What's becoming of the "Frontside" ski?

So are you trying to tell me that most skiers don't spend all day skiing terrain and snow that looks like a cover shoot for Powder Magazine? That maybe skis that are 115mm wide with reverse camber and built in a garage might not "rail groomers like a race ski"? That when a someone wants information on a 'powder ski' that can handle icy moguls and skied off trails along with rock hard man-made snow "because that's all we really get around here" they may actually be looking for (or better served by) an all-mountain ski and not a powder ski?

 

mind=blown.

 

It does look like the 'Industry' is starting to throw some R&D muscle into skis that the middle of the bell-curve of snow sliding enthusiasts will benefit from the most... the elusive 'One Ski' that does 90% of things well. Good times ahead.

Despite what they tell you most people only really do ski the frontside.    I always chuckle when I am in a local ski shop here in the East, and I see someone buying a 100 mm plus ski.

 

I think you are right on the money.

 

It is kind of like the statistics for sport utility vehicles, less than 10% of the people who own them actually drive off road.

I have certainly seen the same trend here in the Northeast, but perhaps not to the same extent.  I would only modify your criteria slightly to go a bit narrower (75-85mm) and crank up the hard snow grip a bit in consideration of the typical eastern terrain and snow conditions.   Here in the east when you leave the groomed trails you are talking bumps or trees.  Not the place for a stiff race ski or pure carver or a wide backside ski.

 

 

This is a tough one. SJ, I hear what you are saying, for 90% of the skiing public, this type of ski is great. And they are the models, (at least in my shop) that sell the best.  Obviously, this is "meat and potatos" of the industry and what most of the manufacturers are building.  But, that type of "vanilla" ski isn't really good at anything, same old story -- looking for the every elusive "one ski quiver". I have skiied  and owned many of these types for typical frontside conditions, they lack the excitement of a true carver, and the strength of a true off-piste oriented ski. So, I am always disappointed, wanting something more.  My current attempt is with the Kastle MX88 --they are a great ski and I like them a lot, but they still don't carve like a narrower ski on groomers/hard snow and don't make crud/powder effortless.  So we are back to the quiver thing, get a good carver (i.e. Fischer Progressor, Blizzard Supersonic, Dynastar Course Ti, etc.) then a good more off-piste oriented model (one of the many great 98mm+ waisters with some form of rocker).  The middle ski of a 3 ski quiver is always just "meehhh" to me and gets neglected and sold off. 

People purchase the skis that they want to be seen in the lift line (and other places?) using.  If it isn't "cool" they won't buy it regardless of whether or not it best suits their actual needs.

I have sort of re-discovered the front-side ski after years of not worrying much about a narrower ski.  Skied my old Dynastar Legends (original 79mm wide ones) a bunch last year during dry spells in UT and realized how much fun they are for frontside carving and bumps.  Who doesn't want to ski in bottomless, perfect POW every ski day of the year but that's not very realistic for all but the lucky locals who can cherry pick only the POW days that they want to ski.  I think one is really missing out without a nice ski in this range in your quiver that you actually use.  It gives you a chance to get back to a narrow, super responsive platform that is more precise and responsive to the inputs from the driver.  Its such a fun change up from the wider skis I have in my quiver.  I guess I'm too old anymore to care what people think of me in the lift line.

My estimation is that much more than 10% of SUVs drive off the road.

 

Did you mean intentionally drive off road?

 

 

It's funny to me how nonchalantly the multi-ski quiver solution is thrown around this website.

 

I'm setting some aside for a snowless day.....(I'm in the NE after all..)

 

I was really hoping the lousy snow year would renew interest in carvers and cheater race skis, but I have my doubts.  I'm afraid in a few years I'll only have race stock skis to choose from, which are just a little too burly and single purpose for me.  As crgildart put it, most skiers want what's "cool," and fat is cool.  Rarely is a skier matched up with the appropriate ski for this reason.  Especially on the East Coast.

 

Don't get me wrong, it's good to see the storm cycle finally dip into the USA.

i don't know much about skis and until this year had never ski'd anything but a narrow old hand me down.

 

i did tons of research on this site and i picked up a barely used pair of head monster im.88. from dawgcatching and OMG it's become a totally different sport. i'm not sure if this would fit into your category SJ.  they seem amazing on groomers, really really fast hooking me into carves i didn't know were possible, and the  few times i've hit soft snow in this dry CO season they totally come alive.  i can't judge if they are not real good at anything as some say 'cause to me they're great at everything.  i'm so happy with them as a osq.

