 Poster: A snowHead
|
I should start out by pointing out that I can't afford and don't need new skis. I have a pair of Rossignol Attraxion VI 162cm 2008 vintage which I bought after very little use from another snowhead. I love them. They are heavy, stable and hold a really good edge on icy pistes.
However on my trip to Ski Amadé last week I rented skis because Ryanair charge £100 per return flight for ski carriage. The skis I rented were Atomic Cloud D2 73 159cm 2012 vintage and I grew to love these too. I always thought I had completely the wrong technique for deep snow and slush on piste, but maybe it's actually my skis. We even had powder on piste last week and these skis just seemed to float through it and turn easily. I'm not sure if they were wider or less stiff than my current skis, they were definitely shorter and lighter. I found myself loving the deep fresh snow where I have previously sought out the smooth stuff (I even ventured slightly off the side of the piste, don't tell my insurance people!). Even the slushy stuff at the bottom didn't stop me dead like it normally does. But they still held a good edge on the hardpack, my only criticism was that they didn't feel as stable at speed as my Rossignols. Is this due to the slightly shorter length or perhaps less weight/stiffness? I wondered whether I would actually need longer skis (I'm fairly tall and heavy 5ft8+ and over 12 stone), but the hire shop guys said no. I realise wider means better for soft snow but there is a compromise with hard piste ability. I guess I'm coming to that age old problem, where do you compromise? I definitely like stability and good grip on hard pistes, but oh my god the soft stuff was so much fun too. I don't imagine I'll ever be a hardcore off-piste expert though, not with 10 days skiing per season.
So I guess what I'm wondering in is do I go wider and/or shorter? Stiffer? Scarpa suggested (in the nicest possible way) that mens skis might suit me better as I am more man-sized than woman-sized. At this point, I'd just like to try a few at the fridge or something. And then maybe have a shortlist of secondhand skis to look for over the next couple of years.
Go on, baffle me some more... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
queen bodecia, Can't help on the skis but glad you have got to like the deep fresh stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
queen bodecia, Theory is as follows
Wide skis will help float on deeper snow
Narrow Skis will go faster
Shorter Skis will turn faster
Longer Skis again will go faster
Heavier skiers typically prefer a stiffer ski
When you turn skis you apply your weight to them in a different way to straight lining, this causes them to bend, the more bend the faster the turn, BUT too much bend may feel uncomfortable and unstable
Turn radius is controlled in two ways, the natural radius turns of the skis is controlled by teh sidecut on each ski, this is the turn radius you get when cruising gently, putting a heavier loading on the ski will cause them to bend more and this bend combined with teh sidecut will give you a tighter turn due to the defformation of the ski
On Hard surfaces like well compressed snow and sometimes on ice (if it's not like a sheet of glass) you want hard and sharp edges to retain control, no one can turn on the occasional blocks of solid ice you get when a puddle orms and then freezes mid piste, the best you can do is go straight over it.
I'm sure if I've made too many mistakes in teh above someone will come along and correct me
Doesn't really answer the original question though 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
I guess the only thing to do is to take another holiday, hire skis but change them every day. By the end of the week you should have more of an idea of what suits your style 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Avalanche Poodle wrote: |
| By the end of the week you should have more of an idea of what suits your style |
or five pairs of skis!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So Scarpa is now Avalanche Poodle? Heck I'm confused...
The problem with renting is that I have had some really rubbish skis before. I had some complete noodles (yes this is apparently an official term!) in Courmayeur which wobbled everywhere, didn't hold an edge and made me ski like a complete numpty. I changed them (and had to pay more!) but they still weren't the sort of thing that suits me. Which is ultimately why I ended up buying my own.
Samerberg Sue is right, I probably can't tell much from a fridge. I demoed quite a few several years back and liked most of them, but that's in comparison to the standard fridge rental shizzle. Plus there's no soft snow or slush at Tamworth, it's hardpack and death cookies.
