 Poster: A snowHead
|
I was more meaning manufacturers claims, usually they are selling you something that's the same as last years model but with new top sheets.
Dont take this the wrong way but I dont see what the claims made by press was BS for the stockli, you where out on skis that where probably on the short side cruising blues and the odd reds (i haven't seen you ski but by the way you speak push on one leg to turn etc probably not pushing the ski) comparing them to a cheap made special order for sport 2000 and by last weeks weather the slopes where very nice conditions. I fell into the same trap with my first skis... some atomic things.
I have never skied stockli's but have heard good things about them Inc your report on them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Yes.
Ski reviews are like car reviews.
Highly subjective.
Too often biased by the reviewer's favorite childhood brand, their employer's advertising budget, or whether the skimaker pays for the free trip.
What's more, a set of planks can be cr*p when the edges are blunt... But transformative after getting sharpened up... Prep is everything.
Best to read at least 10 reviews, from multiple regions, ideally in different languages, and look for trends.
Crowdsource your reviews.
Never rely on just one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| Unfortunately that Atomic Redster MR ski is one which was custom made for (I believe) the Sport 2000 chain, |
I liked the bit on the top sheet: "Engineered in Austria, built by Bulgarians". Having met a few Bulgars over the years it hardly inspires confidence although they do make the Sin R1 550 which is the supercar equivalent of that Atomic MR ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
I dont think its really fair to knock Eastern European ski manufacturing my whitedots are conceived in Leeds but born somewhere east of berlin..... and I love them
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
For a few years I wrote a lot of reviews for a ski magazine.
There absolutely is a lot of utter crap written by some (it's not particularly hard to become a 'ski journalist'), though there are a few very good review sources too (Blister, as posted above, are the best IMO).
I always stayed away from saying a ski is good or bad. That's pointless and doesn't help anyone unless they are my size and weight and ski just like me. My approach was always to describe the feel and character of a ski, what sort of skiing (style, terrain, etc) it rewards, and what sort of skier (ability, approach, style, etc) would get on with it. I think that's more useful than trying to objectively rate skis - the reader should know if it's up their street and fills the hole in their quiver, or not, and can then go test.
Re. advertising and money. Certainly had to review some things because adverts were taken out, but I never felt pressured to talk something up that I didn't like. Sometimes we made sure to find space in the annual gear guide for products from brands that paid for ads in the mag, but individual models or reviews were genuinely never influenced by payments (the guy doing the writing isn't the one getting the money from the brand for starters).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@Sharkymark, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@clarky999,
‘For a few years I wrote a lot of reviews for a ski magazine.
There absolutely is a lot of utter crap written by some ’
Straight from the horse’s mouth, so to speak.
Reassuring that you say reviews not directly linked to ‘bribes’ at least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@clarky999, interesting. I'm reasonably sure that there aren't really any bad skis any more, but that for sure some will suit better than others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As far as " expert" skis being unusable by intermediates, I would suggest the opposite.
Top end skis have a performance capability that is more that an intermediate can use but are still usable.
In my experience, a good skier pushing a basic ski too far is where the problems lie, where the ski just gives up & spits the user off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Unfortunately more or less all the reviews are nonsense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| Unfortunately more or less all the reviews are nonsense. |
Absolute wisdom! …………………………………………………. Better to spend a few years skiing and finding out what makes a good ski than spending a few years skiing and not finding out what makes a good ski.
ever skied something stiff over 200 cms
then you would learn by experience just how skis perform
and then you would take reviews with a pinch of salt rather than dismiss as BS.
ski more skis, then comment.
Last edited by And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports. on Mon 30-12-19 23:04; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Like all sports it's all about the conditions at the time, in windsurfing basically, one board could be so much better at slack water and no chop and then be a nightmare in chop and a fast running tide and if Mag testers on their trip had bad conditions they still tested boards even if the boards they tested were not designed for those conditions.
I've been to the SIGB (GB Ski industry) test a few times, back in 2015 and 2016, as has @clarky999, as it was just up the hill from him in Kuthai.
