 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
meh, good point. I think the intermediate piste carving ski plateau is much much bigger. And flatter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| meh wrote: |
| DB wrote: |
| If however they were being used as a crutch there may not be an improvement in technique (The intermediate Fat Ski Plateau?) although they could be having much more fun (which is what it's all about). |
Why is it always fat skis that come in for criticism? Why not piste carving skis? Both make some conditions easier than others.  |
Probably because if you make a mistake on a skinny ski you are more likely to be punished for it by the ski than assisted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
AsterixTG, sorry, didn't see your comment, what I meant was the opposite - time travel your 80s skier (presuming that they are actually reasonably competent, e.g. able to carve their skinny skis) and I don't think you'd notice an immense difference putting them on modern skis, whereas doing the opposite and putting the modern skier on my late gen but pre-modern SLs would result in all sorts of pain and anguish.
Arno, Interesting... a thought might be that they were encouraging you to "carve" off piste more, you were forced into using a more "modern" carving technique on them to do this and this then naturually translated into working rather well on the SX:11s? Difficult to suggest that the Legends were a better ski, just a different one. (Sure about the 28m radius?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| DB wrote: |
| Probably because if you make a mistake on a skinny ski you are more likely to be punished for it by the ski than assisted. |
What cobblers! Have you looked at some peoples piste skiing recently? On top of which carving on skinny skis piste skis is much easier than carving on fat rockered skis. The only difference is that fatter skis are a later innovation so some people who skied the inferior tech look down on the new stuff. Something similar probably happened when carving skis were first introduced.
I'm pretty sure I'd be rubbish at tele'ing on wooden skis with leather boots but that doesn't make every technical innovation bad for people's skiing because they couldn't do the same on wooden planks as they could on the new kit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
meh, when did you last catch an edge?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
under a new name, I high sided at speed on piste a few weeks ago. On 110mm waisted skis.
Aside from which fat rockered skis hardly 'assist' with skiing well on piste. If DBs argument works for one specialised ski it works on others. Back to carving on straighter skis, these extreme side cuts make it too easy! Metal edges? Wusses!
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Tue 18-02-14 19:47; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonsense these newfangled metal edges are for hacks, and fibreglass layups & anything you didn't hand whittle yourself
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
meh, when did you last ski on skinny skis?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
under a new name, depends on what you class as skinny but my skis vary by more than 2cm at the waist and are variously cambered and rockered.
What's the fattest ski you've been on?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fatbob, tweed all the way!
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| Arno, Interesting... a thought might be that they were encouraging you to "carve" off piste more, you were forced into using a more "modern" carving technique on them to do this and this then naturually translated into working rather well on the SX:11s? Difficult to suggest that the Legends were a better ski, just a different one. (Sure about the 28m radius?) |
according to this they were 29m, although mine were the previous season's. don't think they changed the dimensions though
http://www.skipass.com/guide-matos/ski/2007/dynastar/Legend-Pro-Rider.html
as i remember it, proper carving was a fairly newly acquired skill for me so forcing myself to do it on the LPs was harder than on my SX11s but also really fun because they were a really high performance ski
no doubt the SX11s and LPs were both good skis - have a soft spot for the LPs though. pretty graphics and they were really fun to ski fast 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| rob@rar wrote: |
| DB, I've seen people on skis that they are not happy with resulting in them skiing less well than they otherwise could. I'm sure the opposite applies. If someone is happy and confident on their skis they are more likely to commit to the movements that make them ski well. Perhaps "the ski made me better" is more of a psychological improvement rather than a technical improvement? |
This, if you can be confident your ski will do what you want when you want it will increase your confidence and like Rob says you will commit to the movements.
| meh wrote: |
| DB wrote: |
| If however they were being used as a crutch there may not be an improvement in technique (The intermediate Fat Ski Plateau?) although they could be having much more fun (which is what it's all about). |
Why is it always fat skis that come in for criticism? Why not piste carving skis? Both make some conditions easier than others. |
totally agree, I see loads of people skiing on piste and just riding their edges without any real skill, a lot of skiers use stiff race skis as a crutch to cover up their lack of skill on piste
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
meh, i don't really know, 105 or so I imagine, custom tip rockered only. Usually on 96, often on 66. Why what difference does it make?
