Poster: A snowHead
|
I've got the opportunity to buy these at a knock down price as someone's moving to Oz
Have you experience of these?
Any opinions?
Are they for advanced / expert skier?
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Good ski! skis very nicely!
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Good all mountain advanced ski. I've only skied them in a fridge, but liked them loads.
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
1969jma, a very nice ski and great to ride on piste.
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Decent ski, initiates really easily, slightly smaller turn radiius than some similar skis, not altogether happy going straight and flat.
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Cheaply made, dull graphics, soft and liable to de-lam....typical Salomon really!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am not atni salomon in any way but of the 41 skis i tested at the end of last season this was the only one i didn't enjoy...now it could have been tuning, conditions, the fact it was the first run after lunch... didn't get a chance to ski them again so difficult to say for sure
bit like test driving cars..some you liek some you don't
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
CEM, I would blame the heavy lunch colin
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spyderman wrote: |
Good all mountain advanced ski. I've only skied them in a fridge, but liked them loads. |
There's nothing all mountain about a ski that's 75mm underfoot & a 16m turn radius. I'd be inclined to concur with The Doc about Salomon skis in general. In my opinion they tend to be cheaply made, lacking life in general & lose what little life they have in a very short period of time if you ski they in any way hard.
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Perhaps I should I go with tthem as instructor usually have good knowledge.
for those that dont like the Salomon Ti's, what suggestions do you have for mainly piste, some off piste skiing. 70/30
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
If you dont want them I'll have them if they're 170 or 178.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know a guide in St Anton who uses them as his deep powder ski. If it's not thigh depth, he uses his GS race skis!
I know 5 or 6 people who liked them last season.
Also take a look at the Dynastar Sultan 80 or 85, and last years Legend 8000. Fischer Watea 78's/K2 recons/rossi Bandits are similar skis.
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Just bought them! £220 i told you he wanted a quick sale only used for 10 days on piste
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
1969jma, Good Choice (I do some work for Salomon)
I personally dont use them as I find them to narrow for what I want but my dad loves them and 20 of the Irish instructors bought them last year and I have yet to get a complaint. Happy skiing
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
frank4short wrote: |
Spyderman wrote: |
Good all mountain advanced ski. I've only skied them in a fridge, but liked them loads. |
There's nothing all mountain about a ski that's 75mm underfoot & a 16m turn radius. |
Salomon seem to think that they're an 'All Mountain' ski too. http://www.salomon.com/uk/#/ski/skis/all-mountain/xw-tornado-ti---z14-lab
But what do they know.
I saw a Scottish SIMS Instructor in Tignes last weekend skiing them in powder and he was doing just fine.
BTW, I have no vested interest I ski HEAD and Stockli
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
OMG the hyper mega global ski corporation uses the uber ski marketing expression of the time it's got to be true so.
Personally i would suggest true all mountain skis start at an absolute minimum of 85mm in the waste & a 20m turn radius. Realistically more like 90-100mm in the waste & 22-26m turn radius. Just because a ski instructor used them in powder doesn't make them a powder/all mountain ski. Ski instructors tend to buy short radius skis cause they're easier/more maneuverable on piste. I learned to ski powder on straight narrow skis doesn't make them powder/all mountain skis.
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
To be a true all mountain ski surely it should be twin tipped as well?
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
frank4short wrote: |
OMG the hyper mega global ski corporation uses the uber ski marketing expression of the time it's got to be true so.
Personally i would suggest true all mountain skis start at an absolute minimum of 85mm in the waste & a 20m turn radius. Realistically more like 90-100mm in the waste & 22-26m turn radius. Just because a ski instructor used them in powder doesn't make them a powder/all mountain ski. Ski instructors tend to buy short radius skis cause they're easier/more maneuverable on piste. I learned to ski powder on straight narrow skis doesn't make them powder/all mountain skis. |
Personally I think you're confusing 'All Mountain' with 'Big Mountain/Freeride'. 'All Mountain' skis are designed for 70% Piste, 30% Off Piste. You're hardly going to get good performance on piste from a 100mm wide underfoot, 26m radius ski.
You combine the term
Quote: |
powder/all mountain ski |
this is clearly incorrect, a 'Powder' ski is not a 'All Mountain' ski.
Ski Instructors buy short radius skis, not because they're easier, but because they're better suited to where they spend most of their time i.e. on piste. How can they be expected to demonstrate carved turns on piste using skis that won't hold an edge on hardpack.