It was quite an eye-opener, as it was here that many journos and retailers were "testing" next season's gear.
Basically each ski you take out, be it piste, race, all-mountain etc you then mark out of ten in various categories and then ALL the test results are collated and various top skis come out on top.
So if there's a couple of hundred testers there's a good chance that a good / better ski might come out on top, so it's not too bad a way to determine what is a good ski etc, or is it?
And those results are the fodder for various media's ski tests.
So a top off-piste ski, for instance, might be skied by 60 people all giving it their top marks over other off-piste skis, but as I witnessed, there might not have been any off-piste to ski and or some of the "testers" just stuck to the piste 
What did stun me was a certain retailer (now no more) taking the opportunity of the event to set up a little film studio to then produce a number of so-called ski test videos with his team of employees and himself, attempting to ski every ski on available and then film a review based on 20mins of skiing!
We actually used the test to determine where the ski industry was going, so for instance back in 2015 the buzz was very much about touring with bindings such as the Kingpin and every brand having a touring ski in it's line up.
https://stylealtitude.com/ski-touring-the-percentage-game.html
A year on we went back and I did specifically tested touring skis both on the up and down but again it was sort of to get a broader picture as I know that it's the conditions that so often dictate how good you think a ski is.
https://stylealtitude.com/a-year-on-in-the-ski-touring-world-review.html
And again I saw said retailer, spouting forth on the pros and cons of touring skis without having actually skied the up and the down was on the piste!!!
We have not been back to the SIGB test for a few years, but we're going back in March 2020 as it's in Pila which is close to us.
And again it will be to get a broader picture of where ski design is going for the 20/21 season.
And for many, the SIGB test is about getting photos of new gear for their website/media etc, for the retailers to ski the skis from the main brands that they will be selling the coming season and for the Brands to pimp to the media about how their ski is the new hot thing for next season, and for sure many are taken in by that!
Interesting to note that in our local mountaineering/ski touring shop which is not at all your average ski shop (it's a good few kms from the lifts / piste), there is not one touring ski over 100mm wide compared to a few years ago, it's all back to weight says he who is hoping to tour on my new 105's shortly
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| tangowaggon wrote: |
As far as " expert" skis being unusable by intermediates, I would suggest the opposite.
Top end skis have a performance capability that is more that an intermediate can use but are still usable.
In my experience, a good skier pushing a basic ski too far is where the problems lie, where the ski just gives up & spits the user off. |
You haven't tried my mate's Nordica Super Gs then. I would expect unusable by 99% of people. I'd also throw in the 2001 Stockli Stormrider DP Pro.
Ouch!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@under a new name, as soon as you design in a bit of rocker or early rise things get easier and the trend seems to be erring that way for more piste-oriented models. Certainly not the case with planks from 5 or 10+ years ago though! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
@Sharkymark, a pair of 210 super Gs is about as piste oriented as you get and there’s no early rise about them 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
Like all sports it's all about the conditions at the time, in windsurfing basically, one board could be so much better at slack water and no chop and then be a nightmare in chop and a fast running tide and if Mag testers on their trip had bad conditions they still tested boards even if the boards they tested were not designed for those conditions
|
I seem to remember that all the boards that we had tested were supplied by the manufacturer specifically for testing, ensuring that they were bang on weight and without any defects ... presumably the same happens with skis
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
@under a new name, hewn from railway sleepers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| Unfortunately more or less all the reviews are nonsense. |
You sound like an utter genius. Tries q high end ski in a child's size - can't tell the difference in it from standard rental fodder- so concludes all reviews are BS. Hmm any other variables present?
