(hover to zoom, click to enlarge)

Movement Response-X Ski

Brand: Movement
Model: Response-X
Shipping: FREE*
Availability: In Stock
Price: $799.95 $599.95
    - or add to package
* Ski Length:
Qty:  
   - OR -   

Movement is aiming the Response-X at mountain guides and skiers who go on multi-day tours. Well, we think that if you ever ski back-to-back one-day tours, that is close enough. Weighing in at a little over a kilo, the Response-X will help prevent leg-hangover after a long day of climbing. And with a light rocker tip and a heavy dose of carbon technology, the ski could surprise you on the down with its overall performance and edge hold. While excelling on hard snow often found in shadowed couloirs, the 89mm wide body and rocker will also help you ski variable conditions from powder to wet snow that you may find on the way there. Note this ski replaces the much-loved Logic-X from previous seasons.

  • Impressive surface-to-weight ratio tours like a race ski and skis like an adult ski.
  • Karuba Paulownia light wood core is combined with some Poplar to balance liveliness and weight.
  • Patented Thin Ply Technology (TPT) wraps the core with tri-axial carbon fibers spun around the ski.
  • Sintered bases use 1.3mm of P-Tex 4000 for decent core protection and smooth glide.
  • Part of X-Series skis that use semi-secret Movement Light Technology X, a unique carbon manufacturing process.

Update 2015/16: The Response gets a new paint job but otherwise is the same, thankfully.

** Telemarkers: Movement does not recommend mounting telemark bindings on these skis.

Specifications
Lengths (cm) 161, 169, 177, 185
Weight
-> ounces
1035g [161]
1095g [169]
1195g [177]
1250g [185]
Weight (pair) 2070g [161]
2190g [169]
2390g [177]
2500g [185]
Dimensions 124-89-112 [161]
126-89-114 [169]
128-89-116 [177]
128-89-116 [185]
Turn Radius 16.5m [161]
17.5m [169]
18.0m [177]
19.0m [185]
Skin Fix Curved tip, flat tail notch
Specs Verified Yes
Design
Profile Gentle rocker, camber underneath
Shape short-to-medium radius, flat tail
Construction Cap w/ TPT technology
Core Karuba & Poplar wood
Skimo Co Says
Usage Long tours with variable snow
Notes Amazing surface-to-weight ratio
Bottom Line Ski anything without getting tired
12/1/2016
Question from Patti
 
I am looking at purchasing some backcountry ski's and I like the Response X's but I am a bit concerned that these may be a bit too stiff for me as I am 5'2" and weigh 118lb, I have Scott Celeste Boots with the Fritschi Vipec bindings. I am a fairly aggressive advanced skier.

I am also looking at the Womens blue Blizzard, 85 waist ski and the Movement Vertex X. Can you make a recommendation for me?
Thanks so much!
12/1/2016
Answer from Trace Leches
 
Hey Patti! We've had a few women your size on these skis and have had nothing but thumbs up from them. As far as stiffness goes the Vertex is the same, just a difference in width. The Zero G 85 will be a bit stiffer and favor longer carving turns, whereas the Response accomplishes the happy medium between being a stiff ski with a long precise edge hold and a soft, buttery ski that likes to slide a bit more. To give you an idea of who else is skiing these, the folks around here that really know their skis seem to gravitate towards the Response.
Answer this question:

4/20/2016
Question from Caitlin
 
I am trying to figure out what length to get (177 or 169 cm).
I am 5'11, female, 170 lbs.

Thanks!
4/20/2016
Answer from jbo
 
Hi Caitlin, you could go either way so it's more a usage question. For mountaineering and spring skiing the shorter length would be good. For everyday touring and powder hunting the 177 would be a bit better.
Answer this question:

3/27/2016
by bmiller (used product regularly)
 
A very nice ski. I have put around 30,000 feet of touring on them and a little lift assisted touring.

