An old saying “Freud argued that analogy is the weakest form of reasoning’. While there are valid arguments for using analogy, I’m sick of having skis compared to hyper-exotic cars that few get to see - let alone drive, let alone drive in the conditions they are designed for. Do readers of the analogy really believe reviewer is a sophisticated expert or, like me, believe it’s all b.s.? What is the primary source of reviewers’ information, a subscription to Car and Driver? Gosh, isn’t the snob appeal of the associating Kastle and Porshe extremely meaningful? Give me a break! And then there’s always the question about who has pockets deep enough to buy and maintain said car.
Perhaps the neatest car I’ve ever owned was a BMW 525. A lot to like, nice road car, but very much underpowered. Any comparison to a ski I've owned is purely personal. Maybe I’m just too practical and/or cheap to spend the $$ on high end skis or cars. Certainly, I can’t deny that many appreciate fine cars far more than I. Not knocking those that do. Sit with others of similar taste, smoke cigars and drink Cognac while discussing the finer points of cars and skis, but, stop trying to impress by analogy.
One vote that all who choose to make car/skis analogy be required to post what is their daily driver. Do as I say or Do as I do?