 Poster: A snowHead
|
Yoo!
Basically, I'm looking at Faction's CT 2.0's which are 102mm underfoot - their 2016 2.0's had pretty decent reviews all round.
This season i'm hoping to get my powder skiing down so want to focus on it a fair bit - with a little bit of park here 'n there.
Only problem is I cant afford 2 pairs of ski's and I still want to have a pair of ski's that can handle piste as i'll still be skiing piste a lot obviously.
I'm a competent skier and would say I'm intermediate/experienced - more on the experienced end of the spectrum.
So has anyone got any advice on 102's on piste?!
I'm skiing in La Rosiere, France this season which can have some pretty decent powder sometimes, but on the scale of things it's nothing crazy.
Been looking at ski's far too long so not sure if they are right for me or i just want to get a pair now haha.
Any help will be greatly appreciated, Cheers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
102mm is mid fat. They're not gonna arc on ice like a race ski, but as long as you have some skills they'll do just fine most of the time. Equally they're too narrow to surf powder properly.
This really depends on YOU and what YOU expect from a ski onpiste though.
Lots of people think everything other than a very piste specific ski sucks on piste (unless it's soft and slushy). And they have a point, ig *high performance* carving is important to you.
Personally my every day (and so de facto piste too) ski is 114mm underfoot. As long as the snow is soft enough to get an edge in they ski very well IMO. Not like a race ski, but I rarely to go out to ski just on piste so the compromise is worth it to me.
Waist width is only on part of the equation though. My 114mm skis have two layers of metal and are very stiff and damp. They ski better on hard pistes than many softer but narrower skis.
Really as you're going for a season just man up and find a way to buy two cheap/last season/second hand pair of skis (an extra €100 isn't that hard to find really!) once in resort. One 80-90mm, one 110-120mm.
Otherwise just buy a pair of Faction Chapter 106's and be done with it. Ultimate seasonaire one ski quiver IMO (tested them last winter).
Edit: What does 'the experienced side of intermediate' mean in your book? How many weeks on snow?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
My Shiros at 151 tip and 119 waist ski like a big GS ski on the piste. If I'd had the bottle to go for the 203cm ones I'd have an old skool GS length too.
The Whitedot R108 is like a piste rocket even if lazy hacks like me don't like trad tails in breakable crust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
@clarky999, Thanks for the response man, that helped more than ya realize haha! Yeah I dont want a pair fully dedicated to powder, just a wider pair that it'll be more enjoyable for me.
I've also been given a pair of k2 sights (85 underfoot) - although they get some bad reviews (thats online however - havent tried them out myself).
Spent around 35 weeks on the snow, not sure how that'll match up with your scale - but yeah feel I'm a fairly decent skier.
I'm not really looking for a high performance on piste ski, just a pair that i wont struggle getting decent turns in and that're a lot of fun on and off piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
In the very recent Ski Club tests, the two top Freeride skis were:
Head Collective 105 (146-105-128). On piste it was light and nimble, felt narrower than it was and had good edge grip.
Fischer Ranger 98 Ti (132-98-122). Really smooth and solid on piste performance. One of the most versatile skis on the test.
The way they perform is greatly effected by their design and construction, as well as their width (sorry if this is stating the obvious, but it's easy to get hung up on width). If you are quite light, you should be able to get decent float from a slightly narrower ski....maybe something like Scott The Ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Old Fartbag, Yeah don't worry man i've taken the rest into consideration, been staring at skis for like 10 hours now haha! Just the waist is whats throwing me off the most. Ill check out the ones you posted though cheers buddy. Around 75kg so not sure how that compares.
@Scarlet, Ahh unfortunately not free for the next couple of weekends, cheers though. Ill keep my eyes peeled for any others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+1 to @clarky999 - as important to look at how stiff the skis are, as well as camber etc.
