or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Ski deterioration?? Kinda related to my ski confusion from before.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski deterioration?? Kinda related to my ski confusion from before.

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 
First off, thanks again for everyone’s suggestions to my previous post. I’ve taken them all to heart and decided to take in some demo’s to figure out what my primary boards are going to be.

Of course I also liked the suggestions to consider having two sets of skis so that I wouldn’t have to sacrifice to be able to cover all different conditions. On that note I picked up a pair of Atomic Beta Carvs as an ice ski for an incredible price that I just couldn’t pass up. If I hate them, I’ll be able to sell them already mounted and get back what I paid for them.

Anyway I had a long conversation with the guy who sold them to me and as an “Industry Expert” he had something very interesting to say about this year’s crop of skis. I have basically narrowed down my demo list to the Bandit X or XX, the Axis X, or the Beta Ride 11.20. So this guy is absolutely convinced that the Rossignols and somewhat the K2’s are complete crap. That they ski great when you demo them and for the first 10 days, but that they then break down and loose all of their flex. He was convinced that the Atomics are the only way to go as that because they don’t have a wood core they maintain their flex.

So has anyone heard or had any experience like this. I can’t help but think that if this were really the case it would be all over the place. Then again the magazines aren’t entirely objective and don’t do long term testing. Any thoughts?
post #2 of 11
Well all i can say is that guy is full of crap. My K2 Mod X same as Axis X (new name) havent broken down. I have skied on them about 30 times last year and there still just fine. If what he said was true, your exactly right, it would be all over this forum. You will always run into sombody that only likes one brand of ski, those types are short sited as there are great ski's from all the differnt ski companies. Atomic makes great ski's and iam sure you will like the Beta carvs you got, but other manufactures make some great ski's too. I wouldnt listen to anyone who would only buy one brand of ski and wouldnt even consider others brands. They got there head up there a#@.
post #3 of 11
SkiMad, most will argue that wood core skis are more likely to maintain their flex, especially Volkl which cuts the core to the camber of the ski. Atomic has a tubular core preshaped to the camber. I have been skiing Rossi's (foam core) race skis for years without a problem. Many competitors who ski 80 days + per year do notice significant breakdown - they are more sensitive to this as they have to buy more pairs of skis. If you are not one of them, you should not take this into consideration when choosing a brand. With changing shapes, the ski you choose will be obsolete before it goes flat. Just my opinion.
post #4 of 11
Talk to somebody else about skis , this guys falls under the category of,
"A little learnin can be a bad thing , but a lot of ignorance is a whole bunch worse".
If you've been led to believe that all these skis are going to be the same type of ski start over. Any shop will try to sell you what they have but they should show you more than one brand , brand loyalty is only a game mostly , most on this site have and will ski on anything even Phil.(just a little shot there) High end stuff cost more and cheap skis ....well thats what they are and you get what you pay for . Pick the type of ski you need for the terrain you ski not for where you think you might ski ,most stuff is a whole lot more versatile than people tend to think or admit, you see this way you can justify to yourself ( or wife if this applies)why you need 12 pairs of skis in the rack.
post #5 of 11
I definitely get 80+ in per season. IMO, That shop guy is overexaggerating something that is really too small an issue to weigh into your buying decision. He's being a sales dork.

BTW, I ski a couple of '00-'01 Rossi tele skis. Love 'em.
post #6 of 11
In my experience, if you're an advanced skier and hang out in mogul fields, all skis start to break down after 10 days and are pretty lifeless at 50. My everyday skis with 50 days on them in March ski nothing like the demo skis in the shop. Doesn't matter whether they're wood core (which I think last slightly longer) or foam core. The core's mostly for show. It's the glass and epoxi layers breaking down that makes the ski feel dead. You Volant people might claim otherwise...

Near as I can tell, there aren't any bad high-end mid-fats and they'll all hold up roughly the same amount of time. If you happen to like the marketing hype and fancy graphics of one company over the others and aren't willing to put the time into doing the test drive on half a dozen models, go with the brand that makes you feel good.
post #7 of 11
Thread Starter 
Thanks guys, my BS detector went off when I was talking to this guy, but it was nice to confirm that he was full of it. I suspect it was advantageous to him to sell Atomic skis and thus he was trying to make that seem like the only way to go.
post #8 of 11
Atomic has had some problems too. Yesterday, I sold my kids Atomics for $125 at a swap and was glad to see them go the bases showed additional concavity/cupping in a uneven fashion.

Of the four Atomics that I remember being purchased last year on our race team, two had problems that required a re-grind to make them skiable. My sons skis would have required a re-grind had I not sold them.

One shop admitted that Atomic was having curing problems with the base materials.
post #9 of 11
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by yuki:

Of the four Atomics that I remember being purchased last year on our race team, two had problems that required a re-grind to make them skiable. My sons skis would have required a re-grind had I not sold them.

I'm not sure I understand what the issue is here. I sorta like my ski bottoms to be flat. I have a $100-ish unlimited season tune deal at a local shop and any pair of skis I own with 100 days on 'em have probably been through the wet grinder 20 or 25 times. By then, the ski is totally flogged to death but it still has plenty of edge and base material left. You make it sound like you're destroying the ski by having it flat ground. In 20+ years of season tunes, that hasn't been my experience. In fact, I think most people using a flat file will pull off much more steel.
post #10 of 11
Yikes! In 100 days of skiing, my skis usually will be stone ground only once or twice, and that's only after severe rock damage that would be too hard to fix myself. I do wax and check the edges on a daily basis however. Any small base damage I will repair myself with a repair gun or repair stick. As a race coach, I feel that too many people get their skis stone ground way too often, yet at the same time, don't do simple everyday maintenance such as hot waxing and edge sharpening. Of course, all the local shop owners hate it when I give people this advice. [img]smile.gif[/img]

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ October 28, 2001 07:28 AM: Message edited 1 time, by TJ ]</font>
post #11 of 11
Yeah, but after 100 days, my skis are ready for the dumpster. Why would I want to cut into my drinking time by hand-tuning my skis? I'll take the burrs off with a stone but I doubt I have a file in my hand more than once or twice per year. Sure, you can put a slightly sharper edge on a ski with a file than you can with a machine but you'd be hard-pressed to tell the difference after 10 runs through the trees doing the rock dance. I think some guys just have an obsession with stroking something long and pointy for hours on end. You can go blind from doing that too much.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Ski deterioration?? Kinda related to my ski confusion from before.