I guess what I'd like most of all is something that's stable and grippy like my Rossignols but also fun in the soft stuff like the Atomics were. I did like the Atomics except when they got a bit flappy picking up speed, which is really what stopped me from buying them (they also had quite a bit of rental damage on them, hence the low price). Lots of people have told me my skis are too short because of my (ahem) size, but the rental shop in Austria disagreed vehemently with this (maybe they were just trying to be flattering whilst handing me a shot of Schnapps!)...
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
queen bodecia, and just to confuse you more; (caveat, I don't know you, have never seen you ski, and am not qualified in any way to give advice on this)...
The shape of the ski is a primary factor in how it will perform. If the internet is to be believed, your Rossignols are tip-waist-tail 121-72-100 and the Atomics 118-73-103. Not a great deal of difference I would submit. (Leave the "piste" rocker aside for the mo')
Question - how often have you had your skis serviced? Tactically (as it were) this is a big factor as to how a ski will perform "on the day". A newish rental ski may not have been skied that much.
Question (2) - you assert "deep" snow. How deep? ("I even ventured off the side" suggests to me not very deep). Deep snow comes up to your thigh when you are stationary in it and you need a snorkel to breathe.
Slush is another matter.
Bearing in mind that the Cloud is quoted as being 10% rockered then you are broadly comparing a 162cm ski with a similar ski of only 143cm. This will make a mahoosive difference in slush where you are probably skidding the ski to an extent (which means forcing the turn through the slushy, sticky snow) and probably quite a difference fresh snow as well.
It's also not quite a "slightly" shorter length and the early rise will make them feel less stable in a straight line.
I'd also submit that both pairs might be a wee bit short and "girly" for you.
Servicing will also make a perceptible difference...
But, hey, what do I know? see caveats above...
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
P.S. No criticism or otherwise negative vibes intended by any of my comments!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
queen bodecia, if it's any help I am also more a man sized woman than a woman sized woman. My first skis were women's specific, my last two pairs have been mens/unisex FWIW I get on better with mens/unisex ones. They are stiffer and heavier. I unfortunately have the weight to flex them and their substance and build quality gives me a lot of confidence in them. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend mens/unisex to you as I imagine we are of a similar build.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
under a new name, my Rossignols are regularly serviced, no more than one week of use between each service. They have edges you can cut food with. As for deep snow, it was deeper than anything I have experienced on piste, definitely over my knee if I stood in it. There's a pic on Facebook of Scarpa Poodle and Kooky almost buried in it without snorkels!
Your comments do make sense and do seem to match what I experienced, I can see how the shape makes a difference, but weight and stiffness must also make a significant difference and the manufacturers' websites don't seem to give these details, I wonder why.
Samerberg Sue, your Nordicas do seem to be very versatile skis, either that or you are just so good that you can make them work in all conditions. 
Megamum, that's pretty much what the Poodley one said. I definitely think I need heavy skis being a heavy lass, but not so heavy that I sink without trace in softer or slushier snow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
queen bodecia, Pity you aren't at the EoSB I will have both pairs of mine there and you could have tried either. I am not doing any proper off piste, but Kooky and Scarpa Poodle??? will tell you that we had plenty of the deeper stuff on piste during the time we were out there. Possibly 6-8" one morning. I've also had even deeper than that in VT. I don't ski anything that verges on fat, but I have been very pleased with the Elan Magfire 78 Ti's (they also come in 82mm - even better for the deep stuff). In comparison to my first skis at 68mm at the narrowest point, the 78mm ones were much better in the deeper snow and also over the slush, which is similarly 'sink-y', they were also heavier, stiffer ski's and this was great at whacking the slush to one side - no deflection as I had with the narrower ladies skis and I think this was due to them being both heavier and stiffer. The weight was not a disadvantage in the softer snow where it seemed well balanced by the float the increased width (therefore surface area) gave. FWIW having come of narrower, shorter softer skis it did take me about an hour before I could do 100yards and not have them tip me over when I went to turn, but once I had them sussed I didn't want to go back to what I had been on. The mags had terrific edge hold on ice too and were very good on piste.