I have a pair of volkl gotama's that are 107 underfoot that ski well on piste as they are quite stiff. Lost my edges once on a pretty big wipe out on my first day on them, trying to make them carve. They would do it though (not to the point of a proper carving/race ski, but enough to have fun and get some speed up), just taught me not to push them too hard...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@samtm96, I ski WD R108's carbonlite 186cm as my every day ski (skis a bit like a fat GS ski), and swap onto WD Ragnerok CL 191's (new model not the older charger) when the surfs up, the Rag is a twin rockered fat ski. I'd recommend 2 pairs, nothing better than a full blown powder ski in right conditions but not ideally for all day every day throughout a season. If I was pushed though and you said if you could only have one pair and you enjoy powder more than piste I'd go Ragnaroks and avoid the on-piste ice, but there again with care they do that too.
Talk to Spyderjon on here, he knows stuff and may have a pair of something he can swing your way at a good deal? There'll be some great pow up and around Ste Foy, best snow in the area in my experience, also good over into Italy, La Thuile 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Obviously it's all relative but I have skied Gs skis in their proper environment (glacial ice) and think the analog is fine re the Shiros, long radius relatively fast turns with plenty of edge angle on a soft piste. In all honesty it surprised me because I thought they'd be pretty gash but it turns out if you can tip em you can turn em and size for size they feel like other volkls like the first/ second gen Mantra to me .
Obviously not as fast edge to edge as a ski half the width. I've only skied the Ranger Pro but on the day in question it went like a rocket on any groomer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Another ski I am considering is the Scott Sage (141, 102, 131): a bit more in the freeride category than Scott's Le Ski (which is a bit more 50-50 on and off piste) but I am told is extremely good on piste. (They also did well in the tests OldFartbag mentions, coming 4th but only fractionally lower than the top choice.) However, since I am walking fairly often to get to good unskied snow and am less fit than I was, I may go for something lighter such as the Scott Superguide 95 with my first pin bindings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| snowball wrote: |
| Another ski I am considering is the Scott Sage (141, 102, 131): a bit more in the freeride category than Scott's Le Ski (which is a bit more 50-50 on and off piste) but I am told is extremely good on piste. (They also did well in the tests OldFartbag mentions, coming 4th but only fractionally lower than the top choice.) However, since I am walking fairly often to get to good unskied snow and am less fit than I was, I may go for something lighter such as the Scott Superguide 95 with my first pin bindings. |
The Fischer that I mentioned above is very light (1700g for 180 vs 1950g for Scott The Ski [180] and Sage [178]), as well as meeting the rest of your criteria.....though your Superglide 95 is lighter again at 1450g for the 178.
Choices, choices.
Let us know what you decide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Question............. Honestly.........., what is with this insane fixation of ridiculous uber wide skis that make float plane floats nearly pale by comparison? Seriously. What's next, a return of the scuba snorkel (and mask) for "deep powder", knee high boots, the Burt binding.............?
I bounce around on two pairs of skis in a given year, the primary have a 72 waist, the secondary a whopping 80. There isn't ANY situation that I cannot blast through on the former with the latter almost a novelty. Word is a Barcalounger (replete with cup holder and all manner of media outlet) fitted with 150mm waist skis is being tested........... I wonder if it comes in neon yellow?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Nice brag. I suggest a ski off to display those skills. late on sunny afternoon Eosb Mottaret soup should do it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| arcsinice wrote: |
Question............. Honestly.........., what is with this insane fixation of ridiculous uber wide skis that make float plane floats nearly pale by comparison? Seriously. What's next, a return of the scuba snorkel (and mask) for "deep powder", knee high boots, the Burt binding.............?
I bounce around on two pairs of skis in a given year, the primary have a 72 waist, the secondary a whopping 80. There isn't ANY situation that I cannot blast through on the former with the latter almost a novelty. Word is a Barcalounger (replete with cup holder and all manner of media outlet) fitted with 150mm waist skis is being tested........... I wonder if it comes in neon yellow? |
Fun!
Bounce around (like Grandad) is presumably the operative part of your rant
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
@arcsinice, Your comment "There isn't ANY situation that I cannot blast through" answers the question. Those of us on those despicable wide skis don't want to blast through anything, we want to to surf and float through the powder layer, not cut through to the base layer underneath.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I can see where arcsinice is coming from.....