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Spyderman, well said!
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Spyderman wrote: |
'All Mountain' skis are designed for 70% Piste, 30% Off Piste. You're hardly going to get good performance on piste from a 100mm wide underfoot, 26m radius ski. |
What's your premise for this statement? Surely All Mountain should mean just that? To follow that line to it's logical conclusion surely an all mountain ski should therefore be at least 50/50 if not more like 30/70, however i digress.
My key point is that it's much easier to ski a 90mm ski on piste than it is to a 75mm ski off piste. So if one was looking for a 1 ski quiver that can do everything & be a true all mountain ski then surely one should be going for the bigger ski that's a little less manuevreble (spelling anyone? my spellchecker keeps telling me this is wrong but i can't so far get it right) on piste but is a more versatile all round ski.
I am of the personal opinion that All Mountain in it's current guise is a marketing invention by the mainstream ski industry to sell skis to people with asperations of being great off piste skiers but who aren't prepared to compromise their piste skiing. What they really end up with is a ski that's not really any use off piste & not as good as a true piste ski. If you want to learn how to ski off piste well or just enjoy your off piste more buy/rent/borrow/beg a bigger ski. You might have a little, and i emphasise only a little, more trouble with it on the pistes but it'll be a lot easier & more fun off piste.
For the record my day to day skis are 104mm underfoot & i ski on piste off piste, all over the mountain actually & i've never had any problems with them anywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
frank4short, The name all mountain skis has been put on things like tornados, crossfires, reccons etc 6+ years ago when 80mm was a fat ski and then were thought of as 50/50 skis. Manufactuers still hold onto the 75+ mm underfoot as the all mountain name but they mean this as more of a piste ski that can go off piste or cope with different snow conditions better than something pure piste! lets face it the majority of people that buy these skis like the idea of going off piste but really are going to be stuck on the pistes a good 99% of the time!
Freeride skis tend to be what you are thinking as all mountain, and yep agree I wouldn't ski anything different and personally tend to prefer a ski of around 90mm under foot just cos i find them a little more agile!
|
|
|
|
|
|
I bought a pair of atomic helistar's in 2000. Having difficulty finding a waste dimension for them, but suffice to say the were definitely over 90mm in waste & were considered the commercially available fat ski at the time. 80mm waste hasn't been considered fat since at least the nineties. Whilst i don't disagree with your assertions about who uses all mountain skis. I still think it's a term that should really be turned on it's it head instead of the current BS meaning it has, that's been derived from the big ski companies marketing departments.
|
|
|
|
|
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 wasn't saying that 80mm was the fattest of skis just that it was considered 50/50 for example (first one that comes to mind) is the bandit B2 which used to be considered a 50/50 ski yet what? 76mm underfoot (god I hate them with a passion so tried not to remember)
alot of brands did try to change this, K2 for example have been trying to separate there skis by frontside, backside and park which I think is alot clearer. I agree the system used to put skis into categories is confusing and prob dated. But then me and all my mates always used to argue what genre's different music was... its never clear cut! this seems to be the same sort of debate!
|
|
|
|
|
|
frank4short wrote: |
Spyderman wrote: |
'All Mountain' skis are designed for 70% Piste, 30% Off Piste. You're hardly going to get good performance on piste from a 100mm wide underfoot, 26m radius ski. |
What's your premise for this statement? Surely All Mountain should mean just that? To follow that line to it's logical conclusion surely an all mountain ski should therefore be at least 50/50 if not more like 30/70, however i digress.
|
I didn't invent the term 'All Mountain' I just know what it means in the industry. Most people that would buy that type of ski will live most of their time on piste with the occasional foray off-piste, so the 70/30 split is about right.
I skied Atomic Snoop's in Tignes last weekend, on and off-piste in powder, they were OK on piste apart from the odd hardpack section, but very good in the soft stuff. If conditions had been different and hardpack all over, I'd have been looking for a different ski.
It's 'Manoeuvrable' BTW
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Quote: |
My key point is that it's much easier to ski a 90mm ski on piste than it is to a 75mm ski off piste
|
You need to work on your technique then
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Fattes13 wrote: |
You need to work on your technique then |
No i don't actually. I'm lucky enough to be a good enough skier that I can ski powder on pretty much anything, i choose to ski powder & off piste on fatter skis cause at the end of the day i get the most enjoyment in my skiing from that. I would rather have a ski that for me optimises, what is to me the best part of skiing, rather than buying something that's a poor compromise to make the rest of it slightly better.