I've got a pair of Elan Amphibios 12 now - 76mm wide in the middle, but lovely wide tips and tails for the softer snow, but I haven't got rid of my Mags. I'd be happy to recommend either to you, FWIW the Mags at 78mm underfoot were said to be about 80/20 on/off piste spec. Elan make similar width/dimension amphibios, and waveflex skis - 78mm and 82mm and any of them might be worth you looking at. Or skis of similar dimensions (you could look them up) by other manufacturers,
Last edited by You know it makes sense. on Wed 27-03-13 23:01; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
queen bodecia, weight of ski doesn't really make so much of a difference, they are not such huge marginal differences between them,
Stiffness will, but what stiffness do you mean? Longitudinally, transverse, torsional? I suspect there isn't a huge difference in any of these between the skis you mention.
Probably not servicing making a difference. I put any perceived difference (not accounting for different snow conditions) down to the Atomics being quite significantly functionally shorter.
I don't think you need to go any fatter. If you don't feel you are over powering your skis I don't think you need to go longer. I certainly wouldn't go shorter.
Why would you want to make life any more difficult for yourself?
Oh and trying skis in a fridge only tells you how they feel in a fridge. Not terribly enlightening as to how they'll feel in real life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
under a new name, so essentially, a ski with a 'rocker' feature is effectively shorter which might make it less stable at speed. That would suggest that the same skis slightly longer would be more stable? Or is that too simplistic a view? I love the stability of my Rossis but I also loved the soft snow ability of the Atomics. Skis that can do both would be absolutely perfect for me, would a longer and/or 'male/unisex' version of the Atomics provide this?
Megamum, yes it's a shame, I'd love to try some more skis and yours do sound good. There don't seem to be many opportunities to demo Elans in the UK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Various Elan Amphibios and Waveflex on Sport pursuit today £350 odd - good price
|
|
|
|
|
|
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: |
Oh and trying skis in a fridge only tells you how they feel in a fridge. Not terribly enlightening as to how they'll feel in real life. |
A lot of people seem to think this but there's very few places you can get a handle on lots of different variable conditions quite quickly. OK you'll never get to test SG arcing (or smooth groom unless you get there early) but they're a great simulation of crud, polish, sugar, bumps etc. Put it this way I tell the difference between something that'd be fun (for me) and workmanlike quite quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
queen bodecia, on piste, yes, more or less. The manufacturers claim that the skis will work like their full length while in turn, but I think this is somewhat missing the point.
Rocker, probably makes skis less stable in a straight line.
Rocker in powder/crap has a different intended behaviour.
I think you need to find yourself on a weekend that includes a test day (many places do these early/pre season and the PSB in 2006, 2007 certainly coincided with one.
You get to try lots of skis from lots of manufacturers.
fatbob, in fairness, my only experience of ski testing in a fridge involved using the local rental boots. It is possible that I/we would have had different opinions if we had had our own boots. As it was, we were most unimpressed with the Volkl Kendo in the fridge but I had a rather lovely day out on them in some very rough h.p. About 3 months later.
While I get your point and partially agree with it (also, it's arguably better than nothing) - I am sticking to my guns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
under a new name, I have been to a fridge test session before and thoroughly enjoyed it. I could also easily tell the difference between skis, which turned easier, which felt more stable, etc. But differing conditions are less likely at Tamworth, it's basically icy hardback, no slush or soft snow. Maybe one of the newer fridges would tell me more. A weekend 'test' is probably too expensive given that I have two ski holidays to save up for next season...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
queen bodecia, it's only a question of priorities...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
under a new name, two skiing holidays is something of a priority don't you think? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
queen bodecia, up to 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.
|
|
under a new name, how long would 'rocker' skis have to be to match the stability of my Rossignols? Is it the rocker thing that makes them float more in soft snow, or is that more down to width?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Both ski surface area and rocker contribute to 'float' in this instance the rocker acts to bring the ski tip up out of the snow rather like a speed boat planing.
