What's become of the all mountan ski?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SierraJim 

At the risk of starting to sound like Jimmy Ruffin..............So…..what’s become of the all mountain ski??

 

...........................

 

Then……there are the mold breakers. These are the skis that take an unconventional approach to shape in order to change the game. The runaway here this year was the Blizzard Bonafide. At the time, this was the only ski in this range that was really different and the success was huge (understatement). For 2013, there are two new shapes that broaden the offering in this range. The Dynastar Cham 97 and the Salomon BBR 10.0 are both very worthy entries into the “game changer” shape category. Both of these are even more unconventional than the Blizzard flipcores and together, these three will possibly start to make even more inroads into some of the more conventional shapes.

 

................................................

 

SJ   

Does this mean the Bone is sooo last year now Jim? 

^^^^ Yeah, I think it's soooo non-game changer now. Thank god for a new One Ski To Rule Them All, just when we were at risk of calming down. 

But I digress. IMO there is no all-mountain category anymore because there is no call for a single ski to be decent to good at everything, a B+ ski. Instead, we can decide if we want a frontside carver that can handle soft snow, or a soft snow ski that can carve. Which may better describe how people have always skied. Seriously, who ever really was a 50/50 skier? Either you bided your time until you could find another soft snow stash, or you arced around the groomers and once in a while ventured into some powder. The former group now ski in the high 80's to low 100's, the latter in the mid 70's to mid 80's. All about what you fantasize over...

I figure the all-mountain ski is what I call the airplane si - http://www.epicski.com/t/47119/the-airplane-ski

A ski like the FX94 is an all-mountain ski. You could ski it anywhere from Buck Hill to Hokaido. There is a better ski for almost anything, but it's good enough at everything.

all Mountain

EC - "the one", S3, Slicer, Distortor , Scimitar, Wailer 99

WC - Bonafide, E98, vicik, PM Gear Bro, FX104

We'll, at least one person (me).  In the East, I'll alternate runs between groomers, trees & bumps assuming they all exist.  In the West, I'd love to ski powder each and every day but that's a fallacy.  I've been out for a week to the big name places where nothing fresh falls and seemingly only me and 3 other guys are off piste.  I've been on the Hobacks plenty of times without another living being in sight.  Am I supposed to travel out with 100mm+ skis when these might be the conditions?  That's where the AM ski comes in.  Great at nothing, horrible at nothing.  A safe choice when you don't have or can't fly with a quiver.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawgcatching 

 

Great timing!  Kevin and I were just talking about this very subject: what makes an “all-mountain ski”?  After skiing a demo at Mission Ridge in typical (for this year) conditions, we came to similar conclusions.  The “all-mountain” skis we ended up loving were narrower than some list as all-mountain.  The sweet spot was between 80-95mm of width.  But, beyond that, here is what we came up with in terms of what a true all-mountain ski needs to be able to do: ski zipper-line bumps reasonably well, allow for relatively aggressive groomer skiing (dynamic skiing); float reasonably well in moderate new snow; handle crud in GS turns; hold like glue on firm off-piste terrain.   Kevin is a very good skier, ex East Coast bumper, and bigger than I.  He likes off-piste skiing and air when he can find it. More about the do-everything criteria:

 

1. zipper-line bumps. This one is fairly obvious.  Could a good skier ski a zipper line on Mary Jane on this ski?  Ski has to be not too wide, not too stiff, not too soft, and have a good flex pattern
2. ski groomers well: ski has to have enough bite, enough tip engagement, and enough tail power to pull the skier into the top of the turn and power them through the finish.  Simply holding in a low-energy GS arc or being easily skidded doesn’t make a good groomer ski.
3. Float in soft snow: pretty self explanatory.  Reasonable lack of tip dive
4. Handle crud at GS speeds in the steeps: a ski needs some beef, primarily to do this
5. Hold like glue on firm off-piste snow: dynamic skiing in challenging off-piste conditions (like those experienced back east) requires a ski with some bite again, and some power.  The ski needs to be laterally aggressive enough to hold on firm surfaces in steeps (instead of sliding down the hill) and when the skier puts an aggressive pole plant down the hill, the ski needs to be able to have enough pop to get off the snow; allow the skis to roll flat, and get the skier to be pulling his feet back and absorb terrain. 
6. Have some pop.  Key for skiing steeps and bumps. The “impact” turn is money here.  Skis that only want to slide around are a little less than useless.