If this is a troll then chapeau more original and actually likely to generate more enlightened counterpoints than e.g. our brainless racist trolls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Btw go somewhere where there are really good skiers and skinny little women will be on 180ish freeride skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Dave of the Marmottes wrote: |
| Btw go somewhere where there are really good skiers and skinny little women will be on 180ish freeride skis. |
I saw a lady today on the gondola, about same height as my mrs, 5'2"ish her skis had to have been 8" bigger than her, they werent no floopynoodles either. Just looking at her i knew she could rip. I had to have a sneaky glance at her skiing, my assumption was correct
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"so concludes all reviews are BS"
I appreciate you have made 26648 posts, which certainly entitles you to be rude, but have you read the example ski reviews posted further back?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe the last example is not for a ski at all. That may skew the BS distribution, somewhat 
A quick scan suggests at least some of them are translated into English...never a good starting point for consistency/coherence. As was suggested above, best to scan them, pick out what is consistent and use that as a starting point for some real-world testing
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
"so concludes all reviews are BS"
I appreciate you have made 26648 posts, which certainly entitles you to be rude, but have you read the example ski reviews posted further back? |
Yes they aligned with what I'd expect for a hi end piste performance ski. But doesn't sound like you were skiing them to anything like their potential so I'm not sure how your conclusion has any merit - given you don't even know what a tune is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
Let's look at some reviews of this ski:
***
Extremely efficient, the reviewer's loved the ski's stiffness, grip and energy, especially in short turns, and the exceptionally energetic rebound in turn release. The ski literally leaps from turn to turn and you have to be careful not to add too much pressure if you want to stay in control.
The reviewers' enthusiastic comments sum up the ski's qualities very well: "A stiff and enjoyable ski", "Super ski very incisive, grippy, lively and playful", "Turns easily and strong rebound", "Stable at high speed".
Its weaker performance in skid turns and its powerful rebound mean that it's more suitable for a public with good technical skills.
The Laser SC from Stöckli is an excellent choice for technically good to expert riders who want a stiff, incisive and powerful ski.
***
Allround racer
The Stöckli Laser SC is somewhere in between a slalom and a giant slalom ski. The edge hold is superb again as in almost all Stöckli skis. The rigidity of the ski ensures that there's no speed limit whatsoever, but also causes the ski to be less playfull than for example its cross ski brother, the Stöckli Laser SX. The best thing the Laser SC does is high speed medium radius cornering. It feels wonderfull to engage the turn and then keep pushing, prolonging the turn as long as possible. And all the while the Laser SX does not slide 1mm off line.
This ski is made for...
This ski is made for sportive and strong (both fysically and technically) skiers for whom a slalom ski is too extreme, the radius being so small, and a GS ski too one-sided. I tested the Laser SX at a 177cm length (me being 178cm, 85kg), which I found a little bit too much for me. I recommend 5-10cm below your own length. Take this ski too long and it will spoil the fun. And you don't really need the extra length, because the Laser SC is very stiff.
Stöckli about the Laser SC
"This ski has racing quality in its veins. Its polyvalent character makes it a reliable companion on hard and soft pistes as well as for short to medium radii. The Laser SC features both high running smoothness and – thanks to TFC Technology – high safety reserves."
***
This ski is just right for good skiers. Stable but not overpowering. This stiff-tailed ski is designed for perfect grip on-piste. It is best not to leave the groomed runs with this ski. The ski is available from 149 to 177cm. The skis handle like slalom race skis. Perfect edge hold and a small radius ranging from 11,10 m to 16,20 m make them the first choice for short turns.
[ this one makes some sense]
***
Well known to the Proskilab reviewers and often positioned in the top places, the Laser SC from Stöckli is this year's winner of the "Best Ski" medal in the category.
Performance is on the programme. The ski is lively, quickly enters curves and easily deforms without excess. Its holding to curves is excellent, the ski grips, is very precise and the "pressure reactions are easy to find". The rebound at the end of curves is tonic, without being destabilising.
The ski reviewed this year appeared a little more comfortable in skidding than last year. The fluidity of skid/slip/cut transitions was appreciated by the reviewers.
What impressed them most was the stability and comfort of the ski. The SC Laser remains "laid down", in contact with the snow, tracing its curve with serenity and effectively absorbing all the different types of terrain. It evokes a great sense of security and you feel "in control" in all circumstances. It should be noted that it requires little commitment for a ski in this category.
