I’m looking to try out something like this. I skied the black crows vertis last season for a week but feel I need something narrower. Would like a good carver but still capable in choppy conditions, and something that doesn’t grip the tails too much on skidded turns which I do on steep reds/blacks, so maybe narrow tails/ rocker on the tails? I’m guessing these are roughly what I’m looking for but do you have any other suggestions?
Volkl Deacon 80 and now the Peregrine 80 are right there for you, as are the following: I'd take a square look at the Stockli Montero AS (76 underfoot) or the AX (80). Great all-mountain shapes and styles with narrower footprints. If you're looking for more of a frontside carver, the Nordica Spitfire 74 is an awesome ski.
Great ski, at least for me as a lighter technical skier. It really has great energy and pop, and the ice grip is phenomenal. I have talked to a wide range of skiers who really love this ski. I think a heavier skier with a more powerful style should go for the Deacon 84 that has titanal, though.
Can you provide some detailed insight on how the Deacon 80 would compare to the Stockli Montero AX in terms of grip on ice, ease of turn initiation, performance on crud and any other insights? Looking hard at both. I ski primarily in Vermont at Killington, Sugarbush, Stowe, etc. Thank you.
Sure! The Deacon is a lot quicker and more agile from edge to edge while the heft of the Montero takes a bit longer. This is partly due to the extraordinary mobility of the Deacon as being one of the best in the business when it comes to maneuverable carving. The AX, in turn, blows the Deacon away when it comes to grip on ice and crud performance by harnessing the full power of two sheets of metal and a smoother overall build.
Thanks for the elaborate review! Do you know how this ski compares to the Fische the Curv series (either DTI, DTX or GT). I am a bit lost here. Thanks in advance!
The Deacon is a bit lighter duty of a ski compared to the Curv, especially GT. It uses a fiberglass frame to complement a steel sheet underfoot, so agility and quickness are two of the skis' top attributes. The Curv benefits more from race-like construction, although the GT is pretty mobile for such a powerful ski.
Older 5'10" 255lbs advanced skier looking for a dedicated ski for the firmer New England days. I am thinking of pairing it up with the new Rustler 9 to create a 2 ski New England quiver. I would use the Rustler for the snowier days and in the bumps and glades and I would use the Deacon for the really firm, icy days that typically occur preseason or the freeze right after that January thaw. Would the Deacon 80 fit the need or should I go up to the Deacon 84 based on my weight? Is the Deacon 8x / Rustler 9 a good two ski quiver for the Epic based mountains in New England (Wildcat, Attitash, Stowe, etc)? Love your videos! Learning a lot about the newer technologies. Time to retire my Salomon Pocket Rockets and Volkl AC3s!
Thanks, and long live the Pocket Rocket! I would think the 84 will be a better fit, and I wouldn't worry about the width encroaching on that of the Rustler 9--it's a very different ski and operates very well in our non-snowy days/weeks/months here in NH/VT. The 80 might just feel a bit too light and unsubstantial. Have fun! SE
Just found a smoking deal at my local ski shop on a pair of these 2024 Deacon 80 as they are now lasts years ski. I am an intermediate looking to improve all aspects of my frontside skiing. They look great to work on my carving. Do you think these will help with the bumps and moguls ? That is the most challenging for me and where I would like to be proficient . Thanks
Yup! Super mobile and agile without being too stiff or heavy. We think the Deacon 80 is very overlooked, and while the new Peregrine 80 is an awesome replacement, if you find a Deacon 80 at a good price, I say get it.
Hello, thanks for great reviews! I currently have Volkl AC4 Unlimited Ti in 177cm (from 2007), and I'm looking to upgrade them to something new and improved. I consider myself an advanced skier in the piste (I have no problem with a black piste and I'm fairly comfortable at speeds up to 60-70 kmh), but a beginner off-piste. I want to develop my off-piste abilities. I have been looking at reviews of the Deacon 84 and Deacon 80, and I'm unsure which would suite me best (an expert level friend suggested I should not go under 82 mm waist). I mostly ride in the piste, but would like to get better off-piste. I'm 49y, 179cm and 72kg. So, which ski and length would you recommend for me based on this information? Much appreciated :) Cheers! Henrik
More important than the 4 mm difference in width is the build--the Deacon 84 has two sheets of metal while the Deacon 80 uses a fiberglass frame and a steel sheet underfoot. As such, the 84 is considerably more stable at speed. I don't think it'll hinder you in your off-piste quests. I'd go with the 84 in the 172.
I currently have Völkl Kanjo in 182cm, but would like to add something with a shorter turn radius better suited to carving on hard snow. Would Deacon 80 in 177 be a good fit? Or is this too similar to what I have already? I am 188cm, 105kg, age 44, advanced, mainly skiing in the Swiss alps.