Me: 6'0" 160lbs type III +/-
Skis: 169 X Response with speed radical binding and dynafit tlt6 boot

Conditions from great to good to bad: ice, crust, wind blown, powder, corn to slush. My typical ski is a 170+ but for this ski I got a 169. I was a little concerned I'd gone too short but they ski'd well for being a smaller ski, toured nicely and handled the conditions well.
Comment on this review:

2/7/2016
by Nat (used product regularly)
 
The Movement Response-X Ski is hands down my favorite small(er) waisted ski I have ever used. I am 5'10, 145lbs, and chose to go with the 177cm length as a do everything fast and light ski. I paired them with Plum 170 bindings with the additional ski crampon and heel riser options. This, I feel, is the perfect versatile combo as I like the option to go between my TLT6P and Alien 1.0 boots. These past few weeks in the Wasatch I have skied them in knee to waist deep powder and truly enjoyed every turn. They float incredibly well for their dimensions, feel very stable at speed, and offer quick/responsive/predicable handling. On firm snow they hold a great edge and don't feel squirrelly like some of the other similar dimensioned skis I've owned. I will update this review as I put additional time on them throughout the season - but at this time I could not be more pleased. My recommendation is to grab a pair while you can (these are incredibly popular from what I understand) and open your world to the possibility of bigger, faster, more fun days in the mountains! Enjoy. I sure am.
Comment on this review:

1/26/2016
Question from michael ferdiny
 
Hi, I want to buy from you a response x, but I am not sure about the length: I am 6.2 feet tall by 220 lbs. used to do a lot of ski mountaineering in europe till 15 years ago. But now I want to start again. Should I go with the 185 or the 177?
thanks for your help!
Michael
1/27/2016
Answer from jbo
 
Hi Michael, for pure skiing I would recommend the 185 for you. For heading uphill, skis on your back, tight switchbacks, etc, the 177 would be more manageable.
Answer this question:

10/12/2015
Question from Will Griffis
 
I am 6 feet 185 lbs and an advanced skier but not aggressive any more at age 60. Which size movement response x ski should I buy?

What skins go best with the skis?
10/12/2015
Answer from jbo
 
Hi Will, I would recommend the 177s. That gives you enough length for your size skiing-wise, and is still fairly manageable on the uphill through switchbacks and such.

Movement uses the Colltex skins for their branded ones, although the Pomoca CPGs are really nice as well. 120mm wide is enough for full coverage.
Answer this question:

9/14/2015
Question from Stephanie
 
Do you have the Movement Response in the 161 length?
Thanks!
9/15/2015
Answer from jbo
 
Hi Stephanie, we have more 161s scheduled to arrive before October, so hopefully they will be here soon.
Answer this question:

11/8/2014
Question from peg
 
I am just moving to AT from telemark and am 120lb 5'5", not sure what length to buy.
11/8/2014
Answer from jbo
 
Welcome Peg, I will send you an e-mail to learn a bit more about your plans & style before giving a recommendation.
Answer this question:

11/7/2014
Question from Mark Angevine
 
I am interested in the Response-X to use both on piste and off. I am 5'9" and weight 157 lbs, and I have generally used 175-177 length skis the last few years. A couple of reviewers mentioned that they ski this length, but were much heavier guys (200+). Should I go down to a shorter size? I am not a really fast or aggressive skier anymore; at 61 I'm happy to just keep going uphill and down with some efficiency.
11/7/2014
Answer from jbo
 
Hey Mark, from a pure skiing standpoint the 177 is still good for you. Lots of folks (including myself) shave some centimeters for mountaineering though, as it is more manageable for all the non-skiing parts (and some of the tight skiing). Since you're also using it at the resort, I think I would stick with the 177.
Answer this question:

9/3/2014
by Jonathan S (used product regularly)
 
Overall: Four Stars for an incredible ratio of surface area to weight, with float in unconsolidated snow far above (both literally and figuratively?) what would be expected from the 89mm waist. But minus a star short of perfect for firm-snow carving that is less than what I had hoped – perhaps unrealistically, especially given my alpine racing background (and given all the other entirely positive reviews), but I feel like the Response-X skis like a much wider ski, for both better and worse.

Background on product familiarity: I skied on the 2013-14 version in a 169cm for almost 43,000 earned vertical plus several lift-served runs, mounted with Dynafit Speed Superlite bindings, driven by Scarpa Alien 1.0 boots. Conditions ranged from nearly perfect to nearly indescribably bad. Somewhat similar skis I have used include the Hagan Y Flow (173cm, 87mm waist with significant rocker), Dynafit Manaslu (169cm, 92mm with early rise tip), Movement Logic-X (168cm, 88mm waist with traditional camber and geometry), and Dynafit Mustagh Ata Superlight (169cm, 89mm with traditional camber and geometry).

First, the first impressions out of the box: I had been an early adopter of the Movement X-Series for the 2010-11 season, both their skimo Fish-X and the all-around Logic-X (reviewed here: https://www.wildsnow.com/4181/movement-logic-x-series-review/). I was hoping that the Response-X would retain all of the firm-snow carving ability of the Logic-X, while improving the performance even more in unconsolidated snow by the addition of tip rocker (plus another 1mm of width throughout). Side-by-side with the Logic-X, the tip geometry of the Response-X is far different, both the early rise and the shape. (And the Response-X ditches the Logic-X’s final ~2cm of upturned tail, which had been utterly pointless except for hampering the ability to jam the tails straight into the snow.)

