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 7

post #181 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post



 I have skied with plenty of bad skiers from both sites............... 


I find much truth in this highly edited line from BWPA.  All the more reason gear, while it should not be assigned to a skier, should help one look less god awful on the hill.


 

 

post #182 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post

 

 

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.

 

 


I completely agree with you.

 

When I said "access," however, I more meant that buying a really cool powder fat ski isn't going to bring powder snow and gnarly lines to people who don't already live in places where that is a reality.

 

It's like, you can buy the sickest mountain bike at your local bike dealer, but if all you do is bike around the neighborhood...

 

post #183 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. 


Far as I know, haven't skied with any Mags. And very few Bears. biggrin.gif Laurel and Hardy comment was directed at my friends, not Maggots. Anti-carving and backseating comments were directed at TGR because it's stated fact. Routine cracks about Epic if the discussion moves toward technique, let alone carving, and not uncommon to read gear comments that mention how ski doesn't have strong enough tails to support backseating, or how user slip slides his fats on the way back to the lift. And yep, realize landings or Highway Star style straightlining trees can require that, and realize a few skis like the 138 or PP are allergic to carving. But it feels like over there it's more about what you do than how you do it. Nothing wrong with that, and will take your word it reflects most being past needing to talk about technique. 

 

Some of this also depends on defining an off-piste skill set without using groomer-oriented PSIA levels (which Marshalolson forbids). For instance, if you live in terrain that does not require - or permit - carving, do you need to carve to be an advanced skier? If you spend half your time taking air, does having your COM back make you sloppy? I've read stuff at TGR that argues, essentially, "don't need no d**n technique because it's for losers who ski groomers." Should I assume that the guys posting this are ex-racers who can lay down railroad tracks but don't bother, or guys who jumped from brush turns to OB aerials and never looked back?  th_dunno-1[1].gif

 

Which is kinda related to this thread (gasp): How relevant is a particular skill set if the skis you use and the terrain you like doesn't require it? Or is all good skiing the same mechanically, regardless of the gear or snow? If I can get down a steep and deep chute on my fat rockers, and be in control every moment, am I less of a skier if I don't have my COM where it would be if I were porpoising narrower traditional cambers?


Edited by beyond - 1/25/12 at 10:23am
post #184 of 351

I've skied with mags and bears.  Honestly, when we're having fun on the mountain there really isn't much difference.  We all share the same passion. And we all party at the Beach. 

 

post #185 of 351

This thread is not about all that.

What is relevant though, is that a lot of the style of park skiing on the trail comes from two things.

One is imitating what one should look like, that applies to some as in all things.

The other is if you've got rounded edges from or for doing rails, then you surely want to keep your feet beneath you.  You will not see a lot of high edge angle skiing on skis like that, and park skis are not fat and have little or no rocker.

post #186 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post


Far as I know, haven't skied with any Mags. And very few Bears. biggrin.gif Laurel and Hardy comment was directed at my friends, not Maggots. Anti-carving and backseating comments were directed at TGR because it's stated fact. Routine cracks about Epic if the discussion moves toward technique, let alone carving, and not uncommon to read gear comments that mention how ski doesn't have strong enough tails to support backseating, or how user slip slides his fats on the way back to the lift. And yep, realize landings or Highway Star style straightlining trees can require that, and realize a few skis like the 138 or PP are allergic to carving. But it feels like over there it's more about what you do than how you do it. Nothing wrong with that, and will take your word it reflects most being past needing to talk about technique. 

 

Some of this also depends on defining an off-piste skill set without using groomer-oriented PSIA levels (which Marshalolson forbids). For instance, if you live in terrain that does not require - or permit - carving, do you need to carve to be an advanced skier? If you spend half your time taking air, does having your COM back make you sloppy? I've read stuff at TGR that argues, essentially, "don't need no d**n technique because it's for losers who ski groomers." Should I assume that the guys posting this are ex-racers who can lay down railroad tracks but don't bother, or guys who jumped from brush turns to OB aerials and never looked back?  th_dunno-1%5B1%5D.gif

 

Which is kinda related to this thread (gasp): How relevant is a particular skill set if the skis you use and the terrain you like doesn't require it? Or is all good skiing the same mechanically, regardless of the gear or snow? If I can get down a steep and deep chute on my fat rockers, and be in control every moment, am I less of a skier if I don't have my COM where it would be if I were porpoising narrower traditional cambers?




well you ve skied with one.

