Intermediate Skis . . . oh really?

A snowHead

OK, up front, I’m a not yet 2 week skier, with the stated inability to link more than five turns without eating snow so I guess that I’m qualified to voice an opinion about a ski’s userfriendliness (sic).

I and a fellow snowhead had the chance to swap skis last week. My Atomic SX10s – 160cm (recommended for expert skiers and bought in a fit of madness) and her Head ic140s – 170cm (right length for her and recommended to intermediates for skills advancement)

So why are my SX10s sooooo easy to tip into a turn and edge on and off for absolute easy control between carve and slide out? I couldn’t ask for more comfort. They need so little weight transference to initiate and hold a carve that it’s a bit like walking, you don’t need to think or exaggerate your movements and incredibly stable at speed for a short ski.

Yet the Heads are tail happy, always wanting to spin you out and down the hill backward. It took incredible effort and weight transfer to get the leading edges to grip during turn initiation and really exaggerated hip and knee angles to maintain the carve without the tails slapping round and biting you and they felt ‘dead’ (that’s the only way I can describe it) in comparison to the Atomics. They also flapped about at speed. They knackered me, I hated the dam things and so did my fellow skier. She was quicker, more controlled and much happier on the SXs

So who makes the judgment call on a skis suitability?
I get the feeling that advanced skiers writing reviews use their advanced ability to ski the *rse off every thing on test and label the lesser performing skis as suitable for lesser ability skiers when they themselves have had to exploit their skills harder to make them perform.

Bass Ackward or what?

OK, I’ve very limited experience and this is hardly representative but has anyone else felt that a recommended ski doesn’t meet their expectations (or their ability)?

A snowHead

Tried a pair of Salomon Verses (Intermediate ski?) a couple of years ago - absolute carp for me, couldn't get them to hold an edge. Swapped straight onto a pair of Nordica slalom race carvers - sweet as a nut and so easy to ski.

My conclusion at the time? "Intermediate" skis were not made for folk who want to use skis. Confused

Morning after edition:- OK a quick late night posting and just wanted to say this is hardly a scientific conclusion - purely subjective based on a very small sample Little Angel

and I am referring to hard surface carving, not soft snow. But then, where is an "intermediate" most likely to be skiing?

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

Masque, since a ski can be put into carve at low speed as well as high speed - carved snowplough turns are a very valid way to build ski technique for carved parallel turns - what you say is perfectly valid.

Low-end and intermediate skis are generally made to skid more willingly - in other words they twist more easily (less torsional rigidity) - so they may be more comfortable for those who've not taken much instruction in carving a turn (the majority of skiers?). They may also have a rather sloppy flex pattern.

What you say is interesting, and tends to bear out what I believe - that if you learn to ski properly there's no reason not to use a ski that carves well, even at an early stage of learning.

All in all, there's no substitute for testing skis yourself - ask for premium demo skis from the rental shops, since they will be kept in much better condition than the run-of-the-mill rental stock.

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

David Goldsmith, I'd hardly call my experiences "learn to ski properly" but you can PM DB for his opinion of my skills or lack of.
I get the feeling that manufacturers make such a wide range of skis simply because they can and that a gullible public will perceive a need to upgrade every few years as the “experts” (sponsored and or on junkets?) tell us to. Or am I just being cynical?

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

You'll need to Register first of course.

I agree with Ghost here, what's a carved snowplough turn? I just don't really see how this would work.
As for detuning, a proper detune job should only detune the edges that are NOT effective edges - basically on the tip and tail where the ski starts to turn upwards (if it is a twin-tip, otherwise only the front is detuned):

\./''''''''''''''''''''''''''''\./

So if you can imagine that the above crappy drawing is a twin-tip ski seen from the side, only the first and last characters would be detuned. This shouldn't affect your ability to carve. Then again, I also don't really see how it would effect much of anything. Personally I have ridden fully tuned skis and boards as well as detuned skis and boards, and have not noticed a difference.