I think it's a good enough difference since it's not only narrower overall, but also shaped more like a carver. They're light and fun and incredibly energetic. I'd go with that 177.
HI SE, Thanks for the review: intermediate 50yo M skier, 6'2", 195lb, athletic--this sounds like a great ski: what size would you recommend? Thanks-Greg
Love your channel, great in depth reviews. I'm looking at picking up a set of Deacon 80 as a fun front side ski for use on days when it's packed conditions. Regarding sizing, are they stiff enough to go on the shorter end of sizing or would you ski in a more traditional length? I'm 176lb, and 5'11" expert skier, and normally for a fun ski i'll go around 170cm (i'm 45). I'm thinking the 167 could be a fun length, i want to carve mostly but also be able to ski all around the mountain, I'd be fine on the 172 too. Or would the Deacon 84 potentially be a better option in 167cm? i do want them nice for ripping short turns too, a bit softer tends to be better for that in my experience. Appreciate your thoughts?
What exactly is the difference between the Deacon 80 and 84 other than the width? I was considering the 84 but found out there was an 80 as well. I am 170 cm, 205 lbs (currently trying to lose weight), and about an intermediate skier. Ive skied for about 12 yrs, then took a long break (about 11 years), and just got back last winter season (23/24). I currently have Rossignol blackops 98 (162 cm), Atomic Maverick 88 Ti (169cm), and Stockli Montero AR (170cm). Any advice, tips, and recommendation would be much appreciated.
The 80 uses a steel plate in the underfoot zone and a fiberglass frame rather than a titanal one like in the 84. The 84 also uses a full titanal layup under the titanal frame, so almost double the metal in the 84. That, and the width. If you're looking for more quickness, agility, and pep in the turns, the 80 is the way to go. For more of a stable and powerful ride, especially through marginal snow conditions, the 84 holds up better, especially at speed.
@SkiEssentials Thank you so much for the reply. Seems like I'm leaning a bit more towards the 80. I like the sound of the Deacon 80's better agility and quickness. What would you say about the turn radius? I forgot to mention that I generally like shorter turns.
Damn, just can't decide. Should I go with deacon 80 or rather redster q7? I am looking for sth that takes me comfortably all way down through ice on top to the soft snow in the valley. I prefer shorter turns but sometimes it's nice to get some speed. And I need a solid edge grip. I'm 182 cm, 79 kg. Upper intermediate would say. Deacon 80 172 or redster Q7 168?
I personally prefer the Deacon 80 to the Redster Q7. I like the quickness and versatility and all-mountain character. The Redster feels more like a detuned race ski, but if you are looking for more well-rounded performance I'd go Deacon. and 172 sounds good!
Hi, I have a question. I've been skiing for 3 years now and want to get a new ski. I drive mediocre and am still practicing. Do you think the Völkl Deacon 80 is a good choice for me? I want a ski that is still easy to ski even on not so good slopes. I am purely a piste skier Or would the Elan Wingman 82 CTI be better? Or do you have another choice for me? I am 1.80 m tall and weigh 85 kg
Both are great options. The low to mid-80's is a great place to be for mid-level front side skiing. Deacon 80 is not too easy, and is very fun and engaging. I'd go 172 in that ski.
I'm thinking about buying Deacon 80. Weight 89 kg, height 170. Should I choose 167 or 172 cm? Or maybe Deacon 84? This is supposed to be skiing for the afternoon, snowfall, etc. In the morning I ski on S Force 76 Ti. I am an intermediate skier. Blue and red routes
The Deacon has longer, albeit very low rocker, and that makes it less reactive and planted on the snow. The Atomic is fully cambered, and that makes it lock in to the turn a lot easier. If you want a carver that's a bit more agile and energetic, I like the Deacon, but for more of a race-like feel, the Atomic is fantastic. @@marcinzygacki5852
It's unisex--they have a women's Flair 79, but it's not the same ski. Deacon 80 has the more recent and modern construction while still remaining accessible and amazing as a front side ski with some versatility.
I’m looking to try out something like this. I skied the black crows vertis last season for a week but feel I need something narrower.
Would like a good carver but still capable in choppy conditions, and something that doesn’t grip the tails too much on skidded turns which I do on steep reds/blacks, so maybe narrow tails/ rocker on the tails?
I’m guessing these are roughly what I’m looking for but do you have any other suggestions?
Volkl Deacon 80 and now the Peregrine 80 are right there for you, as are the following:
I'd take a square look at the Stockli Montero AS (76 underfoot) or the AX (80). Great all-mountain shapes and styles with narrower footprints. If you're looking for more of a frontside carver, the Nordica Spitfire 74 is an awesome ski.