The conditions we were skiing were re-freeze steep off-piste, firm groomers, firm bumps, and the 2^nd day with 2-4 inches of new on top of the same snow.  What skis did this the best?  Without a doubt, it was the 80-95mm group of skis. These skis absolutely ripped these conditions: no doubt both of us were better skiers on the   Magnum 8.5 than we were on the, say, Bonafide.  Skis that are best at this allowed us to bend up on the steeps, load, get fall line, and do what we wanted.   Wider skis were much more work edge to edge, edge hold was not in the same ballpark, plus they were too stiff and too much work in fast zipper-line bumps.  Release and it takes a while to engage, which reduces confidence and causes you to throw them sideways early, instead of letting the turn set up.  Not to mention much more sluggish on the groomers.  In my mind, a true all-mountain ski is none of these.

 

Here were some direct comparisons across brands:

Dynastar Outland 80 Pro, 87, and Cham 97 and 107: the Outland Pro and 87 were superb.  Excellent in bumps, powerful in crud, quick, grippy, popping me out of the turn, great in the fall line, and powerful carvers.  We got to ski east-coast style lift lines that were bumped out and soft on top, and not very wide.  Cham 97 and 107 was less grippy off-piste, much more work edge to edge, scary in tight bumps, and meh… on groomers.  Good skis if you get them into deeper snow, but the Outland was a ski that really was made for this snow.  If I owned an Outland 87, I would ski 80% of my days on it in the typical year. 

Blizzard Magnum 8.0ti, 8.5ti, Bonafide and Cochise: similar things that I wrote about the Outland can be applied here, although the Blizzard was even more powerful on groomed snow.  Bonafide and Cochise were ho-hum in the icy steeps; a lot more work to get onto edge, felt like steering a tugboat instead of a speed boat, and we were skiing with less confidence.  No question the 8.0/8.5 were superior in the bumps too, and it goes without saying, on groomers.

 

Elan 88Xti Amphibio, 888, 999, 1010: I am starting to sound like a broken record, but I would take either of the 2 narrower skis over the 2 wider skis for these conditions.  Grip, power, ease was with the narrower skis here.  I don’t need float to ski 3 inches of light snow: I need precision and the knowledge the ski will there for me when it hits firm snow underneath.  88Xti and 888 were slightly different, but both exceeded the wider skis in these conditions. 

 

Volkl Kendo and Mantra: the Mantra probably came closest to the “wide all-mountain” ski in this category, as it was pretty good in bumps and more exciting on groomers. Still, the Kendo was quicker, more powerful, and more nimble.  Maybe too powerful, but that is for another thread….

 

After skiing all of these, and testing a bunch of stuff this year, at least for our preferences and skiing styles, the “everyday” ski of the bunch is going to typically be around 90mm.  Kevin has his go-to ski as the Peak 84.  For me, it could be one of a number of skis, but the new Outland 87, 888, and Magnum 8.5 would be at the top of my list.  They are the best skis out of this group for skiing anything up to 6-8” of new, at least at my weight.   The new skis are getting so versatile!  And, having additional width is of no use if you don't have the new snow to utilize it.   Which is why you should own one of these skis, and a bigger ski for deeper days.

 

Based on this criteria, the big-mountain feel starts at around the 98mm width for many skis (with exceptions: some 98mm skis are versatile).  For him, that is a 195cm MX98 or 195cm BMX108, and for me, I have lots of skis…..but they definitely start to blend in a big mountain feel at that width.  Bumps become cumbersome, skis are more at ease at big GS turns, bigger drops are easier on the longer skis, they have much more float, and can ski faster with more stability.  But, you leave the “all-mountain, do everything” feel behind; marginal groomers, lacking edge hold. 

 

We took lots of A vs. B video on the same pitches. When I get it fixed, I will try to post some. It is pretty obvious which skis are working in those conditions, and which aren’t. 

 

Where is the all-mountain ski going?  Not sure but it sure is a fun ride, if the new crop of skis is anything to go by.  If you are in the market for skis, get a Magnum 8.5 and a Cochise. You will happy every day of the year. 

