# Any opinions on the Nordica Top Fuel Nitrous?



## Grassi21 (Dec 10, 2007)

I've been shopping around quite a bit lately.  I've been look at the Volkl AC 20 and 30, Rossi B2, and now these Nordica Top Fuel Nitrous.  

I'm 5'7" and tip the scales at 205 (should be 190/195).  I'm a sold intermediate and looking to upgrade from the mere 67 underfoot.  I'm looking for something with more girth but still room  (skill wise) to grow into.  I want something that will perform at speed, in the crud, and the occasional East coast pow day, but will also let me lay-off a bit and cruise with the wife (this is the main reason why I've shied away from the AC 30 as of late).  The sales rep at the shop also recommended the Salomon X Wing.  But after talking more he felt the Nordica might be a good compromise between the X Wing and AC 30.


----------



## RISkier (Dec 10, 2007)

This is not very a very definitive review.  I just bought a pair of 170s.  I found a pair of demos that I got for relatively little money and said what the heck.  I had used a pair of K2 Apache Recons for a day in UT last year and had read good reviews of the Nitrous (very similar dimensions).  I did a demo last year at Wachusett.  Did 3 runs.  I liked them but hard to tell a lot on firm snow at Wachusett.  Liked them enough that I really wanted to try them again but not enough to spend the going rate for new.  So when I I found these I snapped them up.  My limited experience is that they like medium and longer radius turns better than real short turns, though they will skid without problem.  They seem fairly forgiving and you can ski them slow.  I consider myself an advancing intermediate with lots to learn.  And I'm wanting to learn more off piste skiing and thought a ski like this should give me more versitility.  Doesn't seem like a ski that will quickly punish you if you get a little in the back seat.  Haven't had a chance to try the new ones so I really can't give a review based on much more than early impressions.  If you can find some to demo I think it would be pretty suitable for what you seem to be looking for.


----------



## Grassi21 (Dec 10, 2007)

RISkier said:


> This is not very a very definitive review.  I just bought a pair of 170s.  I found a pair of demos that I got for relatively little money and said what the heck.  I had used a pair of K2 Apache Recons for a day in UT last year and had read good reviews of the Nitrous (very similar dimensions).  I did a demo last year at Wachusett.  Did 3 runs.  I liked them but hard to tell a lot on firm snow at Wachusett.  Liked them enough that I really wanted to try them again but not enough to spend the going rate for new.  So when I I found these I snapped them up.  My limited experience is that they like medium and longer radius turns better than real short turns, though they will skid without problem.  They seem fairly forgiving and you can ski them slow.  I consider myself an advancing intermediate with lots to learn.  And I'm wanting to learn more off piste skiing and thought a ski like this should give me more versitility.  Doesn't seem like a ski that will quickly punish you if you get a little in the back seat.  Haven't had a chance to try the new ones so I really can't give a review based on much more than early impressions.  If you can find some to demo I think it would be pretty suitable for what you seem to be looking for.



Very helpful thanks.  Sounds like the kind of skiing I want to be doing.  I will still have my Heads that I can use to play in the bumps (shorter, softer, narrow underfoot).


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 11, 2007)

You'll love them---I have the Top Fuels (very similar think just a little stiffer) and they're best ski I've ever been on. Why I say that is because they truly can do it all. They're wicked stable at high speeds, with just a little work can navigate bumps, GREAT inda woods -n- POW, but where they really show off is in the crap. They turn shit snow into groomers to the point where it's almost funny. Enjoy.


----------



## Grassi21 (Dec 11, 2007)

Trigger pulled!  I pick em up on Thursday and ski them at Hunter on Friday.  X Mas is coming early this year!

Thanks for the input guys.


----------



## Greg (Dec 11, 2007)

Grassi21 said:


> Trigger pulled!  I pick em up on Thursday and ski them at Hunter on Friday.  X Mas is coming early this year!
> 
> Thanks for the input guys.



Nice! Congrats.


----------



## Grassi21 (Dec 11, 2007)

Greg said:


> Nice! Congrats.



It was the ability to ease off and cruise a bit that made me pick these over the AC 30.  The Nordicas are also slightly wider underfoot.  I went with the 162 instead of the 170.


----------



## bvibert (Dec 11, 2007)

Congrats on the new skis.  I'm sure you'll like them.  I demo'd a pair of Hot Rod Modified's last year and liked them quite a bit.