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

Masque, Unfortunately, I don't believe your cynicism is greater than the stinginess of an "intermediate" when faced with top-end pricing.

Interestingly, 114/68/98 (Head) is quite a bit different of a shape than 107/65/97 (Atomic) and, if flex and torsional stiffness were equal, would have the Head possibly quicker than the Atomic (with weight far enough forward).

See the Lady Saphir thread for a similar story. I like DG's 2nd paragraph and would like to point out that some 'intermediate' skiers take it as a point of _psychological_ comfort to be able to rotate the ski to any angle with respect to the fall line whenever they wish, regardless of any real 'turn shape'. This is usually accompanied by miniscule edging if any.

PS At least one of the reviewers whose work I read said not to buy the IC140, whereas he called the SX10 possibly one of the most versatile 'cross skis available.

After all it is free

In the end there is no substitute for testing a ski, a ski that is perfect for one person may be completely wrong for another and it is only by trying different skis that you will realise this.

De tuning is carried out to help prevent tips and tails of skis catching which can cause falls, there is a certain amount of debate as to how much this works, much of it seems to depend on things like how hard the edges are on your skis and how you ski, if you ski perfect carved turns every time and your edges are slightly soft you won't need them de tuned if you are an old style skier and do close parrallel turns combined with a harder edge you may find de tuning has an effect, again it is very subjective and is worth trying to see if it makes any difference

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

DG has hit the nail on the head - learn to ski properly (warning, hobby horse on the horizon Smile

) Many people on the pistes today, possibly in their desperation to ski "parallel" at all costs, do not actually make TURNS. They "ski" in what is effectively a series of diagonal sideslips, linked by pushing the tails of the skis from one side to the other. And this after the carving ski "revolution" as well Crying or Very sad

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

Alan Craggs, Well put !

snow reports

comprex, I was trying to be as simplistic as possible in my ‘description’ of how these two skis ‘felt’ to someone of limited abilities. One an ‘expert’ ski though priced right in the middle of the intermediates, the other for people to improve with.
The Head needed ALL my concentration to apply the techniques I’d watched, listened to and tried to emulate. In the end they did start to ‘perform’ but the amount of body english needed was intense and exhausting. This may help someone to achieve muscle memory for good technique but in general sliding around they were truly horrid and I would need a lot of instruction to get the best out of them.

Whereas the SXs were extraordinarily forgiving and rewarding in all on piste circumstances and will certainly help rather than hinder my progress through instruction.

It’s this dichotomy of having all these skis all aimed at differing levels of ability yet this Head required serious concentration and commitment to the fall line just to enjoy a steep blue. Anyone pulling back from that spends all their time trying not to slither round to skiing switch. That can’t be helpful to a timid intermediate.

DG’s right, we should all try as many skis as possible, but with the plethora of equipment we tend to rely on ‘expert’ advice in magazines or through our peers. And with so many of us buying now I wonder how many of us are either unhappy with out skis or being held back by the skis characteristics that we’re not equipped to identify or compensate for.

I’m a boarder so I have a good feel for an edge and sideslip and I love powered carving so I recognise the intrinsic similarity of carving both tools . . . that’s almost certainly assisted me in differentiating between these two ski’s, but I know if I’d bought the Heads I’d be struggling to get off a very lowly plateau and not enjoying the transition of weight into the tails to power out of a carved turn. (first experienced in very disastrous circumstances).

Got to say it, I’m over the moon with my skis and I know they’ll assist me in raising my game. They’re pretty useless in the soft stuff, but then again it was my first time too.

RobW, yes they were set up correctly for both of us.

RobW, indeed,all of these things could be symptoms of improper binding centering.

You know it makes sense.

Alan Craggs, well, yes, but some of these carving skis are surprsingly hard to carve I find. They seem to sell well enough though. As sonn as I get the edge engaged it just flaps about on some of them.

Skiing round in the Portes du Soleil yesterday the number of people actually carving was vanishingly small, less than 1 in 100 I'd say.