Scott,

So I want new skis as much as anyone else.  But will any of these skis be noticeably better than my MX78?  I already have a 98mm ski for fresh snow.
 

NO new skis for YOU!   'fraid you're set.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RatherPlayThanWork 

Scott,

 

So I want new skis as much as anyone else.  But will any of these skis be noticeably better than my MX78?  I already have a 98mm ski for fresh snow.
 

 

Christ, man, pull yourself together. This is not about "noticeably better." This is about "noticeably newer." Which by definition is what keeps America great. Your 78's must be, what, two years old? Maybe (shudder) three? Go get on a waiting list for some 2013 gear and stop your nit-picking! 

What, did you both talk to my wife?

Guess I'll need to look to replace that wider ski. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by SierraJim 

The Bonafide had the "story" that captured the imagination of the buying public. The story grabbed everyone's attention and the ski backed it up perfectly. Next year there will be some new competition.

Was always told to avoid constructions that animate objects. Who, ah, told the story?  (That the ski backed up, of course.)

And what's this year's story? 

Ive been selling skis for a long time.  I think it is sometimes hard to seperate the fact the my average customer is not the epic ski crowd.  Most customers of mine own one ski and they are probably going to ski it for a few years.  I wish every customer wanted to own a quiver of skis to perfectly match that days conditions.  I wish every customer was like me,or you reading this, hell I have 2 pairs of brand new skis that havent touched the snow this year. In reality they are not so it is tough to decide the perfect everyday allmountain ski if they are only going to buy one ski.  Usually, my local mountain is hardpack and 2 hours away the areas usually are filled with new snow.  I really believe to someone buying one ski the 90-100 waisted ski is perfect.  Do you give up some groomed run performance, yes.  Is it perfect on a huge powder day, nope.  But I think these waist widths give the most bang for the buck for the average skier who only wants one ski. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ptex1 

Ive been selling skis for a long time.  I think it is sometimes hard to seperate the fact the my average customer is not the epic ski crowd.  Most customers of mine own one ski and they are probably going to ski it for a few years.  I wish every customer wanted to own a quiver of skis to perfectly match that days conditions.  I wish every customer was like me,or you reading this, hell I have 2 pairs of brand new skis that havent touched the snow this year. In reality they are not so it is tough to decide the perfect everyday allmountain ski if they are only going to buy one ski.  Usually, my local mountain is hardpack and 2 hours away the areas usually are filled with new snow.  I really believe to someone buying one ski the 90-100 waisted ski is perfect.  Do you give up some groomed run performance, yes.  Is it perfect on a huge powder day, nope.  But I think these waist widths give the most bang for the buck for the average skier who only wants one ski. 

First you are right, most people buy one pair of skis for everything. However, I olny half agree with you with the 90 to 100mm ski for the one ski quiver. If the person lived out West this is true but in the East 80-85 would be better. I personally don't like a one ski quiver. It would be like playing golf with one club. If I were to own only 1 ski for the east it would be the 80mm stockli XXL.

Johnny

Great topic......I was just reading how how both DPS is scaling down w/ the Wailer 99 & Praxis is tesing the WooTest, a smaller version of the Protest.

Appears the trend may be shifting toward reasonable (well, starting) waited skis.

^^^^ Of course DPS is also introducing new stuff with much fatter waists, like the Spoon. IMO the really fat stuff is for a relatively few skiers who are highly visible/influential. More of an advertising strategy than anything else. I have never found much use for anything over 115-118 mm or so, and even that extra 10 mm over a more traditional sized pow ski like the Goat, BMX108, Legend Pro, or Cochise probably only is useful if I'm skiing lighter powder slowly - think trees - and need the extra surface area to stay high. The rest of the time modern tip designs make skis in the 98-110 range come up really well, you're probably gonna ski them fast enough in the open that they'll have plenty of float, and they're a lot more fun in tight spaces, chop, typical 3-6" of fresh. 

Not to mention that the wider the ski, the more torque on your knees if you get them over. Above 110, I really notice that. If you just smear and pivot, no issue, obviously. 