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 12, 2007)

Welcome to the Nordica club--you wont be dissapointed


----------



## Greg (Dec 12, 2007)

campgottagopee said:


> Welcome to the Nordica club--you wont be dissapointed



He'll make HPD proud...


----------



## Grassi21 (Dec 12, 2007)

Greg said:


> He'll make HPD proud...



I rock some Nordica Beasts on feet as well.  :beer:


----------



## Greg (Dec 12, 2007)

Grassi21 said:


> I rock some Nordica Beasts on feet as well.  :beer:



Don't you want to give them a spin tomorrow night...?


----------



## wa-loaf (Dec 12, 2007)

Greg said:


> He'll make HPD proud...



Yes, I'm suprised he didn't chime in here. He's usually quick to jump into any Nordica conversation.


----------



## bigbog (Dec 13, 2007)

*.....Nitrous...*

Nice ski Grassi21,
I love that XBS b_system as well.


----------



## Rook (Dec 15, 2007)

Hot Rod skier chiming in.  Great ski for all conditions,  but a little tricky in the bumps.   I take a conservative line when on the hot rods in the bumps, but everywhere else its a lot of fun to let them rip.


----------



## Grassi21 (Dec 15, 2007)

Rook said:


> Hot Rod skier chiming in.  Great ski for all conditions,  but a little tricky in the bumps.   I take a conservative line when on the hot rods in the bumps, but everywhere else its a lot of fun to let them rip.



they worked great on friday.  pounded through the crud and held a nice edge.  i'm very pleased with my purchase.


----------



## RISkier (Dec 16, 2007)

Grassi21 said:


> they worked great on friday.  pounded through the crud and held a nice edge.  i'm very pleased with my purchase.



Glad to hear that.  Haven't had a chance to get back out on mine and likely won't for while since next weekend is out.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Dec 19, 2007)

wa-loaf said:


> Yes, I'm suprised he didn't chime in here. He's usually quick to jump into any Nordica conversation.




True Dat, I didn't see it until today. I have a pair of Nitrous and love them. One of the most verstile skis in the Nordica line up. My Nordica quiver was the Hellcat, Top Fuel, Mach 3 Power, and SM 14. So as you can see I like a stiff ski. All have the titamium layers. 

So anyways, my oldest son had the Nitrous and Elimantors. I have always told him you need at least one stiff ski in the NE, but he's a mogal, tree, short turn freak and he didn't want to hear it. So finally he comes around and wants a pair of TFs. I don't want to see him spend the money so I trade him my TFs for his Nitrous.

Dang, I love the Nitrous. Quick, great in trees, good bump ski for the width and pretty stable at speed for a wood core with no metal. They have a little shake when you are really laying out big GS turns, but I have my Mach 3 Powers for those days.

Anyways great choice, fun, fun, fun ski. They pratically turn themselves.


----------



## Grassi21 (Dec 19, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> True Dat, I didn't see it until today. I have a pair of Nitrous and love them. One of the most verstile skis in the Nordica line up. My Nordica quiver was the Hellcat, Top Fuel, Mach 3 Power, and SM 14. So as you can see I like a stiff ski. All have the titamium layers.
> 
> So anyways, my oldest son had the Nitrous and Elimantors. I have always told him you need at least one stiff ski in the NE, but he's a mogal, tree, short turn freak and he didn't want to hear it. So finally he comes around and wants a pair of TFs. I don't want to see him spend the money so I trade him my TFs for his Nitrous.
> 
> ...



More reassurance that I made a good decision.  Thanks HPD.  I loved these boards on day 1.  And the funny thing is the one small gripe you have about making big GS turns is not an issue because I rarely, if never, turn in that fashion.


----------



## Paul (Dec 19, 2007)

Grassi21 said:


> More reassurance that I made a good decision.  Thanks HPD.  I loved these boards on day 1.  And the funny thing is the one small gripe you have about making big GS turns is not an issue because I rarely, if never, turn in that fashion.



I've been eyeing those as well. Tell me more...tell me more....







Others that are on the Demo short-list:
Atomic Nomad Whiteout / Crimson - I have Atomics now. I do like them.
Fischer Watea
Salomon X-Wing 10
K2 Apache Recon


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Dec 19, 2007)

Paul said:


> I've been eyeing those as well. Tell me more...tell me more....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'd be more then happy to tell you more.

First tell me your weight, level of ability, terrain you ski the most and what are the most important characteristics you are looking for in a ski.

