or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › What's becoming of the "Frontside" ski?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What's becoming of the "Frontside" ski? - Page 6

post #151 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by locknload View Post 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.


Long live the legend 8K!

post #152 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

 


 

But if that (and I suspect it may be the case), will PSIA alter its basic teaching techniques? The practical problems of carving a rockered ski on packed snow seem different. Not least because unless you actually get far enough over to use the "pre-bent" sections, what you have is a relatively short length ski with a no tail. Or are we moving toward an official PSIA "scarving/brush" turn, with full carves (I mean you actually carve to the release of the turn, rather than skidding the belly) reserved for racing wannabe's? 

 



 

there is no need to alter anything....

 

I am able to caver GS turns top to bottom on any of my rockered ski, I just have to be careful not to pivot at the tranistion.

 

 

post #153 of 351

Having watched the evolution of skiing for 50 plus years with 28 years in the business, I have seen this discussion resurface in regard to the ultimate "all-mountain' ski many times. I have a personal favorite in the Salomon X Scream (195cm). Hucked the Palisades at Squaw, have hit mach plus downhill mph, pow stashes anywhere, and laugh a dudes in the shops telling me that they are too big for me. Demo'd the BBR and yes WOW what a ride and will add to my quiver as an all mountain ranger. However, I did have one near miss with another skier. I was expecting to be able to ratchet a 90 degree emergency turn to avoid an unpleasant social meeting, and well, my X-Screams would have left me with more room. The discussion continues....

 

I pulled these handmade RD's (Research Dynamics) powder boards out of my collection. These models offered hand made construction in the 1970's from Sun Valley Idaho. The overall flex was soft and the torsional stiffness was useless in the east. The sidecut was Tip 85 / Boot Toe 67 / Tail 75. Anyone familiar with these models please send me your info, as I am creating a catalog of the roughly 300 pair in my collection. This is the tip of the iceberg, more RD's as well.

IMG_1623.jpg

 

 

post #154 of 351

Volkl Mantra exception to the rules being outlined here IMHO

post #155 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by HumanBodyGarage View Post

Having watched the evolution of skiing for 50 plus years with 28 years in the business, I have seen this discussion resurface in regard to the ultimate "all-mountain' ski many times. I have a personal favorite in the Salomon X Scream (195cm). Hucked the Palisades at Squaw, have hit mach plus downhill mph, pow stashes anywhere, and laugh a dudes in the shops telling me that they are too big for me. Demo'd the BBR and yes WOW what a ride and will add to my quiver as an all mountain ranger. However, I did have one near miss with another skier. I was expecting to be able to ratchet a 90 degree emergency turn to avoid an unpleasant social meeting, and well, my X-Screams would have left me with more room. The discussion continues....

 

I pulled these handmade RD's (Research Dynamics) powder boards out of my collection. These models offered hand made construction in the 1970's from Sun Valley Idaho. The overall flex was soft and the torsional stiffness was useless in the east. The sidecut was Tip 85 / Boot Toe 67 / Tail 75. Anyone familiar with these models please send me your info, as I am creating a catalog of the roughly 300 pair in my collection. This is the tip of the iceberg, more RD's as well.

IMG_1623.jpg

 

 


where are the Coyotes

 

 

post #156 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post



Some current models in no order of preference.

 

Versatile frontsiders................

 

Dynastar Legend 85

Blizz Bushwhacker

K2 Aftershock or Rictor

Nordica Steadfast

Salomon Enduro 800

Rossi Exp 88

 

Hard snow frontsiders..................

 

Rossignol Avenger 82

Blizz Mag 8.7 or 8.1

Atomic Crimson Ti

 

SJ



Have been following this thread with great interest -- newbie here, haven't kept up with ski gear for eons, and so am frankly bewildered by all the choices, types, etc.  Would folks mind providing some recommendations for a less advanced skier (I'd say advanced intermediate), not particularly aggressive, 5'8"-5'9", 165 lbs, strictly East coast skier (wife doesn't ski frown.gif), age 46?  Thanks so much!

post #157 of 351

Someone a few pages back asked "why" people keep buying skis that aren't suited for 90% of what they are skiing -- I'm not sure I read every post, so I'm sorry if it was mentioned already, but my impression is that it has a little bit to do with powder trendiness, but not the "look cool in the liftline" type: Many casual skiers don't get to ski much powder, and when they do, it is difficult for them. They hear how AWESOME and MIND-BLOWING an experience it is, but on the rare occasion it happens for them, they sink and can't turn and fall over and in short become highly frustrated. Here is this experience that is supposed to be pure heaven, everyone else is having a blast, and they are hating it, and wondering why they can't get the hang of it. 

