 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Agreed, best thing to Conquer all the mountain with ease and without too much complication hit the magic 80-88mm underfoot and try and get a good side cut 14-18m.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
SMALLZOOKEEPER, yeah, I'm thinking Head iM82 or perhaps the new iM78 for everything next season. I spent 4 weeks this year on iM72s, but I'd like something with just a bit more float at nearly 90 kg.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
iM82 gets my vote. It's been Whistler's "one ski quiver" this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Thanks for that tip V8, it looks like a good bet. I'll be on the lookout for a good deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
veeeight, uktrailmonster, Hold on. in fact stop right there!!!!!!!!!!! We three agree, totally! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
SZK, Quick, break out the booze. Call 1-800-DISNEY-AGREEMENT !!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| SMALLZOOKEEPER wrote: |
| Agreed, best thing to Conquer all the mountain with ease and without too much complication hit the magic 80-88mm underfoot and try and get a good side cut 14-18m. |
Still got some Hot Rod Modifieds to shift then? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
fatbob, A couple, Hod Rod Afterburner!
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Arno, not wanting to be unnecessarily contentious, but referring way back to page 2 I think where you said
| Quote: |
| so you get comments like "ski X is great on piste and surprisingly OK off-piste - i can't see why you'd need anything fatter" |
and only because I made a comment very like that regarding my funky little slalom skis (which I think are about 60mm underfoot) - I will defend that statement.
I personally, IMHO, think that fat skis probably do get in the way of technique, simply because they reduce the requirement for it. I personally prefer to judge skis by how they perform, for me, on piste. In general (and I am quite sure you will share this view) piste skiing is significantly less demanding and (to my way of thinking) less fun than off piste. Therefore I will default to a pair of skis that are reasonably technically challenging on piste. I am generally happy then to accept the (modern) compromise that they will be less performant off piste than something fatter - as the obverse of a fat ski on piste would just be dull for most of the skiing that I happen to end up doing.
However, I can see why you'd want something fatter - having used Rossi 9Xs for a half day heliskiing I realised about two runs in that I was not going to have the energy for a full day. Out with the Chubbs! But I will also add that for your average holiday skier fat skis are Not A Good Thing (for example the 3 chaps in the bubble in Champoluc on Monday morning). Mantras are not really optimised for a day on piste are they?
Maybe I should change what slopes I'm skiing on!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DM,
No, Mantras aren't but they aren't that tiring for their size IMV. I think the Outlaw ( for example ) is more so as its doesn't hide its weight.
In fact I think the K2 is a tiring Off-piste ski as well, altho the LG guides will not agree but then their skill and fitness level is anothetr thing entirely.................... Francois...!!!!!
I nearly bought the Mantras this year but two things stopped me; those hardpack days where SL/GS skis are just so much fun and pretty well the only thing you want to be on and the fact that I really really can't face carrying skis the way I travel...
Nearly bought them tho'....
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
JT, I must admit that I quite fancy trying them (Mantras). As for the Sophster, although she's dead keen to try the AC4 as a one ski quiver ski I think she'll find it disappointing. (As if a Volkl can ever disappoint...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
DM,
It'll be interesting to know what Sophie thinks of the AC4..and no, I don't think Volkl's will produce a dog either
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
David Murdoch, I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with the statement you've quoted - it's just that it's not the only legitimate way to approach skiing. If I *know* that all I will ski all day is hard piste conditions, I'd want to be on something like your slalom skis. However, I have very few days like that. And actually slithering around on inappropriately wide skis (eg Lotus 120s) on hardpack does have a challenge of its own 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
V8 have you seen (US) SKI Mag, the buyer's guide issue, the Mike Rogan quote on p. 62?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
No, what's he said now? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Mike Rogan with Stu Campbell wrote: |
| Even if you were able to briefly put your wide skis on edge early in your turn, by the finishing phase, they'll flatten. As they do your outside ski will wash out, away from your body. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds remarkably similar to what I wrote:
| Quote: |
| In short, anything we can do to reduce T the torque on the ankle (which is constantly trying to flatten our ski) |
in the edging thread ages ago......
Last edited by Then you can post your own questions or snow reports... on Wed 12-09-07 18:25; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed, only rather more deterministic in a bad Karma way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Horses for courses...it's never been any different..but the gap is closing. Whereas a few years ago you might need a softish quick turning mogul ski, a SL/GS and a powder ski..which might have been done on GS skis, and the compromises therein, now all you need is 88-90 fatish ski for eveything but the boilerplate and the huge dump days. Where you ski 80% of the time depends where you position the fatness.
For people who want a warm up, it might be better to get the piste ski out for the day just to get into the groove again....something a lot of us miss, IMV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect veeeight is right - you probably improve your technique (especially under instruction) quicker on mid-fats or narrower - in large part because you are going to learn the core of your technique on piste. That said, making progress is a combination of confidence and technical improvement (which support each other) so to make progress when you move to off-piste skiing it probably is helpful to have a bit of help from girth. I doubt though, if you are making the switch to off-piste that you will be skiing much terrain/conditions that would really benefit from > 100mm.
In general, when improving technique you want a ski that pats you on the back when you get it right rather than spanks you for getting it wrong. When I learned to ski off-piste on 200cm skinny slalom skis you certainly got spanked for any error in balance. To a lesser extent, if you are skiing on something really fat with a 40m radius, I think you might get spanked when you need to make a tight turn under pressure.
I also think that a very fat ski may not be great for imtermediates heading off piste because you can basically get away with anything (I'm not talking about better skiers who are schmeering turns at mach schnell) - do you get a noticeable pat on the back when you do something a little better?
By the way, I think JT is being a little conservative about how much of the time you can get away with a compromise ski. The only conditions in which I have been frustrated by my stockli stormrider XLs has been after a dump of warm wet snow. At 174cm and 12.5 stone, the only way I could make progress on even quite steep slopes was to lean back as otherwise the tips would bury and I'd grind to a halt. Ice, moguls, gates, powder, cut up powder, chalk, spring snow, breakable crust* were all just fine. I reckon I could have fun 95% of the time. That's not to say something fatter might not be more fun in some of those conditions.
* provide it wasn't deep warm wet sludge underneath
I suspect the veeight and SZK are right - somewhere around 80mm is the best choice for a typical male improving intermediate who wants to ski on piste and dabble with off-piste.
J
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
another thing, anyone who says you cant get by off-piste with bad technique and fat skis hasn't been out on a day trip with Whistler Heli. You see some pretty hopeless skiers enjoying themselves in the powder on fatties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
JT, the difference between V8's edging thread and the above quote is that the quote leaves no room for maybes, buts, fitness or technique.
"Even if you were able to briefly put your wide skis on edge early in your turn, by the finishing phase, they'll flatten" does not present a continuum of possibly increasing effort to sustain edging.
Can anyone explain why they would write it that way, as if there was a definite threshold?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because if I was Mike Rogan I'd have some pretty strong forthright views about most things (as HH does, as Warren Smith does, especially Gareth Roberts etc.). As I'm not Mike Rogan, my views tend to be pretty open and conservatively written.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
I've come to this thread late so apologies for not having read all the posts ...
I have a fat pair of skis (98mm underfoot) which, I agree, are pretty forgiving on technique.
What I don't understand is WHY this is the case. Bigger ski to manoevour so surely requires more effort / angulation to get an edge, yet it FEELS easy. So easy in fact that I find them to be much less demanding than my other skis which are 84mm underfoot (I think). Does this mean that I'm actually not getting good edge on my fat skis on piste?
I may have missed the explanation further up the thread - if so, feel free to paste!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
