 Poster: A snowHead
|
Masque, Plus the fact i'm the only one who knows anything about FISH. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| CEM wrote: |
| mind you if he is in the industry in the uK..... i can only think of 2 Jeremys, both of which.... |
I'm shocked, shocked I tells ya. Surely there must be a surplus of Jeremys, Tarquins, Quintons etc within the ski industry, probably hyphenated surnames as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
SMALLZOOKEEPER, no you're not 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Sharkymark, Your a different kind a FISH my scaley friend, slightly more difficult to hook! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
SMALLZOOKEEPER, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Masque wrote: |
| veeeight, what we're saying is that this is a community, it's not a pro-ski test forum and that anyone reading the reviews should not be dictating the terms by which we talk about skis or skiing. Join in and add to the debate but don't hector us about how invalid our opinions are because they don't fit within your measurement criteria. |
Is that directed at me, or jeremy12? And which side of bed did you get out of this morning?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
veeeight, you're assuming I actually got to bed last night  aimed at Jeremy12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
maggi, well said!!!!!(I should be 54 kilos, but I'm not).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't believe the animosity and closing of ranks towards jeremy12.
OK he did make a hell of an entrance, but he has got some valid points. What some of you seem to be saying that anyone else googling for info, stumbling upon snowHeads, shouldn't take any notice of our reviews as they are not part of the community and therefore don't understand the clique and comments made in the review.
Thanks for that VEEEIGHT.
I did make a bit of an entrance for which i apologise again.
I think a few of you understand what im getting at.
yes i am in the industry and i have seen and experienced the headaches when it comes to collating test results into a suitable format that can then be presented to the public.I am not saying you are not qualified to test.Its the way the info is collated and presented which is my problem as you may have guessed.
A few of you guys have acknowledged that there is still a bit of work to be done when it comes to the test card and what the tester should be asked to comment on.
Yes this is a nice place to share info back and forth between friends BUT why not look at the bigger picture ADMIN guys.
Does anybody out there have a test card from an SIGB test? As Colin said this industry test has been going since 1999 and ever since the guys at RARE have been tweaking the machine giving us what we have today,a perfect format/industry standard.When i see the hard work that goes in to the SIGB test by the all involved it just seems crazy that you guys dont tag on and use a tried and tested "test card".
go on snowheads you know it makes sense.
I know it was just an informal ski test amongst friends.Im not trying to take anything away,im actually trying to add to what you guys are doing believe it or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
The turn this thread has taken is hilarious...!! Its a bunch of opinions of people who have skied a ski. They have posted in good faith a few references about certain skis that the trade put up for them to ski. I find the views valid. I wouldn't buy a ski because of this or that but I take note if it was on the lines of whatever else I knew about them. The only arbiter for a ski for me, is how I ski it on what I ski it on and these tests make me aware of skis that I haven't come across in my travels.
And the beauty of this site is that there is anough knowledge across the spectrum to be able to 'introduce' you new skis or ideas etc...!!!
People ski skis and talk about them and as HB says, its what we do on here...talk, thats what it is...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
jeremy12, Welcome to Snowheads
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
veeeight, did you try the GC race instead of the 3V?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Really weird. I just didn't get on with the supershapes at all at Castleford, but liked the iSL.
Just shows; it's best to test.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Wear The Fox Hat wrote: |
| veeeight, did you try the GC race instead of the 3V? |
No, for some bixxaire reason known unto themselves, all Shalom brought out were the knarly toys, all the foils, XWings etc. No top end skis.
MG, I had to take back 3 pairs of skis from various manufacturers throughout the course of the evening, because either the tune was off (usually base bevel), or something funky was going on with the prep (travelator grease, dry base, crap wax prep).
So it just goes to show that when testing skis, you are also testing the tune at the time, as well as the prep!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
scottp, not sure about the Recons, but some of the older K2s (going back 2+ years) had slightly different construction in the longer lengths, which made them feel like completely different skis.
