 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
snowbunny, probably!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| fall line magazine wrote: |
| There's a reason these are so well-regarded - they ski like a lost banshee! For advanced nutters. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
snowbunny, Kramer, I think they're exaggerating...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Isn't it a 'given' that to "get the best" of any ski you need melon sized gonads? . . . of course there is empirical evidence that this is not exclusive to the 'externally endowed' members of this forum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
It's stupid exaggeration. I own a pair. I'm a wuss and ski them just fine. Tip them on their edges and they turn - funnily enough. Mind you I ski them at 174cm. I guess bending the 194cm ones into a tight carve would require a bit of effort...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowbunny,
Don't know what they are talking about and skied in the right lenght they are great. They are on the stiff side so lenght here is V important. Like jedster says the 194's might be beasts..!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guess I'm just going to have to condition my chest hair, and then try a pair. Grrrr. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 bought a pair of 184s for touring. alas they proved too much for the boots I was touring with (and me) and they were pretty much impossible to ski well. Turned like supertankers. This was in 1m of powder though. Am putting normal bindings on them, will give em a bash before giving up on them if alpine boots can't beat them into submission.
They are ****ing stiff as well. I ski on rossi 9s and they feel like flip flops in comparison!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Which stormrider did they test?
XL- 76mm waist
AT- 70mm waist
DP- 94mm waist
Schmidt Pro- 89 mm
PIT Light- 70 mm
I can see several of those floundering in 1m of powder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
I was on XL.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
me too - XL
by the way comprex, I assume that you are saying that 76mm is too narrow for skiing 1m of powder. Interesting that STockli regard the XL as a powder ski. I'm pretty certain that I could ski them in 3ft of powder. Might just get the chance in Feb!
lewis - just out of interest, how heavy are you? Might be worth PMing me if you decide to sell your 184s.
J
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've played with a few pairs if Stormriders. By far the most exciting and certainly the pair that deserve the testers comments were a pair 203cm (205?) Stormrider DPs (03/04 model). Now that was a rocking ski, it cruised through anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
parlor, designed for the eminent extreme fellow Dominic Perret. Who, ddly enough, is trying to resurrect rear entry boots with a pair of his own design.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
jedster, depends on the skier's speed (thus terrain) and snow density: 'powder' ski for me perforce means 'tree ski' so the 178cm SS Pro would be perfect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
David Murdoch, I met Mr Perret in Verbier two years ago where he kindly signed a copy of his book for me. Not sure about the boots though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
I love the XL's and have plenty of brawn and speed but alas i have no watermelons
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| David Murdoch wrote: |
| designed for the eminent extreme fellow Dominic Perret. |
Who is M. Perret? I've just bought a pair of Hestra gloves named after him, and was wondering who he is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
comprex,
take your point. I got to try my XLs in 18 inches of (for Europe) very light powder last year. THey were fine in the trees (and that's European style tree skiing - not much space!) but I've never been lucky enough to see 1m of fresh and nothing close to that while tree skiing.
As I say, should get the chance to compare them against something fatter this season in those kind of conditions.
J
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I've been skiing on XL's for 2 seasons. They are 75cm at boot.
Yes they are stiffer than your average all mountain ski but lewis dunno how you can compare them with Rossi 9S which these days are like ice skates they're so short!
XL's are a fantastic all round ski but you have to ski them fairly hard to get the best out of them. Treat 'em with respect and they ski OK (less so in bumps - a bit slow edge to edge for their waist) but bully them and they rock!
I have skied them in bottomless powder and struggled a bit but in 1m they are more than fine. Particularly as at some point in a day when you will ski powder, you will probably power some GS's on the piste and bomb some bumps.
They are popular with tourers but the spring I will be using the B3's I'm buying from Alan Craggs just in case, having walked up for 3 hours, the snow is too heavy and I want to slide over it rather than through it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| B00thy wrote: |
| I've been skiing on XL's for 2 seasons. They are 75cm at boot. |
Supersize Phatties!
Sorry, couldn't resist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry rob@rar.org.uk, I guess I was making the distinction that they were 75 not 76 so "last year's model" as it were. Not the Phattiest I admit - but you don't want the Phattest for all mountain
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
B00thy, sorry, I think you missed my point. I was making a joke about your typo (you said 76 cm which would make them quite a fat ski I think).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rob@rar.org.uk, I too was thinking he's one helluva bandy knee'd skier!
All mountain skis should be around 100mm under foot...
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
B00thy,
I agree with this and the XL is a stonking ski. If your domain is totally 100% deep snow, for a heli holiday or something, then go fatter, but for lift-served off-piste or a short hike here and there I would be looking at the XL with the 8000 as a backup choice.
I am looking to do a few more drops down into the valley which will mean a taxi back so I might just go to the 8000 as I know it is manageable in tight situtations and can trade off the edge hold on ice for a bit more of an easier float. And for those shot and very steep pitches I need a ski that gets up and around and both those skis will do for me. I don't always want a 90mm carpet ride..!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, rob@rar.org.uk, for being so dim - probably thinking 'bout me board. Yeah, JT, everyone raves 'bout the 8000 too - I know 3 people who've got 'em (or is it the 8800 - I dunno the difference)
And as for the taxi the 8000's are a better bet cos they'll fit in the rack!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
B00thy,
Good point re the rack...
Didn't get to test the 8800 but was surprised how condusive to quicker turns the 8000 was. On that basis I wouldn't shy away from the 8800 as its only 8mm wider so should be pretty much the same, I would have thought. You're not going to use them for slalom so the trade off is OK, I reckon, with nothing much lost..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
aah - 88mm - at that width we have the rack problem again 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
men. Any views? . Is the tester a wuss? 
