Look; I love powder days as much as anyone. What can be better than first off the lift and out into the trees? But I don't travel to North America or Japan; I'm focussed on the Alps and on a couple of extensive resorts. I skied deep powder a lot last year, but it was a huge exception. Two years ago we were mud-hopping most season, not getting powder out of our collars. So...on steep and deep days I like my fat skis. But for the rest of the time? Yes, I can use my fat-waisted skis on piste, but when I do, I miss my slalom skis - 69mm waists, great for edge hold, fantastic for getting through the bumps, fast from edge to edge in short turns. So I feel a wee bit uncool when I am in the queue with my Rossignol 9s oversize (remember those?) or my everyday Sensor2s (the Volkl workaday skis). And I get enough flotation at speed to use these big-shovel skis in the interlinking off-piste on a non-true-powder day where crust is more prevalent; not as much flotation as fats, naturally, but a hell of a lot more than the skis of a decade ago. So although I feel a bit self-conscious, I do wonder at all the people on fat skis who clearly seldom, if ever, use them for full on powder sessions, and basically ski on-piste most of their time - I've struck up conversations with people and overheard chat which makes it clear that many of the owners are on-piste skiers only. So...I am not asking for Victorian waist-pinching, but I do wonder at the middle-aged spread which seems to be affecting many skiers....
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
I was misled by the title of your posting.
I'm only reading this thread because I thought you were talking about the fairer sex.
LOL
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 know what they say. Put a bad skier on fat skis and he's still a bad skier.
ha-ha! I've seen some instructors teaching on nursery slopes on fat rockers:)
I understand skiing is a technique, not an equipment (though equipment helps). So when there is no technique equipment alone doesn't get you very far, particularly off-piste. I guess a few skiers who spent money on fat skis raher than lessons discovered this hence they stay on piste even if they have skis more suitable for off-piste. Floation is a good thing but they need to know how to turn their skis too. I've got a pair of Head Titans for my piste days. I picked them two years ago when off-piste conditions were simply horrible, and I ended up spending maybe 70% of my time on groomers. Made it more enjoyable than 94mm 20m radius skis. And they are OK off-piste too on a regular day, though need attention in bumps because of their stiffness. I used them only once or twice last season and I hope I don't have to use them more often this year, but it's good to have a back up ski in case man-made snow on groomers will be served this year in large quantities. No reason for you too feel self-conscious, being able to ski is more important than having the latest technology equipment. One of my friends until last year was skiing on his old straight skis and didn't feel deficient in any way.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
I was going to say..... "that's why I've started jogging again!"
Mind you I reckon they'll be on midfats in soelden any minute!
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
I was given some fat skis by UCPA for their offpiste week this year, very good offpiste but rubbish in the bumps or anwhere that a quick turn was needed, my skinny little 170's are much better in the powder than the fatties are in the bumps, so for an allround ski I will stick to the skinnies.
After all it is free
After all it is free
If I'm on a firm piste I have significantly more fun on a pair of slalom skis than I do on anything fatter.
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'm very fortunate to travel to Japan each winter and still prefer a narrow waisted ski.
Last winter I was on a 173 cm Movement Jam (136-85-117) which is a tremendous all-mountain ski with great piste performance and I found that I was closer to the surface of the powder than I prefer.
Towards the end of the winter I got myself a pair of 170 cm Head iSupershape Magnum (121-71-107) and found the immersive experience in the powder far more to my liking.
I recommend a tip width of 125-135 mm and a waist width of 75-85 mm to the students I instruct on Hokkaido as we spend significant amounts of time on the groomed runs.
When we venture to the fringes and into the deeper powder in the trees the skills they've developed on piste combined with very accommodating powder makes a fat ski somewhat superfluous.
But I am impressed with how tip rocker technology facilitates this transition without compromising piste performance.
Will be starting this season on the Heads but also considering going slimmer in the tip and seeing how a twin tip ski performs in the Hokkaido powder.
Something like the Coreupt Caspers in a 173 cm (112-79-105)
If I'm on a firm piste I have significantly more fun on a pair of slalom skis than I do on anything fatter.
Same here... Great for getting down steeps too...
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.
I can see many parallels between skiing, motorcycing and cycling.
Any sport or passtime which has a degree of 'equipment' related snobbery is always going to have some people choosing a specific set of skis/motorcycle/bicycle based based on what their perception of what they think they need and what they think is cool rather than what they actually need. The truth often being far more boring and mundane than the mental image of themselves.