Great ski, at least for me as a lighter technical skier. It really has great energy and pop, and the ice grip is phenomenal. I have talked to a wide range of skiers who really love this ski.
I think a heavier skier with a more powerful style should go for the Deacon 84 that has titanal, though.
It's totally unassuming, too. People get on this thing not expecting much, and are then super-impressed with the capabilities.
Can you provide some detailed insight on how the Deacon 80 would compare to the Stockli Montero AX in terms of grip on ice, ease of turn initiation, performance on crud and any other insights? Looking hard at both. I ski primarily in Vermont at Killington, Sugarbush, Stowe, etc. Thank you.
Sure! The Deacon is a lot quicker and more agile from edge to edge while the heft of the Montero takes a bit longer. This is partly due to the extraordinary mobility of the Deacon as being one of the best in the business when it comes to maneuverable carving. The AX, in turn, blows the Deacon away when it comes to grip on ice and crud performance by harnessing the full power of two sheets of metal and a smoother overall build.
Thanks for the elaborate review! Do you know how this ski compares to the Fische the Curv series (either DTI, DTX or GT). I am a bit lost here. Thanks in advance!
The Deacon is a bit lighter duty of a ski compared to the Curv, especially GT. It uses a fiberglass frame to complement a steel sheet underfoot, so agility and quickness are two of the skis' top attributes. The Curv benefits more from race-like construction, although the GT is pretty mobile for such a powerful ski.
Older 5'10" 255lbs advanced skier looking for a dedicated ski for the firmer New England days. I am thinking of pairing it up with the new Rustler 9 to create a 2 ski New England quiver. I would use the Rustler for the snowier days and in the bumps and glades and I would use the Deacon for the really firm, icy days that typically occur preseason or the freeze right after that January thaw.
Would the Deacon 80 fit the need or should I go up to the Deacon 84 based on my weight?
Is the Deacon 8x / Rustler 9 a good two ski quiver for the Epic based mountains in New England (Wildcat, Attitash, Stowe, etc)?
Love your videos! Learning a lot about the newer technologies. Time to retire my Salomon Pocket Rockets and Volkl AC3s!
Thanks, and long live the Pocket Rocket!
I would think the 84 will be a better fit, and I wouldn't worry about the width encroaching on that of the Rustler 9--it's a very different ski and operates very well in our non-snowy days/weeks/months here in NH/VT. The 80 might just feel a bit too light and unsubstantial. Have fun!
SE
Just found a smoking deal at my local ski shop on a pair of these 2024 Deacon 80 as they are now lasts years ski. I am an intermediate looking to improve all aspects of my frontside skiing. They look great to work on my carving. Do you think these will help with the bumps and moguls ? That is the most challenging for me and where I would like to be proficient . Thanks
Yup! Super mobile and agile without being too stiff or heavy. We think the Deacon 80 is very overlooked, and while the new Peregrine 80 is an awesome replacement, if you find a Deacon 80 at a good price, I say get it.
@@SkiEssentialsThanks I’m heading out now before they’re gone. THINK SNOW!!!
Hello, thanks for great reviews!
I currently have Volkl AC4 Unlimited Ti in 177cm (from 2007), and I'm looking to upgrade them to something new and improved. I consider myself an advanced skier in the piste (I have no problem with a black piste and I'm fairly comfortable at speeds up to 60-70 kmh), but a beginner off-piste. I want to develop my off-piste abilities. I have been looking at reviews of the Deacon 84 and Deacon 80, and I'm unsure which would suite me best (an expert level friend suggested I should not go under 82 mm waist).
I mostly ride in the piste, but would like to get better off-piste.
I'm 49y, 179cm and 72kg.
So, which ski and length would you recommend for me based on this information?
Much appreciated :)
Cheers!
Henrik
More important than the 4 mm difference in width is the build--the Deacon 84 has two sheets of metal while the Deacon 80 uses a fiberglass frame and a steel sheet underfoot. As such, the 84 is considerably more stable at speed. I don't think it'll hinder you in your off-piste quests. I'd go with the 84 in the 172.
I currently have Völkl Kanjo in 182cm, but would like to add something with a shorter turn radius better suited to carving on hard snow. Would Deacon 80 in 177 be a good fit? Or is this too similar to what I have already?
I am 188cm, 105kg, age 44, advanced, mainly skiing in the Swiss alps.
I think it's a good enough difference since it's not only narrower overall, but also shaped more like a carver. They're light and fun and incredibly energetic. I'd go with that 177.
