 Poster: A snowHead
|
After I broke my leg in January my skis stayed leaning in the hallway near a radiator for about 2 months. Stupid of me: they warped (well one did - the camber reversed. The other which had got too flat just got its camber back).
Can it be bent back?
In any case I need new skis but haven't been keeping an eye on what is out there.
My last 2 pairs have been Scott Missions (127, 88, 115) with touring bindings - one set of which I will reuse (the last ones were Marker Barons). These were the last Missions which had a carving profile (ie no rocker. I am a bit dubious about rockering but admit I have not tried it).
I ski almost exclusively off piste but of course this means much of the time it is not proper powder - you have to ski a lot of heavy snow, crud and and breakable crust or just an icy crust. Really most skis ski easy snow so what skis the crap conditions well is important. I do like to be able to carve on a hard piste, though, which I could do reasonably well on the Missions, at least on longer turns.
I loved those skis. Perhaps I should try something a shade wider? I want to be able to be a bit nippy in steep couloirs, which I know is not completely compatible with stability a speed. Perhaps a "Freeride" ski - though I am not certain what this really means?
Any advice would be gratefully received
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Mon 7-04-14 18:08; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
I am slightly astonished, given the wear and tear that skis get in normal use. (not thought too hard about it and clearly in generally colder conditions). Our skis, all 14 or so pairs of them live against the wall of the garage and although indoors and protected from the worst heat, ambient still gets up to 26-30 degrees in mid summer...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Right by the edge of the radiator in this case - must have got direct rising heat (though in a bag).
With the new ones it might be good to catch the spring sales.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I've felt a "freeride ski" is more or less how you describe what you want to do with them in your description of your missions, if that's right or not I'm not quite certain.
I like being able to ski on any type of snow and found as you have that something around 88mm underfoot.....for me at least...seems to be quite a sweet spot, I'm usually about 83kgs. I do think when they go over about 95mm in the centre then they just start to feel more awkward and less natuaral on hard piste.
I may get some opposition on this but I'd guess that the defective mission should go back to what it was, i'd put a block of wood under the centre and hook a ratchet strap from one end to the other, going over the block and tension it back to a little over normal camber then leave it for a day or two on the heater.....remove and let it cool down before removing the strap and see what you've got......nothing to loose really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
More moderny skis maybe to check out
Blizzard flipcores e.f. Bonafide
Norica Enforcer (might be being replaced)
Whitedot Ranger seems a sweet ski (from my brief try of them) but maybe a bit wide for you
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
snowball, FWIW, you rarely see anything less than 100 mm underfoot in Scotland's off-piste, and we do get 'firm' snow as well as nice powder from time to time, as you well know.  I'm about 67 kg / 172 cm short and in the last 8 years have gone from 80 underfoot in 167 cm, through 90 in 170 cm to 100mm in 174 cm now. Each change I've wondered if I'd be making a compromise on the firm stuff but actually only noticed the extra lift and punch. I can't comment on rocker effect though as they're all trad camber but there're a lot of folk happily using fat rockers in dodgy looking gullies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've been a bit loathe to go above 100mm as I thought I would find them unmanageable on hard snow but am now coming to the point where skiing with my boyfriend we do 90% off piste. I demoed 2 pairs of 106mmish skis this year and was amazed at how easy I found them to ski and while I would never choose to ski them if I was spending any time on piste I was totally happy skiing them back to the base at the end of the day. I also wouldn't buy fatter skis without rocker now, this may well be my terrible technique but all the rocker skis I have tried have been so much easier in manky snow, totally agree with you on powder, I'm happy skiing my non rockered skis there but when the snow is thick and heavy or uneven the rocker really smoothes it out. FWIW I've just bought another pair of 98mm skis as my everyday ski as I do think this size is a bit of a sweet spot for a do anything ski but I want a fatter ski as well and it will be interesting to see how much I end up skiing the fatter ski (if I ever get round to buying one)
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
snowball, having sold the Praxis Freerides I'm in the market for a European touring ski on the lighter side, and narrower than my DPS 112s (somewhere around 100 mm width and 185 length)
Looking at (but haven't tested any of these):
DPS Wailer 99 - my current favourite but you may find it too modern shaped?
