oh I realise, out of 180cm of ski, when on piste only about 100cm of that is touching the surface... but at the end of the day, these were bought for powder and I have my old bandits for piste.
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?
milnerhome,
Quote:
bandits
says it all...
Sure, but you kind of get the point. Hellbents+Japan - a sound idea. Hellbents+manmadeconcrete - not quite so idea.
oh yeah I get the point, as obviously thats what their made for... to have a little fun I did the end of week slalom on these beasts and nearlly got top spot, was quite amusing to see all the faces when I got the skis off lol
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
milnerhome, Mosha Marc, put those piste skis away......
After all it is free
After all it is free
Mosha Marc, is there a report up yet that I have missed?
bobinch, nice skis! Do you like them in all types of soft snow or does it have to be a fair bit deeper than usual...
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.
arv, they are super smooth in anything soft. The ride gets bumpier if you go through to a hard, uneven layer underneath but even then the additional float will mean you feel it less on Kuros than a narrower/cambered ski.
But we don't have to worry about that at the moment... Tomorrow, I'm guessing windblown, heavy but essentially soft there won't be a better ski on the mountain.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
bobinch, just toying with ski choice for Glencoe tomorrow - there is no middle ground - either 89 or 128. Your posting is almost tempting me just to go for it, even if it is just to make a statement
Saw a couple of guys getting on to the gondola in Zermatt last year in May with Kuros and they were getting some weird looks
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
arv,
That would have been Joel (on my Missus' 175's) and me.....
If there's as much snow in Scotland as is being reported surely the choice is obvious!
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.
bobinch, I didn't think they had Dukes on them... were they mounted with something else before? Jesters? Must have been May 5th or something.
The skis are an unknown quantity, to me, so will take both pairs and can always change at lunch if it doesn't work out
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
arv, nope ours are mounted with Dukes. We were there Saturday 2nd and Sunday 3rd. Superb conditions.... Alas Zermatt doesn't seem to have got as much so far this season but hopefully March and April will be good months.
What are the your skis?
ps you have one more chance of winning the holiday
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
bobinch, ahh I went a little later - jumped on a plane as soon as I could after 'the dump'
190 Redeemers. First rockered ski, other fat skis tried: El Hombres, Preachers and the black Goats with the silver Buddha. Just don't want to waste half a day pissing about on them which is the thought that keeps running through my head.
If there's a day to be skiing rockered fatties in Scotland it is tomorrow!!!
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
OK. Preparing answers on the 'are those waterskis??' question. Might even write them down on a card.
Thanks for the entry - now at about 50 so if I don't win it must be rigged
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
OK before i start I'm going to hold my hands up here & wave my flag as being in the fat ski camp though i believe my opinion is valid.
Firstly I have to say I'm bemused by the OP's statement that fat skis are a new thing. I learned to ski in 98/99 & at the time i had a number of american mates who were skiing on what were then fat skis e.g. in excess of 90mm. I would agree they'd only be considered mid fat by current standards but just to get the record straight this is definitely not something that's a new thing. By the winter of 02/03 seeing skis in excess of 100mm in waste in chamonix wasn't an unusual thing. It has however only relatively recently that the big market brands have openly been pushing them
Secondly in my opinion someone who's done a bit of piste skiing say 4-6 weeks & would be at the upper intermediate end of the scale but has dreams of skiing off piste so is say spending 20-30% of their time off piste a ski circa 90mm in the waste will be easier to learn on off piste. YES you will lose on piste performance in doing so. However the benefits in learning off piste will i believe the out weigh the slight loss in piste performance. Whilst it is possible to ski in all conditions on any ski as the likes of under a new name, is categorical in his assertion of this. Which is fine for him in the case of skiing off piste on skinny skis cause he already has the skills to do so. However getting to this stage & passing that plateau will take considerably longer on the skinnier skis.