As I said elsewhere though, I really, really can't speak highly enough of the Stöckli Laser SC's I was on yesterday. Mrs Ise skied them a few weeks back and thought they were great so I was interested to try them, we're likely to end up with some his and hers. This is pretty interesting because we're pretty different as skiers really but both find these race skis just perfect. The grip on them is just surreal and yet you can relax on them unlike some other race skis I've been on.

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

masque, were her skis set up for a lady? If so, the binding will be effectively out of position for you.

A snowHead

Wear The Fox Hat, maybe, but that would imply that the bindings were mounted forwards, whereas as RobW pointed out the symptoms that Masque is experiencing would suggest that they were too far back.

A snowHead

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

Wear The Fox Hat, Okanagan, The bindings were set in the central point of their adjustment with 12mm available to go back or forward. The centre point of both boots were within a couple of mm of the centre point on the ski.
we both experienced the same results and the edges were dressed to see if that cured it. I did get a feel for them by the end of the day when the snow was getting softer but I had to be very aggressive and I feel that’s not what an intermediate ski for someone to progress with should behave like.
I threw this up in the air to see if others have experienced similar issues. I never expected there to be such a marked difference in the feel of the skis or the levels of skill and effort to use them.

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

Okanagan, yeah, I wasn't sure, you see, while moving him forward on the skis may mean he puts less pressure on their tails, it also means that the turning centre of the ski is further back, which might feel like the tails are doing more of the work. I'm not sure. It may also have to do with the delta angle of the bindings. (I know that Tyrollias are fairly flat, not sure on Atomics)

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

Masque, what bindings have you on your skis, and on hers?

You'll need to Register first of course.

Masque, I've found in my, very limited, demo-ing this year that what you found is not so uncommon between differing ski manufacturers, even at the same user level.

I couldn't get ski's by Salomon and Volkl to initiate as easily or hold an edge as well as a pair by Rossignol and they were all meant to be aimed at the same level as skier. I'd have thought that the variation would be even bigger when you start to compare intermediate and advanced as well, which is what you found.

Also, someone who calls themselves an intermediate is more likely to be a beginner (big generalisation I know) and will be happier on skis that skid turns more easily.

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

marc gledhill, When does an intermediate become an advanced, on a ten point scale of ability I think I'm a six - can ski fast on-piste, can manage moguls, some off-piste experience in open and in trees. Should I get advanced skis or will it make much difference (might only encourage ski theft). When the shops sell superior skis are they designed for better skiers or just newer models? Puzzled

After all it is free

Masque, I couldn't agree more. Myself and my good wife have just been away skiing for some 11 days. The 1st week saw us each on hired Salomon RCs (exact model unknown) slalom skis. This was our 7/8th weeks skiing and we own our own boots but always hire skis. Despite last skiing a year before, we had no problem diving straight off on a red slope and picked up almost where we had left off. We had hired intermediate level skis, but the technicains in the shop was a friendly guy and I asked him for the best he had available.

After 7 days we moved on to a different resort. In the ski hire shop we were asked if we were good skiers, and being modest of course Embarassed

said no and explained ourselves as being upper intermediates who enjoyed skiing and could probably make it down pretty much any piste (who wouldn't to a local who has probably skied that number of weeks each year since he was 4!!!) Anyway, we got on the slope and both flopped around. I was given a pair of Heads and my wife a pair of older Salomon (exact models unknown). Both of us felt like absolute beginners for the entire afternoon. The only way you could get them to ski well was to be really aggressive and overemphasize everything - a bit like instrcutors may tell you to do when learning in ski school. The only way I could get it to carve was to accept a huge radius and forget about any smooth transitions as the edge just wouldn't take without some real aggressive trasnfer of pressure. Similar comments reagrding the smoothness of the ski - on a cut-up slope with some icy-patches, it was almost impossible to hold it in a traverse without it flapping around and knackering one to adjust the whole time. The condition of both skis looked fine - they weren't old by any means. Responsiveness zero - which was concerning on busy slopes on a Sunday afternoon packed with locals!

