 Poster: A snowHead
|
alan empty, I know the ZOOKEEPERS are huge fans of this ski, if perhaps a shorter version due to dwarven issues 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Now I'm feeling completely hardcore 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Frosty the Snowman, We like all things fat. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
SMALLZOOKEEPER, Awwwww...you say the nicest things 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Frosty the Snowman, What? What did i say. I'm cooking with Goose Fat. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SMALLZOOKEEPER, would you say the performance of the Navis is typical of a ski that width? I'd still be slightly wary of trying something else of that width (old habits die hard I guess).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
alan empty, No, in simple terms, the Black Crows range are a variety of Scott Mission with it's Variable sidecut, meaning a shorter radius on piste or hard pack. The ski's are awesome, but there are very few bad skis out there. If you managed the Navis in the conditions you specified, let me tell you they rock in deep snow too, they are at current, our favoured 'Variable Conditions' ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
alan empty, you can't generalise any more than you can about "piste skis". check out what the sidecut radius is and have a think about whether they felt stiff or soft and you can then start to look at other skis and get a rough idea of whether they will be similar or not
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arno, yeah, but that involves effort (and thought)! Damn...
I suppose what surprised me (and prompted the question) was the fact I could still do short turns fairly comfortably - I'd assumed that at some point with the ever-widening skis that this would be sacrificed. Which leads us nicely to your point about stiffness and sidecut I guess.
SMALLZOOKEEPER, interesting that you mention the Missions. They'd previously been my favourite skis, although I felt they sometimes lacked a little oomph. The Navis gave me that, although inevitable they don't quite have the ease-of-use of the Missions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
The new Mantra is 96 and not super fat but you know you have it under your feet, You don't think that way when you turn it in deep stuff though and you are surprised how agile it is on those paths through the tress.. you don't have to shift much weight..and it snakes there. Once you realise this, you can revise your technique to cope in what you may have thought needed a tight turning ski.
Let them run and just stay on them...deep and chopped up is so easy...!!! Fight them and they'll wear you out, IMV.
Who cares what they may be like on-piste...Didn't try them there... but you are only passing through anyway...
When it hasn't snowed for days and days and the snow is very hard...get out the racers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hahahahahhhhaaaaaaaaa
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
As JT says the Mantra's are awesome skis. Had a bad incident involving me on Mantra's and a tree but pre-tree had a wicked time on them. There had been about 70cm of fresh in a few days and they were sweet in the deep and the choppy stuff. Good for ripping back to the lifts as well. One of the best skis i've been on this year.
Ross
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
parlor, Take it you saw Whitegold's post? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
oh dear me! threads like this crack me up, hey parlor, guess i should have been on some proper 65mm 165cm long race carvers in verbier hey!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
the_doc, Sounds perfect,
|
|
|
|
|
|
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'm personally a big fan of snowblades. All the floation I need on the gnarliest runs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
DaveC, amen
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Approximately; if you're 5 9 or under or 11 st or under, then you can probably get away with std., old style, skis off piste on a good day. Virtually nobody but a local or an old body skiing since they were three is going to manage that. In most reasonable conditions you can get by with modern std skis if you want to enjoy yourself, don't mind taking a few tumbles and speed isn't an issue. Otherwise get fat skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm puzzled that so many people talk about fat skis for powder - that's surely the one condition that is truly easy to ski if you've got the right basic technique, on almost any modern ski. OK, if it's metres deep you just disappear, but that's rare for most parts of the world, and when it's 'just half a metre' you surely want to be in it, not on it. It's when it's deep but not powdery - and worst, breakable crust - that fat will turn an average day into a great one.
If you're looking for a ski that multi-tasks, Rossignol have a new system: the DC (Dual Camber) has a tension system on the front of the ski to pull it into reverse camber when you head off piste. That makes turn initiation easier, and generally improves deep snow performance, so the theory goes. I joined a Rossignol test day for dealers and French press (I was there on behalf of Fall Line who had cunningly engineered an invite) at the end of April. Great test conditions in Tignes - a lot of snow, and much of it very wet and heavy. In places you would have been totally stuffed without a lot of ski underfoot and I liked the DCs for that reason alone. Clicking them back into piste mode for the few metres we did on groomed sections seemed to make a difference but I'd really want harder conditions to be able to judge for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FoulNative, My car has one of those buttons that you can press to open the petrol cap, awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
I also feel that bindings and plastic ski boots are a waste of time. If you're going to be involved in a non-competitive sport like recreational skiing, the feel of being in touch with nature that leather boots and a lot of glue gives is an experience lost on you heathens. I also shun shaped skis, as skiing in 50cm deep wet powder on 210cm straight downhill skis is the way it was done and the way it should be.
How many more times are we going to do this topic to death before someone brings helmets back up then?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DaveC,
I believe you're not being true to the spirit of skiing. I hand saw my own saplings before lovingly shaping them into beautiful 250cm long all wood beauties. I've noticed some newcomers trying to nail metal edges to them but I feel this is a step too far.