With your bad knees, I'd suggest you stick with the 174.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
scottp, no problem, and report back on how you get on with them! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That is a very interesting last few posts, (and i'm glad to see this thread getting back to ski reviews rather than berate the loud talking sales rep) and one that I was hoping to jump on.
I skied that Crossfires last year and found them an excellent ski (or maybe I'm just ace and any old plank of wood will do!) on the piste and okay off. I was in PDS towards end of Feb, early March and it dumped it down so even the piste was pow for the morning session. I really liked the responsiveness of the Crossfires but wanted to increase the overall surface area to try and get more out of the powder. The obvious progression is the the K2 Apache Recons as they should meet that requirement whilst still remaining a good on-piste, carving ski.
Here's the issue, at the moment the skiing appears to be shite in the PDS and I may find that most of my days are spent on-piste, will the Recons be responsive and fast? Are they easy to control or do you need legs of steel? I found the Crossfires were very tiring on the flats and my legs would burn trying to keep them in a straight line. (I do have a hunch that I was carrying a little quad muscle injury from over exercise leading up to the trip) How do they rate on the icier stuff, will they keep me upright?
I would also like to know what length Recon's I should get, I'm 176cm (5'9") 85kg and reasonably in shape. I would class myself as an advanced skier. Skiing since 9yo with 6 yrs in Canada.
Any other serious suggestions for alternative skis that are similar to the Apache range please feel free to post. Please do not post about skis you own or like just because they were good for you, they may be rubbish for me. I'm only really interested in ones that are between 50%Pister:50%Off-Piste - 70%Piste - 30%Off-Piste
Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
PowderHunter, Wear The Fox Hat, i used to be SCOTTP but have changed names, i am still 193 cm and 98kgs 
to report back I have two weeks on the 174 recons and initial reaction on the first day was they chattered a bit when overpressured in the bottom of turns on steep icy pitches and i thought i went too short as i have never been on anything less than 180's. BUT after a couple days got to grips with them and find they have much more energy than the crossfires in a 181. They really store up a lot of bend and short swings were excellent; almost a slalom ski. The little bit of just off the piste skiing i have managed really showed what a bit of extra width can do as they were very floaty compared to the crossfires.
Bumps were much more fun in the shorter ski and the shovels feel a bit more springy than the crossfire and crucially in some very high speed GS turns felt very secure to me. So with the exception of deep snow (which i am hoping to test on Saturday) they are a much better ski for me than the crossfire 181 which i really liked. Great ski go for them and dont be afraid to go short and have some fun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
javascript:emoticon('skimottaret,%20')
Wow, I can't thak you enough for the detailed advice. Apart from your obvious height advantage you seem to have the same experience as me with the Crossfires which made your insight into the Recon's invaluable. I'm 176 (i think) should I therefore go for the 174cm? Any more similar experiences I would be very interested to know.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PowderHunter, not sure height is an advantage with all the flapping around i do...
i think length depends on what type of skiing you do and as you are on piste a more than occassionaly i would personally go a bit shorter and have some fun. remember that big heavy guys are running slalom gates on very short skis. The 174 recon definately had plenty of float compared to the longer crossfire, you may want to consider a 167. I am using a ski 19cm shorter than me and they are great. I demoed the 181 and found it felt completely different to the 174 with much less responsiveness.
Also check out this thread were peeps are saying K2's are actually longer than advertised as they dont count the turned up bits on the ends.
http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?p=546794#546794 i concurr with this as my skis seemed longer than 174 to me
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Hi, great thread and website! As a consumer these days I do a lot of research of a product before buying. The tests that are being done on this site (in my opinion) are invaluable to someone like me. If I was looking to buy a new ski I would want all the info/testing on that ski. This site gives me an insight on how that ski would perform in a refreshing way. I'm 35 years old and just picked the sport up again after a long recess.
I agree with Agenterre and keep up the good work!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
.
) skiers, aged over 40, around 54/5 kilos. (And that's no snowHead I've met yet 
.) But I'm a bit p!ssed off that someone just comes on here and tells me, in effect, to shut up 'cause I know nothing 
.