 

Enter wide and/or rockered skis, and it is so much easier to ski powder with whatever technique you want. I think these skiers are willing to trade off hard snow performance for the ephemeral floaty powder day, even if it means 15 mediocre days on hard pack to 1 fun day in powder. Few people wax poetic about carving on manmade snow ... and racing just isn't the big thing here in the US. (although I think Mikaela Shiffrin is on the latest cover of Powder mag?)  -- I know it's fun for a lot of you, but as someone said earlier, most people don't know how, anyway, and it's easier to buy a powder turn than an icy turn (although darn it I'm trying to buy a hardpack turn...).

 

post #158 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by segbrown View Post

Someone a few pages back asked "why" people keep buying skis that aren't suited for 90% of what they are skiing -- I'm not sure I read every post, so I'm sorry if it was mentioned already, but my impression is that it has a little bit to do with powder trendiness, but not the "look cool in the liftline" type: Many casual skiers don't get to ski much powder, and when they do, it is difficult for them. They hear how AWESOME and MIND-BLOWING an experience it is, but on the rare occasion it happens for them, they sink and can't turn and fall over and in short become highly frustrated. Here is this experience that is supposed to be pure heaven, everyone else is having a blast, and they are hating it, and wondering why they can't get the hang of it. 

 

Enter wide and/or rockered skis, and it is so much easier to ski powder with whatever technique you want. I think these skiers are willing to trade off hard snow performance for the ephemeral floaty powder day, even if it means 15 mediocre days on hard pack to 1 fun day in powder. Few people wax poetic about carving on manmade snow ... and racing just isn't the big thing here in the US. (although I think Mikaela Shiffrin is on the latest cover of Powder mag?)  -- I know it's fun for a lot of you, but as someone said earlier, most people don't know how, anyway, and it's easier to buy a powder turn than an icy turn (although darn it I'm trying to buy a hardpack turn...).

 




she is

 

but powder has always been about good skiing and they have gave racers props before.

post #159 of 351

Well sort of. It's a special best under 18yrs old issue.

Yes, didn't they give props to Hermann Maier that year he crashed in Nagano?

 

pw-POWP-120200-CC1.jpg

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wwtma View Post

Have been following this thread with great interest -- newbie here, haven't kept up with ski gear for eons, and so am frankly bewildered by all the choices, types, etc.  Would folks mind providing some recommendations for a less advanced skier (I'd say advanced intermediate), not particularly aggressive, 5'8"-5'9", 165 lbs, strictly East coast skier (wife doesn't ski frown.gif), age 46?  Thanks so much!

Might want to post in ski gear section. Lots' of choices. I'd say something in the 75mm range around 170cm long. But I'd be flaming myself probably. We'll see.

post #160 of 351
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post


Also in earlier posts you seem to be saying that manufacturers are designing some rocker into anything they can get their hands on. Curious how that will translate to carvers. Know that there are now a few racing skis with early rise. Will early rise become so ubiquitous it ceases to have a name (consider what shovels looked like 40 years ago, we don't call them "low" now), and simply reduce the effective running length and initiation qualities of all skis, right down into the high 60's? One argument for that is climate change. Early rise helps deal with heavy crud, and crud is gonna be getting heavier...

 

Or will manufacturers decide that 80 is the new 70, and consign narrow carvers to the dustbin? This appears to be your read. But if so, I'm unclear how they will get around physics of moving a ski onto edge and making that edge bite in. Narrower skis do it faster and concentrate the force more. Unless they have ascertained that most skiers don't carve anyway, so it doesn't matter.  

 


A fair number of hard snow biased skis will have some form of rocker (usually just a very mild tip rise). However a fair number will not, and it wouldn't shock my socks off to discover the truly technical skiers still preferring the conventionally cambered models. The "tip rise race skis" are far from ubiquitous and have had mixed reception so far. This may change in the future especially if someone decides that this is a way to get around the new FIS mandates for >35m 195cm minimums (or whatever they ultimately decide) The rocker thing is becoming almost universal but the amount of rocker has actually moderated somewhat.