Thirdly the OP's assertion that all of these people with skis in excess of 100mm are buying them for fashion reasons & that lots of these people are using them mostly on piste. I do not believe this to be the case. I bought my kingswoods 2 winters ago, 104mm waste. Over those 2 winters I have had 4 weeks skiing. Of the 3 places I've been in those 4 weeks in 2 (Tignes & Les Arcs) I've rarely if ever seen anyone with noticably wider skis, & the vast majority of people have had considerably smaller skis. In the instances where i did see people with bigger or similar skis it was instantly apparent that these people knew how to use them. But the OP probably saw them on the piste on their way to where the goods were & instantly put them down cause they were on piste. The other place i was, was Chamonix & this is clearly the exception to the rule cause there is a significantly higher proportion of high performance off piste skiers there. So seeing large skis their isn't unusual & whilst this is no guarantee the holders of these skis can actually use them the vast majority there clearly can.
Fourthly ski construction is king! Obviously an extremely soft fat rockered ski will be a pain in the hole on hard iced up piste as this is clearly not what it's designed for. However it's quite possible in the way a ski is constructed specifically in it's flex pattern & torsional stiffness to make a relatively fat ski ski quite well on piste. Obviously it will be slower in the roll over from turn to turn & will put greater overall loads on the users knees relative to a circa 70mm waste ski. This does not however necessarily mean it will it will be an absolute pig in these conditions.
Finally fat skis are a lot of fun to use when off piste. I learned to ski off piste on a pair of 68mm 180 toothpicks that were for mogul skiing. This was mostly cause the friend of a friend who had advised me to buy them was of the opinion that you need to start on skinny skis to learn how to ski properly. I didn't know better so bought the skis i was advised to buy him. Later on i bought proper carvers & then fat skis as i learned more for myself. Even though i'm well aware of the fact that i could probably ski these skis in most conditions again tomorrow if faced with it, I wouldn't ever voluntarily do this. I love my fat skis & given the choice will almost always take them out over my other skis, movement thunders that are about 90mm. In saying this if i were in a resort where conditions were hard ice pack with no new snow anywhere in say the last 3 weeks i probably would rent a pair of race skis just to make the most of the conditions but this would be not a situation i would voluntarily put myself in & i've been lucky enough in my last few trips to have gotten decent snow.
My €0.02 I hope they make sense & add to the discussion.
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?
frank4short, You make (as usual) good and thoughtful points.
1.
Quote:
OP's statement that fat skis are a new thing
- I didn't think I implied they were any sort of recent innovation? My first heli trip in 2001 saw a very incompetent chap being progressively upgraded to something definitely >100mm so he could keep up and enjoy himself. Umm, they were Volkls, which probably aren't the biggest brand in the world, but they're not tiny.
2.4-6 weeks: upper intermediate? Leaving aside classification, (and I know you had a particularly unusual learning experience) at 4-6 weeks I would expect most skiers to be focusing on cementing robust on piste technique (getting down blue/red/black runs delete as applicable). 2.b. fat skis mean there is no (as far as I can see) plateau for off piste.
3. The skis I referred to were in a pile in the corner of the shop, having been left there by their owners who'd realised they were totally unsuited to skiing on-piste on hard pistes. (Umm, read the post, maybe?) My other home is Chamonix and I can assure you that I see many skiers there skiing on what I, curmudgeonly, consider inappropriate (I am not mad).
4.
Quote:
This does not however necessarily mean it will it will be an absolute pig in these conditions.
EXACTLY - point being that if you spend 100% of the time on piste, why buy something that is a little or a lot less good than what you could be skiing on.
Yup, checked, I didn't imply they were a recent innovation.
I think the first I saw, ever, were Volkl somethings that CMH had taken on as their heli ski fleet. About 1999. I could be wrong.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
under a new name wrote:
1.
Quote:
OP's statement that fat skis are a new thing
- I didn't think I implied they were any sort of recent innovation? My first heli trip in 2001 saw a very incompetent chap being progressively upgraded to something definitely >100mm so he could keep up and enjoy himself. Umm, they were Volkls, which probably aren't the biggest brand in the world, but they're not tiny.
