 Poster: A snowHead
|
Any views on fat skis? I'm currently using a three year old pair of Atomic 11.20s which (I guess) they would call 'All Mountain' skis these days. Anyway to cut a long story short, I spend about 90% of my (skiing) time off piste these days, and having seen the way I get left standing by skiers on fats I have decided that the time has come to move on...
I tried out a pair of Blizzard fats a year ago in really heavy spring conditions. Rarely had such fun...
Anyone got anything to report about K2 Seth-Pistols, or Atomic (forgotten the number), or Voelkl, or Rossis, or Salomon etc etc ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I use and love Salomon Pocket Rockets. A friend and I took out loads of test skis in Val-T 2 seasons ago. We were lucky that our bindings matched as we could do a run then swap skis and do it again. We did Rossi Scratches, Bandit XX's, Bandit B3, 1080 (161, 171, 181) and Pocket Rockets (165 and 175)... mostly all in one day!
It was a fab experience: taught us loads about the skis; taught us even more about our own skiing. We ended up both getting right into the PR's so we took out a pair of 165's and 175's for the day. We now both own PR 175's 
At the snowHeads/Ellis Brigham ski test at MK last month I checked out the Seth Pistols and the Volkl Karmas. The Seths I liked, Kind of like PR's but a little more attitude. The Volkl's I wasn't so keen on: they seemed to need driving much harder than the others. I suppose I'm a fairly lazy skier, I just like to let gravity do its bit and point the skis generally where I fancy going. The Volkls made me think too much whereas the Seths seemed natural by the second run.
Of course, I know people who have come to the opposite conclusion. Perhaps it's down to what you're used to.
In the end, there's nothing to beat doing a proper A/B comparison for your self (or even a A/B/C/D/E/F comparison). Find a shop in resort, find a pal who's interested too and dedicate a day to trying out 6 or 8 models that U are interested in. I expect we'll do another snowHeads ski test before long but don't suppose Munich's too convenient for MK is it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
I understand the rapid increase in the number of fat skis in recent years has got the ski federation quite concerned. Obese skis are known to suffer a higher incidence of problems. The increase in ski size is being blamed on the use of saturated wax as opposed to the more traditional natural products.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| u brain wrote: |
| ...Of course, I know people who have come to the opposite conclusion. Perhaps it's down to what you're used to... |
I don't know ... I don't think it's all that mysterious.
The conclusion one comes to about a given pr. of fat skis depends dramatically on your weight, typical density of snow you encounter, radius of turns you like to make, speed, and a bunch of other variables. Unfortunately, this is a long enough list of variables to make the wide variety of experiences captured in the usual anecdotal end-user reports seem pretty mysterious.
Tom / PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Damn. Looks I'm just going to have to go out there and try them all for myself! As you pointed out, Munich's not well situated for as ski test in Milton Keynes. I'll just going to have to go out and search for alternatives...
As far as problems with obese skis are concerned, the only problem that I know of is that fat owners seem to end each run with an inane grin on their faces. The grin seems plastered in place for several hours after the end of the days skiing, and can only be temporarily removed by looks of pity when watching other non-fat owners jump turning down the run they just laid a set of faultless tracks into...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
If you want your reading assignment for the week laid out for you, do a search over on Epic for the term "fat" or {"fat" "mm"}. Lots and lots of discussion of fat skis over there ... even some discussion of fat skies (sic).
Epic: http://forums.epicski.com/index.php?
Tom / PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fat skies: New speak for snow laden?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike
MK is probably not the best place to test fat skis or do they have off piste days these days? If I was you I would go down to St Anton where you can demo any fat ski there is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Hi snowman.
In fact there are test centers right near Munich (St. Anton's about 2 1/4 hours drive). Best for powder is (surprisingly enough) the local glacier on the Zugspitze in Garmisch-Partenkirchen. Crap on-piste, amazing off! Or if you get it on a good day, the Dammkar in Mittenwald, which is billed as a freeride area, i.e no pistes at all. They have a special test center at the bottom of the Karwendelbahn where you can borrow a different pair of skis at the end of each run (each run takes about 1-1.5 hours).
It's just a question of going out and doing it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Lawrie, Unless you ski offpiste ALL the time, a pair of the real fatties are probably a bit over the top. When I'm at a offpiste area (say La Grave), for several days, then I'll use fatties. Last time they were a Nordica Beast - which were much less tiring to use than a thinner ski, but a pain to put in the bin on the gondola.
Otherwise, for 'normal' ski areas (where I'll ski offpiste as much as possible), I use some Salomon Xmountain Tours, which work fine and weren't expensive.
Does anyone else think skis are getting too heavy these days ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Quote: |
It's just a question of going out and doing it!
|
I can think of worse chores!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
ski, I blame the bindings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mike Lawrie wrote: |
| Fat skies: New speak for snow laden? |
Good one!
Unfortunately, it's more likely new speak for "Doh, I failed spelling in grade school" 
Tom / PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Physicsman, I suppose if it did stand for 'snow laden skies' then according modern street spelling it would be 'phat skies'?
I also blame the bindings by the way, which is why my phat skis are going to be equipped with Fritschi touring bindings. Diamar. Or would you recommend something else?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
I too ski mostly off-piste now. I love my Volante "Chubbs" which are nearly fat skis (112/85/103), though I don't think that model is available any more. Volants area bit expensive and very heavy but they ski anything (quite good on piste too) and just smash through crud and crust. So stable, but they reward agressive skiing. Perhaps not the best for jump turns in a narrow couloir, but they do OK. They certainly improved my skiing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Mike, you might also want to check with Sport Schuster and Sport Scheck whether they run a season opening/demo weekend. the problem with demoing fat skis is that they are not exactly mass market in places such as Bavaria and therefore many shops do not bother stocking them, perhaps with the exception of one or two models (it's usually the Pocket Rocket as they can be used by almost any skier).
if you liked the Blizzard (SIGMA? which have a reputation for being superstiff) then I would suggest that you try other Teutonic brands such as Voelkl, the Explosiv is their powderski and has a cult following. I ski their v-pro with 83mm waist (and Freerides), as this is my only ski I needed to make a bit of a compromise by going not too fat. As I am fairly light at 160lb I found through demoing that I do not really need more ski for good flotation.
Enjoy the powder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Mike,
Unless Munich offers you a really wide choice of fat skis then I second Snowman's suggestion of St Anton. It's full of ski shops with Fat skis to buy/rent and the terrain to test them on.
If you like stiff skis and you are 175lb/80kg+ it's unlikely you will like the Pocket Rockets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
IMHO, fat skis are too restrictive. I spend my time skiing off piste as often as I can find good snow, but in reality spend most time on piste getting to and fro. Pocket Rockets may be (are) a fine thing underfoot in 60cm of Utah powder, but anywhere else they're decidedly unimpressive.
My suggestion is something like the new Atomic Beta 5 Metron which apparently (I've not tried them) mixes up the sidecut of a SL with the surface area of a fatboy. Buddies relate they're pretty impressive, but not for your average punter...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