Back we went to the ski hire shop and asked to change at which stage we were told we could pay more and get superior skis. I got upgraded to a pair of Dynasar Omeglass and my wife to a pair of Salomon Streetracers. All fine again with race level skis.

I wondered where the point came that you become good enough to ski on any ski with syle (even cr@p skis) - or whether it was just a big con (by both advanced skiers and the ski companies) and the 'advanced' skis are just easier to ski with?

I can assure you that there are plenty of high end skis that are "too much" for me - too stiff, too fast, too unforgiving. (I remember a very interesting run in Snowbird when I was on a pair of Head World Cup race stock. They were too much of a ski for me then, and probably still would be)

Peter Ross, if you're looking at the US scale, if you can ski in a controlled way on any piste, linking carved turns, then you'd be a level 7 or 8. In some cases it's a lot easier to ski fast than ski controlled, so it's always a hard one to call as to what level someone is.
I tend to rely on others watching me, or instructors putting me through drills, and then them telling me what level I am.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

Wear The Fox Hat,

snowHeads are a friendly bunch.

I saw Masque on the Atomics and the other snowhead (No2) on the Head skis. For under two weeks on skis Masque put down some nice turns, he wasn't forcing the Atomics through the turns. His inside ski tended to get caught up a little but I think this is because he is used to carving just one edge on his snowboard. No2 was clearly not happy with the setup but didn't know if it was the head ski or the boots, both of which were new.

My best guess would be the binding position on the heads is too far back. I have some K2 skis with the bindings mounted back and the ski chatters at speed making it hard work on the piste. It's an effort to stay out of the back seat but in the off piste they perform much better.
Put the two sets of skis together and line up the centre of the bindings. I did this with 4 pairs of skis once and the results were surprizing.
I think this also explains why the Atomics are no good in the deep snow as the forward mounted binding will cause them to dive.

I prefer bindings that can be moved a few cm's forward and back so I can play with the binding position.

snow reports

Peter Ross, see what Fox posted. That's based on US charts. What I meant was that yer average punter will say "intermediate" after their first week on skis, as of course they aren't beginners anymore.

E.G. On my trip this year one of our group, a third week skier with only a weeks group lessons under his belt, had been sold a pair of Volkl 5 Star by our local ski shop before the trip. He's a big bloke and probably told them he was intermediate, skied parallel, did black runs, bumps etc. (In fairness he did try blacks and bumps, but it took him ages to get down and he was knackered and bathed in sweat at the bottom). He skied the Alan Crags linked side-slip style, so the 5 stars were a bit wasted to say the least.

D G Orf, I was a 12stone intermediate when I tried them! Shocked

You know it makes sense.

Wear The Fox Hat, and now you're heavier?

Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:

marc gledhill, just edited it, yes, now I'm heavier. That's the difference!

A snowHead

Fuxup, It's all those naff chocs and the ambasadorial regalia you scrawny muppet. You only weigh 7 stone with a good sweat, you could ride powder on a pair of 18" blades snowHead

A snowHead

Masque, consider that the marketing categories aren't about "ability" per se. Consider that the marketing categories are devised to suit a mean "intent". Intent (if I stray from the understood sense of the word I hope ssh and the other instructors will correct me) translates 'ability' through 'awareness', 'self knowledge', 'instruction', 'practice' and other factors into actual performance.

Allow me to tell you about a fairly athletic (paddles a dragon boat, shoots competitively, inline skates at a high level in terrain parks) snowboarder whom I skied with for a week. He had very little trouble keeping up with me and the group on the snowboard (except he didn't care for moguls much). We were going to go to Alta, and he, knowing that snowboards are banned there, decided to hire a pair of Blizzard Sigma XLs in 159cm. That was an entirely appropriate ski and size for someone of his stature and physical ability.

