My wife got a pair of the Moment Sierra’s last year and after spending just day on them, promptly came home and sold her Line Pandoras, because she had just found her perfect ski, SHE LOVES THEM. It’s good to see other people realize what I discovered 6 years ago, That Moment makes the best skis in the world
Hi Julie —
I read a lot of your reviews and am trying to decide between the Sierra’s or the Blizzard Sheevas to be my all-mtn downhill ski. I ski 171 Atomic Access skis as my touring ski – but this season I have been ripping on them inbounds as my rock skis. I over power them a little bit (with my softer touring boots and they are pretty soft…) I have Armada VJJs for powder — so I want a good ski that’s all mountain for 4 inches or less of snow — most days. I want a ski I can push hard on steeper, tighter terrain and also rip groomers on (not a racer just like to ski hard.). I live in the PNW so something that will cut through crud without getting tossed all over the place is key — but I spend quite a bit of time in SLC / Tetons on hard pack.
Think the Sheeva’s will stand up to charging hard or will they be too soft? Trying to find a deal on them now end of season deals — and not really seeing the Sierra’s on good sale anywhere.
Thanks!
Pam
Hi Pam,
Thanks so much for reading! I think the Sheeva and Sierra would both be excellent choices for what you’re looking for. I think you’d be able to ski both hard, although I did find the Sierra to ski a little better on hardpack (stronger edge hold and more fun to carve on), and it’s also a bit narrower and more fun on lower snow days. If you really like to carve, I’d say the Sierra wins, but if you don’t mind as lively of a carver, you’d be really happy on the Sheeva too (it still carves well, just isn’t quite as exciting).
If you’re looking for a ski that is more hard-snow oriented but is fun to ski all around the mountain, you also might think about the Blizzard Samba or the Volkl Aura (which we have reviews on). They have flatter tails (the Aura now has full rocker, but it’s pretty subtle in the tail), and are really capable in firmer conditions and fun on groomers. They won’t be quite as good in soft snow or have as playful of a feel as either the Sierra or the Sheeva, but feel a bit damper and stronger in tough conditions. I hope this is helpful and let me know if you have any other questions!
Julia
Hi Julia
What length would u recomend for the sierras ? Im 169 tall and this will be my first kinda fat ski. Ive mainly been skiing dedicated alpin skis before and therefore not used to the longer skis. I will be skiing tree-skiing, and just have this as my go to when i dont know the conditions for the day, and just want to have a bit of fun.
Will the 162 be to short for me. Im thinking of just going with the 172 and hoping i’ll get used to the length.
Im a good trained technical skier with a limited experience in the backcountry.
Curious if anyone on the Blister team has tried the Hot Mess and how you would compare the Hot Mess with the Sierra?
My wife got a pair of the Moment Sierra’s last year and after spending just day on them, promptly came home and sold her Line Pandoras, because she had just found her perfect ski, SHE LOVES THEM. It’s good to see other people realize what I discovered 6 years ago, That Moment makes the best skis in the world
Hi Julie —
I read a lot of your reviews and am trying to decide between the Sierra’s or the Blizzard Sheevas to be my all-mtn downhill ski. I ski 171 Atomic Access skis as my touring ski – but this season I have been ripping on them inbounds as my rock skis. I over power them a little bit (with my softer touring boots and they are pretty soft…) I have Armada VJJs for powder — so I want a good ski that’s all mountain for 4 inches or less of snow — most days. I want a ski I can push hard on steeper, tighter terrain and also rip groomers on (not a racer just like to ski hard.). I live in the PNW so something that will cut through crud without getting tossed all over the place is key — but I spend quite a bit of time in SLC / Tetons on hard pack.
Think the Sheeva’s will stand up to charging hard or will they be too soft? Trying to find a deal on them now end of season deals — and not really seeing the Sierra’s on good sale anywhere.
Thanks!
Pam
Hi Pam,
Thanks so much for reading! I think the Sheeva and Sierra would both be excellent choices for what you’re looking for. I think you’d be able to ski both hard, although I did find the Sierra to ski a little better on hardpack (stronger edge hold and more fun to carve on), and it’s also a bit narrower and more fun on lower snow days. If you really like to carve, I’d say the Sierra wins, but if you don’t mind as lively of a carver, you’d be really happy on the Sheeva too (it still carves well, just isn’t quite as exciting).
If you’re looking for a ski that is more hard-snow oriented but is fun to ski all around the mountain, you also might think about the Blizzard Samba or the Volkl Aura (which we have reviews on). They have flatter tails (the Aura now has full rocker, but it’s pretty subtle in the tail), and are really capable in firmer conditions and fun on groomers. They won’t be quite as good in soft snow or have as playful of a feel as either the Sierra or the Sheeva, but feel a bit damper and stronger in tough conditions. I hope this is helpful and let me know if you have any other questions!
Julia
Hi Julia
What length would u recomend for the sierras ? Im 169 tall and this will be my first kinda fat ski. Ive mainly been skiing dedicated alpin skis before and therefore not used to the longer skis. I will be skiing tree-skiing, and just have this as my go to when i dont know the conditions for the day, and just want to have a bit of fun.
Will the 162 be to short for me. Im thinking of just going with the 172 and hoping i’ll get used to the length.
Im a good trained technical skier with a limited experience in the backcountry.
Curious if anyone on the Blister team has tried the Hot Mess and how you would compare the Hot Mess with the Sierra?