Scott RockAir - subtl-ish rocker, may be the Mission+ you are looking for
LA Sportiva Vapor Nano for really light http://www.sportiva.com/products/ski/skis/vapor-nano#tech-specs
Dynafit High Mountain Cham 97 - Costin's new skis which he loves (big dollop of a rocker though, rivalling my Wailers)
Down 4 (http://www.downskis.com/skis/countdown-4) or maybe Down 6 for me
Zag Ubac XL http://www.zagskis.com/en/our-products/skis/48-ubac-xl.html
Everyone else out there is putting a light-ish tour ski on the market: K2, Volkl, etc... I know touring is not your main purpose in life but that's the niche where you may find a do-it-all ski for the stuff you usually ski, as long as you avoid the superlight end.
EDIT: I forgot about the Blizzards that fatbob is mentioning above. I've only heard great things about them, so if you're happy with a more normal-weight ski they may be great for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks everyone (and hi, horizon). I'll look these up on the web.
I'm 66kg, by the way.
PS Some ski reviews have sections for "all mountain skis" and "powder skis", and "freeeride skis" in between. They mostly seem about 10mm wider than I'm used to.
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads  on Tue 8-04-14 14:24; edited 3 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
There's always the DPS W105 too, which I believe is being re-released/updated for 2014-15.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
horizon, I demoed the Down 6 this year and it was ridiculously easy to ski, if I was getting a touring ski I would get it. They were't as good in skied out stuff as the (much heavier) Whitedots I also skied but for touring only where you are presumably skiing mostly untracked I think you would struggle to beat them price to weight ratio if you buy in their pre season sale.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lynseyf, thanks. Do you remember their rocker profile? A friend saw some on the hill and said they were nearly flat (very low tip) which slightly worried me as I've come to love rockers.
This being Europe we pretty much always get all kinds of snow on the way down, but I'm ok to deal with that with my Soviet tank style, even on a lighter ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
horizon, long low continuous rocker (which personally I'm a big fan of, on my EHPs at least - just so frictionless in good snow). Their website does a pretty good job of showing the rocker profile:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
horizon, They were very flat but ridiculously easy to ski, for reference I'm skiing 177cm Rossi S3s at the moment which are mega rockered and far too short for me and these were as easy to ski as those but much, much better. I only skied them on piste back to the base at the end of the day but I was happy skiing them on piste and I hate icy end of day pistes.
I'm talking myself into buying a pair as I type 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
lynseyf, you know it's the right thing to do!
I think I'm going to get a pair of CD5s in the pre-season sale...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
clarky999, I would like to try some of the other ones to see if any of them are a bit better in crud, I'm also out of a job at the end of June so no more ski buying until I get a new one or I'll have a beautiful quiver of skis to keep me warm in my cardboard box!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Looking at the shapes of the Down skis (I had never heard of them) - they have very little sidecut and reverse camber so I don't understand how they can grip the snow at their ends and carve. I was thinking of getting replacements for my Missions before one got bent because they had become almost flat (ie lost their camber) and consequently seemed rather dead with no spring to them.
This is very frustrating. After my broken leg I'll want to judge my return to skiing against a ski something like the ones I know. I'd like to be able to carry on with my current skis while I test several others but that isn't an option. Most days with the group I need to have a touring option (though I don't do very long hikes) but not many places have more than one or two (if any) choices of ski to hire with touring bindings. I really need to buy something but don't dare go for something very different in case I want to throw them out when I've tried them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| snowball wrote: |
| Looking at the shapes of the Down skis (I had never heard of them) - they have very little sidecut and reverse camber so I don't understand how they can grip the snow at their ends and carve..... |
The tip'n'tail rocker are very low (especially the tail) so you still get a large length of engagement in most snow short of true boilerplate/ice. I've got CD3C's & their tip height is lower than that on either my Brahma's or Ranger CL's but is probably twice the length.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| snowball wrote: |
| Looking at the shapes of the Down skis (I had never heard of them) - they have very little sidecut and reverse camber so I don't understand how they can grip the snow at their ends and carve. |
Most SG and DH race skis don't have much much sidecut either (and once bent into a turn will also be reverse cambered) and they still carve just fine - just big turns. Obviously when the ski doesn't have positive camber to start with there's much less pop/rebound out of the turn though.
