Snow Reports
FAQ
Help!!
Log in to snowHeads to make it MUCH better!
Registration's totally free, of course, and makes snowHeads easier to use and to understand, gives better searching, filtering etc. as well as access to 'members only' forums, discounts and deals that U don't even know exist as a 'guest' user. (btw. 50,000+ snowHeads already know all this, making snowHeads the biggest, most active community of snow-heads in the UK, so you'll be in good company)..... When you register, you get our free weekly(-ish) snow report by email. It's rather good and not made up by tourist offices (or people that love the tourist office and want to marry it either)... We don't share your email address with anyone and we never send out any of those cheesy 'message from our partners' emails either. Anyway, snowHeads really is MUCH better when you're logged in - not least because you get to post your own messages complaining about things that annoy you like perhaps this banner which, incidentally, disappears when you log in :-)
Username:-
Password:
Remember me:
👁
durr, I forgot...
Or:
Register
(to be a proper snow-head, all official-like!)
Never mind the width feel the ski
snowHeads Forum Index
>>>
Equipment Reviews/Questions
Prev topic
::
Next topic
Poster:
A snowHead
Poster:
A snowHead
https://gigiski.com/the-mute-point-of-ski-width/
Quote:
This article, however, has one single purpose: to make the point of width being only one factor in what the ski does best. And that width alone can never place the ski in a specific category, but its strengths and weaknesses will.
Only thing I would say is that width in pow clearly makes a difference where as it clearly doesn't on a hard surface where no float is required.
Thinking about there must be a sweet spot for float - I mean clearly you don't want to sink completely but neither do you want to float completely.
Obviously
A snowHead
isn't a real person
Obviously
A snowHead
isn't a real person
never mind the engineering feel the journalism.
Um. I think many people will have worked that out from first principles or from
direct experience already.
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?
Quote:
I mean clearly you don't want to sink completely but neither do you want to float completely.
Speak for yourself
Floating completely is my objective when I ski in powder. True powder skiing is a 3D experience, where your skis say in the powder layer throughout.
Most refer to powder skiing incorrectly, as they are actually skiing in new snow, but cutting through to the base underneath. Yes, you might leave a nice track in the snow, but until you ski in deep snow with wide skis you haven't experienced true powder skiing (IMHO)
As for the article, they make a valid point that 3 apparently similar skis can behave very differently, but I'm not sure that those who would need to know this would be the ones to read it.
You need to
Login
to know who's really who.
You need to
Login
to know who's really who.
Bit of a pointless article as I'm not sure who it addressed at edumacating other than giving a platform to some sort of god like "I ski everything on my skinny ass skis" boasters.
Waist width is a pretty good indicatior of the intended application of the ski so the other factors are secondary postioners in what you can do with that ski. It is indeed stupid to be locked into a mindset of you can only carve on a ski <X> Y but we'd still say a 110mm ski optimised in all other respects for carving was stupid* or a 75mm ski optimised for powder similarly. unless the skier were at extremes of the size/aggression spectrum.
*There have been big mountain skis that really were like GS skis scaled up for Norse gods like the original Ragnarok or the SuperTurbo but really they should have come with health warning for anyone in the band of "ordinary skier" and the intent was more make the mountain your biatch than carve it up on piste.
Terms and conditions
Privacy Policy
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
never mind the engineering feel the journalism.