On the other hand, at very high speed, it loses a little of its lustre: the ski becomes less clear and the presses less solid.
It is an excellent ski for this category where we prefer performance, but especially the pleasure the skier experiences. We advise the Laser SC from Stöckli to a wide range of skiers from good to expert levels.
***
Just over a year ago Chord Co, cable mongers to the pace, rhythm and timing cognoscenti, introduced Tuned ARAY to its Sarum range of top ranking interconnects. I got fabulous results with this cable, it’s the first Chord Co cable that has really made an impression, and I have subsequently used Sarum Tuned ARAY analogue and digital interconnects in my reference system. They have superior timing to most cables but avoid the forwardness that often accompanies pace and deliver an unusual degree of musical coherence.
[this is a joke, a review of a 500 quid RCA cable, worth about 2 quid, from the hi-fi business, which filled up with this cr*ap when the CD came along and trashed it]
***
Basically these reviews are some 90% totally meaningless tosh. No wonder some mug like me rents one of these - a 1.3k ski which is supposed to exterminate people like me - and actually gets on well with it, despite it being about 10cm "too short". |
There a bunch of issues here...
A. HOW TO CHOOSE A SKI SIZE ?
In my humble opinion we should stop with the "skier size +/- x cm" old rule to choose a ski size, which I think is a terrible mistake.
Since modern skiing is all about deforming skis, skier static weight and skiing technics/aggressiveness are the main factors to be taken into account. I would qualify skier size as a secondary factor.
2. Each ski has a reference size
More over, there is no general rule for ski size. Each ski is made by manufacturers to be skied in some specific size. When they design the ski, they start from a "reference size" suited for a reference weight, size, and skiing level.
With 82 kg, 180 cm I am usually not far from the manufacturer reference weight. I would usually choose 165 cm for a slalom ski and 180/185 cm for an all mountain ski.
B. REGARDING THE STOCKLI LASER SC
I tested this ski the Proskilab testers and absolutely loved it. I tested it in 170 cm which was the good size for me, because 1) the ski is softer 2) and has a larger radius that a standard slalom ski. For you, assuming that you have size/weight ratio not very far from mine, I guess that one size below may have been a slightly better choice. But I am not surprised that you liked it in 156 cm.
C. REGARDING SKI REVIEWS
We have been organizing the Proskilab ski reviews for 14 years now. I also have read many complaints about ski reviews during this period...
I think that the main issue here is that people don't know what is a ski review and expect to read the same content from one test to another.
But there is a ton of factors that will induce discrepancies between tests : test methodology, category expectations, testers technical level, terrain, snow conditions, other skis tested in the same category, rating system, condition of skis given for reviews, and so on.
You will NEVER get the same results... but they will be usually more or less converging.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Also throw in subjective terms like ‘playful’ and you can enter a world of confusion! One of the reviewers found them playful and the other didn’t (paraphrasing a little). For a slalom racer, playful likely calls upon a different set of objective physical characteristics of the ski than for a beginner or a freerider or a mountaineer turned skin tourer or an alien.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| tangowaggon wrote: |
As far as " expert" skis being unusable by intermediates, I would suggest the opposite.
Top end skis have a performance capability that is more that an intermediate can use but are still usable.
In my experience, a good skier pushing a basic ski too far is where the problems lie, where the ski just gives up & spits the user off. |
You haven't tried my mate's Nordica Super Gs then. I would expect unusable by 99% of people. I'd also throw in the 2001 Stockli Stormrider DP Pro.
Ouch! |
I'd also offer the Movement Superturbo - one of the few modern freeride skis made in an over 2m length.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Back to OP - Big bloke 174cm/74kg rents very short skis(156cm) and squishes all the vitality out of them!! QED??
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
@proskilab, Thank you for an informative post.
I also found it illogical that skier height should be a big factor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| ......I also found it illogical that skier height should be a big factor. |
Increase skier height = increased leverage. A longer ski gives greater resistance to the increased leverage and aids fore/aft balance. Rent s pair of blades for day and see for yourself.