 

As far as 80mm becoming the new 70mm, this is practically a fait-accompli (but not entirely). You will see few "flagship" models introduced in under 80mm widths and the biggest new offering in hard snow models will be coming around 84-85mm or so. I'm not sure if it will stop there or not (I hope so) but certainly there have been skis in the low 90's that were good hard snow tools (Nordica Hellcat, Atomic Savage Ti) but they were never terribly successful. FTMP, there isn't a ton of new hard snow specific stuff coming anyway (at least that I've seen so far) The Nordica EDT 84 and Volkl V-Werks are two very techy offerings but neither company is expecting many numbers there. For sure the marketing spin on the 80-90's is mostly versatility and most of what we'll see follows that.

 

I think that the ski makers have been over-clubbing the skiing public for decades now. The average skier doesn't think he is average anyway and he gravitates toward the vector products. Look at the skiers skidding and sliding around on high end skis and wearing cheap buckets for boots. I don't think this will change much as everybody wants to sell the high ticket item whether it's a blender, a laptop or a car and of course the ski industry (being a for-profit venture) is not immune to this stuff. I do think that many of the newer offerings will be better choices for the real customer's needs.

 

 

SJ

 

post #161 of 351

Is anyone experimenting with adding more camber and maybe combining that with some early tip rise or rocker?

 

I think it was the year before last that Phil and I tried some Vertical skis at ABasin. One of his models, I think it was supposed to be a mogul model, had a lot of camber - more than you ever see on skis nowadays. We couldn't really give the skis a great test, the conditions were really terrible, but I remember that ski engaging really quickly. It was almost like they never left the snow at transition in the float phase.

 

Some older straight skis used to have a lot of camber. So back to epic's point, what advantage really is the early rise or rocker on the hard snow? It seems as if it's all touted as making it more versatile in softer snow, which is fine, but in hard snow I don't see the huge advantage. You don't catch an edge as easily? You can steer them more easily?

 

post #162 of 351

I saw a lot of remarks about the snow in Europe, but I have to say that they don't really resemble my experiences over the last 5 years. Over that time, about half of my ski days have been in snowing/whiteout conditions. In fact, in the last 5 years, I've only had one trip where I made it through a full week without getting snowed on.

 

Now, the interesting thing is to see what happens when it snows (and the visibility drops). Even with the fresh grooming overnight, the pistes start accumulating fresh snow which gets pushed together to form soft bumps. Since the visibility above treeline is so poor, people hit these bumps without seeing them. Those on skinny carvers who lack the technique/positioning to handle those blind bumps end up toppling over quite a lot. And when they find themselves in anything deeper than boot-high snow, they struggle even with good visibility (below treeline) because they can't twist their skis to skid their turns.

 

So, anytime it snows heavily in a busy resort, you end up with a human slalom course on piste because of the people who can't make skinny skis work in soft snow. On top of that, more European resorts are opening ungroomed pistes (a.k.a. ski routes, freeride areas, nature ride trails, etc.) as more and more people want to ski something less two-dimensional than the groomers. For those two reasons, I can see Average Johann moving to wider skis (into the 80's or 90's perhaps) in the Alps.

 

Yes, you get dry spells where conditions get hard and icy, but you also get storms that can drop snow for 2 or 3 days straight (sometimes small amounts, sometimes large amounts). At least, that's what I've seen.

 

post #163 of 351
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

Is anyone experimenting with adding more camber and maybe combining that with some early tip rise or rocker?

 

 

So back to epic's point, what advantage really is the early rise or rocker on the hard snow? It seems as if it's all touted as making it more versatile in softer snow, which is fine, but in hard snow I don't see the huge advantage. You don't catch an edge as easily? You can steer them more easily?

 



Lower camber over a longer portion of the ski appears to be one coming trend. In hard snow conditions I think it relates to what an individual feels is an advantage to them. Easier to steer and smear is how a majority of skiers ski anyway and so for them that's an advantage. I don't think these mini-rockered skis offer anything but perhaps a perceptual advantage in anything with any depth. The lack of catchiness in loose snow over a firm base is helpful and the skis do ski short. Lots of folks like to buy high end skis in short sizes.

 

SJ

post #164 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

The "tip rise race skis" are far from ubiquitous and have had mixed reception so far. This may change in the future especially if someone decides that this is a way to get around the new FIS mandates for >35m 195cm minimums (or whatever they ultimately decide)

 

That would be clever.

post #165 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDad View Post

 

That would be clever.



