What is this, a comparison between Volkl's RTM 81 and another RTM 81? What is this? Well actually it is a review of the original RTM 81 with no camber and their new RTM 81 which has camber and their new 3D Ridge contstruction.
I am able to make this comparison as I just sold my original RTM 81's in a 171 length and replaced them with the new ones in the 170 length and tried them yesterday for some late season skiing at Holiday Valley yesterday. Sidecuts are very similar with an almost identical turn radius of 16.1.
First let me say that I loved the original RTM's. I am a believer in the 80mm width for most conditions here in the midwest and east where all of my local skiing is done. That ski ripped nice arcs, held on hardpack and was decent in bumps. It was my go to ski for the past 4-5 seasons. When an opportunity to get a great late season deal at the same time a friend said he would buy my old ones made the decision easy.
The first thing I noticed was how light and nimble the new 3D Ridge construction feels on your feet. Making a mere thought of turning enough to turn the skis. So far so good. The snow conditions this day was mostly spring softer snow after a recent dump with a layer of hard pack underneath. About 1/2 of the slopes were groomed the other 1/2 left over freshies from a day or two earlier. On the groomers these skis railed well and cut clean arcs just as the originals, but with a lighter feeling which took getting use to.
On the broken soft snow on the un-groomed is where these skis really shined. Where the heavier originals cut and plowed well through soft crud, these new ones just skimmed the top as if I was floating on powder. They actually surprised me how well they handled that softer broken snow, reminding me of a less powerful Bonafide that I had just skied in Alta in similar conditions.
Then I went into some bumps. As much as I liked the original in bumps, these felt better. Quicker turning and more controllable is how they felt. I really had fun with them in both intermediate and expert bump hills.
The only area where I felt the originals were better was in high speed stability. The newer lighter 81's only 1mm shorter at 170 vs 171, felt 5-7 mm shorter, feeling not as stable as my speeds increased on bomber hills. I now wonder if the 177 would have been a better choice, but I think the better versatility everywhere else will make up for that on deficit. Of courses my originals are gone and the new ones are paid for, so what else am I going to do? LOL
Looking forward to skiing these in other conditions to continue my self analysis
Rick G.
I am able to make this comparison as I just sold my original RTM 81's in a 171 length and replaced them with the new ones in the 170 length and tried them yesterday for some late season skiing at Holiday Valley yesterday. Sidecuts are very similar with an almost identical turn radius of 16.1.
First let me say that I loved the original RTM's. I am a believer in the 80mm width for most conditions here in the midwest and east where all of my local skiing is done. That ski ripped nice arcs, held on hardpack and was decent in bumps. It was my go to ski for the past 4-5 seasons. When an opportunity to get a great late season deal at the same time a friend said he would buy my old ones made the decision easy.
The first thing I noticed was how light and nimble the new 3D Ridge construction feels on your feet. Making a mere thought of turning enough to turn the skis. So far so good. The snow conditions this day was mostly spring softer snow after a recent dump with a layer of hard pack underneath. About 1/2 of the slopes were groomed the other 1/2 left over freshies from a day or two earlier. On the groomers these skis railed well and cut clean arcs just as the originals, but with a lighter feeling which took getting use to.
On the broken soft snow on the un-groomed is where these skis really shined. Where the heavier originals cut and plowed well through soft crud, these new ones just skimmed the top as if I was floating on powder. They actually surprised me how well they handled that softer broken snow, reminding me of a less powerful Bonafide that I had just skied in Alta in similar conditions.
Then I went into some bumps. As much as I liked the original in bumps, these felt better. Quicker turning and more controllable is how they felt. I really had fun with them in both intermediate and expert bump hills.
The only area where I felt the originals were better was in high speed stability. The newer lighter 81's only 1mm shorter at 170 vs 171, felt 5-7 mm shorter, feeling not as stable as my speeds increased on bomber hills. I now wonder if the 177 would have been a better choice, but I think the better versatility everywhere else will make up for that on deficit. Of courses my originals are gone and the new ones are paid for, so what else am I going to do? LOL
Looking forward to skiing these in other conditions to continue my self analysis
Rick G.
). I found it an excellent hard groomer ski. It didn't quite have the grip strength of my old SCs at 10/10ths but for 80% of my skiing it was great, so easy to bend into a turn!