Straight shape and long low rocker work really well for me offpiste (in all conditions) but clearly are not the most rewarding if on piste carving is important to you. FWIW I can rail the Down CD1s just fine on their short sidecut section (31m radius) as long as it's not boilerplate, but clearly they don't get anywhere near high performance piste skiing and you have to be careful to balance over the sidecut section (whereas offpiste you can drive the tips as much as you want unless it's very tracked).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
lynseyf, not a bad idea, though those Missions (two years after mine, I think) have a very different shape and were not as much liked by the critics (you can see that the front part of the ski does not continue the carving curve but straightens and then then they become almost straight skis at the front end. Mine have a continuous curve, widening more and more, which was what I liked. Still, I might get them I suppose, if I can't see anything better (or some a bit like them - those are 7cm longer than mine- a bit much, as that would be 6cm taller than me (I am 77cm and 66kg)).
I think perhaps my doubts about modern off piste ski shapes is more, about the ends of the skis not continuing the side cut shape but straightening out, so not contributing to the carve. This isn't rockering, I know, though initially I used to think that was what the word meant. I don't know what it is called. It seems to me strange to not use the whole length of the ski to steer it and I cannot understand why people would want this.
I must admit, though that the performance on piste is an add-on. Really it is off piste that matters, so I am perhaps stressing the wrong things.
Perhaps I'll have to take an extra short few days of holiday to test out skis, when when we aren't being guided, so it doesn't matter if I'm not on touring bindings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just noticed on ebay some just like mine but also 183cm like the ones previously mentioned. Strangely, though, they have the bindings mounted about 5 inches back from where mine are. Weird. I suppose I could have them re-drilled and remounted (or more likely mount my own bindings). Is re-drilling a ski a bad idea?
Last edited by After all it is free on Thu 10-04-14 12:33; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| snowball wrote: |
lynseyf, not a bad idea, though those Missions (two years after mine, I think) have a very different shape and were not as much liked by the critics (you can see that the front part of the ski does not continue the carving curve but straightens and then then they become almost straight skis at the front end. Mine have a continuous curve, widening more and more, which was what I liked. Still, I might get them I suppose, if I can't see anything better (or some a bit like them - those are 7cm longer than mine- a bit much, as that would be 6cm taller than me (I am 77cm and 66kg)).
I think perhaps my doubts about modern off piste ski shapes is more, about the ends of the skis not continuing the side cut shape but straightening out, so not contributing to the carve. This isn't rockering, I know, though initially I used to think that was what the word meant. I don't know what it is called. It seems to me strange to not use the whole length of the ski to steer it and I cannot understand why people would want this.
I must admit, though that the performance on piste is an add-on. Really it is off piste that matters, so I am perhaps stressing the wrong things.
Perhaps I'll have to take an extra short few days of holiday to test out skis, when when we aren't being guided, so it doesn't matter if I'm not on touring bindings. |
I think what you are talking about is 5 point design - like say a Rossi S series (most big roker skis have this to some extent). very tip is narrower than the widest part of the ski, sidecut is in the middle of the ski and tail tapers similarly to the tip. That's the view from the top. Taking a 3D view the rocker profile changes things.
On hardpack you're left with a relatively short effective edge (which might be quite a tight radius - making a big wide ski quite turnable) but in 3D snow the tip and tail come into play as well. If they are well designed the rocker and tip profile work together to make smooth turns. A poor implementation of the concept possibly not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