 

I doubt you read anything from any serious posters saying you do not need technique. Alot of those llurk here just to read the ski coaching threads.

post #187 of 351


Same ski (Sultan 85), same result.  The versatile Sultan is just fine on the hardpack, but somewhat boring.  Really boring when compared side-by-side with a true carver.

 

IMO, 75 is around the perfect width for an EC all-in-one.  Problem is, all-in-one is never the best one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post



True, some do.  But, there is always that vroom.....feeling I get when I load up a sub 80mm power ski that just isn't there on a frontside oriented wider ski (such as the Sultan 85).  When it is hard snow, that power and pop out of the turn. is the reason I am at the hill.  The best skis for that are race carvers, but a well tuned frontside power ski (like the P900, RX12, Stockli SX) gets it done better than any 80+ ski I am aware of.  But, if we are talking about the general population, most people don't want that kind of power and precision in their skis.   



 

post #188 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldsbar View Post


Same ski (Sultan 85), same result.  The versatile Sultan is just fine on the hardpack, but somewhat boring.  Really boring when compared side-by-side with a true carver.

 

IMO, 75 is around the perfect width for an EC all-in-one.  Problem is, all-in-one is never the best one.



 


If you EC all in one includes off piste in north vermont after its been crusted good luck on those 75mm skis ;).

 

post #189 of 351

N VT is sort of the extreme of the EC (in a good way). 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post


If you EC all in one includes off piste in north vermont after its been crusted good luck on those 75mm skis ;).

 



 

post #190 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post

well you ve skied with one.

 

I doubt you read anything from any serious posters saying you do not need technique. Alot of those llurk here just to read the ski coaching threads.


Yeah, know. Point taken about serious posters on TGR. Lot of the cracks about technique come from folks with smaller post counts, prolly posturing. 

post #191 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldsbar View Post


Same ski (Sultan 85), same result.  The versatile Sultan is just fine on the hardpack, but somewhat boring.  Really boring when compared side-by-side with a true carver.

 

IMO, 75 is around the perfect width for an EC all-in-one.  Problem is, all-in-one is never the best one.



 

 

Truer words were never spoken.

 

post #192 of 351
Thread Starter 

Well.....after seeing most everything in the show before the show, it's clear that the (hard snow) frontside ski is not completely dead after all and there will probably be enough to go around. The aforementioned Volkl V-Werks will come in a wide (84mm) and a narrower (75 mm) version. Both are high tech/high bucks models with one having continuous rocker and the other mild tip and tail + camber. Nordica has their tech wagon and Blizzard has theirs as well although both of those those are in the 80's. Nordica is also making the real race stock ski (commercial version) in a narrow 19M TR version and a 14M version as well. Dynastar retains the Course Ti, Head the Titan, and Rossi has a new offering in the Avenger spot. Fischer has a new metal laden ski with a rocker adjustment in 85mm. Salomon still has the Enduro line, Atomic the Nomads and Elan is expanding the Amphibios. None of those last ones promise to be scalpels like some of these others probably will.

 

The odd and unfortunate thing about all this is that some of these ski makers actually sound apologetic for building these hard snow skis. OTH, they are really excited about the versatile frontsiders because they'll "blend in with the wider skis on your wall". Privately they understand that the marketing pendulum has shifted a bit too far toward the soft snow categories. They also  understand that they are ignoring a greater part of the market in order to follow the stampede in the pursuit of a lesser part of it.

 

Fortunately, most of the versatile frontsiders are really pretty danged good on hard snow. While I appreciate hard snow technology and know how to use it, I'll be perfectly satisfied with a versatile frontsider as my narrowest ski. But.....I'm a 75% off trail skier so that makes sense. Many of the groomer mavens will still be best served by the very best hard snow tech available and fortunately, there will be enough.

 

SJ

post #193 of 351

SJ, have you been on the Stockli Laser SX?  If not I should bring it up to Squaw when I'm there in late March for you to try; IMO the most fun you can have on-piste with your clothes on and IIRC dawgcatching rates it pretty highly as well.

post #194 of 351
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxman View Post

SJ, have you been on the Stockli Laser SX?  If not I should bring it up to Squaw when I'm there in late March for you to try; IMO the most fun you can have on-piste with your clothes on and IIRC dawgcatching rates it pretty highly as well.