Just ordered a par of Deacon 80. Cant wait to try them on ⛷️
HI SE, Thanks for the review: intermediate 50yo M skier, 6'2", 195lb, athletic--this sounds like a great ski: what size would you recommend? Thanks-Greg
I think the 177 is the way to go in this ski based on your stats and application.
Love your channel, great in depth reviews. I'm looking at picking up a set of Deacon 80 as a fun front side ski for use on days when it's packed conditions. Regarding sizing, are they stiff enough to go on the shorter end of sizing or would you ski in a more traditional length? I'm 176lb, and 5'11" expert skier, and normally for a fun ski i'll go around 170cm (i'm 45). I'm thinking the 167 could be a fun length, i want to carve mostly but also be able to ski all around the mountain, I'd be fine on the 172 too. Or would the Deacon 84 potentially be a better option in 167cm? i do want them nice for ripping short turns too, a bit softer tends to be better for that in my experience. Appreciate your thoughts?
It sounds like you're looking at an 80 rather than an 84 based on your description. For your stats, I'd think the 172 will work better. So fun!
@@SkiEssentials you guys are awesome. Thanks so much for getting back to me :)
What exactly is the difference between the Deacon 80 and 84 other than the width?
I was considering the 84 but found out there was an 80 as well. I am 170 cm, 205 lbs (currently trying to lose weight), and about an intermediate skier. Ive skied for about 12 yrs, then took a long break (about 11 years), and just got back last winter season (23/24). I currently have Rossignol blackops 98 (162 cm), Atomic Maverick 88 Ti (169cm), and Stockli Montero AR (170cm). Any advice, tips, and recommendation would be much appreciated.
The 80 uses a steel plate in the underfoot zone and a fiberglass frame rather than a titanal one like in the 84. The 84 also uses a full titanal layup under the titanal frame, so almost double the metal in the 84. That, and the width. If you're looking for more quickness, agility, and pep in the turns, the 80 is the way to go. For more of a stable and powerful ride, especially through marginal snow conditions, the 84 holds up better, especially at speed.
@SkiEssentials Thank you so much for the reply. Seems like I'm leaning a bit more towards the 80. I like the sound of the Deacon 80's better agility and quickness.
What would you say about the turn radius? I forgot to mention that I generally like shorter turns.
Damn, just can't decide. Should I go with deacon 80 or rather redster q7? I am looking for sth that takes me comfortably all way down through ice on top to the soft snow in the valley. I prefer shorter turns but sometimes it's nice to get some speed. And I need a solid edge grip. I'm 182 cm, 79 kg. Upper intermediate would say. Deacon 80 172 or redster Q7 168?
I personally prefer the Deacon 80 to the Redster Q7. I like the quickness and versatility and all-mountain character. The Redster feels more like a detuned race ski, but if you are looking for more well-rounded performance I'd go Deacon. and 172 sounds good!
Hi,
I have a question. I've been skiing for 3 years now and want to get a new ski.
I drive mediocre and am still practicing.
Do you think the Völkl Deacon 80 is a good choice for me? I want a ski that is still easy to ski even on not so good slopes.
I am purely a piste skier
Or would the Elan Wingman 82 CTI be better?
Or do you have another choice for me?
I am 1.80 m tall and weigh 85 kg
Both are great options. The low to mid-80's is a great place to be for mid-level front side skiing. Deacon 80 is not too easy, and is very fun and engaging. I'd go 172 in that ski.
I'm thinking about buying Deacon 80. Weight 89 kg, height 170. Should I choose 167 or 172 cm?
Or maybe Deacon 84? This is supposed to be skiing for the afternoon, snowfall, etc. In the morning I ski on S Force 76 Ti. I am an intermediate skier. Blue and red routes
I'd go 167 in the 80. The 84 can feel pretty heavy and stiff if you're more in the intermediate range. I think you'll have more success with the 80.
thx@@SkiEssentials
How does Deacon 80 compare to Atomic Q7.8?
The Deacon has longer, albeit very low rocker, and that makes it less reactive and planted on the snow. The Atomic is fully cambered, and that makes it lock in to the turn a lot easier. If you want a carver that's a bit more agile and energetic, I like the Deacon, but for more of a race-like feel, the Atomic is fantastic. @@marcinzygacki5852
I think I'll go with the Deacon 80. My second pair is the S Force 76 Ti
Hello, i am 5'6'' 70kg advanced skier, not an expert, should i go for 1.62 or the 1.67 ?
I think you'll get all the performance you need out of the 162. Have fun!
Is this a unisex or is there a female equivalent?
It's unisex--they have a women's Flair 79, but it's not the same ski. Deacon 80 has the more recent and modern construction while still remaining accessible and amazing as a front side ski with some versatility.
idk, I think it could be more red
You can always add red boots and poles if you wish to go full fire truck.