I rep for Nordica so I know quite a bit about their line. I won't be able to help much with the other skis on your demo list, but hopefully others will be in the know. This could be a real fun thread. :-D


----------



## Grassi21 (Dec 19, 2007)

RISkier said:


> This is not very a very definitive review.  I just bought a pair of 170s.  I found a pair of demos that I got for relatively little money and said what the heck.  I had used a pair of K2 Apache Recons for a day in UT last year and had read good reviews of the Nitrous (very similar dimensions).  I did a demo last year at Wachusett.  Did 3 runs.  I liked them but hard to tell a lot on firm snow at Wachusett.  Liked them enough that I really wanted to try them again but not enough to spend the going rate for new.  So when I I found these I snapped them up.  My limited experience is that they like medium and longer radius turns better than real short turns, though they will skid without problem.  They seem fairly forgiving and you can ski them slow.  I consider myself an advancing intermediate with lots to learn.  And I'm wanting to learn more off piste skiing and thought a ski like this should give me more versitility.  Doesn't seem like a ski that will quickly punish you if you get a little in the back seat.  Haven't had a chance to try the new ones so I really can't give a review based on much more than early impressions.  If you can find some to demo I think it would be pretty suitable for what you seem to be looking for.



This assessment made me feel confident that the skis would fit my current style.



highpeaksdrifter said:


> True Dat, I didn't see it until today. I have a pair of Nitrous and love them. One of the most verstile skis in the Nordica line up. My Nordica quiver was the Hellcat, Top Fuel, Mach 3 Power, and SM 14. So as you can see I like a stiff ski. All have the titamium layers.
> 
> So anyways, my oldest son had the Nitrous and Elimantors. I have always told him you need at least one stiff ski in the NE, but he's a mogal, tree, short turn freak and he didn't want to hear it. So finally he comes around and wants a pair of TFs. I don't want to see him spend the money so I trade him my TFs for his Nitrous.
> 
> ...



This assessment made me feel confident that the skis will be able to handle the type of skiing I want to do more.

Hunter was covered in a slightly sticky coating of powder on Friday and the skis performed well.  As the day went on they pounded the crud.  As bumps and push piles formed they handled them well will my limited bump technique.

Interesting we were both have/had a similar shopping list (I wasn't considering the Atomic).  If my shop carried the Watea or the Rossi B2 I would have had a tougher decision.


----------



## Paul (Dec 19, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> I'd be more then happy to tell you more.
> 
> First tell me your weight, level of ability, terrain you ski the most and what are the most important characteristics you are looking for in a ski.
> 
> I rep for Nordica so I know quite a bit about their line. I won't be able to help much with the other skis on your demo list, but hopefully others will be in the know. This could be a real fun thread. :-D



Good point...

5' 7" 152lbs Advanced Intermediate. Right now I'm on Atomic C9s which are nice for Groomers, but little else. I think they're about a 67 underfoot. Looking for something wider that will be able to edge the hardest hardpack (like a narrow waist would) but able to float in crud and light NE Pow. I'm not a "bump skier" per se, but would like the ability to not have to avoid them. IOW, I like to go to the top of a mtn. and take whichever trail I end-up on without having to plan ahead. I'd like to get into the trees, but am not necessarily heading out to the back-country just yet. I do like the feel of the narrow-waist carving skis, yet they also seem limited to conditions. I'm looking for a ski that will begin to expand the terrain a bit, but not one that can't go back to nice arcs on the groomers. Also, want to be able to continue to improve on steeps and at higher speeds, but won't get too pissed off when I'm cruising with the 7 yr. old. 

Yeah, the proverbial One Ski Quiver for the aspiring Expert. I do still have the Atomics, so I will keep those for the days when there is little to no chance of anything but flat, hard trails. I guess the new ski should be about a 70/30 or 60/40 crud-pow / groomed type.

This is shaping-up to at least be a lively thread.;-)


----------



## Grassi21 (Dec 19, 2007)

Paul said:


> Good point...
> 
> 5' 7" 152lbs Advanced Intermediate. Right now I'm on Atomic C9s which are nice for Groomers, but little else. I think they're about a 67 underfoot. Looking for something wider that will be able to edge the hardest hardpack (like a narrow waist would) but able to float in crud and light NE Pow. I'm not a "bump skier" per se, but would like the ability to not have to avoid them. IOW, I like to go to the top of a mtn. and take whichever trail I end-up on without having to plan ahead. I'd like to get into the trees, but am not necessarily heading out to the back-country just yet. I do like the feel of the narrow-waist carving skis, yet they also seem limited to conditions. I'm looking for a ski that will begin to expand the terrain a bit, but not one that can't go back to nice arcs on the groomers. Also, want to be able to continue to improve on steeps and at higher speeds, but won't get too pissed off when I'm cruising with the 7 yr. old.
> 
> ...