I have not been on a Stockli for two years although I think the last one I skied was the LSX. For various reasons, we are not terribly interested in Stockli and IAC for a ski brand such as that, Stockli has nothing on Kastle.

 

SJ

post #195 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

Well.....after seeing most everything in the show before the show, it's clear that the (hard snow) frontside ski is not completely dead after all and there will probably be enough to go around. The aforementioned Volkl V-Werks will come in a wide (84mm) and a narrower (75 mm) version. Both are high tech/high bucks models with one having continuous rocker and the other mild tip and tail + camber. Nordica has their tech wagon and Blizzard has theirs as well although both of those those are in the 80's. Nordica is also making the real race stock ski (commercial version) in a narrow 19M TR version and a 14M version as well. Dynastar retains the Course Ti, Head the Titan, and Rossi has a new offering in the Avenger spot. Fischer has a new metal laden ski with a rocker adjustment in 85mm. Salomon still has the Enduro line, Atomic the Nomads and Elan is expanding the Amphibios. None of those last ones promise to be scalpels like some of these others probably will.

 

The odd and unfortunate thing about all this is that some of these ski makers actually sound apologetic for building these hard snow skis. OTH, they are really excited about the versatile frontsiders because they'll "blend in with the wider skis on your wall". Privately they understand that the marketing pendulum has shifted a bit too far toward the soft snow categories. They also  understand that they are ignoring a greater part of the market in order to follow the stampede in the pursuit of a lesser part of it.

 

Fortunately, most of the versatile frontsiders are really pretty danged good on hard snow. While I appreciate hard snow technology and know how to use it, I'll be perfectly satisfied with a versatile frontsider as my narrowest ski. But.....I'm a 75% off trail skier so that makes sense. Many of the groomer mavens will still be best served by the very best hard snow tech available and fortunately, there will be enough.

 

SJ



V-Werks sounds great, and a 19M race stock ski??? Even better. Does it have EDT? Tell us more!

post #196 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post



V-Werks sounds great, and a 19M race stock ski??? Even better. Does it have EDT? Tell us more!



It does! Nordica is billing it as a beer leaguer. 

post #197 of 351

So if I prefer something 66 underfoot in a non-FIS ski longer than 165 for ripping around the frontside I'm basically SOL?

Oh well, I'm good and hunting the classifieds.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

Well.....after seeing most everything in the show before the show, it's clear that the (hard snow) frontside ski is not completely dead after all and there will probably be enough to go around. The aforementioned Volkl V-Werks will come in a wide (84mm) and a narrower (75 mm) version. Both are high tech/high bucks models with one having continuous rocker and the other mild tip and tail + camber. Nordica has their tech wagon and Blizzard has theirs as well although both of those those are in the 80's. Nordica is also making the real race stock ski (commercial version) in a narrow 19M TR version and a 14M version as well. Dynastar retains the Course Ti, Head the Titan, and Rossi has a new offering in the Avenger spot. Fischer has a new metal laden ski with a rocker adjustment in 85mm. Salomon still has the Enduro line, Atomic the Nomads and Elan is expanding the Amphibios. None of those last ones promise to be scalpels like some of these others probably will.

 

The odd and unfortunate thing about all this is that some of these ski makers actually sound apologetic for building these hard snow skis. OTH, they are really excited about the versatile frontsiders because they'll "blend in with the wider skis on your wall". Privately they understand that the marketing pendulum has shifted a bit too far toward the soft snow categories. They also  understand that they are ignoring a greater part of the market in order to follow the stampede in the pursuit of a lesser part of it.

 

Fortunately, most of the versatile frontsiders are really pretty danged good on hard snow. While I appreciate hard snow technology and know how to use it, I'll be perfectly satisfied with a versatile frontsider as my narrowest ski. But.....I'm a 75% off trail skier so that makes sense. Many of the groomer mavens will still be best served by the very best hard snow tech available and fortunately, there will be enough.

 

SJ



 

post #198 of 351
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevesmith7 View Post

So if I prefer something 66 underfoot in a non-FIS ski longer than 165 for ripping around the frontside I'm basically SOL?

Oh well, I'm good and hunting the classifieds.
 