In simple terms bringing it back to first principles it takes an awful lot more effort to keep a slimmer ski on top of powder or in general any sort of off piste snow than it does to ski with a wider ski on piste. Basically to control the wider ski on piste you need greater pressure than the normal piste ski to bend the ski around to get it to carve but essentially this isn't a huge amount of effort. It's just more than modern piste carving skis require. Possibly troublesome for some but on balance not a massive amount of effort. Whereas to ski a narrow ski off piste you need to bounce it. As a narrow ski's natural inclination is to sink you need to constantly bounce it, gay short powder turns, to keep it on top of the snow. So you're wrong
Which brings me back to my point. Which is that if one truely has asperations of being an all mountain skier then one should forgo some of the ease of use on piste that you get with modern piste skis as in the long run it will make the off piste an awful lot easier & more appealing to learn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
frank4short, Whats the point on skiing on top of powder? Use a GS ski for powder but have skied the powder bowl in lake louise Waist deep and above on a Salomon ski wouldnt call it a whole lot of effort? Best part about sking powder is skiing through it what is the point of skiing on top of it you may as well stay on piste if that is the case?
Anything over 88 is currently considered big mountain/Freeride by all of the ski companies and anything between 74-88 is all mountain.
Allot of the bigger 100 plus have a very small sidecut and can be difficult for powder newbies to use on pistE.
Most humbiling experience I have ever had on skis was deep pow with an Austrian instructor he was wearing a pair of Atomic late 90's slalom skis and my god even the guys on fat skis could not match him so Yes you do need to work on your technique if you find powder turns difficult on skinny skis
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
What do you think would happen if you put that same instructor on fat skis?
Of course you can ski powder on anything, but it's better/easier (so you can push yourself more)/more fun on skis designed for the job.
What I like most about powder is the floating sensation, which you definitely get more of on fatter skis. And of course you still go through the snow, you don't stay right on top of it, that's an idiotic statement. Have you ever seen anyone on a deep day actually literally on top of the snow?
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Whoa there! Left the thread for a coupla days and its all lit up, everyone getting excited about the snow then! Hmm, been reading a few line's and want to stick a couple of things down on the record....
Firstly I'd like to know what Ordhan means by biased opinion? Do you know if I'm connected with WhiteDot or Blink through my signature post? Do you know what position I hold in the company, a Director/Rep/Rider etc, you're suggesting I have some vested interest in selling the skis? There's a few guys on here who have WhiteDot as their signatures...they like the company and what it stands for and want to spread the word a little. Now if I am connected with the company do you think that WhiteDot somehow competes with SALOMON, or more specifically someone riding TORNADO's!! They're two completely different markets, WhiteDot Freeride makes Freeride skis (the clue is in the company name see?), our all-mountain ski is 112mm under foot...
Anyway, how do you know I have no connection with Salomon? As a matter of fact, before I was sponsored by them I used to work for them running their test centre's for 4 years.
To suggest that I somehow have some vested interest in giving biased advise in an internet forum is insulting and ridiculous, and wrong. All the opinions I express here are based on personal and technical knowledge and are completely unbiased, I was very excited about the new Salomon range when they decided to try to bring back some wood cores a few years ago but the fact of the matter is that they still don't compare well with other brands (IMO) in the "advanced/expert" category. Yes I am connected with WhiteDot, yes I am in fact connected with Salomon, I'm even connected with Helly Hansen, and if you want to know more than that you'll just have to dig , maybe over a beer at the EOSB!
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
doc I tried the XW Ti and thought they were great:- I liked the lively feel (wood core) I and I enjoyed the way they were really easy to make short turns both on and off the piste (I'm happy bouncing up and down having learnt on skinny old skis ). I'm sorry they've increased the radius for this year and was looking for a pair from last season. Could you suggest some alternatives ?
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
k2 reccons, atomic nomad blackeye ti, head monster i82, scott neo the list continues!
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Funny that: I tried the Atomic Black eye at the same time; They felt heavy and lifeless compared to the Ti. What I enjoy is a ski which behaves on the piste like an equipe 3v - lively and agile - just more versatile. I think that I dont like heavily damped skis that are designed for speed. Used AK freerides last year - loved them.
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Yeah, you see it really is horses for courses! I found the Tornadoes just got flattened when I travelled anything above 20mph and felt dead!!! definately with you on hating the over-damped ski feeling, I like to know what they're doing!
|
|
|
|
|
|