How about the Nordica Hot Rod Nitrous? ;-)


----------



## Paul (Dec 19, 2007)

Nahhhh.... I was thinking more of the Top Fuels. ;-):-D


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Dec 19, 2007)

Paul said:


> Good point...
> 
> 5' 7" 152lbs Advanced Intermediate. Right now I'm on Atomic C9s which are nice for Groomers, but little else. I think they're about a 67 underfoot. Looking for something wider that will be able to edge the hardest hardpack (like a narrow waist would) but able to float in crud and light NE Pow. I'm not a "bump skier" per se, but would like the ability to not have to avoid them. IOW, I like to go to the top of a mtn. and take whichever trail I end-up on without having to plan ahead. I'd like to get into the trees, but am not necessarily heading out to the back-country just yet. I do like the feel of the narrow-waist carving skis, yet they also seem limited to conditions. I'm looking for a ski that will begin to expand the terrain a bit, but not one that can't go back to nice arcs on the groomers. Also, want to be able to continue to improve on steeps and at higher speeds, but won't get too pissed off when I'm cruising with the 7 yr. old.
> 
> ...



Let's see...we need a ski for all conditions, all terrain, holds a great edge, but can float on powder, and stable at speed for an advanced intermediate. That's not askin alot.;-)

*Nitrous* would be a good fit, waisted at 79 mm it's quite a bit wider then what your use to, but for a ski that wide it is quick edge to edge. It may get a little nervous at very high speeds,but really not bad at all for a ski with no metal. These or the Afterburners are my first choice for trees. 

*Speedmachine Mach2 *would be my first choice for you if you didn't throw in 70/30-60/40. Very nice ski for the money. Would be great for someone who is trying to improve in a variety of turn shapes. It will hold a nice edge and be very quick and responsive in short turns. At 116-70-102 you can certainly venture off paste sometimes, but they are really an inbounds tool. Also has the XBI integrated binding system which is a plus.

*Grandsport 14 XBS* - the grandsport line is often overlooked. The Grandsport series took over for the SUV series 2 years ago. 119-72-102 is a little wider then the Mach 2 and does everything pretty well. It is a very easy turner.

If you really spend more then half your time on ungroomed trails I would say the Nitrous is your choice. If not I'd look at the Mach2 as well. The GS14 would be my third pick for you.


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 19, 2007)

HPD-why not the Top Fuels. Just curious


----------



## Paul (Dec 19, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> Let's see...we need a ski for all conditions, all terrain, holds a great edge, but can float on powder, and stable at speed for an advanced intermediate. That's not askin alot.;-)
> 
> *Nitrous* would be a good fit, waisted at 79 mm it's quite a bit wider then what your use to, but for a ski that wide it is quick edge to edge. It may get a little nervous at very high speeds,but really not bad at all for a ski with no metal. These or the Afterburners are my first choice for trees.
> 
> ...



Awesome, Thanks HPD!

Honestly, much more than half is on groomers. Doesn't mean I wouldn't like to do something about that. I looked at the Speedmachines. I was keeping them in mind, but if it really is a groomer ski, I still have my Atomics for that. That's pretty much why I was throwing that ratio out there. On days with the family crusin' the cord, I'd still probably grab the Atomics first. These would be the skis for "Daddy Days." The Grandsport is an interesting recommendation as well.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Dec 19, 2007)

campgottagopee said:


> HPD-why not the Top Fuels. Just curious



*BECAUSE*



Paul said:


> 5' 7" 152lbs Advanced Intermediate.



If Paul was an expert skier then the Top Fuels would be at the top of the list. That's my preference for the Northeast, but some experts might still choose the Nitrous. I just think that the majority of the time we need a stiff ski in our part of the world.


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 19, 2007)

My bad--didn' read ALL the words. I do that often


----------



## Paul (Dec 19, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> *BECAUSE*
> 
> 
> 
> If Paul was an expert skier then the Top Fuels would be at the top of the list. That's my preference for the Northeast, but some experts might still choose the Nitrous. I just think that the majority of the time we need a stiff ski in our part of the world.



