Originally Posted by davluri
Originally Posted by beyond
No ski is gonna love refrozen. I own a pair of Nordie Burners (CA's with my own bindings), and that's the thing they do least well; too lively. I'd suggest something damp and firm, like Stockli, Kastle, Head, Dynastar, and agree about width. Wider skis IMO just get bounced more, and softer over all will be too springy at any speed. A 68-75 is perfect. Try out a Blizzard G-Power, Stockli SX, Dynastar 4x4, that kind of ski.
But confused: You said "off-piste." Planning to take a hike with these? AT? Unclear what uses you have in mind. If actually for off-piste much of the time, then above are too narrow obviously. Shift to stuff like Stockli XXL, Kastle MX78, Dynastar Sultan 85. But either way, what you gain in stability will cost you in weight...
momentarily forgot your french, mon ami? planning to take a hike? that's a good one.
Reduced to tracking my usage across the boards? Last time I was at Chamonix and Val d'Isere (mid-90's), "off-piste" referred to any terrain where ungroomed snow could be found in terrain vaguely served by/initiated by lifts. (Which is a bunch there, including glaciers, often requires guides, who refer to same as "off-piste"; suggest a look at Vallee Blache. Ever had a guide?) In the U.S., as in Yrp, that includes lot of sidebounds where folks hike to ridges, over to trees etc., eventually end up back at a lift. Hike means skis on pack or shoulders, last time I checked. While Euros are in general less enthusiastic about hiking, they still do some, y'know. As in approaches? Getting to chutes? And AT setups are often seen on the shoulders of people hiking, since they may also use skis to tour, even mixed in with the hiking, last time I checked. Even in tight little mountains back east, let alone the French Alps. Since OP was rather vague, I decided to ask. So still unclear what the h you're talking about, but hey, not the first time.
OP: You're just flat wrong about soft skis. A soft tip will not "absorb" shocks from coral reefs, it'll bounce you all over creation. A transversely soft ski will not "absorb" the shocks, it'll deform and cause you to lose grip. Soft skis are for soft snow, which is why powder skis are, ah, soft. The only solution, if you insist on skiing this stuff, is a heavy damp ski with some beef; that's physics. Metal is not so much a stiffening agent (that's fiberglass or carbon) as a damping agent. So metal is your friend. Now in all honesty, the XXL should be OK. But IMO it's too wide. This is why in Yrp, people who ski off-piste in typically dense variable snow tend to use skis in the 80's. We Americans have a width fetish because we get a lot more light pow sometimes and pretend it's a constant condition over here. So look for a ski that's built not unlike your XXL's, but significantly narrower.
Or rethink why you are determined to seek out this stuff, when unless you're touring and can't avoid it, is best dealt with by a brew at the base lodge...