In motorcycles you see it with the sunday powertubby(*) brigade with the race-rep bike and matching leathers. I realised a LONG time ago that a sportsbike wasn't for me. I love them, but I'll never use them to anywhere near their limit on the road. My main bikes are a big off-road/rally bike and a 1300cc tourer : both of which are fast enoug and handle well enough to demonstrate that the rider is far more important than the bike.
In cycling, it's the chap on the Pinnarello with Team Sky lycra, puffing along at 10mph. I'm out there on my Charing Cross, which is certainly a 'nice' bike but it's designed as a hard-core commuter and cyclocross bike. Put some skinny 23 tyres on and it serves as a perfectly good road bike, but while it's certainly not 'cool', it serves me very well does what I need, not what I think I need.
I wonder how much of it is also down to being told what they need in the shop to sell the latest and greatest?
(*) Powertubby : the Fitzwilliam lovechild of a tellytubby and a powe-ranger.
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
welshflyer wrote:
I was misled by the title of your posting.
I'm only reading this thread because I thought you were talking about the fairer sex.
LOL
So was I.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
I had 86mm waisted all-mountain skis, and sold them after 4 holidays. Whilst they were good on most types of snow, I found them a real struggle to turn on steep slopes. I've now got 78mm-waisted rockered skis and they're AMAZING, they turn so fast. Will keep them until they fall to pieces.
Totally my fault for buying what I thought I needed rather than what I actually needed as feef demonstrated.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Marketing, marketing, marketing - don't get sucked in....
nozawaonsen, SOREEEE..... didn't realise that this had been done to death before .... it was bugging me as a pre-season niggle....
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
valais2, no reason not to discuss it again. Maybe the persuasive arguments in earlier threads will have lead people who were previously convinced by one side of the argument to reconsider and see things in a different light?
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 don't understand why you would care what other people are skiing and I also don't know how you can tell how much about where a person skis just by sight. And also like nozawaonsen says
This seems in keeping with this thread. I haven't used my Wavemagics since I was gifted the Magfires several years ago - I have a lot of trust in the Magfires and think I am OK on them now I've got to grips with them. This year I want to have a bash at moguls and on that trip I might have space if needed to cart more than one set of skis if I needed to. Which of these two would I find easier for an intro to moguls session please? N.B. its been several years since I last used the WaveMagics
Elan Magfire 78 Ti (08/09)
168 cm, r = 15.4 m
Sidecut: 123-78-105
Urgh, that BBR 'review' is horrible! Suprisingly average skiing and cowdoo marketing, embarrassing.
Anyhow, I think this topic has been done to death in the past, yes people like fat skis because they are cool, no they are not the best for hard pack, but if you are skiing deep snow and jumping off stuff, it really helps to have a bigger ski.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
lynseyf, nozawaonsen, ...there is one reason I can think of. I was in Courchevel in 19... blah de blah blah (not telling you how long ago...all I can say is that my beard is a wee bit whiter than it was then...) - and I was with a great guy I used to ski with. We then saw a guy on these madly short and wildly shovelled skis - white red and blue Dynastars. They had a stupid name - Omeglas. They looked very very odd. But one look and a deep think and it was clear they were THE FUTURE. And they were.
Likewise when the first ABS appeared on test in resorts - what the FFF is that? But talk to the guy and then it was worth watching and following up. So it's not necessarily empty fashion, this looking people up and down. But then you also notice other things, just in passing.....but that's another thread entirely....
After all it is free
After all it is free
Pedantica, I like to think mildy amusing and slightly left field but then I could be wrong - I did add the word 'helmet' to the fork one after all the outcry - let's face it, a thread on 'waists' on a skiing site is unlikely to be about slimming biscuits...and everyone else got it...hang on a minute, your handle is Pedantica and you're a lawyer - and can't handle ambiguity? what's the world coming to....
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.
Yeah I notice what other people are skiing as well, I just don't make such sweeping judgements about what they do when I am not watching them, everyone is different and enjoys different things so who cares as long as you are having fun (obviously this doesn't include folk using blades, they are hideous)
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Megamum, I would have thought the WaveMagics because the shorter turn radius will help you whip round the moguls more easily.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Piccadilly, that's what I wondered. It might be worth getting them waxed up.
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.
jimmer wrote:
Urgh, that BBR 'review' is horrible! Suprisingly average skiing and cowdoo marketing, embarrassing.
Agreed. A far better stance (pardon the pun) would have been:
Snowworks is sponsored by Salomon. From the Salomon fleet we at Snowworks feel that the BBR 8.9 is the best ski to use on one of our courses.