 



If it really has to be 66 then maybe so. Keep in mind though that most real FIS stuff is wider than that (higher 60's, very low 70's). IAC, there are several skis made with full on FIS builds but cheater shapes. The Head I-Speed, Rossi GS Master, and this new Nordica come immediately to mind.

 

Among skis of this type, the Nordicas may be the new wolf in the henhouse. I can't tell any difference at all in the flex, the EDT carbon fiber, or the plate system over the FIS skis just the different shape and a SL version to boot which the others are not doing.

 

Rip is probably a very apt term for this deal but I doubt they'll sell a hundred pairs in the US of A.

 

SJ

post #199 of 351

 

66mm ski?

Here's a brand new one. 66mm in all lengths! It's a great ski. Get it before the company is buried by themselves. (may not be long)

(By brand new I mean not used. It's been around several years now.)

 

 

phoenix_skis.png

 

Quote: http://www.hartskis.com/products/f-series-all-mountain/phoenix/

With a 4D ISO Sport Top Sheet Graphic this Phoenix ski looks as hot as it skis. A responsive and versatile all mountain carving ski with a contour that allows for long or short radius turns. The wider tip geometry of the Phoenix also allows for easier turn initiation and less deflection in the crud. With phenomenal edge grip and stability at high speed, it makes carving easy. Excellent on groomed and hard packed snow, this ski makes skiing fun.

CONSTRUCTION: Sandwich

CORE: Microfiber laminate constructed of ash and beech, unidirectional fiberglass interlaced to 90º, and anti-vibration rubber strip. Titinal for torsional ridgidity.

SIDEWALLS: Melamine

TOPSHEET: 4D ICP topsheet sublimated from below

BASE: Graphite

TIP and TAIL: Aluminium

SPECIFICATIONS

  • Length: 152 Sidecut: 116-66-101 Radius: 10.5
  • Length: 158 Sidecut: 116-66-101 Radius: 12
  • Length: 166 Sidecut: 116-66-101 Radius: 14
  • Length: 170 Sidecut: 116-66-101 Radius: 16.5
  • Length: 180 Sidecut: 116-66-101 Radius: 17.5

 

A Fischer:  At 165cm it's 67mm

 

RADIUS: 14 m
SAMPLE LENGTH: 165 cm
SIDECUT: 117 - 67 - 99
LENGTH: 150, 155, 160, 165, 170

 

FischerRC4SuperRace.png

http://www.fischersports.com/us/Alpine/Products/Skis/Race/228-RC4-Superrace-SC

 

 

I Don't understand the FIS rules. Why if the minimums are these, are the skis so wide?

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

 

FISRules1.jpg


Edited by Tog - 1/26/12 at 9:00am
post #200 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

 

I Don't understand the FIS rules. Why if the minimums are these, are the skis so wide?

 



To prevent bootout since stack heights have been lowered.

post #201 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post


 

Rip is probably a very apt term for this deal but I doubt they'll sell a hundred pairs in the US of A.

 

 


I'm buying one of them. Can I get it now?

 

post #202 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taxman View Post

SJ, have you been on the Stockli Laser SX?  If not I should bring it up to Squaw when I'm there in late March for you to try; IMO the most fun you can have on-piste with your clothes on and IIRC dawgcatching rates it pretty highly as well.



 



Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post



I have not been on a Stockli for two years although I think the last one I skied was the LSX. For various reasons, we are not terribly interested in Stockli and IAC for a ski brand such as that, Stockli has nothing on Kastle.

 

SJ


I reviewed the Cross SX, not the Laser SX.  It might be a different ski, a little softer, which worked better for me. 

 

post #203 of 351

IMO if you ski frequently and are able to have 2 or 3 pair of skis, why wouldn't you have a "frontside" ski with a waist width of  66 or so as one of them?

 

If I was teaching,especially a beginner, and was teaching tipping movements etc at slow speeds, a narrow waisted ski will make life easier for both the instructor and the student. 

 

If I am free skiing and it has not snowed in days or weeks like this season began,  I want my 66 frontside ski out there on the hard pack and in the hard bumps that will inevitably be there.  It is simple physics....the narrow waisted ski tips easier and faster...so I don't have to work as hard and it saves the knees compared to tipping wide boards on hard snow all day. Besides, ripping high energy short turns on hard snow or groomers is fun,  Try it if you haven't.  Also, because I am trying to ski efficiently and keep improving I want to engage the front of the ski in the snow....especially hard snow...so rocker does me no service in improving or engaging the tip if it is off the ground.