- Experience 1: Meribel - Mid Jan 2016: A mental week of waist deep powder on my normal piste skis - that I haven't measured the waist of but are maybe 85mm....Fantastic time; full face shots and the sensation of floating through the powder.
Experience 2: Catskiing in BC - Mid Feb 2016: Three days of mixed conditions, from heavier snow to boot-deep powder - with a (150mm?) surfboard on each foot.....Good fun but unwieldy and heavy in the softer snow; not noticeably fantastic vs my normal skis; and having to fight the skis' desire to race away and do big arcing turns. At times I was wishing I'd had my normal skis for comparison.
The above made a total of eight days on powder skis for me (all catskiing in Canada) compared to dozens of powder days on my thin-waisted piste and touring skis.
I'm sure that ultra-wide skis, by their design, float more than narrower-waisted skis - but in my view you can nevertheless have a seriously good time in deep powder on piste skis. I've never skied deep powder on them and wished I'd had powder skis....
Maybe if you want to 'surf through the powder' you should get a snowboard .....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Clearly it's a matter of taste but I wouldn't want to go back to a situation where I was having to bounce powder 8 turns rather than nail any type of turn I wanted at whatever speed.
Plus I don't really believe the slalom ski everywhere posse really have skied in Sierra Cement, Cascade Concrete, any sort of snow that is setting up or spring snow that is past the turn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
@mountainaddict, Sounds like something was wrong with your 150mm surfboards, what brand/model were they?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can remember reading on a Forum (at that other place), of a "Flotation Factor". It was Ski Length x Width divided by your weight in Kilos.
IIRC. Look for a figure of 250+ for really good float and maybe 210+ for All Mountain.
This might be a bit simplistic, but at least it brings weight into the equation. For example, I get a figure of 255 from a 180 Scott The Ski, whereas somebody weighing 95Kg would get a figure of 174.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Old Fartbag, doesn't work IMO as the narrower skis almost never have the right shape to truly slash and surf any turn shape at will. It's not just the width, the rocker and taper plays a big part too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 wrote: |
| @Old Fartbag, doesn't work IMO as the narrower skis almost never have the right shape to truly slash and surf any turn shape at will. It's not just the width, the rocker and taper plays a big part too. |
You may be right, but it's the first attempt at coming up with a simple formula that I've seen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@samtm96, I've got a similar number of weeks on snow (perhaps a few more?) and the same weight as you. I'm currently running a pair of Scott Powd'airs (100mm) and a pair of Downs (114mm) and pistes are still fun. Shape is more important than width IMHO. The Scotts are shaped like trad carvers, the Downs are 5 point rocketed things so have a different feel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
How would a Faction CT 3 compare to Down Countdown 104? I've been looking at the Factions and I liked the look of the CT 2, but was assured (by a child) that the CT 3 would be better for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
This is a very interesting thread as i am also thinking about getting some freeride skis for this winter but i am not sure what to go for in width, i have a set of skis that i use for on piste light off piste which are experience 80's and are quite a versatile ski, but this winter i intend ( conditions permitting) to hire a guide for some much bigger off piste adventures.
i have tried a few skis on the indoor slope at cas but at the moment they don't have all there demo skis in, my favorite so far are the K2 pinnacle 95 as they felt light nimble and could tighten the turn during a carve as well as handling the indoor moguls ok.
but i am wondering would i be better with the 105 version of this ski?
what would you all recommend as a good width for a freeride ski as i am pretty sure i don't need a full on powder ski
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have skied both the Pinnacle 95 & 105. Unsurprisingly I found the 95 the better of the 2 on piste, not that the 105 was bad, it was still quite easy to carve med/long radius turns and was stable at speed, it's just that the 95 was noticeably better.
I didn't get the chance to do much off piste with either ski so can't really comment on their difference in performance in this area. You are obviously going to get more float in the soft stuff with the wider ski, it would depend upon your weight and whether you tend to like a longer or shorter ski as to how much difference it would make to you.
