 Poster: A snowHead
|
The first major ski trade show of the spring - the SIA show - has taken place in Las Vegas (moving to Denver next year). The Ispo show in Munich - the world's biggest - is from 1-4 February.
Here are five trends in gear for next winter, reported by Popular Mechanics:
- More reverse-camber 'rocker' skis for the powder
- A new Avalanche Airbag system from Black Diamond, building on the success of the Avalanche Balloon System (ABS)
- An improvement in split snowboards from Atomic, for those wanting to climb and re-connect the two halves of the board more easily
- A wide-angle helmet camcorder, called the GoPro Wide Hero
- 'Body Armor' for upper body protection in park riding and aerials.
Any comments?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
David Goldsmith, I'm glad to see the industry is focusing on the conditions that the vast majority of skiers experience and enjoy, the vast majority of the time...powder of course.
Don't you just hate those rare occasion where you come across someone "on" piste?
I saw someone on rockers having a nightmare on hardpack in PDS last year. Oddly enough I spotted him a few times; I spent most of the weekend off piste and every time I saw this bloke (he had very distinctive Norrona kit on) he was on piste, struggling with the skis and demonstrating a regrettable lack of technique. Hilarious. "Buy these sir, they're all the rage and they'll go nicely with your new London Bridge".
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
have you seen that movement fly swatter? Now that's a rocker 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Quote: |
A wide-angle helmet camcorder, called the GoPro Wide Hero
|
This shall require further investigation.  I quite fancy myself as an action movie maker
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
what is a reverse camber rocker ski?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| I saw someone on rockers having a nightmare on hardpack in PDS last year. Oddly enough I spotted him a few times; I spent most of the weekend off piste and every time I saw this bloke (he had very distinctive Norrona kit on) he was on piste, struggling with the skis and demonstrating a regrettable lack of technique. Hilarious. "Buy these sir, they're all the rage and they'll go nicely with your new London Bridge". |
I stumbled across someone on reverse-camber-two-snowboards-for-skis explaining to someone that "that's how you nail carving". My 75 year old mother could have done better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rambotion, A ski that is bent up at the top
Camber if you look at a ski the bit under the foot is arched up so when you put pressure on it flexes and the ski will turn.
What they have done now is bent the top of the ski the opposite way, so it curves up adn away from the snow to allow for better movment through powder
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tip rocker is the greatest thing to happen to my skiing  Piste skis haven't got much left to improve on so it's hard to innovate there...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Reverse rockers are really a quiver ski - not necessarily a Euro ski and certainly not an "average" Brit holidaymaker ski - but they are fun. I skied Hellbents in MK and they really weren't that bad as they ski very short. Don't knock the innovation - eventually it'll make easier turning skis for the masses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fatbob, "easier turning skis for the masses" - if you wanted to make skis turn any easier, you're going to have to equip them with steering wheels. The whole point is that it should be a skill. THey're too easy already. We're going to have to rename skiing as snowboarding soon (it's so easy).
Making life any easier for the masses will just result in more crap skiers and more carnage/injuries/deaths and helmet debates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
under a new name, luddite
I've got an old pair of 205 cm Volkl VP19s in the garage, which are far harder to ski on than today's skis. But they just sit there gathering dust because they're nowhere near as much 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.
|
uktrailmonster, not really a luddite honest, just an awful lot of shoite is talked about skis. f-Bob's right in that rockers are a quiver ski and if I thought I was going to get to ski the sort of snow that they work in often enough, I might even have a pair. They'd look a little out of place alongside the currrent quiver but hey, who cares...
I'm just not sure how much easier you can make the sport without it becoming pointless. There will soon be no excuse for not just going straight to a fine, gourmet lunch and a nice bottle or two of Mercurey.
