisp, primarilly. One or two week long trips per year - one out west and one to New England. Occasional night skiing at Liberty and Rountop.
Skiing: I am what I would say is an advanced skier. Expert to me is someone who skis 50+ days a year on some gnarly steep slopes or mogul runs. I'll ski any slope that is not too moguled up regardless of pitch. Moguls give me trouble, although I am getting better. After tiring myself out on the steep stuff, I finish my ski day on the blue cruisers. I alternate my style from GS type long radius turns to short radius 'hop' turns depending on what I am in the mood for. I seem to be skiing moderately fast in relation to other skiers on the mountain since I seem to be skiing faster than most of them but slower than a few. I ski well in crud and powder but I could get better with more practice with powder (scarce here in the east)

Hopefully that is enough info.
THank you for your input

Both skis are highly rated on Peter K's site for the 2011 models. You really can't go wrong with either ski and they are in the same category. At 197 lbs, I'd be surprised if you like a ski shorter than 170.

I don't know where Jimmy is coming from wrt the early rise comparisons. All skis in K2's 2011 line are rockered. Peter K's site wonders if the Sultan 85's really are "early rise" since they've been pretty much unchanged for several years. Maybe more marketing than any thing else.

Dunno on 2012 skis.

Per the reviews for 2011.
Ice: K2 is better
Powder: Dynastar is better
But they seem to be pretty comparable skis.

I demo'ed the Dynastar 94s and 6th Sense Slicers at Whitetail this past January. (Wider skis than the ones you're looking at.) Both are kick butt skis. Dynastar makes some great skis.

Oh no...you add 4 pounds to my already robust figure!

I read the reviews on Peter K's web site and they both sounded good. But it sounds like the Sultan 85's with a length of 174 is the way to go. I can use my Head Monsters on icy days.

Thanks for the advice!

Who/what is this Peter K that you speak of???

Peter's a great guy. I have emailed him questions and he calls me on the phone to give me answers. They have a great ski review section on that web site. I bought the Sultan 85's and can't wait to try them. I see the snow guns are starting up so it should be soon.

I tried the K2 Rictor's and they are a fun ski, but I have been told the Sultan 85's are a more versatile. I wish I could have demo'd them but what the hell.

Thanks guys! Just bought a subscription.

I'm looking at the Sultan 85 too. I have the legend 8000 but am thinking of passing them on to my rapidly growing son who needs new skis and getting the 85's for myself.

I have the sultans and luv them! I think I had more fun on them last year then any ski to date. I was surprised at how stable they were at speed as well. Not a lot of front end chatter like some of the other wide skis and actually power through the bumps pretty good as well. Do get a little squirrelly in the ice.

Bumps, did you have the Sultan 85's or 80's?

I went wide, i have 94s. I tend to ski a shorter ski so went with 164s. I have 8800's and like sultan better. I tried a lot of different skis last year and still like the feel of dynstars. Many other were just to soft for my style and hand no spring. If I remember right the sultans have a hybrid rocker camber thing going on that helps give them that spring but works well in the deep stuff as well. The biggest problem w/ 94s is the width limits binding selections. I have the largest rossingnol they have on mine. I thought I would still ski the 8800's but just ended up having he 94's as my daily ski. I just seem to be able to find every inch of powder with these things and the difference in stability at speed is just amazing to me.

I'm looking to get a pair of demo "2012 Dynastar Legend Sultan 85 Skis (172 cm)" . They are described as All Mountain Rocker. I'm concerned about getting rockers considering that most of my skiing is done here. I do get to CO and VT for a week each year. So do folks love their rockers here on groomed / hard pack? Or am I wasting money on something I will very rarely get to take advantage of. The ski shop in CO say it does well on hard stuff, but we all know what those spoiled skiers in CO consider an icy slope.

I consider myself an intermediate, ski anything except bumps. I am 6'0 , 165 lbs.

That ski is more of a traditional camber with an early rise or rockered tip. I think there's some misunderstanding that rocker is for deep snow. 85mm underfoot is a "skinny" ski these days. My limited experience on rockered skis, 25 days or so on Blizzard One's and two runs on a pair of 2013 Blizzard Magnum 8.0ti, tells me that they love to turn. Edge grip on the One's on hard snow would be impressive for a narrower ski, amazing for a 98. You might look at something a bit longer??