Quote:
Anyhow, I think this topic has been done to death in the past, yes people like fat skis because they are cool, no they are not the best for hard pack, but if you are skiing deep snow and jumping off stuff, it really helps to have a bigger ski.
+1
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
valais2, I'm not complaining, just stating a fact.
As a matter of interest, do you think most people (or at least lazy people like me who don't bother looking at which forum a post is in*) 'got it' before actually opening the thread?
This is nothing to do with pedantry or being a lawyer (and ambiguity is, of course, a lawyer's bread and butter). As I've said before, life's too short to bother with opening threads on topics which are of no personal interest. It is for this reason that I prefer thread titles to be informative. I don't, however, find the ambiguity of your humour life-threatening, so it's fine by me however you label your threads. But if you've worked hard on your eye-catching thread title, you must surely be expecting comments on it. And, the internet being what it is, they're not all going to be along the lines of 'hahaha, what a funny thread title'.
* But now for a bit of actual pedantry: shouldn't this thread be in 'Equipment Reviews/Questions'?
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Pedantica wrote:
But now for a bit of actual pedantry: shouldn't this thread be in 'Equipment Reviews/Questions'?
no its mentions............. BBR's...............................keep them away......................yuk!
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
jimmer wrote:
Urgh, that BBR 'review' is horrible! Suprisingly average skiing and cowdoo marketing, embarrassing.
... yes people like fat skis because they are cool, no they are not the best for hard pack, but if you are skiing deep snow and jumping off stuff, it really helps to have a bigger ski.
Precisely.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
carroz wrote:
Pedantica wrote:
But now for a bit of actual pedantry: shouldn't this thread be in 'Equipment Reviews/Questions'?
no its mentions............. BBR's...............................keep them away......................yuk!
Pendantica - sorry for post split, I couldn't resist another chance to highlight just how rubbish they are while making the point that most of what people on holiday ski on is down to the marketing.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Sun 28-10-12 16:37; edited 1 time in total
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?
flowa, it was carroz who made the comment, not me. But I found that video cringeworthy too! And I'm sure you're right about the marketing, but what are these ski manufacturers to do? They have to get their product sold somehow or another.
Pedantica, Most people would know that that video was paid for, but some may have been duped into thinking it was a legitimate test. Regardless of that, it was just a poorly made video anyway, awkward dialogue and mediocre gopro footage.
jimmer, indeed. But, equally, Snoworks have to tow the line with their sponsors. Well...up to a point...maybe they crossed a line they shoudna' ?
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
At one time I used to take 2 sets of skis - my first medium fat skis plus narrow race skis, but I found I never used the piste skis since I was almost never on piste. On the other hand, really deep, light powder off piste is fairly rare in Europe so I've never thought about fat skis at all.
Now you can't take 2 pairs on most airlines so I can't take a second pair even if I wanted to. I'm afraid I have lost touch with the names and characteristics of all piste skis (and most others). I only have to think about changing my skis about every 6 years.
I find my skis carve well on piste as long as it isn't icy. About once a year, though, I ski an icy slope and think - I wonder if I could have carved that on different skis. I must confess it might be fun one day to spend a couple of hours skiing modern race skis - but I don't know when I'll fit it in.
The only people I see ski 95% of the time are my own group and if I'm briefly skiing on piste I'm concentrating on avoiding other skiers as I weave through, so I'm not looking at their feet. I have no idea what skis people ski in relation to their ability. Perhaps they do attempt to ski off piste on their wide skis. If they have money perhaps they have aspirations to Heli-ski.
And yes, of course I thought this thread would be about fat people. Since it isn't in the equipment forum, didn't everyone? That was the hook, wasn't it?
After all it is free
After all it is free
Quote:
Since it isn't in the equipment forum, didn't everyone?
Not me, I immediately guessed it was about ski width and it didn't even occur to me that it should have been the equipment section
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.
The problem with fat skis is that you stay on the top more: which means less face-shots!
I got some 90mm-waisted Icelandtic Pilgrims a few years ago and they keep me on top sufficiently to follow oski down almost anything on his 67mm-waisted slalom skis. But they are cr*p on a hard piste, and this year I plan on using my Head iSLs more. But I've been tempted by reports of narrow-waisted rocker skis, so maybe I should look at those...
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
A patroller or pisteur riding the lift with you will never hook you up with the lowdown on where the snow is going off (or a previous closure is opening) if you're on skinny minnies
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