Right for the record perhaps i misinterpreted you on this front however that was the jist i got from your original posting. Oh & also for the record it was the original volkl explossifs that CMH had specifically made with their own top sheet.
Quote:
2.4-6 weeks: upper intermediate? Leaving aside classification, (and I know you had a particularly unusual learning experience) at 4-6 weeks I would expect most skiers to be focusing on cementing robust on piste technique (getting down blue/red/black runs delete as applicable). 2.b. fat skis mean there is no (as far as I can see) plateau for off piste.
Perhaps, now this is just a perhaps, not all intermediates are interested in having perfect on piste technique. For these people the allure of off piste & the apparent fun it offers is much greater than having perfect technique. I know it certainly was for me. I also know that if someone had offered me the opportunity when i was learning to skip about 6 weeks of persistent & sometimes painful crashes of learning to ski off piste on skinny skis then i would have jumped at the chance at the time. It may have prevented me from having better technique on piste though i wouldn't have cared.
Quote:
3. The skis I referred to were in a pile in the corner of the shop, having been left there by their owners who'd realised they were totally unsuited to skiing on-piste on hard pistes. (Umm, read the post, maybe?)
Maybe the person who left the fat skis in the shop brought them on holidays hoping for good snow but wasn't aware of the fact the resort in question was one of the drier resorts in the alps. So when they got there & found the snow wasn't good decided to rent something more suitable for the job. Not everything is always black & white & a shop owners opinion isn't the be all & end all.
Quote:
My other home is Chamonix and I can assure you that I see many skiers there skiing on what I, curmudgeonly, consider inappropriate (I am not mad).
And yes i'm afraid if your other home is in cham & you consider fat skis inappropriate you are in fact mad. I would have thought it's possibly one of the few places in the alps where there's a true justification for them on a regular basis with it's higher quantities of snowfall, bigger lifts & greater areas of off piste relative to pistes compared to most euro resorts.
Quote:
4.[/b]EXACTLY - point being that if you spend 100% of the time on piste, why buy something that is a little or a lot less good than what you could be skiing on.
How many people that only have one ski quivers of truely fat skis spend 100% or in excess of 50% of their time on piste? I'd hazard not actually that many, actually scratch that a tiny percentage i reckon. Or for that matter even larger mid fats, say in excess of 95mm. I'd say a few more but not all that many.
For the record for myself I spend maybe somewhere between 20-40% of my time skiing cruising about on pistes. This is because of my group of friends i regularly go skiing with the vast majority of them are intermediates. Sometimes it's nice to go skiing with your mates even if it's not the type of skiing you're into. I'd love to have a nice pair of GS piste skis for that but when it comes down to it i've only enough room in my bag for 2 pairs of skis. So for the forseeable future i won't be investing as i'd rather bring my mid fats for touring & my fats for everything else.
I'd also like to add i feel i deserve special award for seperating out all of these paragraphs into individual quotes. I never realised how much of a pain in the erse it is.
There's been some interesting and well reasoned discussion on this thread that I've certainly learnt from, but the clear sign that there is a fashion statement side to fat skis is the way fat bois all fawn over each other's skis like a bunch of women talking about shoes
I think the main thing I've learnt is that if there aren't already, there will probably be increasing numbers of people skiing off piste on fat skis who don't have sound piste technique/fundamental skills and will form a group of intermediate plateaued off piste skiers comparable in level to intermediate plateaued piste skiers.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
frank4short wrote:
Perhaps, now this is just a perhaps, not all intermediates are interested in having perfect on piste technique.
Can you explain the difference between on-piste technique and off-piste technique?
After all it is free
After all it is free
rob@rar wrote:
frank4short wrote:
Perhaps, now this is just a perhaps, not all intermediates are interested in having perfect on piste technique.
Can you explain the difference between on-piste technique and off-piste technique?
I was told that they were the same, except that you have to ski correctly off piste.
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.
frank4short,
Quote:
original volkl explossifs that CMH had specifically made with their own top sheet
That's the ones.