Hmmm. Do we see a market for tip extenders?

post #166 of 351

Skiers like gadgets, should we make them retractable?

post #167 of 351

SierraJim is talking about shape, not tips.

 

Let's hope they come to their senses and don't implement 35m gs skis in minimum 195cm

Manufacturers should lobby against it as no one who doesn't have to will buy them.

 

Here are the current rules for slalom tips:

The wording is a little strange. Maybe it's better in French or German.

 

Quote:  http://www.fis-ski.com/uk/insidefis/fisgeneralrules/equipment.html

Specifications Competition Equipment/Commercial Markings 2011-12 (Edition September 2011)

Precision for the length of Slalom Skis

 

When a ski tip different from the main body of the ski is used, the
measurement will only be taken into account to the extent it covers a
surface corresponding to the natural shape of the ski.
The manufacturer must mark the tip showing the limit of the natural shape
and thereby allow an easy measurement.
To prevent doubt, specific designs of ski tips as part of the main body of
the ski are allowed.

 

post #168 of 351


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

Let's hope they come to their senses and don't implement 35m gs skis in minimum 195cm

Manufacturers should lobby against it as no one who doesn't have to will buy them.

 

 


Why would manufacturers have to sell a different ski to me than what is on the market just because FIS changes its rules?

 

 

post #169 of 351



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

SierraJim is talking about shape, not tips.



Tog.....

 

I like my tips with a pleasing shape cool.gif

 

ski-bunniessmall.jpg

post #170 of 351

Looks like a great 70mm frontside ski...

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by NayBreak View Post

Why would manufacturers have to sell a different ski to me than what is on the market just because FIS changes its rules?

Because you probably won't buy a 195cm 35m ski to race in a beer league.

post #171 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossi Smash View Post
I like my tips with a pleasing shape cool.gif

 

ski-bunniessmall.jpg

 

Simply unbelievable delta, tho.
 

 

post #172 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossi Smash View Post

Tog.....

 

I like my tips with a pleasing shape cool.gif

 

ski-bunniessmall.jpg



I don't want to hear a single comment about early rise either........

 

post #173 of 351

No matter how awesome fat rockered skis get, and no matter how awesome a time locals in snowy mountainous areas enjoy them, all that awesomeness will never bring more access to powder to the masses who buy these skis and then mess up their experience on the groomers they spend 97% of their season on.

 

It's like wearing the latest Vineyard Vines sailing outfit to a waterpark for the tube ride... total waste of resources.

post #174 of 351

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post

No matter how awesome fat rockered skis get, and no matter how awesome a time locals in snowy mountainous areas enjoy them, all that awesomeness will never bring more access to powder to the masses who buy these skis and then mess up their experience on the groomers they spend 97% of their season on.

 

It's like wearing the latest Vineyard Vines sailing outfit to a waterpark for the tube ride... total waste of resources.

 

Eh... Fat rockered whatevers certainly do make powder more accessible, assuming you can find some. What they do not do is make it more plentiful. And given the greater accessibility and finite supply that means there is also less to go around.

 

Specialized carving skis and the focus towards carving in ski instruction has been present in this sport for over a decade. But how many people do you see laying down thrilling caves these days? Not many I suspect. This carving the groomers style of skiing has never really caught on with the masses.

 

What SJ is saying throughout this thread seems to be that the groomer bound  masses are not interested in skis that would actually enhance an idealized carving  experience on groomers.  And that the new in demand breed of "frontside" skis, fatter, more forgiving, less camber, more versatile and less carving oriented seem to be targeted towards enhancing the skills that the masses actually have -- defensive skiing, steering and skidding around and less focused on carving.

 

 


Edited by tromano - 1/24/12 at 9:37pm
post #175 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by segbrown View Post

... Many casual skiers don't get to ski much powder, and when they do, it is difficult for them. They hear how AWESOME and MIND-BLOWING an experience it is, but on the rare occasion it happens for them, they sink and can't turn and fall over and in short become highly frustrated. Here is this experience that is supposed to be pure heaven, everyone else is having a blast, and they are hating it, and wondering why they can't get the hang of it. 

 

Enter wide and/or rockered skis, and it is so much easier to ski powder with whatever technique you want. I think these skiers are willing to trade off hard snow performance for the ephemeral floaty powder day, even if it means 15 mediocre days on hard pack to 1 fun day in powder. 