 

Wide skis, rockered skis....they have thier place as well.  There are skis out there for just about everything.  The manufacturers have been saying wide wide for several years now, especially in the States, and now rockered in an effort to move the product.  As if everywhere here and everyday is a powder day in some ski movie.  It doesn't mean that wide and or rockered are the best for every individual's needs all the time. 

 

If I could only have a one ski quiver,  that ski may be different depending upon where I sk.i  It would be different if I lived/skied in the East as compared to Colorado, and maybe different again if I skied in the Pacific Northwest or Cali

 

Common sense and the reality of what you are doing and/or trying to accomplish should rule, not what the manufacturers/industry say.

 

Mike

post #204 of 351

As has been alluded to,  "frontside" is not one thing. There is a  world of difference between a carving "maven" and the previously mentioned "average" skier. The "average" skier is likely never going to slice arc to arc turns on icy snow. They usually ski cutup/messy groomers. Now and again some perfect corduroy for a run or two. Maybe a wee bit of ice- but really not so much. Some spring slush. The odd modest covering of powder. And frontside or not, they'd probably like to be able to hop off piste a teeny-tiny bit. So stability and forgiveness should be design priorities. Something decently carve capable - but that is amenable to sliding around under control. So.... that sure does not mean a sub-80 ski race-derived ski. IMO it does not even mean a "crazy 88".

 

Just to put a stake in the ground for when we revisit this thread some day  wink.gif - my bet is that in 2-3 seasons, the "frontside" ski for normal mortals is gonna be somewhere between an S3 and an S7. I mention those not because I am especially in love with them, but because they are arguably iconic - they are "fatter" but not gargantuan, have tip and tail rocker, and sport early taper. All appropriate for the average skier.

 

 

post #205 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

 my bet is that in 2-3 seasons, the "frontside" ski for normal mortals is gonna be somewhere between an S3 and an S7. 

 

 


Bet taken. I've bookmarked this, will revisit in two years. But what's the wager? biggrin.gif

 

post #206 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post


Bet taken. I've bookmarked this, will revisit in two years. But what's the wager? biggrin.gif

 



Well, I did say 2-3. Nonetheless, the trend will be clear one way or another. WA has some very nice wines (to go along with our abundant and superior snow). Alternatively we have some fine smoked salmon around these parts. But that is neither here nor there, Whatcha got in the way of regional specialities that I can plan on enjoying? wink.gif

 

post #207 of 351
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post


I'm buying one of them. Can I get it now?

 



Which one, what size and I'll AXE the question tomorrow.

 

SJ

post #208 of 351



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post



 


I reviewed the Cross SX, not the Laser SX.  It might be a different ski, a little softer, which worked better for me. 

 



Just over the page in you sub 80mm 2011 ski review:

 



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

 

2011 Ski reviews: sub 80mm skis

 

 

Stockli Laser SX: 70mm waist, 15.6m radius in 170cm, more of a GS version of the CX, although the radius changes very little.

 

Again, this ski was mounted on top of a Stockli plate, so it was taller than I would have preferred. Having skied this just after the CX, I was able to get a good feel for the difference, which was similar to what I had expected. Speed limit, already high on the CX, was best-in-class on this ski. There simply wasn't a speed limit. Energy was a bit lower: the ski felt a bit more glued to the snow, not quite as snappy, really damp, effortless when gliding along. The tip was quick to engage and it hooked up powerfully; running flat, it was more at home than the CX. There was a definite ability to cruise with low edge angle, tip the inner foot, engage the sidecut, and then be flying across the fall line in no time. The SX doesn't turn automatically. Rather, it waits for input, then takes off like a bat out of hell. Turn initiation feel was hard to describe: it did exactly what I asked of it, nothing more, nothing less. Again, full railroad tracks on bulletproof snow on steep groomers. It really doesn't get much better for a frontside ski. And, this ski insprires the confidence I needed to get forward and let my COM get down the fall line into the new turn. The SX was there for me, and would hook up as soon as I was over the neutral point and tipping the skis again, drawing up the inside foot and getting pressure outside. Besides racing my bike in a high-level crit, this was as close as I have ever come to feeling like I was driving an F1 car. I would buy this ski in a heartbeat.

