Powder Review: Icelantic Shaman 2.0 110

Cy Whitling
·6 min read

The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.

In a Nutshell

The Icelantic Shaman 2.0 updates a classic for the modern age. It’s a unique ski that might work well for some skiing styles, and definitely brings a different experience to the table from the usual crowd.

  • Length Skied: 182 cm

  • Weight: 2141 g

  • Stated Dimensions: 160-110-130 mm (in the 176 cm length)

  • Stated Sidecut: 17 m

  • Recommended Mount Point: -9 cm

Intro

If you’ve ever seen an Icelantic Shaman in the wild, you probably remember it. The original version was a striking ski. That super wide, pointy tip, combined with their unique topsheet art really stands out in a crowd. The Shaman has always been a slightly different take on the do-everything ski. While most brands in that class aim for a ski in the 110ish width range, with pretty traditional sidecut, rocker, and taper lines, the Shaman takes a different approach with an average tail and waist and an absolutely massive tip.

The theory is that the super wide tip makes the Shaman float like a much wider ski in fresh snow, while the narrower waist and tail of the ski help it stay nimble and aggressive when carving in shallower snow. After a brief hiatus, the Shaman is back for 2023, in both 99 and 110 widths. I’ve been skiing the Shaman 2.0 110 in a variety of conditions, and it certainly is unique.

Length and Mount Point

I skied the 182 cm Shaman. That’s the longest length Icelantic makes, and it worked well for me. The Shaman is also available in 169 and 176 cm sizes, and anecdotally, I’ve seen way more of the 169s out in the wild than any other length. Maybe that’s because not enough brands make propper fat pow skis in shorter lengths?

The Shaman has a recommended mount point of -10 cm. That’s not out of character for this class of ski at all, and while you could probably move that mount point a little to experiment, I don’t see any huge value in doing that. This is a pretty unique ski, and there’s no reason to move the mount point to try to make it into something it isn’t.

Where does the Shaman 2.0 110 shine?

Usually this section outlines the conditions a ski does best in. But the Shaman is a unique ski (how many times have I mentioned that?) so it’s more worthwhile to talk about the experience of skiing the Shaman 2.0.

When the snow surface is soft, the Shaman 2.0 feels a lot less weird than you’d expect given how wide that tip is. With an inch or two of fresh cut up snow on groomers, the Shaman 2.0 held a decent edge and was easy to carve. No, it does not “rail turns like a race ski.” But it carves on par with other 110 underfoot skis, and much better than you’d expect a ski with a 160 mm shovel (!) to do. That said, it’s not really an energetic carver. With some skis, it’s easy to bend them through the turn, cutting tighter than the sidecut, and bouncing energetically back and forth between turns. The Shaman doesn’t have that kind of spunk or pizzazz. It does the job, but isn’t terribly exciting doing it.

On firm groomers the Shaman feels like it has a hard time getting an edge to bite consistently. It’s not terrible for its waist width, but it’s far from class-leading.

In fresh snow the Shaman 2.0 floats well, but doesn’t feel like a traditional pow ski. It’s damn near impossible to bury that tip, but that doesn’t mean it has that floaty, surfy feeling you’d expect from a modern all-mountain or pow ski. Instead, it feels like the ski has a really defined contact point that it prefers to be driven through. You turn the tip, then the tails follow, but not necessarily in the smooth arc you’d expect. If you don’t have your weight in exactly the right place, pow turns can feel almost jerky and disjointed.

With modern pow skis like, say, an Atomic Bent 120, it feels like you stand on the ski and turn it. With the Shaman 2.0 it feels almost like you’re standing behind the ski. That’s not a bad thing, it’s just, well, unique.

If you want to slash and jib your way around fresh snow, the Shaman 2.0 is not the ski for you. But, if you like to make pretty traditional, front seat, consistent radius turns in pow, the Shaman is happy to lead the way.

Where does the Shaman 2.0 110 make some compromises?

In cut up soft snow, and, heaven forbid, moguls, the Shaman 2.0 can be a handful. If you drive the ski really traditionally, with feet close together, and equal edge pressure, always making consistent radius turns, the Shaman is fine. But, if you like to straightline to shutdown turn, or slarve and feather your way down the slope, it’s trickier to keep a handle on the Shaman 2.0. Those big tips just have a tendency to catch and wander.

It’s not aided by the fact that it’s not the dampest, or the most energetic ski. I never felt like I was using the flex to my full advantage, leaning into it and then bouncing out. Instead I didn’t notice the ski flexing, but it did get bucked around by piles of snow. Again, there’s just a lot of surface area out front to catch on things and get yanked around. You have to strike a fine line between plowing and dancing to make the Shaman 2.0 work well in inconsistent snow.

What would a perfect day on the Shaman 2.0 110 look like?

I’d rather answer a different question here. What would the perfect skier for the Shaman 2.0 look like? Well, you’re a skier that values consistency, and only ever wants to ski the same ski for everything. But you ski a fair amount of pow. And you’re not concerned with slashing or goofing off in that pow, you just want to make turns. Everywhere. That’s sort of the bullet point. If you want to make turns, generally the same shape and size turns, all over the place, in somewhat soft snow, all the time, you might get along well with the Shaman 2.0.