I find it way more likely that I'll catch an edge on these [img]http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Rossignol-Mens-7SK-Kevlar-Course-Titanium-Maker-Skis-m38-twin-cam-04-1-jr13-198-/12121469646[/img]1 than my Mantras. 
lynseyf, race skis as crutches? Really? What a strange thing to do!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
under a new name, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
under a new name, none at all dear chap, I just felt the interrogation was a bit one sided. 
AFAIK we're talking about people using specialist skis as a replacement for skill in order to make the skier better and how this is terrible. I just complained that fat skis always seem to get it in the neck for this when the vast majority are skiing a 'specialist' ski anyway but because it's what is considered normal it doesn't attract the same ire. DB seems particularly worried that others are doing themselves a disservice by not taking their licks trying to ski something less suitable to specific conditions in those conditions. Skiing fat skis or straight skis well on piste is harder than using skis designed for it just as skiing off piste well on slalom skis is harder than some nice fat skis.
For me it's definitely the case the more piste oriented a ski I ski the better my piste skiing gets. Same for you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
meh, oh, most definitely. That said, just because they're getting most miles these days on a consistent basis, I'm maybe even happier on my Mantras than any of my piste skis at the moment.
Mind you, the SGs take some beating...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| meh wrote: |
| DB wrote: |
| Probably because if you make a mistake on a skinny ski you are more likely to be punished for it by the ski than assisted. |
What cobblers! Have you looked at some peoples piste skiing recently? On top of which carving on skinny skis piste skis is much easier than carving on fat rockered skis. The only difference is that fatter skis are a later innovation so some people who skied the inferior tech look down on the new stuff. Something similar probably happened when carving skis were first introduced.
|
Ski a fat ski badly on piste it just ends up in a scrape but the skier normally remains upright. Ski a skinny ski badly offpiste and it often ends up horizontal.
There's no snobbery, people can ski what they want and there's no question that many people have fun on super fat skis. I'm just wondering if the equipment does makes us a better skier or actually stiffles development or makes no difference at all.
I overheard a conversation in a ski shop recently. A small woman (max 55kg) said she was a very good offpiste skier but her touring skis were cr@p offpiste. It turned out that the touring skis were 76mm wide and her offpiste skis were 115mm wide. Is either set of skis likely to further her development more than the other? Is she really a good skier or is it the equipment?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Serriadh, you said it, not me.
(I learnt on straight skis too!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Pfft. I bet you used plastic boots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
DB, as I said earlier in the thread:
| Quote: |
| DB, I think the biggest thing that stops people improving their technique is a lack of desire too rather than any kit they are using. Personally I think skiing on a ski appropriate to the conditions is probably best for learning technique as you're not constantly fighting to achieve what is being asked of you or what you are trying to do. Beyond that skiing something that has headroom for you to improve into is probably a good idea. |
In most cases I do think once you've developed strong fundamentals on kit that is easier to learn on its much easier to transition that knowledge to other pieces of equipment that are harder to ski or less suited to the conditions. For example I'd have someone learn to ski on piste on recreational carving skis before sticking them on race skis. Likewise once you can carve it's possible to carve fat skis with a reasonable sidecut using the same fundamental skills, albeit harder. Teaching someone to ski off-piste I'd make sure they were on something that didn't make the skiing unduly hard because skiing a ski unsuited to the conditions would be getting in the way of learning.
With your anecdote do you think waist width was the main problem in the off-piste/touring ski comparison or perhaps other things like ski length, weight, stiffness, dampness, rocker or ski geometry? The focus on underfoot width is a bit myopic.
Is it cheating to ski on a longer ski to get more stability at speed? With a stiffer tail to make landing big drops easier? With full rocker and more width to slarve? With a stiff, damp ski that weighs as much as a freight train for busting through crud? A really noodly ski for tight trees? Specific mogul skis? All of these things make skiing various conditions in various styles easier and others harder.