This rings true. I have intermediate friends who go on and on about wanting some real pow, and when they get it, look something like Laurel and Hardy moving that piano. They're patently more comfy scarving groomers at speed, but the talk in the bar is always about that one "powder stash." And over at TGR, there's an active, loud anti-carving, anti-PSIA contingent who from their comments seem to have made smearing back seaters into a new art form...
 

 

post #176 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

This rings true. I have intermediate friends who go on and on about wanting some real pow, and when they get it, look something like Laurel and Hardy moving that piano. They're patently more comfy scarving groomers at speed, but the talk in the bar is always about that one "powder stash." And over at TGR, there's an active, loud anti-carving, anti-PSIA contingent who from their comments seem to have made smearing back seaters into a new art form...
 

 



never skied with many of the mags have you?

 

there are alot of former racers, current racers, former coaches, current coaches and really ripping big mountain guys. I have skied with plenty of bad skiers from both sites but the worst tend to be from here and the real ripper that are truly fun to ski with tend be from there. 

post #177 of 351
Thread Starter 

I have now seen all but a few brands and indeed, most of the "new" offerings tend to lean toward "versatile frontside" rather than specialty frontside. The few specialty offerings seem to be in the high tech category and even most of those are above 80 in the waist. The new K2 "Bolt" is one exception as it is new, not a carryover and it's 72mm at waist. Whether this one will hold up to the others remains to be seen. I have a few brands yet to see today and some followups to do as well.

 

SJ

post #178 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post



never skied with many of the mags have you?

 

there are alot of former racers, current racers, former coaches, current coaches and really ripping big mountain guys. I have skied with plenty of bad skiers from both sites but the worst tend to be from here and the real ripper that are truly fun to ski with tend be from there. 


This is probably pretty spot on.  TGRs demographics tend to be younger folks with more freedom to ski frequently.  Getting older takes the edge off simply due to physiology.  But, not skiing as often due to business world (non skiing) career obligations really dulls the skills over time.  When it comes to confidence in big air, I'm probably only about 60% of what I was 20 years ago. Also not nearly as powerful or quick regardless of whatever dry land off slopes exercise I get.  Your abilities wane when you're not getting 80+ days a year on the snow, add age and whatever. I'm currently averaging around 10, now mostly on easier trails with youngsters. Would anyone really expect me (or even former top pros) to totally rip currently competitive younger skiers?  These are simply sacrifices we make through maturity so that our kids can have a fulfilling youth as well.

 

One thing we can still do as well as anyone is enjoy the sport when we do get to go.yahoo.gif

 

post #179 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post

never skied with many of the mags have you?

 

there are alot of former racers, current racers, former coaches, current coaches and really ripping big mountain guys. I have skied with plenty of bad skiers from both sites but the worst tend to be from here and the real ripper that are truly fun to ski with tend be from there. 


This is probably pretty spot on.  TGRs demographics tend to be younger folks with more freedom to ski frequently.  Getting older takes the edge off simply due to physiology.  But, not skiing as often due to business world (non skiing) career obligations really dulls the skills over time.  When it comes to confidence in big air, I'm probably only about 60% of what I was 20 years ago. Also not nearly as powerful or quick regardless of whatever dry land off slopes exercise I get.  Your abilities wane when you're not getting 80+ days a year on the snow, add age and whatever. I'm currently averaging around 10, now mostly on easier trails with youngsters. Would anyone really expect me (or even former top pros) to totally rip currently competitive younger skiers?  These are simply sacrifices we make through maturity so that our kids can have a fulfilling youth as well.

 

 

One thing we can still do as well as anyone is enjoy the sport when we do get to go.yahoo.gif


In my experience, while there are excellent skiers at both sites (many of whom are on both), there's a slightly different range.  On the low end and middle of the bell curve, never-evers, terminal intermediates, and groomer zoomers (other than Dookey) may lurk on TGR, but they rarely post there.  On the top end, the full-time ski industry folks on TGR are more likely to be in front of or behind the camera, or working on their boutique manufacturer startup, or running a heli op, or chucking avy bombs, while those here are more likely to be instructors or work on the retail end of things.  And demographically, TGR has fewer Easterners, and those who are there are more likely to be backcountry enthusiasts than those here.  Complementary memberships, and I've had a blast skiing with people from both sites.  That said, I've skied more with Maggots (or dual citizens) than with Bears, if only because it's easier to identify the former.

post #180 of 351

This site seems to have more middle-aged people.

 

 

TGR has reprobates, and they all act like 10 year olds.

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 › What's becoming of the "Frontside" ski?