SJ, you just described my Fischer Motive 84's. They are just about perfect out here in the east. Only on the iciest days do I miss a real race ski.

I'll extend JimH here and disagree with the basic premise about buttered toast. (Which of course I can do as an industry insider who knows what skis will be offered in 2015.) Yes, you see plenty of 75-85 mm skis in the World Outside The West, but y'know what? I'd guess the most common width is 72-75 mm. And there's a reason for that, which is becoming sadly apparent this season: Lack of natural snow + manmade that thaws and freezes a few cycles + grooming the hell out of a and b every night = skids for the average skier on a 80 - 90 mm. Thus my argument:

 

1) Simple physics: Narrower waists produce more force, more quickly, concentrated on the edge. Even a mediocre skier can survive boilerplate on a 70 mm by scarving in spite of himself. On a 90 mm, he'll be deceased by 2 pm. Seriously, it ain't excess capacity, SJ. On hardpack, IMO a modern race carver is more forgiving to someone who doesn't know how to pressure their edges than a 90-something. Yes, I'm the first (as a MX88 ownder) to be impressed by mid-fats' grip these days. And they're smooth and stabile to a fault. But truth: Any competent 68-72 mm race carver will leave a MX88 mm for dead on actual ice with actual irregular surfaces. SJ, you skied the MX78 and MX88 back to back, said in a review (memory now, didn't go back and check) that you didn't notice that much difference except for a bit more quickness in the 78. On serious ice, I think you'd have noticed more of a difference, but IMO the real issue is that an intermediate would have noticed more still. You're too good to get it; you make any ski handle ice, whether it's optimized or not. Most skiers are intermediates who ski groomers and try to survive, not exploit ice, though. 

 

2) Moreover, we enjoy a surplus of these features called "bumps," such that on many slopes you can't avoid them unless you like 5 mile green run-outs. So another bit of physics: Narrower waists are easier to navigate through moguls. 

 

3) We do not much have powder except in trees, and even then only for a few days after a storm. As a result, far fewer people actually need a "versatile" soft snow ski because they do not have the skill sets to get through tight trees with exposed rocks or roots.

 

4) We have enthusiastic and long-established racing programs for kids. And not just chic academies; we sample the (gasp) SES groups that don't read the New York Times. Ever been to Cannon? It's a state run, hard scrabble mountain with some of the worst weather and crappiest grooming you'd have the misfortune to ski at. Guy named Miller grew up racing there. Has a great mountain club that teaches racing to one and all. The jokes about it taking a New Englander to understand edges have an underlying truthiness: I'd guess a greater % of us spend most of the day carving than anywhere outside Austria. We regard hardpack as normal, not something you wait out until the next dump. If you want to ski, you learn to deal with scratchy snow. Period. 

 

5) And just when you're ready to say, "ah, but the NE is a special, weird case," I'd argue that our type of conditions characterize the entire east and north/midwest, not to mention most of Europe much of the time. (And with the climate going predicted directions, whatever the cause, it's not like we'll have more light powder over the next decade than we had last decade.) I know it's fun to consider our brothers across the puddle as backward, marketing wise, but their exasperating embrace of good carvers also reflects the conditions they ski and an active interest in racing. Not X-Games, mind, but racing. So overall, our special case constitutes more skiers paying more money to resorts and ski makers than the default assumptions of you who live in the far west or the Rockies. Which means that we should also constitute the largest potential market. 

 

6) Therefore I am confused about the buttered toast. To whom are these companies responding? Is this a case of marketers trying to create new demand simply because there are too many highly competent race carvers? Eg, make us dissatisfied with what we have so they can sell us something again? Or will stores simply refuse to stock narrow skis so we are forced to get wider? Or are skiers crying out for Enduro type skis at Killington or Smuggs or Mt. St, Anne? If any of these, I'm oblivious. I just do not see the groundswell, either on the slopes at or local stores (which stock loads of <80 mm skis). 

LOL! Skis are sold for fashion.

"Fashion is something so ugly we have to change it every six months!"
~Oscar Wilde

If people only bought what they needed, and only replaced it when they either wore it out or got to within 50% of it's ability, the ski industry would collapse.

Personally, on the same run I would rather beat a ski into giving me it's 110%, than autopilot after just having it hand me 20% of it's ability.

Before this weeks 7 ft in 3 days bombardment I skied my old Solli XScreams and had a blast, was worried about rocks and my MX88's, the Screams were really fun.

