Armada Norwalk... Anyone have any beta?

[reemdog]

Did anyone get a chance to put some time in on this ski? Anyone have a set in their shop, and can get a wight on them? Heavy? Not heavy? Any initial thoughts would be great! Looks like it could be pretty aaawesome!

Cheers.

[gregL]

One ski, 179, 2040 grams on my scale.

[reemdog]

Thanks! A guess then that the 189s will probably be around 9.5+ pounds...

[reemdog]

ok... so is there any chance any one has any thoughts(and/or experience with) about a comparison between the atomic automatic and the norwalk?? the skis will primarily be used to tour with (dynafits).

cheers!

[RonMexico]

Haven't skied them, but played around with them in a shop. I decided to go with the 192 TST for touring just because I think it will have plenty of float and the reduced weight and narrower waist will just make skinning that much easier.

That being said, Automatic definitely seems a bit heavier and a bit stiffer. While the tip on the Norwalks is pretty soft, the tail is on the stiffer side. They really seem like they'd be a fun ski and less of an all-out charger than the Automatics.

[reemdog]

hhmmm... so you think the automatic felt heavier and stiffer? were you checking out the 189 norwalk vs. 186 automatic?

[RonMexico]

hhmmm... so you think the automatic felt heavier and stiffer? were you checking out the 189 norwalk vs. 186 automatic?

Yes - compared similar sizes. I just liked the overall flex and feel of the Norwalks. To be honest, there's probably not a big enough difference in weight and flex to make one standout over the other especially when skiing them (take this with a grain of salt since I've only hand flexed them and haven't had a chance to ride them).

I also like the cap-sidewall-cap construction of the Norwalks. I have it in other Armada skis and think it really improves the swing weight and durability of the skis.

I'm a big Armada fan, so I might be a little biased. You really just need to check them out yourselves and see what you think.

[gskis]

I spent some time on the Norwalks a few weeks ago in BC. they were fun, and felt decently stiff to me, but I'm also pretty small. they had a nice tight turning radius compared to what i've been on (billy goats) but that is expected. really liked that they only had early rise in the tip, not the tail. definitely made me interested in these or the TST's for touring, depending on what skis I have when i get a new setup. overall really impressed with these.

[toast2266]

Quick 1 run review:
I skied the 189's in a small amount (2-4") of cut up soft snow, with a bit of groomed, and some areas that were scraped hard. I'm 5'8" 150ish.
Fairly easy to ski at moderate speeds. They were more inclined to make a bunch of medium radius turns than charge through everything. Well mannered through soft chop. Didn't stand out in any particular respect; they weren't awesome in any particular situation, but they also weren't horrible in any situations.

[ctw55]

From what i've heard the Automatics are going to have a softer tail than the Norwalks, but the rest of the ski is stiffer overall than the Norwalks, making them more of a harder charging ski. I think if I were to be mountain a touring setup I would choose the Norwalk because its quite a bit lighter and especially because of the sidewall construction of the Armada vs. Atomic.

[brew_ski]

I skied the Norwalk 189cm back to back with the Automatic 186cm at the industry demo day. While I love the Norwalk's reduced weight and versatility, I have to give the edge to the Automatic. The Automatic was WAY more fun to ski, a lot more lively and overall had a more responsive feel. I love the TST, which is more or less a narrower Norwalk, but the Automatic buried the Norwalk in the fun category. I like the TST better too, but after skiing 40-50 pairs of 2012/13 skis I have to say the Automatic is my pick of the litter. Best ski of 2012/13 by far

[Skiwald]

Ski: Armada Norwalk 189 cm
skier: 5'8" 140lbs.
boots: dalbello krypton2 fusions 25.5
bindings: Rossignol FKS 14
mounting: at recommended with dynalook plates.
Location: Tahoe area resorts and BC

current quiver:
salomon rocker2 122mm 184cm
moment bibby pro 184cm
armada norwalk 189 cm
armada JJ 185 cm
armada TST 183 cm
Praxis BC 180 cm

So I bought these with high hopes after being pleasently surprised with how well the armada TST skied in a variety of conditions. way more versetile than the JJ's with the flat tail but still really fun. That being said I was looking for something that kept the light weight and playfulness of the JJ and the TST but could charge more like the Bibby Pro making it a great all round ski for the resort and tourning.

So far I've skied the norwalks in a mix of light pow, chopped up pow, wind buffed snow, and groomed. I have not toured in them yet but that's also where I think these will be the most useful.

initial impressions: for a smaller guy, these felt bit much initially but after a few runs they were easier to ski than the moment bibby pros. On hard pack they held an edge great. On soft snow they provided more than enough float. They were a little hooky but with a detune on the tips and tails that will probably be solved. In chop they were second only to the bibby's which blast through that like mack truck. So where does that leave these? I'd say a great light weight pow/charging ski to tour with. For the resort i think there are better options in this category like Bibby Pros, Squad 7, etc.

I'll be swapping out the Rossi FKS for Dynafit Radicals this week and should have some input on how they ski as a touring setup: Scarpa rush boots and dynafit radical ST bindings.