I would go for something around 105 - 110 for what you are after, but I do weigh around 100 Kg. Something like this will probably be my next ski purchase.
Roll on Saturday so I can get testing. 
If you decide on something narrower the Nordica Enforcer at 98 under foot was also good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
PowderAdict Can't remember what our whopping hire skis were...other than IIRC they were a non-mainstream piste ski brand that I hadn't heard of.
Will have a look at my photos and see if that sheds any light on it...EDIT/UPDATE: The skis were by Revision - though I can't identify the model.
Maybe it might have been a case of just getting used to them?? Especially as they were so heavy - couldn't believe just HOW heavy for shouldering/bootpacking.
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Wed 5-10-16 21:34; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@Mikeg36, thanks for the reply yea i only weigh around 70 kg which is probably why i can do a lot on the 80s was pretty much afyer opinion such as yours. I am going to try and get some others tested when there available. Shame i cant make the ski test with you guys would have been fun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
I would offer the advice that Volkl V-Werks BMT109 or 122 are super off piste, light as a feather and hoon on piste too(so long as you do not want to go straight, long arcing curves are the order of the day unless you are very precise)and I've even been down the half pipe on them....but at an eye watering £1200 with bindings fitted you could swap these for a very large quiver so I think the OP would not be impressed. Trouble is the OP wants to play in the park a bit as well as go powder sniffing. While there are loads of skis that will do this you probably will not want to have payed for them with your own money as rails will totally kill them. Better to have a semi decent pair of piste / powder skis from a year or two ago such as Rossi Sin 7 and match this with some second hand park beaters that you aren't scared to chew up trying to show off to chalet girls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@mountainaddict, Thanks for checking. I had a look on Revision Skis website and there is nothing currently that wide, the widest being a 119mm.
I've seen some horrendous constructions touted as powder skis, where all the manufacturer has done is double the width of a narrow ski without changing the shape, rocker or construction.
A typical 90mm all mountain skis (such as the Scott The Ski) is around 2kg for a 180cm, so you could easily be approaching 3kg for a really fat ski, unless lightweight materials are used.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
@Old Fartbag, My 203 SGs get 250ish. Doesn't feel like it...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My Volkl BMT 122s come out at 267. Feel a lot floatier than just enough for pow. There needs to be a correction factor for camber profile such as x1 for trad, x1.1 for tip rocker over 25cm, x1.3 for tip and tail and x1.5 for full rocker with no camber whatsoever. No scientific basis at all but then... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| mcspreader wrote: |
| My Volkl BMT 122s come out at 267. Feel a lot floatier than just enough for pow. There needs to be a correction factor for camber profile such as x1 for trad, x1.1 for tip rocker over 25cm, x1.3 for tip and tail and x1.5 for full rocker with no camber whatsoever. No scientific basis at all but then... |
I think building in a "correction factor" is very sensible.
It is my understanding that a figure of 250ish is much better than, "just enough"....and there is no scientific basis for my view either.
I do think that a simple formula that would help with choosing the dimensions of an off piste ski, based on one's weight, would be helpful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Quote: |
Plus I don't really believe the slalom ski everywhere posse really have skied in Sierra Cement, Cascade Concrete, any sort of snow that is setting up or spring snow that is past the turn.
|
I agree with that - in light powder you don't actually NEED that much float (you might want it for your preferred style of skiing of course). But if it's deep, wet porridge then I can't get by on skinny skis (I have seen people who could ski it on old 2m skinnies but they were better skiers than me).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
Obviously it's all relative but I have skied Gs skis in their proper environment (glacial ice) and think the analog is fine re the Shiros, long radius relatively fast turns with plenty of edge angle on a soft piste
|
The soft piste is a pretty important caveat!
But it's also the ability to link short carved turns. If the piste is reasonably soft I can rail big medium / big turns on my R108. The straight, flat tails mean they are easy to pivot around in shorter-turns. But short-carved cross-under turns? They just can't do that like a GS ski. At least not with me as the pilot!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
as my quiver equates between 303 and 414 