Not appropriate to his intent, though. Far, far more advanced.

Very early in the day, when faced with steeps and rock, he decided that all he needs to do is stay 'in control' on the terrain the other skiers were relishing, and his intent was to do that with shallow-angle linked hockey-stop style recoveries and possibly a snowplough or two. Well, the skis said, in a loud and commanding voice "THOU SHALT NOT DO THIS!" So, he would wind up locking himself into a traversing stem, with the uphill foot barely weighted, utterly unable to unlock the other ski from whatever path it chose. He was utterly miserable, utterly out of control, and without any idea of what was happening to him. Neither had the group, at first; we'd seen him carve turns in powder (Honeycomb Canyon, Solitude, on miniskis).

We took him off those as soon as we could and put him in the capable hands of Kim the masseuse. Dearly I wish he'd had something of the level of the C140 or C160 to enjoy the day on snow, though.

So. Consider that a C140 is designed to be marketed to folks with an average intent far less than carved parallel turns at speed. I speak not of their ability, Alan Craggs, rather what they desire and are willing to project their body image into doing. They may be able to do it, they do not intend to!

Consider also that an SX10 is designed to be sold to folks who explicitly intend to carve parallel turns at some speed.

I would say that the engineers and designers did a spanking good job with all of these designs. It's sales-department gimmicks and ego that get in the way of appropriate gear for the job.

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

comprex, To a point I agree with you and having thought hard I'd like to try the heads again with the bindings in their most forward position. The Atomic boot position is much more 'central' on the ski and will make them behave in a more 'snowboard' fasion - probably why I'm so comfortable with them.
BUT, They're also very forgiving when I wuss-out, happy to slip,slide down the fallline without any propensity to favour toe or tail, making them (to my limited experience) an ideal learner ski.
This is the crux of this thread, are beginers/intermediates being asked to use skies that are inherently more difficult to control in learning to sideslip and carve? And the SX10s will happily carve at very low speeds

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

Another thing to consider is that many so called intermediate skis are designed to be reasonable at everything, weather on or off piste in powder or on hardpack, however this means they will not perform as well as a dedicated ski in its ideal conditions, as an example my Head GS skis are fantastic on hard pistes or with a little powder but have real problems in deep powder or breakable crust requiring a huge amount of extra effort in those conditions

Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.

D G Orf, It's obvious horses for courses, but most of us start learning basics on the piste and stay there for the majority of the time and unless I develop some serious quads and learn how to surf the tails (a la snowboard) they're always going to be a liability in the soft stuff . . . is that possible, to force the tips up by weighting the thails and use hip articulation to alter the decent line?

You'll need to Register first of course.

Masque, sort of, some modern bindings allow you to shift the balance point allowing you to put more weight on the tails of the skis and lift the tips I can't say how well it works as I've not got a suitable binding to play with. The other way to do it is how they used to teach people to ski deep powder which is effectively to sit back on the skis, something you normally try to avoid doing, because you should be heading roughly down the fall line however sitting back will not cause you to fall and it does raise the tips out of the snow, feels odd at first though wink

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

Masque, powder skiing is tougher than powder boarding, but, as DGorf said, just shift your weight to the tails of your skiis and it's alot of fun. It's also important to remember that you don't have to turn as hard when skiing powder - the snow slows you down a fair bit on it's own. Go for gradual, flowing turns and you should do fine.

After all it is free

ponder, given your location I suspect that you may have skied many more powder miles than I, but do you really think that "shifting weight" to the tails (what does that mean exactly?) is an appropriate modification of technique?

Woah! I was told to be central, but NOT on the tails. If you get back on your tails, you have less control of your speed, or your tips for turning.

*Ski* the Net with snowHeads

I'm with fox on this one.

A lot easier said than done but in powder try to stay balanced in the centre of the ski and tip your heels slightly back to keep your tips up and get a little more float.

Help!!

Intermediate Skis . . . oh really?

snowHeads Forum Index >>> Equipment Reviews/Questions