 Poster: A snowHead
|
Am just thinking of getting my first 'all-mountain' skis. Looking at the Völkl Bridges. Has anyone skied them? I am a competent piste skier and starting to get to grips with the pow. I want to start heading off piste a little more, but still want something I can use to get me between bars! Does this seem like a sensible choice, or can anyone give me any other advice? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Go faster when off piste!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
Haha! Thanks dk100 - funnily enough that's what my instructor said last time I was out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Do you go in the park? if not, if you want piste and powder, maybe the bridge wouldn't be the best bet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I bought the Volkl Bridges, they were my first freestlye ski but was told they handle well all over the mountain and are great in powder.. mind you i'm not so good off piste but they still are good carvers on the slopes. I found a new website with useful product reviews and they also have some videos for the testers.. www.skiunion.com and look at the products page.
The new Armada ARV looks good as an all mountainer too! Arty graphics too!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
It's 92 underfoot, and a fatt(ish) shovel at 130 - so if you mounted them back a bit then they might be ok in some powder.
But why bother trying this when there's loads more skis out there designed for powder shredding?!
I understand if you've got a good deal lined up, but I was under the impression they're designed to give a 'bridge' between groomed and park.
I know some jib skis (Line Anthem etc) are fat enough, and stable enough, to ride almost everywhere; but unless you're looking to pull tricks off-piste (which based on the thread title I doubt), then look for a different all-mountain ski.
There's been loads of good, helpful discussions about these types of skis in the equipment section - and quite a few deals kicking about between here and pre-season reductions. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
monkey1, partly depends on how heavy you are. A 100mm ski for a 90kg guy provides less flotation than an 80mm ski for a 60kg gal, but a 100mm ski won't help you get between bars as competently!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fr0sty, Bridge is between park and off piste, rather than park and piste. AndyB1080, suggests they are also ok on piste. As monkey1, suggests he is 'competent' on piste the Bridge might work, but a 50:50 piste /off-piste may be better. Head Monsters again, or the Volkl AC range?.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
beequin, aha, fair enough.
The Volkl marketing aside, why not just take the Mantra then? (especially if you pick up an older model, there's only about 2mm difference underfoot!)
IIRC the Mantra was applauded by nearly all that skiied them, tight on-piste too by all accounts for any skiier who can ski competently enough to put something a bit wider on edge.
Perhaps that would be the better choice, with the Bridge geared more to pulling tricks (i.e. in the same mould as a Park ski, without being the Wall or Ledge).
Perhaps that's why I was confused.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| fr0sty wrote: |
beequin, aha, fair enough.
The Volkl marketing aside, why not just take the Mantra then? (especially if you pick up an older model, there's only about 2mm difference underfoot!)
IIRC the Mantra was applauded by nearly all that skiied them, tight on-piste too by all accounts for any skiier who can ski competently enough to put something a bit wider on edge.
|
The Mantra is -too- piste oriented.
The Katana is your huckleberry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Surely something like the Mission has to be in the mix then? Not so wide that there's a major culture shock on piste, and performs well off? Or something from Movement? The Spark perhaps?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| comprex wrote: |
| fr0sty wrote: |
beequin, aha, fair enough.
The Volkl marketing aside, why not just take the Mantra then? (especially if you pick up an older model, there's only about 2mm difference underfoot!)
IIRC the Mantra was applauded by nearly all that skiied them, tight on-piste too by all accounts for any skiier who can ski competently enough to put something a bit wider on edge.
|
The Mantra is -too- piste oriented.
The Katana is your huckleberry. |
I like this suggestion.
Kuro is too powder orientated.
Last years Gotamas can be had for cheap cheap cheap. Although this years look amazing...Both are reat all mountain skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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:
|
|
monkey1, I think you need to define what you mean by powder i.e. where do you do most of your skiing? For someone just getting into diddling around Euro "mixed" off piste the default advice is often Missions followed by some of the softer Movements. Depending on the amount of pies you eat you might find these are not really wide enough for proper powder so then you need to start thinking about a quiver (& so it begins...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| fr0sty wrote: |
A BIG ski for a novice off-piste venture, no..? - 110+mm underfoot would take some patience until it tipped up on edge. :D
|
By the same token, slower to respond to unwanted deflections and rough bits, and therefore easier to control.
And what's this 'on edge' business anyway?
Carved turns are /intentionally/ slower off-piste, and if anything needs to happen *right now* then skidding or jump turning or retraction are the tickets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| comprex wrote: |
And what's this 'on edge' business anyway?
Carved turns are /intentionally/ slower off-piste, and if anything needs to happen *right now* then skidding or jump turning or retraction are the tickets. |
Which all comes from experience, or did you think / find it altogether intuitive the first x number of runs on fat skis?
Indeed skidding and jump turning being the compromise on-piste for using a powder specific ski, and negotiating it back to the lift or other part of the mountain. Rather than picking the ski as the compromise in the 'all-mountain' style - which is what the OP was about I thought.
So just get a powder specific ski, make the best of navigating back to the lift, then really enjoy the fun of a big fat ski when you're well away from the piste.
I never mentioned carving anything off-piste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| fr0sty wrote: |
| comprex wrote: |
And what's this 'on edge' business anyway?
Carved turns are /intentionally/ slower off-piste, and if anything needs to happen *right now* then skidding or jump turning or retraction are the tickets. |
Which all comes from experience, or did you think / find it altogether intuitive the first x number of runs on fat skis?
|
Which all comes from on-piste experience, and yes.