The stability question is a bit 'how long is a piece of string'. Rocker profiles vary widely as does the stiffness of skis. One way of getting close would be to find a ski with a similar contact length and stiffness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
DB, meh, thanks. A bit of internet research can keep me occupied for now...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| queen bodecia wrote: |
| under a new name, how long would 'rocker' skis have to be to match the stability of my Rossignols? Is it the rocker thing that makes them float more in soft snow, or is that more down to width? |
If I've got the right end of the stick, the skis you're looking at have 'piste rocker,' so I suspect it will be very very subtle and make little noticeable difference to stability/how long a ski 'skis.' Stiffness is likely to be a much significant factor here.
FWIW, my Dad loves Dynastar Sultan 85s for piste and 'a bit off the side' - and has enjoyed the fresh snow and slush this week much more than when he used to rent generic piste skis (he's skied around 20 weeks, competent on all pistes and improving off, but certainly could improve technique). Used to be mine and I also found them to be excellent, versatile 'piste-biased' skis. May be worth looking for a set of them or the slightly narrower Sultan 80s, a season or two old now so should be able to find them for a good price new.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
I should start out by pointing out that I can't afford and NEED new skis!  (See my comment on the British + equipment thread)...
It's a difficult one, isn't it? Especially in a hurry and at the end of the season, and I often just go for a day/half a day at the last minute and hiring really isn't an option.
Another man sized woman here too, or at least English size: I don't buy clothes or shoes here in Italy unless I want a giggle. My football team coach calls me 'un armadio'... a wardrobe - why, thank you -.. and there are very few women in this division who are taller (a few more who are wider..). Women's ski models assume a fair bit on size/weight, and probably on fitness too. When you haven't been in the market for skis for 6 years or more it's difficult to know what's what, especially if equipment is something you buy when you have to, so I'm equally in the dark on rockers, widths and appropriate lengths.
Let us know what you get.
I may try and get some second-hand skis to see out the rest of the season. I've been offered some good condition K2 Rictors which are tempting if I can knock him down from typically over-priced Italian second-hand prices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
fluter, i have never undestood (beyond marketing aesthetics) the point of women's skis.
And why the focus on pink (traditionallly a male child's colour)?
And why white for ski boots?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
under a new name, I thought with women's skis the bindings were in a different position? Something to do with centre of gravity. Not that I have an objection to pretty graphics either...
I think clarky999 makes a good point, when the time comes I can just see what's available secondhand. If I buy and try something I don't get on with I can probably sell for a similar amount, so nothing lost there. I might take a trip to the demo events in the autumn too. For now I'm enjoying a bit of internet research.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
FWIU the bindings are set farther forward on womens specific skis, but having used a womens specific ski and a so called mans/unisex ski I think you've got to be skiing at the top of your game to be aware of the difference. As far as the marketing of asthetics goes I am not into the flowery, so called feminine top coats with ribbons and prettiness all over them. Elan had a spell down that route, but the current batch of ladies versions of the amphibios are not too bad http://www.elanskis.com/en/w-allmountain.html - however, if you read about them, dimension wise, they are exactly the same skis as the mens ones just a different colour.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
queen bodecia, apparently sometimes yes.
Because, you know, women are, universally, all lighter, smaller, weaker, less aggressive than men and have small derrieres and large poitrines so their centres of mass are further forward.
Obviously.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Except that I am heavier and bigger with a derriere the size of a small African republic... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
queen bodecia, i guess you are a marketing outlier, or something! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Proper BASI jobbie too... |
Queen Bodecia, 'bout time you got on some properly sized skis then as the skis that you've been on are very under sized/under spec'd for your stats/ability.
MTFU!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
queen bodecia, you need purple/pink ones - they are the best! Ange x
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
spyderjon, I'm really nothing more than a solid intermediate. I was a pretty decent skier once, but several years off, then illness took its toll. I'm gradually getting back to something vaguely resembling fitness and I've skied a lot better this year, more like my old self. The Rossignols have served me well, they cope with my weight and have given me back a lot of confidence. But I may now be getting to the stage where I want more, the purpose of this thread was to get an idea what to look out for. I don't want any scary long planks, I'm a holiday skier first and foremost, but I like the idea of skis that cope better with softer conditions, whilst still allowing me to hoon about (and trust me Samerberg Sue Miss 60kph is no slouch either!) with stability and confidence. Maybe in your expert wisdom you might have some suggestions...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