And I bet if you took your P19s out, you'd soon find them plenty of fun. You would also get fitter and if you want or need to, lose weight. Probably become irresistibly attractive to your chosen gender preference as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| under a new name wrote: |
I'm just not sure how much easier you can make the sport without it becoming pointless. There will soon be no excuse for not just going straight to a fine, gourmet lunch and a nice bottle or two of Mercurey.
|
Try harder. Whine less. Do you swim across the Channel to get to the alps because a flight is just too easy? You get out of skiing what you put in.
Oh, and skis like the Salomon Lord and similar make an easy quiver of one that'll ski groomers just fine. If you don't think you can find snow to ski them in, clearly you're just making life too easy for yourself
|
|
|
|
|
|
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:
|
| uktrailmonster wrote: |
| I've got an old pair of 205 cm Volkl VP19s in the garage, which are far harder to ski on than today's skis. But they just sit there gathering dust because they're nowhere near as much fun. |
I've got an old pair of 205 cm Volkl P9's and do at least half my piste skiing on them. It's great fun to switch back and forth from "old" to "new" technique and the P9's are still a blast after all these years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| ...I need a ski that is at least as enjoyable (and "sort of" challenging) on-piste as off. I really don't want something that will "ski groomers just fine". Why compromise like that? |
Wise words 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Levitt, Ah, P9s. An awesome ski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| under a new name wrote: |
My issue is really with the whole lets make it easier thing. It really is exceptionally easy now - the difficulties all lie between the ears.
|
I'll be sure to turn up to my ISIA exam and let them know I'm listening and they should just give me the cert, then. I guess for crusing between resteraunts while telling people how many years you've been skiing and how easy it is these days for the common folk to have their fun is a tough day.
Quick thing though - isn't skiing supposed to be fun? Obviously the challenges are there if you look for them, so what you're saying is you just want to look down your nose at people?
Don't misunderstand me, I don't care where people ski or what they ski on - you're right, on-piste based skis are good if you want to ski on piste - I take my RX9s out for groomer days (GS style skis that are an absolute nightmare in variable conditions), but the attitude makes me glad I'm away from the normal British punter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
I'm just not sure how much easier you can make the sport without it becoming pointless.
|
That's an odd way to view skiing. Sure it's easier than it used to be, but that just allows you to extend your boundaries. Having used both, I just find skiing more fun on modern skis. It's only easier if you don't challenge yourself at all. The day I can ski absolutely anything with ridiculous ease and boredom is the day I'll pack it in. But skis are not that good yet
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I think I'm probably being confusing by mixing up a few points;
DaveC, Yes, skiing should be fun. No question. I think you misinterpreted my comment (for which I accept full responsibility, it is my comment after all).
By "between the ears" I only mean that IMHO/limited observation, the biggest obstacles to getting started (for adults) are fears of falling, sliding, lack of control, et al (i.e. understandable and natural problems "between the ears" - in other words, in the skier's own head).
If a small "toy" (it's not really a toy but forgive me that simplification) can ski with no intelligence whatsoever... I have a problem understanding how the technology can make the process of getting over the mental challenges (of which I am sure you recognise there are many) much easier. If you're going for your ISIA, I'd assume that was a major consideration in lesson planning?
As for looking down my nose at people. No. Never. Well, rarely, I hope.
Regarding on vs off piste skis? My Dobies are a joy in every condition. They're probably not as good for big sweeping GS turns in thigh deep powder as a pair of Stockli DP Pros (lust, lust, lust) but how often do I get to do that? I'm lucky enough to have a greater than average chance (for a European city office dweller) to ski big mountain powder at the weekend, and it still doesn't happen often enough to justify a single ski only for those days. The big plus is that the Dobermanns can be my only ski and I can still have heaps of fun on piste as well as loving them off piste.
What's my point then? There are two.
1. I don't see how you can make the sport much easier and I don't see why you'd want to. More comfy hire boots would be a good start in a different direction however.
2. I'm not sure what rocker skis add to the argument. No. I haven't skied them. Yes, I should and will. I really have a problem with making powder skiing any easier. Now... ... ... if they simply make it more fun... ... that would be interesting.