 

In bumps, it was a bit stiff and a bit long. Again, adequate, but not great. This is a groomer machine. There is no denying that this ski is a ripper. There might not be a better hard snow ski on the market. At least one that is this forgiving: plenty of consumer race GS skis have this amount of horsepower, but the Stockli goes a bit further in that it really can work at moderate speeds, and go from frontside carver to detuned race GS. The other skis tested here are just a bit stiffer and really need 30mph+ speeds to do anything, and are most at home going 35+. This is one of the best frontside skis I have ever had the privilege of demoing.

 

 

 

Pretty sure we have the same ski.... black with green and white graphics saying Laser SX, AFAIK this is Stockli's skier-cross ski.  Anyway, even a good recreational skier (myself) as opposed to an expert/advanced skier can appreciate the on-piste performance of this ski over a mid-phat or wider ski.

 

post #209 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

As has been alluded to,  "frontside" is not one thing. There is a  world of difference between a carving "maven" and the previously mentioned "average" skier. The "average" skier is likely never going to slice arc to arc turns on icy snow. They usually ski cutup/messy groomers. Now and again some perfect corduroy for a run or two. Maybe a wee bit of ice- but really not so much. Some spring slush. The odd modest covering of powder. And frontside or not, they'd probably like to be able to hop off piste a teeny-tiny bit. So stability and forgiveness should be design priorities. Something decently carve capable - but that is amenable to sliding around under control. So.... that sure does not mean a sub-80 ski race-derived ski. IMO it does not even mean a "crazy 88".

 

Just to put a stake in the ground for when we revisit this thread some day  wink.gif - my bet is that in 2-3 seasons, the "frontside" ski for normal mortals is gonna be somewhere between an S3 and an S7. I mention those not because I am especially in love with them, but because they are arguably iconic - they are "fatter" but not gargantuan, have tip and tail rocker, and sport early taper. All appropriate for the average skier.

 

 


I agree with you "frontside" means many things.  My take on it is it means anything from ice, to perfect corduroy, to crud, to bumps, and anything else not fresh within the ropes.

 

Anyhow, I don't mean to start an argument but I disagree with the fact that "most skiers" will or should be skiing on an S7 for everyday "frontside" use.  I've never skied the ski, but that just seems excessive.

 

 

 

By the way, tip rocker on "piste" skis is a hooky disobedient edge waiting to catch... have any frontside skis sorted this out?

 

post #210 of 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoWestSkier View Post

IMO if you ski frequently and are able to have 2 or 3 pair of skis, why wouldn't you have a "frontside" ski with a waist width of  66 or so as one of them?

 

If I was teaching,especially a beginner, and was teaching tipping movements etc at slow speeds, a narrow waisted ski will make life easier for both the instructor and the student. 

 

If I am free skiing and it has not snowed in days or weeks like this season began,  I want my 66 frontside ski out there on the hard pack and in the hard bumps that will inevitably be there.  It is simple physics....the narrow waisted ski tips easier and faster...so I don't have to work as hard and it saves the knees compared to tipping wide boards on hard snow all day. Besides, ripping high energy short turns on hard snow or groomers is fun,  Try it if you haven't.  Also, because I am trying to ski efficiently and keep improving I want to engage the front of the ski in the snow....especially hard snow...so rocker does me no service in improving or engaging the tip if it is off the ground.

 

Wide skis, rockered skis....they have thier place as well.  There are skis out there for just about everything.  The manufacturers have been saying wide wide for several years now, especially in the States, and now rockered in an effort to move the product.  As if everywhere here and everyday is a powder day in some ski movie.  It doesn't mean that wide and or rockered are the best for every individual's needs all the time. 

 

If I could only have a one ski quiver,  that ski may be different depending upon where I sk.i  It would be different if I lived/skied in the East as compared to Colorado, and maybe different again if I skied in the Pacific Northwest or Cali

 

Common sense and the reality of what you are doing and/or trying to accomplish should rule, not what the manufacturers/industry say.

 

Mike


You need to stop. You're making too much sense.  What, you think there's something wrong with people and they can't learn to tip a ski at 85mm? Why not 100? Just because it's easier on something narrower, come on.  rolleyes.gif

Why don't we just institute "No ski left behind"?

 

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?