If it really worries you so much, jump on a pair of fat skis and see what the fuss is all about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Serriadh, 
There's a guy at my local hill who tele's everything in leather boots and big old straight skis. By far the person I like to watch the most from the chairlift and I've only seen him fall once in really heinous crusty conditions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Started skiing late 90's. The only straight skis I've ever skied were Rax skis for one day
My ski quiver is relatively new (2011+) and getting fatter though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| meh wrote: |
| In most cases I do think once you've developed strong fundamentals on kit that is easier to learn on its much easier to transition that knowledge to other pieces of equipment that are harder to ski or less suited to the conditions. For example I'd have someone learn to ski on piste on recreational carving skis before sticking them on race skis. Likewise once you can carve it's possible to carve fat skis with a reasonable sidecut using the same fundamental skills, albeit harder. Teaching someone to ski off-piste I'd make sure they were on something that didn't make the skiing unduly hard because skiing a ski unsuited to the conditions would be getting in the way of learning. |
This.
Select skis which minimise the compromises you need to make when choosing a pair, and hopefully you will on kit which maximises your enjoyment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My new boots made me a better skier
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
^+2
What doesn't help late beginners/early intermediates is people with higher level skills suggesting that their own particulalry bias in "favourite" ski is equally good everywhere.
Also clearly there is market confusion when reviews of wider skis say they are "good" on piste or an "all mountain" ski is great in powder - there is an implicit "for a ski in that category/size" in all these reviews
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
"My new skis made me a better skier"
|
...
...because they now colour match my jacket! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| meh wrote: |
| With your anecdote do you think waist width was the main problem in the off-piste/touring ski comparison or perhaps other things like ski length, weight, stiffness, dampness, rocker or ski geometry? The focus on underfoot width is a bit myopic. |
She was talking about powder and compairing a soft touring ski with a wider freeride ski of a similar stiffness. Neither set of skis were straight skis. The wider skis had rocker the touring skis didn't. She said the touring skis just sank in the snow (but 76mm waist should be enough for a 55kg skier). Maybe she skis powder very slowly and can get away with it on the wider skis.
| meh wrote: |
| Is it cheating to ski on a longer ski to get more stability at speed? With a stiffer tail to make landing big drops easier? With full rocker and more width to slarve? With a stiff, damp ski that weighs as much as a freight train for busting through crud? A really noodly ski for tight trees? Specific mogul skis? All of these things make skiing various conditions in various styles easier and others harder. |
I haven't said it's "cheating" or "terrible" those words have come from you & others - I'm just wondering if fat skis do really help skiers progress/better as opposed to allow them to get down slopes they couldn't before without falling and without improving their technique. I suppose another reason why fat skis are discussed is that people invariably go fatter (as opposed to narrower) and then say the skis make them ski better.
There are a lot of skiers who have the skills and use fat skis because they are the most fun. I suspect there are also a lot of skiers out there who believe they are very good skiers because they get down offpiste runs with fat rocker skis. In reality it's the ski that allows them to get down upright. As many only have one set of skis (or take one set - the fat ones) on a skiing holiday then their on piste technique doesn't improve as they don't have the skill to carve fat rocker skis. Not every day is a powder day and they probably spend a lot of time on pistes. The marketing of fat/rocker skis has enabled many to get down the offpiste but for those who haven't yet developed a good set of fundamental skills, it could be stiffling their development.
| meh wrote: |
| If it really worries you so much, jump on a pair of fat skis and see what the fuss is all about. |
Not worried at all.
Have gone fatter in recent years but plan to give some wide skis 110mm+ a try one day (need some decent snow first) but still use narrower skis on piste to try and develop my technique.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
I don't believe a ski can make you a better skier and I've bought a few but it can enable you to become a better skier. There is no doubt a fat ski will make life easier off-piste so why not but by the same token I have seen that fat skis inhibits people's piste performance development - not good or bad just the right ski for the person/circumstances. Interestingly, I skiied with a large group of Austrias and Germans recently and did not see a single fat ski so the prevalence towards fat skis seems Btir mkt thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| TTT wrote: |
| Interestingly, I skiied with a large group of Austrias and Germans recently and did not see a single fat ski so the prevalence towards fat skis seems Btir mkt thing. |
Austrian & German piste skiers or offpisters? I could categorically say all Italians use race replicas and only ski pistes but my sample is limited.