I just really think that for most holiday skiers it's all rather academic beyond being able to step into a hire shop and take out a pair of sticks that are well aligned with their ability and make the whole thing fun (please note I have not at any point suggested that this is not the objective). This doesn't appear to be the motif behind this trade show.
uktrailmonster, well, OK, would I make the irrevocable choice between my Rossi 7Ss or my Nordicas? Hell yeah, Nordicas all the way. And I really do try and extend my boundaries most days and with every turn; more graceful, smoother, more efficient, steeper....faster...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I still don't get what you mean about the sport being "easier". The rest of your post is pretty much the usual "fat skis are cheating, fat skis are pointless" argument that's been done a few times no? You have a problem with making skiing powder "easier". Yes, fat rockered designs do simplify some aspects - I don't have to worry so much about sinking a tip, and that kind of thing. However, on my thin skis, there're lines that simply aren't skiable. Anything with a mellow runout, anything particularly low angle, tighter trees become a way scarier prospect, any weird snow (wet or similar) or slab is suicide. Extra floatation makes life easier, it also allows me to ski faster, harder, and more creatively, and in conditions that wouldnt be fun at all on thin skis. So, yes, my fat skis make powder a lot more fun. My mid-fats make all mountain skiing more fun, and my GS skis make skiing groomers more fun than my fat skis.
Looking at the trade show for holiday skiers rentals is misunderstanding it's purpose too. It's a technology event, showing off what they can do and how they're innovating. They're not trying to put their reverse camber and sidecut skis into every rental shop. Keep in mind it's a worldwide show, and the North America market is very different to the European one, so they have to cater to both.
Not sure what you meant about going for my ISIA and dealing with robots? Obviously lesson planning and pushing clients at their own rate without freaking them out is part of the job, but that's never gonna change. People only take lessons if they want to improve - and there's always ways to improve. It's amazing watching the top level instructors here analyse their own skiing and find holes in it. So, that's why I don't understand worrying about technology. It's a muscle memory sport, you can't take the human element out of it, and there'll always be ways to improve that aren't easy. If you choose to stop wanting to improve and ski things that don't challenge you, I guess that's the way skiing could be too easy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DaveC, no, it's not. (oh why am I doing this at this time in the AM? ) (Why don't we go skiing instead and settle the argument over a beer afterwards? - a much better plan)
In sort of reverse order, RE: trade show - the article refers to rockered skis. Let's take the Geneva Motor show. Sure, they who case the latest 911, et al., but they also show off the local compact. Fair do's. Selling Rocker skis to Joe public is not far away from theft..IMHO.
Nope. I'm going to stop myself there, not cos I'll be rude, but I won't do either of us justice. I can live with mid-fats though, I'm not completely prejudiced...
Back tomorrow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pretty sure the trade shows have companies full lines, not just freestyle/freeride - but how do you market and sex up another carver? No innovation, no trend there - so they're there, and being shown off, but who takes photos/cares about the 09 Punto when there's the bright orange Gallardo with suicide doors? Hard to make a big fuss on the Nordica stands about the Doberman or anything else that's stood the test of time.
Anyway, I'll let you get your thoughts out properly before I keep arguing with you
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
DaveC, very true. History is littered with mad experimental ski boots, invented by men in dodgy clothing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| under a new name wrote: |
I can live with mid-fats though, I'm not completely prejudiced...
|
Define mid-fat? Opens new can of worms & grabs popcorn.
Curiously I think despite your handbagging tiff here you'd probably get on very well skiing together.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
doesn't the most beloved  ski of all time (the Mission) have a rockered tip?
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
fatbob, "despite your handbagging tiff here you'd probably get on very well skiing together"... Do you think he can keep up with me on my slalom sticks  ?
DaveC, OK. Fatter skis; you have a point. And I will admit that the first time I went (shhhhhh! don't mention the BBC) heliskiing I did try the 1st afternoon on my Rossi 9Xs. I could keep up (just) but, boy, was I the exhausted one. So you can imagine who was on Volant Chubbs the day after  Not only did they make that specific experience more enjoyable but they also gave me a feel for big swoopy turns - which I will confess hadn't been a part of my powder experience previously. Which was a nice extension as I can sort of do them on my skinny skis now.