Skier height is also a factor on calculating din settings due to the increased leverage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Can you draw a diagram which shows the "increase in leverage" of a taller skier, versus a shorter skier of the same weight and doing the same thing with his legs?
FWIW I am a "mechanical engineer" and I can't see it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
@proskilab, Thank you for an informative post.
I also found it illogical that skier height should be a big factor. |
Doesn't that post offer an opinion of having low / negligible effect, yet with this statement "With 82 kg, 180 cm I am usually not far from the manufacturer reference weight. I would usually choose 165 cm for a slalom ski and 180/185 cm for an all mountain ski" then give the opposite in factual dimensions to alter the skiers effect acted upon the ski length?
Isn't the same height (same person) preferring shorter ski for slalom use to enact greater pressure over the tip and hence improved steering response, and all mountain in greater length to subsequently reduce the skiers effect on the ski tip to more readily deflect the skier upward when approaching rising ski surface?
A taller skier will surely have a higher centre of mass than the same weight skier in a shorter size. It must change the geometric influence as spyderjon says, isn't that true?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
Can you draw a diagram which shows the "increase in leverage" of a taller skier, versus a shorter skier of the same weight and doing the same thing with his legs?
FWIW I am a "mechanical engineer" and I can't see it. |
It’s torque that pulls your heel up and out of the rear binding for example. Torque is in Nm. Taller person has a centre of mass further away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
Can you draw a diagram which shows the "increase in leverage" of a taller skier, versus a shorter skier of the same weight and doing the same thing with his legs?
FWIW I am a "mechanical engineer" and I can't see it. |
It's all about "moments", or mass times distance. (m x l)
As regards skis, it really depends on what sort of ski and skiing you actually do. Slalom skis are shorter than GS skis, Freestyle skis differ from Powder skis, so do Touring skis. Longer skis tend to suit faster skiers, to a point.
Other forces are at play … some light reading ….. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/System-of-forces-acting-on-the-ground-during-a-ski-turn_fig2_221723820
These forces are variable due to skier weight (ma), skier speed (v), CoG, and effective ski contact, ski rigidity (torsional and longitudinal), normal react to left/right skis turning left/right. In some cases shorter skis are helpful when turning, but not always the case.
Different strokes for different folks!
Dare I mention about equivalent ski length with rockered skis!
As I previously said …………. ski more skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
OK; I can see a longer ski obviously provides more stability in the foreward/backwards direction, but is that really a problem when skiing? It is really difficult to tip a ski over by leaning forwards or backwards. When turning, one is putting pressure in the middle of a ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| OK; I can see a longer ski obviously provides more stability in the foreward/backwards direction, but is that really a problem when skiing? It is really difficult to tip a ski over by leaning forwards or backwards. When turning, one is putting pressure in the middle of a ski. |
As a "mechanical engineer" I'd have thought it'd be easy for you to figure out 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Peter Stevens, How can you be a "mechanical engineer" and not understand how a lever works? It is such a simplistic concept that my 9 year old could explain to it to you. Assuming you actually do understand, which is a stretch given your posts so far, what part of taller skier = longer lever are you struggling with?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Peter Stevens wrote: |
| It is really difficult to tip a ski over by leaning forwards or backwards. |
No it isn't - you can do that standing still if you commit. Other examples include going over the handle bars in powder or landing a jump, hitting a bump/rut at speed whilst a little backseat, etc. I get the impression you are quite new to skiing and don' really have a feel for everything that's going on with your skis on snow yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@zikomo, in which part of the turn this longer lever makes a difference? If the skier is balanced over the middle, the lever doesn't matter. The weight and strength do. As mentioned above, if the skier is out of balance longitudally, then the longer skis can counterbalance it, but does it really make such a bit difference, compared to other factors in play, e.g. the maneuverability of short skis?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Daedra, yes. That's one reason why GS and DH skis are much longer than slalom skis for example. Offpiste even more so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
