 Poster: A snowHead
|
Seeing what a colorful debate there was over here, I figured I'd get a few opinions on these....
www.fat-ypus.com
I know Parlor has seen this already "elsewhere", but I'm now highly intrigued to see the opinions voiced.
I'm going to be skiing them in January, and having spoken to the owners of the company, am very excited to do so.....
Oh, and before I get stick for the fat ski loving, this is what I ride on:
Fischer Atua - 186cm, 126-96-119, twin tipped
Fischer Riu - 180cm, 112-80-104, twin tipped
Volkl Snowranger - 180cm, 105?-79-100?, flat
I am trying to get hold of;
Volkl Dragon Slayers - 180cm, 94-66-80
A pair of the A-lotta's s above maybe?????
But I will also be spending about 6 weeks of this year on these;
Volkl RaceTiger GS Racing - 175cm, 108-67-94
Why do I ask this question and highlight these skis? Cos I generally think most <4 week a season skiers will have more fun and progress just as fast on 80mm underfoot all mtn/freeride skis a la B2, 1080, Legend 4800 as they will on Metrons or 5 stars, PROVIDED that it is with the right direction (instruction, encouragment, mindset, etc) from those around them.
Anyway, take a look at the site. And I'll see you in MK with them for a couple of laps, in a couple of years!!!!!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Most snowboarders I know only use one. Snowboard that is. 140cm doesn't seem wide enough to mount your bindings crossways?
Fat skis are a bit like "compacts" in the mid-70s, IMHO. I was there, recall my mum changing from long very skinny skis to Kneissl compacts and nasty plastic boots. The skis disappeared, the boots got better.
And, no, please take those nasty electric guitars away, John and Paul, they'll never catch on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
There is nothing so weird about these, they are just tending more and more towards an oversized skiboard....
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Hhhmmmm. Firstly I'd like to say I don't think it's stirring the pot. As you are clearly an established skier and you're asking for opinions rather than me telling you to try fatter, which at this point would be impossible. That's Alotta ski.
I am yet to ski my Prophets. I have skied a 120/125/115mm - Spatulas so it has anti-sidecut. The Spatulas didn't make me go reaching for my credit card, which is good as I don't have one, they were OK. I would really want this ski if I was skiing light fluffy pow all of the time, so it could be a quiver ski if I lived somewhere that had a propensity to lots of snow without having to ski across groomers and hike in and out of to get the soft stuff. There are often days like this in Verbier but I don't want to be restricted whatever.
The Prophets have an 18m turn radius!! So it will be hard to try and compare the Prophets with the Spatulas. I do know that every time I got fatter I loved it. Ask FTS. Jumps of like 10mm really makes a difference. I've skied a couple of skis at 100mm+. A pair of B3 (square tail factory edition - this ski does not exist  ) but mainly Gots and Sanouks, goodness, they were great days. I found the Gots too soft in the tail, I was hoping it would ski a little like my Exploders, the extra waist width just felt natural The Sanouks were soft, not that it caused me any problem. I ended up skiing bumps and messing around with briccage on the Sanouks, they swung so quickly I couldn't believe it. The 193 B3s were awesome and I considered getting some Squads this year, I don't know the dimensions, guess for 105mm underfoot and very little sidecut. Yes sir. She was stiff and skied me like I was paying for it, a real pro .
The Fat-ypus looks like a very interesting ski. I think I'd ask SZK to lend me a small elephant for a few days before I took these out - you must have to ski with your feet so wide apart I might do some crotch damage, but what's 10mm huh?
There is no doubt that this ski will be awesome for stomping large drops, it'll be like trying to sink a basket ball in a bath. She's a true twin so probably skis something like a 175-177.
SZK thinks that the fat ski market will draw a natural halt at around 110mm, I can see that. I think people will be skiing somewhere between 100 - 115mm with a few pairs of anti-sidecut at around 120 - 130mm But then who knows? If the kids are building them and the kids are riding them, I'm ready! I've heard other arguments that suggest skis won't really stay as wide underfoot with people tending towards large foot prints instead, wide(ish) in the waste with large sidecut i.e. beefed up Metrons, Zags et al. I can understand this argument - but I, and many other freeskiers don't want sidecut!! Well, not too much anyway, we might have to turn then. 
I'm after something else as my next skis - Ski Wals I saw some for sale in a shop. 195cm but I couldn't find a matching pair (like not even close, not worried about graphics). Stiff as you like, fat, no sidecut and a true beast. The Skiwal or Ski Whale is mental, no idea why you'd put two pairs of bindings on that, get two and ski 'em. I'm also looking into either some speed skiing skis or maybe some ski jumping skis, 240cm, huge underfoot and no sidecut. Come On.
Does anyone know if the ski jumping skis are actually too soft? I did a trial day (at Les Arc?) many, many years ago when I was a kid and I can't remember the flex pattern.
Yes, I have a problem. It's OK.
Also I'd like to add I bought two pairs of skis last night. One of them was 83mm underfoot... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
buns, funny you should mention, I've been fascinated by the Icelantic AT Scout in 143 cm (140/105/130):
Any of you heard of something called a VISU Avalanche, a scaled, edgeless XC ski in 107/80/107 and like 170cm?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