I do, tho', have an issue with folk being misled by the marketing into buying inappropriate tools for their purpose (and ability) - and while I take your point (partially anyway) about the trade show, I think it does reinforce for those with high gullibility indices that über fat rockers are what they need on their one week a year in piste-land. And there is a limit to what's reasonable in the fat stakes beyond which they're a. ridiculous and b. unusable outside of Utah; I don't think I need to ski on two snowboards - there's no point skiing thigh deep champagne powder if your skis make it feel like it's a groomer (cos they float so much), IMHO.
Mind you, in my youth (and you'll see this coming a mile away) I was completely conned into 203cm slalom skis (I stand 165cms and 62kgs, and stayed conned from 1984 until ~2001) and a deep burning desire for orange Lange ZRs (which I never got, having feet of the wrong shape). I toyed for a while with painting my Nordica 970Rs(?) orange but didn't think it would work.
I think we're probably in agreement but talking at cross purposes about the "easy" thing. The robot thing is purely to demonstrate that the actual act of getting skis to do what they want to do is, in and of itself and when much simplified, not really that hard. Getting poor humans to do it is the hard bit once all those primitive reflexes get in the way.
I think I've forgotten what I was arguing about  Oh! I know - it was fatbob, 's comment. "easier for the masses". Hmmm. I don't see that skis can get much "easier" to ski on (see "Robot" above), nor why you'd want to make them do so, nor that you could demonstrate any improvements in the fun factor for most people, most of the time, if you did so. (I hope we're not chasing our tails here...I think there's a subtle distinction lurking in here that one of us, probably not me, might elicit).
What I do see is folk getting on skis that are easier to initiate turns on but not completing them. I see people with limited experience skiing (almost) out of control as they don't have the experience to realise it. And almost worst, people getting to an early "intermediate" (whatever that means) plateau and stopping lessons because "they can ski". And I don't see making skis any "easier" is going to help any of these. Lessons would.
I hope that's constructive!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Ah I knew it would be all my fault. Just thinking of what the beginner end applications of reverse camber might be - maybe making specific "preweighted" learning skis so that even if they weren't physically decambering beginners would get a feel for a decent turn and built confidence.
Thinking more along the lines of Burton LTR snowboards - not available on the consumer market and not appropriate for use past a few days experience but apparently very good for the first few days.
More lessons in it for the pros too as early confidence = fewer drop outs but a need to manage the transition onto real skis in a controlled environment.
Of course I might just be talking bollux - I definitely couldn't ski last time out and had all the grace and poise (but fouler language) of a tranquilised giraffe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
fatbob, why indeed?
You know that the redoubtable Dominique Perret (of the DP Pro and 1998 world cliff jump record) has for some time been working on a rear entry design?
Ski evolutif, IIRC, was a great idea until the teacher had to get the class to move up beyond skis of the length that we're all now used to. There was some resistance. It was futile. ROFLOL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 still a little bit lost on the "easier to ski" thing - I don't think any technology can replace the core elements of what skiing actually is - I'm not sure where you're drawing the distinction too. Are shaped skis the problem, making turning too easy, or the huge sidecut skis like Missions that're really simple to figure out but not punishing like a SL ski, or is it just rocker that you're not happy with?
I agree that week holiday skiers in Europe don't need more than a hint of tip rocker and anything >110mm is pretty much pointless. For a seasonaire or North America resident, they become a lot more reasonable. I'm actually with you on conventional skis at 130mm type widths are pretty rubbish too. The Salomon Rocker at 120mm is about as fat as you can get even as a powder specific ski without being a bit over the top. Bringing up reverse camber/sidecut skis like the Spatula probably drags the argument into a whole new gutter, but they're incredible for what they're designed for (soft snow). Basically, writing off rocker and reverse camber/sidecut type innovations as an unnessecary gimmick isn't giving it anywhere near enough credit. I'd argue that if you're skiing off piste at all, you could definitely benefit from something more specialised. I don't think rockered skis are actually being sold as a "quiver of one" ski are they? Just because people are stupid enough to ride their pow skis on icy groomer days doesn't mean that that's theyre intended purpose...