How far apart ability-wise are the Nitrous to the Fuels? It sounds like the biggest difference is the stiffness. Is there a chance that the Nitrous could end-up being too forgiving? (Seriously doubt it, but playing Devil's Advocate) I would assume it is harder to skid the Top Fuel's tails and to get the edges to disengage?


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Dec 19, 2007)

Paul said:


> How far apart ability-wise are the Nitrous to the Fuels? It sounds like the biggest difference is the stiffness. Is there a chance that the Nitrous could end-up being too forgiving? (Seriously doubt it, but playing Devil's Advocate) I would assume it is harder to skid the Top Fuel's tails and to get the edges to disengage?



The TF is a more demanding ski. You have to put more effort into the turn when skiing at slow to moderate speeds. The reward is a smooth and confident feeling when skiing fast. Because of the added metal they also hold better on ice. 

Both skis have big up sides.


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 19, 2007)

Paul said:


> How far apart ability-wise are the Nitrous to the Fuels? It sounds like the biggest difference is the stiffness. Is there a chance that the Nitrous could end-up being too forgiving? (Seriously doubt it, but playing Devil's Advocate) I would assume it is harder to skid the Top Fuel's tails and to get the edges to disengage?



HPD will answer better than I, but at 152lbs you would really have to work that ski hard to stay on top of it and enjoy it. If you like bumps at all, that ski is somewhat demanding at times due to the stiffness of it. But at 6'4" 250lbs it servers me well---great ski!!!


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 19, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> The TF is a more demanding ski. You have to put more effort into the turn when skiing at slow to moderate speeds. The reward is a smooth and confident feeling when skiing fast. Because of the added metal they also hold better on ice.
> 
> Both skis have big up sides.



HA, HA, HA, we responded at the same time and I was right. your resonce was much better than mine.


----------



## RISkier (Dec 19, 2007)

I actually subscribe to RealSkiers.  I won't directly quote their reviews but they describe the TF as a ski for big aggresive skiers.  They like it but they definately review it as a ski for experts and said it was not a good ski when skied at slower speeds.  They gave it a 2 out of 5 for forgiveness.  They described the Nitrous as the ski they thought would be very popular.  They said it's not as stable as the TF but much more forgiving.  They gave it a 4/5 for forgiveness.  They also say that while the Nitrous won't match the TF at at very high speed that it was respectable.  So the TF would probably give you better edge hold and more stability at high speeds.  The Nitrous should be easier to relax on, better at slower speeds, and probably better in bumps and softer snow because it's softer.  I've still not been out on mine and events beyond my control are conspiring to make it unlikely that I'll get back out before the New Year.


----------



## Paul (Dec 19, 2007)

RISkier said:


> I actually subscribe to RealSkiers.  I won't directly quote their reviews but they describe the TF as a ski for big aggresive skiers.  They like it but they definately review it as a ski for experts and said it was not a good ski when skied at slower speeds.  They gave it a 2 out of 5 for forgiveness.  They described the Nitrous as the ski they thought would be very popular.  They said it's not as stable as the TF but much more forgiving.  They gave it a 4/5 for forgiveness.  They also say that while the Nitrous won't match the TF at at very high speed that it was respectable.  So the TF would probably give you better edge hold and more stability at high speeds.  The Nitrous should be easier to relax on, better at slower speeds, and probably better in bumps and softer snow because it's softer.  I've still not been out on mine and events beyond my control are conspiring to make it unlikely that I'll get back out before the New Year.



Kinda what I expected. Sounds good, I won't be skiing very fast for awhile anyway. Don't have the knee stability at the mo'



> I've still not been out on mine and events beyond my control are conspiring to make it unlikely that I'll get back out before the New Year



Aw, c'mon... even YAWGOO is open. :-D


----------



## Paul (Dec 19, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> The TF is a more demanding ski. You have to put more effort into the turn when skiing at slow to moderate speeds. The reward is a smooth and confident feeling when skiing fast. Because of the added metal they also hold better on ice.
> 
> Both skis have big up sides.





campgottagopee said:


> HPD will answer better than I, but at 152lbs you would really have to work that ski hard to stay on top of it and enjoy it. If you like bumps at all, that ski is somewhat demanding at times due to the stiffness of it. But at 6'4" 250lbs it servers me well---great ski!!!