The notion of anything other than carving being a 'compromise' is really a very modern phenomenon made possible by super sidecuts on piste skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| comprex wrote: |
The notion of anything other than carving being a 'compromise' is really a very modern phenomenon made possible by super sidecuts on piste skis. |
Agreed; however, only in part as I tend to think that the notion of 'compromise' is also a product of super fat skis, often with virtually zero sidecut, which require some compromise on groomed snow (or indeed most snow that doesn't have enough fresh cover).
I learned on skinny skis, and still believe that this compromise is more evident and more required with some modern skis, far more than when we skiied extra long numbers for that extra surface coverage to ensure float in powder.
Imho there's a requirement for compromise with these modern ultra fat ones. Although perhaps this was because I tended to straight line the old style skis back to lifts as much as possible, so didn't struggle to control them at slow speeds - which could very well be the case with a modern skiier of modern fat skis...
New ski designs are wonderful, and allow people to ski in such ways and on such varied terrain as they may not have ever enjoyed before. I'm not for one second lamenting these incredible evolutions.
(This is probably the point where everyone with a BASI or equivalent qualification comes in and hounds me because 'technique is technique', and never changes...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| fr0sty wrote: |
Agreed; however, only in part as I tend to think that the notion of 'compromise' is also a product of super fat skis, often with virtually zero sidecut, which require some compromise on groomed snow (or indeed most snow that doesn't have enough fresh cover).
Imho there's a requirement for compromise with these modern ultra fat ones. Although perhaps this was because I tended to straight line the old style skis back to lifts as much as possible, so didn't struggle to control them at slow speeds - which could very well be the case with a modern skiier of modern fat skis...
|
I'm intrigued by these statements of yours of ultra & mega fat skis. What do you mean when you say ultra & mega fat skis? 100+, 110+, 120+, 140+? I've been skiing fat skis for over 10 years now & whilst i'll concur that they're not as manuevreable as modern piste skis i've never had trouble carving them. They certainly don't require a different technique as far as i'm concerned.
In reply to the OP: All mountain, bridge, mid fat they're all different terms for POOR COMPROMISE. If you want to ski off piste buy something that's in excess of 100mm underfoot, with a large radius & preferably taller than you are. You'll probably find them tricky at first & troublesome on the piste however in the long run the will reward you in spades whilst off piste & you won't struggle so much in the kind of conditions you ultimately want to ski in. As opposed to being marginally better than piste skis but not really a massive improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What others skis do you have or this this a 'one ski quiver'. That makes a BIG difference to your choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fr0sty, frank4short,
I think you are both right and to use some poor allusion to some wikiphysics the key lies in relativity.
Most of the discussion you see on tinternet of modern fat skis (lets say for argument these are 120+ in the waist) is by owners who have quivers and access to regular soft snow conditions e.g. N America or European big day skis. Usuable on piste in Colorado or Interior BC can mean skiing in far softer conditions than a boilerplate day on a European glacier for instance or even day old refrozen suncrust offpiste.
The industry has, after a slow start, taken modern mid fats (say around 100mm waist) to its heart and for most guys these are a reasonable all round compromise IMO if you can adapt your skiing. Of course if all you ski is boilerplate or groomers there are far better tools for the job and if you've spent all your life on SLs you'll have to recalibrate. I recently got off a 65mm ski at Hemel onto a 105 and not surprisingly immediately found the latter a bit of a pig on edge. Most good instructors I've met recognise the need to try lots of different things re stance/balance/edging etc to enable self adaption to conditions. I don't see why the same shouldn't apply to skis. If you have the skills you can adapt but there's no harm in deciding what best gives you most bang for your buck and where you're prepared to make compromises if you want a one ski quiver.
FWIW the best single one ski quiver is a snowboard, you can carve it, float powder on it, slash turns, wiggle through tight trees (oh and get anchored in treewells, fall off traverses, lose an edge in no fall zones etc)
Caveat - this is all a bit sexist and the usual caveats apply re lighter weight inidividuals of both sexes not needing as much ....ahem..girth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| frank4short wrote: |
| I've been skiing fat skis for over 10 years now & whilst i'll concur that they're not as manuevreable as modern piste skis i've never had trouble carving them. They certainly don't require a different technique as far as i'm concerned. |
Not everyone has been skiing fat skis for so long, nor does everyone have so few problems making the transition between thin and fat.
Not everyone is an immediate ninja on every shape and size of ski they clip into.
| Quote: |
monkey1
I am a competent piste skier and starting to get to grips with the pow. |
Perhaps I'm mis-reading the OP - or failing to give enough credit - but this doesn't strike me as someone that will automatically be at home on skis which for some can require a real shift in technique - even if that shift is just re-assessing how imperfect your technique actually is.
fatbob, I have to confess I've only ever tried a board on a dry slope. It was a painful experience, and my arms were killing me by the end of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| fr0sty wrote: |
fatbob, I have to confess I've only ever tried a board on a dry slope. It was a painful experience, and my arms were killing me by the end of it. |
You're lucky - I first boarded on a dry slope and had a purple 'arris by the end of the first session as well.
I think after my sweet blog the only way to really see if can compromise with certain characteristics is to experience enough to see what you like. For that reason I'll try to test lots of stuff even if I've no intention of ever buying it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
but maybe they are as good as people say. I haven't tried them myself..