I agree that the less steep learning curve means people aren't putting as much time into lessons too - but I'd argue the same "intermediate plateau" has existed and will always exist, where less dedicated skiers decide that they're done putting money into learning and are happy. Making it more effort to get to sells a few more ski lessons, but it doesnt make any difference to the end result. No reason to begrudge ski companies making life easier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
"I don't think any technology can replace the core elements of what skiing actually is" - hmmm, maybe I'm barking up a wrong tree. I think I have an issue with rocker - but maybe I'm really just wrong. Anyone got any idea why skis have negative camber in the first place? Or, rather, is there a good engineering reason for them to have -ve camber? I do also have an issue with huge sidecut skis as I think they actually make the hard snow experience more difficult than it needs to be as "caster" effects come in.
NB I haven't skied any rockered or reverse cambered skis and I do promise I will - so I will admit that a lot of what I say is simply prejudice!
Maybe a hint of tip rocker would help some people (although I'm not sure how often). I had a friend at Uni who'd rockered a pair of Dynastar Acryglass (by skiing into a rock) and reckoned he'd dropped 5-10% off his average GS time...whether this was to do with the "rocker" or the reduced effective length is unknown.
I do have a sort of feeling, unsubstantiated, that what we generally see for the average 1-2 week skier is simply a shift along the turn - it's no longer hard to initiate, but hard to complete. It's not actually easier to do properly.
I (hate to admit) don't ski off piste in deep snow enough to worry about having a specific ski for it - if I know I'm going for a blast after a storm, I can hire/borrow something if I really want. If the budget allowed, I would really (I think) like a pair of Stoeckli DP Pros. But then, they ski very well on piste for a deep snow ski.
Oh, dear, I think we've argued ourselves onto some sort of agreement... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
under a new name, If you can get your hands on the 2009 edition of Peak Performance "magazine" there's a decent article in it about the evolution of reverse camber in the hands of Shane McConkey. It's a bit onesided in that it claims that Atomic ski makers just didn't get it after they took over Volant manufacture IIRC. The jist is that where the ski doesn't bottom out then you've got nothing to decamber against so camber is actually working against your turns. I think rocker is more specific than reverse camber so you get early tip rise , leaving you with less effort and greater ability to do other stuff as you're planing rather than working to get your skis up and out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
NB I haven't skied any rockered or reverse cambered skis and I do promise I will - so I will admit that a lot of what I say is simply prejudice!
Maybe a hint of tip rocker would help some people (although I'm not sure how often). |
The thing is, I'm arguing that it's not about "helping" people - that's a side effect, in the same sense that SL type sidecuts make short turns easier. I'd argue that for both SL and freeride designed skis, the theory wasn't making life easier, it was about making it better at it's intended goal. So, SL skis turn superfast and hold an edge between gates. Rockered skis allow skis to plane and keep planing on soft snow, allowing more line selection, better performance in normally shunned snow conditions (like windslab, super wet cement, etc), and to go faster in soft snow.
| under a new name wrote: |
I do have a sort of feeling, unsubstantiated, that what we generally see for the average 1-2 week skier is simply a shift along the turn - it's no longer hard to initiate, but hard to complete. It's not actually easier to do properly.
|
You're right. It's easy to wang your skis on edge and leave thin marks in the snow a la "carving". Steering the ski, and controlling the elements of your skiing through a complete turn is very difficult and doing it to a high level is very difficult. Not many people are very good at it - as an instructor it's something that I'm still working on, my peers are still working on, and the people that're training me are still working on. This is pretty much why I'm so in disagreement with the whole "skiing is easy" thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DaveC, so when do we get to go skiing??? and beer???
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