Quote:
not all intermediates are interested in having perfect on piste technique
That's why there's a phenomenon known as the "intermediate plateau". Very few 4-6 week intermediates, as far as I can see, want to spend lots of their time off piste. Too far away from a decent lunch to start with.
Quote:
I know it certainly was for me
Sure. That's why I alluded to your rather unconventional skiing development. I really don't know, or of, many skiers who had quite the baptism of fire that you had.
Quote:
Maybe the person who left the fat skis in the shop brought them on holidays hoping for good snow but wasn't aware of the fact the resort in question was one of the drier resorts in the alps
Exactly what did happen. Out of many explanations - one could hat-rabbit (I just coined that expression, do you like it?) say, it was his one ski quiver in which case he's a pure fashion victim or imagine that he could only bring one pair of skis and if he did get a meter of Utah powder he would be unable to rent something equivalent (why not go to Utah then?) making it a bit of a schoolboy error.
Quote:
you consider fat skis inappropriate
I don't. That's why I'm pondering whether to go out on my 188cm/93mm skis or my wife's slightly shorter ones today.
Quote:
only have one ski quivers of truly fat skis spend 100% (corrected for your spelling)
I agree too. I'm not saying that fat skis should be banned. Just that as far as I can see, many skiers are on skis that are too fat for their abilities or aspirations and it's probably doing them no good, and may be doing them much bad.
That's all. I'm going skiing. On my fat skis.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
bobinch, kuros with dukes...way to go...and people on here laughed at me for suggesting 'bents and dukes for japan!....nice pic of the matterhorn BTW........if you picked the right line, it looks almost skiable!...
okbye
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowpatrol, I noticed your post about squatting. I have been known to partake and can say it is a prerequisite for touring on Kuros with Dukes. On the other hand skiing the North face of the Matterhorn would definitely require wings....
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.
snowpatrol, bobinch, Been done from about 3/4's of the way up the face in the photo shown. Was by Stian Hagen & Chris Davenport i think & probably a few before them. Just thinking of them specifically as it was in a segment on a TGR or matchstick film.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
frank4short, chapeau to those gentlemen!
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Fat skis in Verbier = normal, never ever heard the "water ski?" comment.
Last season in Meribel the days after a big dump I had the "water ski?" question about ten times and never saw a pair fatter than my Factions, and the fattest skis in Freeride (the obvious fat ski shop there) were Nevis Black Crows which are only 100 or so.
Verbier is an off-piste mecca, Meribel is an on-piste mecca.
Horses for courses, use the right tool for the task, etc etc.
I rest my case.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
rungsp, I get the water ski question a fair bit here in Fernie too. I'd attribute it more to "people think they're funny" than where you are
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
bobinch, went for the fat skis today - good choice!! So much fun in any description of soft snow. Took a few runs of getting used to but after that they just rip
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
There is no doubt that fat skis in the right conditions, for the right skier, skiing in a particular way, work way better than "skinny". But, just as the 80s cablecar challenge was how high your skis were above your head, there are definitely some who now go fat simply because it means they have to take their skis into the gondola to show off their topsheets and how they don't fit in the ski rack! Fat skis are not all for fashion victims, but many fashion victims are using fat skis - plus ca change and all that.
Fat skis are apparently forever now, but sadly I also remember when I didn't think you would get anything better than a Dynastar Vertical for off-piste (c1998). Couldn't find a review online, but they were apparently renamed Renegades in 2000 - you will note they were all mountain, free-ride mid-fats at 70mm waist.., and that the attributes sounds familiar....
"Review: Its mid-fat geometry provides the perfect combination of crud-busting float and hard snow control. With a stout wood core, the Renegade sets a new benchmark in high performance, versatility, and lasting value. The Renegade lets skiers jump into the Free Ride game without breaking the bank. Skier: Good skier looking for freedom in all snow conditions and terrain. Sidecut/geometry: 104-70-87 (Tip, Waist, Tail) Turn Radius: 25.5m"
Those were the ultimate - made powder simple, or so we thought - luckily we didn't know that we should have been struggling...