Tie yourself to them with some sisal rope and shape a nice lurk and there's nothing you can't do with good technique.
Easyjet don't seem to have worked out a bagge policy for lurks howerver.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
DaveC, sounds like you're a telemarker? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Why would I free my heels when I can enjoy skiing with absolutely no technological advances? I also think chairlifts and mobile phones are the work of Satan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FoulNative wrote: |
I'm puzzled that so many people talk about fat skis for powder - that's surely the one condition that is truly easy to ski if you've got the right basic technique, on almost any modern ski. OK, if it's metres deep you just disappear, but that's rare for most parts of the world, and when it's 'just half a metre' you surely want to be in it, not on it. It's when it's deep but not powdery - and worst, breakable crust - that fat will turn an average day into a great one.
If you're looking for a ski that multi-tasks, Rossignol have a new system: the DC (Dual Camber) has a tension system on the front of the ski to pull it into reverse camber when you head off piste. That makes turn initiation easier, and generally improves deep snow performance, so the theory goes. I joined a Rossignol test day for dealers and French press (I was there on behalf of Fall Line who had cunningly engineered an invite) at the end of April. Great test conditions in Tignes - a lot of snow, and much of it very wet and heavy. In places you would have been totally stuffed without a lot of ski underfoot and I liked the DCs for that reason alone. Clicking them back into piste mode for the few metres we did on groomed sections seemed to make a difference but I'd really want harder conditions to be able to judge for sure. |
This is advertorial 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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:
|
Fat skis plane higher in the snow and carry speed. Thin skis plane deeper in the snow, so more drag and loss of speed. What do you do when you get to a flat area in your line?
The Rossi cable thing sounds like every other yearly gimmick on skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| snowbunny wrote: |
This is advertorial |
Not sure its advertorial - Foulnative is a journo who gets paid to write about stuff, giving us the heads up on something new doesn't necessarily mean he has a personal stake in it.
Sounds like a gimmick though even if it works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| DaveC wrote: |
| Fat skis plane higher in the snow and carry speed. Thin skis plane deeper in the snow, so more drag and loss of speed. What do you do when you get to a flat area in your line? |
Go fast enough on the steeps not for it to be an issue?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
You got me. We sink, and have to pole more than those on their super-fat fatties with extra lardy bits attached.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Did I just manage to successfully argue that fat skis are better in powder because they allow more stability at speed and exponentially increase the amount of terrain skiiable? Not to mention that fatter, higher turn radius skis pivot more easily and are less hooky and grabby off groomed runs... so - not a waste of time and we can finally lay this issue to rest? Good.
Now, who wants to tell me why reverse/reverse skis are rubbish?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| fatbob wrote: |
| snowbunny wrote: |
This is advertorial |
Not sure its advertorial - Foulnative is a journo who gets paid to write about stuff, giving us the heads up on something new doesn't necessarily mean he has a personal stake in it.
Sounds like a gimmick though even if it works. |
I would define advertorial in this instance, as an advert dressed up to look like a spontaneous chat. The 2nd para onwards looks like it's been written for a magazine page (to me). 1st para is personalised and tailored to the thread it's in, providing a platform for the pitch of the product/service whatever that follows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DaveC wrote: |
| Fat skis plane higher in the snow and carry speed. Thin skis plane deeper in the snow, so more drag and loss of speed. What do you do when you get to a flat area in your line? |
Maybe they need to invent fat cross country skis?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DaveC wrote: |
| Did I just manage to successfully argue that fat skis are better in powder |
I don't think anyone's arguing that fat skis are crap in powder or that thin skis perform better, just that for the sort of conditions one gets day-in day-out in Europe super-fats may not be ideal.
Now, what's better on a corrugated steep icy red or black first thing in the morning after a thaw-freeze? A reverse camber 110mm-waisted behemoth or a FIS-stock 65mm slalom ski? Oh look, the slalom ski. Horses for courses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
snowbunny, so what?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like to ski really fast. As fast as I dare. (Away from other people you understand).
I like a challenge.
I ski fat skis because I can ski them very very very fast off piste. They also allow for big drops and jumps.
I like fat skis on hard pack / piste / etc because they make otherwise boring skiing more exciting.
I prefer long skis to fat skis. Long and fat skis make me happy.
I can see why, if you are old, don't like to go fast or only get one or two weeks skiing per year you want every turn to count. In which case billy goating everything is for you, and the best thing to do this on is a pair of SL or GS skis.
A few years ago I remember having an online conversation with JT about my "fat" skis, a rather anorexic Volkl Explosive (92mm underfoot). I was laughed at, mocked and generally shunned. Now one of JT favourite skis is a Volkl Mantra (basically the same ski). Ohh how things change.
I've skied and own some very fat skis, including a proper reverse / reverse and I love it. I am happy to ski a ski as fat as you can reasonably make it, providing it can be pointed in a straight line, I then like to see how long I can hold on before I decide I have to lose some speed.
Each to their own. Actually I shouldn't be advocating fat skis as it means that people that otherwise don't have the skills to ski off piste track my powder. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