That's three.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Dec 19, 2007)

RISkier said:


> I actually subscribe to RealSkiers.  .



What do they say about the Hellcat? I was lovin mine in the storm last week.


----------



## RISkier (Dec 19, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> What do they say about the Hellcat? I was lovin mine in the storm last week.



They like the ski if you're man enough for them.  They basically say it's a powerful ski for big, aggressive, high energy skiers.  More of a backside ski but they say it works pretty well on groomed for a ski that size.  The review certainly implies it's not a ski for an undemanding, cruisy kind of ski.  Nordica has seemd to really make strides in the ski market the last few years.  I see a lot more of them on the mountain and in shops and they generally seem to get good reviews.A ski instructor friend we've worked with is a Nordica guy.  I think he skis the Mach 3 Powers most of the time but I also know he has a pair of Hellcats.  He thought either the Nitrous or the Mach II would be a good ski for me.  The Mach II might actually be a better ski for me on a day-in/day-out basis but I found the Nitrous Demos at a great price and snapped them up.


----------



## RISkier (Dec 19, 2007)

Paul said:


> Kinda what I expected. Sounds good, I won't be skiing very fast for awhile anyway. Don't have the knee stability at the mo'
> 
> 
> 
> Aw, c'mon... even YAWGOO is open. :-D



Good point.  I probably need to venture down to the mighty Goo and do some laps on Yellow Jacket.  I am absolutely swamped at work and I'm planning to work on both the 24th and 26th.  And my wife won't be able to make it out either this weekend or next so unless I go down to Yawgoo I don't think I'll make it out.  Perhaps I should venture out for my first ever ski day without my wife?  She is my ski buddy and it would be weird, but I would like to get out.


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Dec 19, 2007)

RISkier said:


> They like the ski if you're man enough for them.  They basically say it's a powerful ski for big, aggressive, high energy skiers.  More of a backside ski but they say it works pretty well on groomed for a ski that size.  The review certainly implies it's not a ski for an undemanding, cruisy kind of ski.  Nordica has seemd to really make strides in the ski market the last few years.  I see a lot more of them on the mountain and in shops and they generally seem to get good reviews.A ski instructor friend we've worked with is a Nordica guy.  I think he skis the Mach 3 Powers most of the time but I also know he has a pair of Hellcats.  He thought either the Nitrous or the Mach II would be a good ski for me.  The Mach II might actually be a better ski for me on a day-in/day-out basis but I found the Nitrous Demos at a great price and snapped them up.




Thanks.


----------



## wa-loaf (Dec 19, 2007)

Hey HPD, do you go around and do demo days for Nordica?

The Top Fuels are definitely something I'd like to try, plus they go with my new boots (which rock! btw).


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Dec 20, 2007)

wa-loaf said:


> Hey HPD, do you go around and do demo days for Nordica?
> 
> The Top Fuels are definitely something I'd like to try, plus they go with my new boots (which rock! btw).



Nope, I'm the pro rep @ Whiteface.  The guys who travel to demo days are full time Nordica employees. They are great guys who really know their stuff. I hope you get the chance to try the TF's. I don't think you'll be disappointed.

I'm glad you like your new boots.


----------



## RISkier (Dec 20, 2007)

hpd,

Are you a ski instructor at Whiteface?


----------



## bvibert (Dec 20, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> Nope, I'm the pro rep @ Whiteface.  The guys who travel to demo days are full time Nordica employees. They are great guys who really know their stuff. I hope you get the chance to try the TF's. I don't think you'll be disappointed.
> 
> I'm glad you like your new boots.



HPD, if you happen to have easy access to a list of locations that the Nordica demo team will be visiting I'd appreciate seeing it.  I might be able to add a couple of more dates to my list of Demo Days with it.

I know they showed up at Sundown last year and I had no idea they were going to be there..


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Dec 20, 2007)

Will do, it will probably be after the holidays.


----------



## wa-loaf (Dec 20, 2007)

highpeaksdrifter said:


> Nope, I'm the pro rep @ Whiteface.



If for some reason I (or someone else) make it up to Whiteface, can we hit you up for a demo?


----------



## highpeaksdrifter (Dec 20, 2007)

RISkier said:


> hpd,
> 
> Are you a ski instructor at Whiteface?



Nope



wa-loaf said:


> If for some reason I (or someone else) make it up to Whiteface, can we hit you up for a demo?



They don't leave us demos for people to use. As you know you can usually work something out with a local shop.


----------