Recently I've been skiing on Scott Punishers, (86mm), off-piste, and also on-piste with my kids. Off-piste, I've tried fatter, but they don't for much more for me than the Punishers - because I'm still in the Powder 8s camp... I can, however, see the attraction of fat, rockered, skis that are letting people charge down mountains much, much faster than they used to in the days when Partick Vallencant was jump turning his way down mountains that Shane McConkey would have straight lined. It's a different way of skiing so needs a different ski, although not sure which was chicken and which was egg.
I was skiing in Italy last week, good snow and Punishers would have been perfect and I would have been completely happy that they were perfectly good piste skis (was skiing with my 7 year-old), except they got waylaid by airline, so I hired GS carvers for a day - and it was a revelation...had forgotten how fast and responsive narrower skis could be - on-piste. Edge-to-edge much quicker, and the simple weight difference of less material when doing tight turns was obvious.
What I would want to be on at the top of an icy Tiger at Glenshee is way different to what you'd want to be on in 18inches of powder in Colorado - surely anyone can't argue with that? Personally, I don't believe that anything above mid-80s (and I've tried them) make a sensible all round-ski for most people doing a mix of on and off-piste, but if you're specialising or have more than one pair, then go for what is best fit for the day.
And, of course, being a rose-tinted spectacle wearing veteran, I think if you're skiing moguls, then a really fat ski is the only way forward:
98/99 Rossi B3 were the widest ski around. Cant remember the size but were BIG at the time. I was on a pair of Salomon Race skis (3V something?) think about 60mm at the waist and they had a fair amount of shape. Was the biggest snow season in the Alps EVER and I skied lovely powder all season I thought they were a real step forward ! They are in my shed so will measure waist today !
footsoldier, Dynastar Vertical had been around a little while already at that time I think.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
rungsp wrote:
Meribel is an on-piste mecca.
Meribel (and the rest of the 3V) can be an off-piste mecca, for the very reason that most skiers stay on-piste.
I spent the day skiing (lift-served) off-piste yesterday on 128mm ...... it was quite nice !
Alex A, I bet you the 3Vs were a little wider than 60mm. maybe 67mm?
Dynastar Verticals have had various incarnations, the first I think being in 1989 with lovely fluo orange bases.
98/99 everyone seemed to be on the original Salomon Xcreams, a skis which transformed many of my chums skiing (and allowed me a great day up les Grands Montets with a crushing hangover which would have prevented me enjoying myself on my race skis. I'd just have fallen off them)
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
slikedges, wrote
Quote:
The point is the more the mm the less good on groomed. Dunno why you'd think the point was being able to tell the difference on each and every mm increase
sorry, but once again you're stating that each mm more is worse on groomed - hence it should be noticed. If the diffrence is not noticeable, it should be the same, not worse.
Quote:
brain doesn't adapt
yes it does. Some changes do occur at a lower level, but most don't
Quote:
The Weber-Fechner law seems like a pretty superfluous way of stating the obvious, that the smaller a change is as a proportion of the baseline stimulus the less it's noticed! (I think one of the many reasons why it might not be very useful)
It actually states a logarithmic relationship and way to go, rambling on issues you've no idea about (you could have at least checked on Wikipedia...)
After all it is free
After all it is free
under a new name, Yeah you are prob right with regards the 3V's... will measure them when this rain stops !
Loads of Xscreams about as you say but B3 was defo biggest ski about. Think they were 89mm or so? Maybe 85mm... cant remember (too drunk in those days )
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.
Alex A, I don't know that they were actually the biggest, I think Volkl explosivs (as discussed above) would be bigger and Atomic had some pretty fat sticks. B3s (or at least Bandit XXXs as they were properly known) were pretty big.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
under a new name, ah yeah... sorry XXX's ! At the time I was MEGA anti anything like that. Took me a few years for sure. Looking back it really didn't stop me skiing anything. Maybe it was just harder work and slower. But when powder was so great it really didn't make much difference. Just different technique. as you sink.
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
lol
I thought they were a real step forward ! They are in my shed so will measure waist today !