All 14 binding holes drilled out very nicely with the screws seated securely – except for one that I botched by foolishly and lazily trying to force in a screw that started crooked. Fortunately the helicoil went in very well. Overall, an impressively secure mount for such a light ski. (And note that unlike some other light high-carbon skis, the profile is of normal thickness, so no need to compromise retention by filing down screw lengths.)

Second impressions, in use: Overall, the Response-X excelled in all sorts of unconsolidated snow. In untracked powder that had formed a slight crust at the lower elevations, the Response-X skied better that the Manaslu had the prior day in the same location. In a varying combination of sheltered powder and potentially tricky windslab, the Response-X easily handled the constant transitions. Returning from Mount Hood’s Hogsback through the Palmer snowfield (which had been open to lift-served skier traffic early in the day), the Response-X plowed through the rapidly setting up piles of loose corn, which would usually have me thinking mainly about my ACL.

Exiting through a lower-elevation gully on Mount Saint Helens, the Response-X was so much fun in overly ripe corn (probably more so than the twice-as-heavy skis of my four partners, whom I’d arranged to meet at summit, which is a nice arrangement when on a ski this light). Probably so much fun as to even encourage unsafe habits with regard to danger from wet slides and rockfall! In breakable crust, it managed as well as pretty much anything could. In heavy isothermal almost bottomless mank – well, that one outing was really pushing it, but at least both the skis and I survived.

But on nice lift-served groomed corn, I had to get my skis way out from underneath me, drawing on all my gs racer and race coach angulation skills, to produce the true two-footed carve I would have expected to come far more easily from the Response-X, especially given my experience with the Logic-X. Ditto for some brief experience with a groomer.

I could even feel this to some extent when deskinning as I pushed off against one deskinned ski while messing with the other. I suspect the culprit could be the relationship between the sidecut position versus the tip rocker?

Fortunately, in “firm” “snow” more typical of a ski mountaineering situation, the Response-X was fine when having to put them sideways and not being concerned about race-precision carving. Coming down twice from just below Mount Hood’s Hogsback in mid April, the uneven frozen surface sparkled beautifully, but skied ugly – I knew it wasn’t just me since other skiers were downhiking (and not just telemark skiers, but skiers on AT gear, even sporting technical ice tools from their summit bids).

Third impressions, for long-term durability: I can’t pass judgment on that yet given my usage. And my similarly constructed Logic-X are still relatively low usage. However, my similarly constructed Movement Fish-X rando race skis are in excellent condition despite logging almost 386,000 of earned vertical feet, plus a bit of lift-served, and also sporting three sets of holes in the heel area.
9/18/2014
Reply from Kerry
 
Jonathan, thanks for the review. Can you compare edge hold of Response X to the Manaslu on steep/firm/icy? (Are your Manaslus of the 2010-2013 variety? Use Alien 1.0 also in Manaslu?)
Ever use a stiffer boot on the Response X? I skimo in Alien 1.0 too, but prefer TLT-5 P for the kind of skiing you've described here.
Thanks,
Kerry
9/19/2014
Reply from Jonathan S
 
Hard for me to compare the two, since they seem so different to me in so many ways. My Manaslu is the original generation, which continued on until recently as the women’s version (while the men’s/unisex became a bit stiffer). And note that the new 2014-15 version is entirely unrelated (but for the name).
I’ve used my Manaslu almost exclusively for backcountry powder. During my one run on a relatively steep groomer, I thought it held fine, but not much of a carver since the sidecut is so straight.
By contrast, the Response-X is a much more responsive and precise carver once it’s highly angulated since the sidecut is much more pronounced, and stiffer too (as least compared to my retroactively deemed women’s Manaslu).
I’ve used the Response-X exclusively with the Alien 1.0, and the Manaslu exclusively with the original-generation DyNA and then the TLT5p. I don’t think that’s a factor though, given that both boots are very stiff laterally.
Comment on this review:

Write a Review Ask a Question Post a Comment


Your name: (or )

Your e-mail:



Overall rating:
1 star 5 stars
Familiarity:


Your review:

What is 6 + 3?

Your website (optional):



Earn store credit by writing reviews. Learn more.
» Compare to other Mid-fat Skis 
© 2016 Skimo Co
View Full Screen Version