 

Dawg, can you believe this storm? Unfortunately it's likely too deep to ski give the lower Mt B  flatness, LOL at the cats not being able to groom. looks like tomorrow for me.

 

Clearly you're one of those elite snobs that contaminate god-fearing po-dunks; Newt warned me about you types the other day. Don't worry, store availability will be halted Nov.7. 
 

 

I completely agree with your comments about 70-75mm wide frontside carvers.  I ski 40+ days each season at Killington/Pico and my current daily driver is a three year old Progressor 8+.  If I was looking to replace it this season, I would probably be looking at the new Progressor 900 or 1000.  That said, a lot of Killington regulars have moved to wider skis that come close to what SJ outlined.  When we had some decent fresh snow a week ago, I was shocked to see how many were on wide rockered skis.  The firm base was never that far away and bumps were growing by the run.  Can't imagine they were having more fun than I was on my Progressors.  

Dawg, good point.  Got it covered with a Progressor 1000+, been my go to (and lovin' it), during this low snow winter.

 

 

That's exactly what I think every time I see a pair of Kastles...

 

Nothing like mostly dated designs and a solid build combined with a giant marketing budget and effective moichandizing to the right demographic in order to be able to charge an uber-premium price. 

I'm embarrassed to admit that I abandoned my front side ski because I found the Black Pearl so easy to ski in all conditions, and I'd probably still be using the Black Pearl as my front side ski if it weren't for working on instructor certification.

 

What I found while working on instructor cert is that, while the Black Pearl is easy to play around and ski all over the mountain, but its not ideal for demonstrating precise maneuvers.  

I have been using the Blizzard Viva 8.1 for clinics over the past month or so, and have actually considered getting something a little more carvy. 

With the conditions we've had this year(thus far) carvy is good. 

 

Bringing it back full circle, I think I'd rather play around on a nice mid fat because its so darn fun and easy, but I really missed having a front side ski (and I didn't even know it)

 

Seriously?  I think the simple graphics are classic not dated.

As for how they ski, The ski I miss most in my line up is my Kastle MX78.  I really wish I'd kept it for this season.   

 

Did a hike out to some side country stuff before our current cycle on the E98... about 10" of smooth wind fill. There's kind of the 'look at the piste guy' thing going on as everyone else is on 115 and wider. 98 is plenty wide for pretty much anything with some nominal skills. Honestly, the E98 ski more conditions better than anything available 10 years ago, maybe even 5. Sure, there are fat skis that hold reasonably well on hard snow, but skiing them is NOT fun. Maybe I'm a wimp, but it takes a good deal of extra energy to roll fats up on edge. They're like driving a large truck on neighborhood side streets. Are the 98's a race ski? Nope. Are they a fat ski? Nope. Do they cover about 98% of the conditions you'll see on a typical day of typical skiing at the mountain? Yep. So will many other >100mm skis.

The graphics are part of  very well executed marketing campaign. And BTW - that is not a criticism. I think they are, arguably, elegant in their simplicity. I'm always willing to tip my hat to a company that can build extra brand equity by effective marketing.

 

In all seriousness though - Kastle plays to a certain asymmetric view of skis and skiing. Call it sort of "old school" or "euro centric". And they do it well. 

 

Sorry about drifting OT a bit, but it was hard to resist replying to an observation that in my view has two sides...

 

 

Two sides?  Surely you jest!  There is only MY side!!  

 

[sorry for the drift]

 

 

Jim, apart form the rocker sounds remarkably close to my Blizz Titan 9s (the Blue one).  While getting a bit long in the tooth now they still tend to be my selection if I am not on a race ski.  You can lay them over like a GS ski but still use them in the chutes or trees.  And yes, I have owned and used a selection of newer/wider/rr skis including superchargers, praxis powder, Answers etc but ended up getting rid of them as being kind of one dimensional whereas I know I can take the titans out and have fun regardless of what i come across.

 

wrt your hypothesis, it is refreshing to see someone in the industry actually addressing the elephant in the room  (and the lack of snow this year has made it more obvious!).  Has been funny (and sometimes scary!) this year watching all the cool kids/broh brahs skidding around on 100mm+ skis on manmade hard pack.  Seems most resort to pointing straight down and crossing fingers sometimes!.  While a decent front-side ski rips it up.

 

Just because we have had a couple of big snow seasons here, doesn't mean that we are skiing in something out of a movie all the time!