The (western) US market is almost totally all mountain and freeride now on the retail side, so it's not surprsingly that anglocentricity of reviews/media carry over to UK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
DB, arguably the problem isn't the kit the person is on but their mindset and approach to skiing. Yes you could be happy as larry just pootling about off-piste on fat skis just as many people never really get over the intermediate hump skiing on normal recreational skis on piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
TTT, depends on what you call fat. The preference for most people I know is around 100-110 in the waist which isn't fat as such but might be to some other people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| meh wrote: |
| DB, arguably the problem isn't the kit the person is on but their mindset and approach to skiing. Yes you could be happy as larry just pootling about off-piste on fat skis just as many people never really get over the intermediate hump skiing on normal recreational skis on piste. |
I suppose there are two main mindsets i.e.
a) People who realise a ski doesn't make their technique better but does enable them to implement their advanced skiing technique better.
b) Those who believe the purchase of equipment somehow magically makes them a better skier, perhaps even makes them better in bed. Takes them right off the intermediate plateau and deep into the realms of an offpiste skier who during Apres Ski has many a gnarly tale to tell.
..... thinking about it my only worry in all this is I could well be in the second group 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
It does depend on what you mean by fat but in this case the widest ski I saw was 80mm and that was the exception! I would not say if they were piste skiers or off-piste skiers - just about 60 odd decent standard skiers who generally ski regularly and mainly brought up living near the mountains. It may be that the off-piste opportunities were limited and they all have a pair of fat boys at home or its anecedoetal and the sample was not representative but my experience of skiing regularly and seeing what is in the shops is that brits are typically on wider skis than locals. That does not mean I don't see locals going off-piste on wide skis but I just found it surpising that I did not see a single vaguely wide ski amongst such a large group of regular skiers with their own skis. Is it cultural, historical (many would have been in local race clubs as kids), marketing or are locals bought up near the mountains just better skiers and don't feel the need for wider skis. Can't really say for sure without percentage skis sold by width by nationality but my perception is that the preference for a wider skis is a Brit thing and many Brits I know are actually going narrower as they progress to higher levels. Not casting judgement. Just curious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
DB, the manufacturers, media and even some people on forums are all too happy to promote (b). I remember a guide telling me to get a decent pairs of skis (by which he meant well made and vaguely suitable for the job in hand) and learn to ski them. good advice I think [/reformedgearwhore]
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Arno wrote: |
| [/reformedgearwhore] |
We all know is that DPS only need to drop the next generation of rad and you'll be all over it like a freegan in a Tesco skip.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TTT,
Similar experience here - mainly ski with Austrians who skied from an early age. 90mm is the max width although most are sub 80mm. They do tend to use old technique on new skis and favour short wedln turns though. Suspect they don't go for wide rocker skis as their technique doesn't match the ski so they feel very little benefit or difference between the newer generation of skis.
Arno,
fatbob just rumbled you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DB, the term for B is all the gear, no idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
I think it's a cultural thing... after all plenty of people grow up near mountains in North America and fat skis are very popular there.
Here in Iceland we just had a thread where pretty much everyone agreed around 100mm was best for the touring conditions here which tallies surprisingly closely to similar discussions when I was skiing in Scotland. Which isn't a massive surprise as the terrain, weather conditions, snowpack and altitude are all very similar. It's also an age thing as well, I reckon Euro kids (and big kids) into freeriding are likely to be on fatter skis.
Mind you the vast majority still ski about on narrower skis on piste.
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Wed 19-02-14 20:42; edited 3 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DB wrote: |
| b) Those who believe the purchase of equipment somehow magically makes them a better skier, perhaps even makes them better in bed |
Does this not work for you 
Perhaps you need more carbon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
