 Poster: A snowHead
|
There have been many threads about wider skis, I was just musing the other day and wondered what are the widest standard manufacturers 'in production' skis (that aren't snowboards!) that you can buy, and are these the widest that you have ever been able to buy? I often hear on threads that skis that are required to be >100mm underfoot and this sounds as though it is getting quite wide, but I get the impression that you can get a number of skis wider than this, I just wondered how much wider?
As I say its just an idle curiosity type question though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
The fattest skis (not a mainstream brand) which I have come across are the Duret Monstre Fat at 170 underfoot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
fatbob, I tried these out the Jah Loves against Salomon Rocker and Volkl Kuro at the end of the 2008/2009 season. They were awesome skis. Zero camber if I remember correctly, floated beautifully in the powder and were quite stiff so blasted through the crud pretty well. The only problem was that skis and bindings came to about 10kg's and after skiing the long Gultiberg off piste itinerary at Engelberg on them my legs were absolutely buggered going through the avi debris at the bottom!
I think someone posted a thread on here about some 150mm wide skis recently. Can't see it getting much wider than that as your feet end up too far apart to ski properly! Even with the Kuros at 132mm you get a bit of ski knocking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Don't know why they have felt the need to make it wider over the past few years 
Exact same shape as their World Cup Monoski.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure after the 130mm mark, wider with "normal" technique will start to risk blowing knees or ankles up...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 wrote: |
| I'm pretty sure after the 130mm mark, wider with "normal" technique will start to risk blowing knees or ankles up... |
I'd say wider skis protect your knees off piste. Less tip dive equals less back seat driving reducing pressure on the knees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edging them, however, is horrific... and normal technique implies not skiing pow in the back seat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
wow! not to sidetrack this thread, but the waist on my snowboard is 230mm!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
So when folks use this type of ski, which must fall into the category of 'pure off piste powder weapons' how do folks get back to base? Can they be successfully skied and edged on piste or do those skiing them have to take more care when using them in an on-piste setting?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm aware of the text book but haven't skied with too many people who can maintain centered balance at the end of the day in wind crust or heavy snow. That's when knees go.
Don't ski mine on the piste much but when I do they seem pretty easy to pivot turn controlling speed with the edges. Carving on them is a bit trickier and only an option on relatively gentle slopes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
I have Whitedot Redeemers and they slide turns on piste with ease. Despite being tapered at the tip and tail and reverse cambered they maintain a bit of traditional ski shape under foot which makes them manageable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Megamum, they're much easier to ski than most people imagine. The width means they are slow edge to edge and you don't get the edge control of a piste ski but there's a certain stability that comes from having 2 big wide planks under you and you get used to the small technique adjustments required to get them down an icy piste or through a mogul field very quickly. Mine are 132mm and I used them pretty much every weekend this season. I've got plenty of narrower skis but didn't feel the inclination to get them out except in November and when touring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Duplicate
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Sun 25-04-10 17:35; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
BobinCH, really can't imagine that it'll be the case taht the wider the ski, the safer your knees - skis bigger than 130 (which is what I was talking about starting to get risky) aren't going to give you much more in the fore/aft plane. It's not that hard to stay centred, every joint should be compensating for resistance not just your knees.
However, its hard to get around the amount of extra torque you'll put through ankles and knees as the edge gets further from your boot (pretty sure SZK has argued this too) - pivoting turns is all well and good but eventually you'll have to use breaking force on the edges even if you're not carving? I've got a fair bit of experience on fat skis so I'm not just talking out of my back bottom, definitely felt it in my knees after a day on reverse/reverse skis where different muscles had worked a lot harder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| Quote: |
wow! not to sidetrack this thread, but the waist on my snowboard is 230mm!
|
LOL at what point do skis become NAS (narrow a$$ snowboards)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
DaveC, I'm only talking off piste on 132mm full rocker but I find it much less work than on 100mm traditional skis (dyna LP's) and am impressed by the edge hold on steep slopes - what you say logically makes sense but I've not felt it in my ankles (not aware of ankle injuries being a major ski injury - at least with proper fitting boots?). I have dodgy knees and rockered skis have definitely saved them in challenging conditions. Much above 130mm and you are only going to use in powder so the argument about edge hold etc becomes a bit pointless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Sorry Bob, took the below to mean "and above 130mm will protect knees off-piste [more]". It's not really that suprising that Kuros are less work than LPs, shape's a big factor, but I really found that stuff like sidestepping and when it got a bit icier, my Praxis Powders really took it out of my knees in these spots, and I'm only 23 so bit off putting! I think knees more than ankles, I'm just aware of ankles as mine's been injured all season so very aware of anything putting strain on it. Generally though, after owning or at least trying a few fatter skis, personally I'm happier on the 115~ mark for more versatility. Shape's definitely the big contributing factor for me - I really wouldn't ever fancy trying the Jah Loves or any of the insane waists below for more than a quick run for a laugh!
| BobinCH wrote: |
| DaveC wrote: |
| I'm pretty sure after the 130mm mark, wider with "normal" technique will start to risk blowing knees or ankles up... |
I'd say wider skis protect your knees off piste. Less tip dive equals less back seat driving reducing pressure on the knees. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I saw someone on skis a couple of months ago that were 180 or 190mm underfoot, they looked like two snowboards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a photo of someone skiing with 2 snowboards at Glencoe on Winterhighland from a wee while ago... can't find the link to it right now....
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Redeemer is a good practical maximum width for me at the moment I think. Unless I suddenly acquire permanent access to a helicopter any skiing I do is likely to involve hardpack, variable snow, refreezes, packed skintracks, tracked traverses or groomer/piste at some part during the day. That said I regard 105-112ish as the new all-mountain benchmark. I took mogul lessons etc on this size ski this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
I bet they don't fit in ski racks!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
So does that qualify as skiing or is it snowskiboarding LOL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mine are in the region of 180cm wide, but only about 110mm long.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Haggis_Trap, your weight is too far back. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Actually 177mm (still wide 
