skis and icy/hard conditions

A snowHead

petemillis, Sorry for the late answer, but only on a dialup connection here in Andorra. Speedwave 14 are the ones I tried in tried last year, they were just too stiff and not damped enough, they went into terminal judder on icy pistes. Also went for a spin on next years Magfire 10's and 12's New sidecut and widths, the 12 is now aimed at freeride with an 80mm under foot. Can't comment on their offpiste as there was no soft stuff to be found, however there is 15cm of fresh this morning and I am off to trash it before anyone else gets the chance Twisted Evil

Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?

spyderjon, {edited}
instead of a name brand course or clinic I spent 6 back to back days with a level 2 at my local bump doing nothing but cleaning up my OLR, on ice, on the ogasaka factory 1/1 bevel? * And that since that week in mid-January I have not sharpened them (or felt I needed to) at all? Funny how much of our perception of speed comes from the violence of our stopping and braking moves.

But, I know what you mean and I've long been ignoring recommendations in favor of 1/3.

*Financially a wash in view of all the beer I had to buy for his efforts at staving off boredom.

You need to Login to know who's really who.

My 2p's worth.

Technique, technique, technique (of course sharp helps too).

I spend my seasons on 1/1 or 1/2. And yet I still hold an edge on bulletproof ice.

If I went to 3 side, my skis would last me half the season. I hold the view that 3 side is a necessity for racers, to hold at that speed, and grip against the high forces generated.

But for recreational skiers, they don't approach that sort of speed, nor generate those forces to warrant a 3 side.

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

I have thin race edges to start with.

Even if I didn't, at my frequency of tuning, I'd be removing metal faster just to keep that edge, as I'm sure you'll agree that a more acute angle blunts quicker.

Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...

veeeight, so do quite a few modern 'recreational' skis with factory 1/3 tunes (EDIT, I think it makes super-sidecut designers' lives easier); if you look at material thickness the difference is one part in just less than 90 per degree bevel (no matter how dull or sharp!) if you hold the gummi at 45; the material removal rate is exactly the same if the tool is parallel to the side bevel face; and there really isn't much difference in moment arm for bending moment arguments to apply.

1/1 allows the tuner to use less accurate tools. That I'll grant.

Edited to clean up punctuation

After all it is free

PS not arguing the technique bits & being able to sense mass-center motion.

With regard to the fat ski debate & the new found ability of many of them to perform adequately on piste. Whilst the latest construction methods obviously help with torsional stiffness so that a softer ski can still hold an edge etc., it's interesting to note that, when using my Campbell Balancer with my customers, how far forward the factory binding mark is on some of these skis - the Scott Aztec's & Mission's in particular.

Going through my records 8 out of 11 of my Scott clients would require the Scott factory binding position to be moved back a tad, which is the opposite of what I usually find. K2 Recon's & Outlaw's also seem to a more forward factory binding location, though not as forward as the Scott's. Atomic's factory location is still the most rearward on the market, the new Nomad's being no exception rolling eyes

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

I like my Fischer WC SCs on ice.
From Salomon, the Equipe SC works. I would also expect that the the Equipe GC does too, but with a longer radius, as would their slalom "LAB" skis.

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

spyderjon, that's pretty interesting. I -HATED- my Scotts 2 cm back (ssh can tell you how much) which is where BOF put them. I didn't have a Balancer then, of course.

snow reports

My $0.02, living here in the eastern United States where we get boilerplate ice quite often (though the past fortnight has been powder, powder and more powder):

- I second the mention of "technique, technique and technique." Look at Harald Harb's new book if you've not yet tried the PMTS technique, which is simply great for getting the most out of the new skis in practically every condition.

- K2 hasn't made a truly ice-compatible ski in years. Yeah, the Apache and Burnin' Luv skis are okay, but they don't hold a good edge.

- If you look at what a lot of skiers here in the eastern U.S. ski for an all-mountain (including off-piste, hard and soft conditions), you'll see the Völkl AC3 and AC4, the Atomic Metron series (incl. the M:EX, B:5 and M:10), the Atomix SX:10 and SX:11, the Blizzard Sigmia SLR, various Nordica HotRods, Fischer RX9 and RX8, and Stöckli Stormriders. You don't see a lot of K2s, mainly because they favor softer snow.

- Folks who tend to stick to on-piste go with racing skis or race carvers. You'll also see some of the cross skis (e.g. Blizzard Sigma-X, Dynastar Contact, Atomic SX) on the feet of the on-piste types. The Fischer RC4 series is really popular among this set.

- You also don't see too many Salomons here in the east. I think it's because they tend to lose camber quickly - or did, until they acquired a bit of know-how from Atomic. But my experience on the SC and GC was very positive, though they weren't as good as the L.A.B. series on the true, see-though boilerplate.

As for me, I use the Atomic SX:11 for the mixed-condition days, and the Blizzard Sigma SLR for on-piste days. I also will break out the Atomic SL:11m for icy days when I know I want edge hold and maneuverability.

Just my $0.02 - your mileage may vary.

Good luck!

songfta, I think its because Salomon don't market their piste carvers here. Drive north to Quebec and Crossmaxes and Siams and Scramblers are outselling everything except Rossignol.

I think that's also true of K2. The last Mach SL I saw was in Vermont.

You know it makes sense.

comprex, while I've seen a few K2s in New England (the Mach series, some Apaches), they're not nearly as common as they are out west. When I return to Utah (where I grew up), K2s are almost dime-a-dozen. The Apache series sells like wildfire where the snow is softer, and it's a great ski for mountains where soft snow is the norm.

And when I was in Utah this past January, there were tons of Salomon X-Wings out there, with a big marketing push featuring the Crist brothers, who were lured from Atomic this year.

If I were to sum up what I saw out west, the top four brands were K2, Salomon, Rossignol and Dynastar. All four brands offer some great, big mountain skis that do the job in powder, crud and softer snow.

But in Vermont this season, the dominant ski brands seemed to be Völkl, Fischer, Atomic and Nordica. And I can't blame 'em: they're known for a tenacious hold on ice, with some off-piste versatility thrown in.

Of course, when I was in the Salzburger Sportwelt in February, Atomics ruled the roost - not surprising, given the factory in Altenmarkt (and at Zauchensee, Atomics accounted for over 90 percent of the skis I saw).

Again, just my observation.

Help!!

skis and icy/hard conditions

snowHeads Forum Index >>> Equipment Reviews/Questions