This a great discussion as the AM category has gotten pretty broad in spectrum. Alot of the discussion has focused on the "waist" of the AM ski, but I believe the other factor to consider is the introduction of "rocker" to the AM ski - front, rear, both - early rise. Round tail-square tail, etc.   That's one of the things I appreciate about these forums is the discussion and testing feedback. I can't possibly ski them all like some of you - but i can hear about them and add them to my "Quiver List!"  There aren't many places one can find this type of interaction.   Great stuff!  Personally I have 3 skis in my quiver;  Salomon X-Wing Tornados (78 waist), Salomon X-Wing Enduro (85) early front rocker, and Stockli SS Pro (101) early rise.  Conditions and who I'm skiing (terrain) with most often dictate my choice of ski(s) for the day.  

Dawgcatching,

I too was at Mission for both days and have come to some slightly different conclusions.  I am 5'11" and weigh 215, so in that respect I suppose I'm on the other end of the weight spectrum.  I tend to ski hard and fast. I skied the Cochise 193 on Tuesday and was blown away by how it held on groomers.  Just an estimate, but let's say hard, 40+ mph carves where I could drag my uphill hand.  I (and the guys I was with) was stunned by how that 108mm ski could truly"rial" a groomer, snake it's way through the trees, and hold on steep icy patches (e.g. the little pitch to the left at the top of the Bomber Express).  For me this may be the single ski that I could truly call a one ski quiver.  Conversely, I really have little positive to say about the 8.5 in 174.  It left me cold with respect to edge grip, stability and directional fidelity.  It seemed like all it wanted to do was pivot, which is what Dave told me it was going to do.  (For what it's worth my daily driver at my home hill about 2 hours north of Mission is a last years 8.1 179)  So, I suppose it goes to show you that there are different strokes for each of us.  My take home message from this years event was that the manufacturers are finally coming up with skis in the 95-110mm range that can handle firm conditions (e.g. Tuesday) and still deliver off piste.  Others that I really like were the Hell and Back (another great one ski quiver), P-98, Bone, Mantra and the Ski Logic Ulr's Chariot 188 (The latter was just a little too turny for my taste but a good stick none the less)  In short, I think it pays for folks to demo before buying as each of us has a different ideal.

LT

New England one quiver skier here. Very happy with my new Dynastar Outland 80 XT. 6 ft.185lbs. Age mid 50's, experience skiing almost the same.

That's all.

An All Mountain ski depends on individual preference/ability not an industry standard.  that's all I have to say about that. . 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philpug 

...and which mountain. 

and which season..... 

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawgcatching 

 

The conditions we were skiing were re-freeze steep off-piste, firm groomers, firm bumps, and the 2^nd day with 2-4 inches of new on top of the same snow.  What skis did this the best?  Without a doubt, it was the 80-95mm group of skis. These skis absolutely ripped these conditions: no doubt both of us were better skiers on the   Magnum 8.5 than we were on the, say, Bonafide.  Skis that are best at this allowed us to bend up on the steeps, load, get fall line, and do what we wanted.   Wider skis were much more work edge to edge, edge hold was not in the same ballpark, plus they were too stiff and too much work in fast zipper-line bumps.  Release and it takes a while to engage, which reduces confidence and causes you to throw them sideways early, instead of letting the turn set up.  Not to mention much more sluggish on the groomers.  In my mind, a true all-mountain ski is none of these.

Wish I had read this before writing my Hell & Back review last night. I could have just pointed to this one paragraph and skipped all the rest.

Phil,

I totally agree that the Cochise is not the correct tool for zipper bumps, or any 100+mm board.  I was trying to stick mostly to the 95-105mm boards and, like I said, this category has come a long way.  There are several 98's that would fit right in the sweet spot for me and would be preferred to the Cochise in bumps.  That said, if we had taken the time to go to Bomber Bowl I feel pretty confident that the Cochise would have been a top pick.  For me, the Hell and Back was another real stand out, but the 8.5 was not.  In fact, I prefer my 8.1's to the 8.5.  After trying last years 8.7 I was quite excited to try the 8.5 but it was just one board that left me cold.  The great news is that manufacturers are coming out with a number of outstanding new skis.  My overall impression is that skis are evolving/improving rapidly right now as the perfect the rocker/camber/sidecut combos.  My wife loved next years Nemesis and Aura but didn't think much of Samba, just like she didn't care much for the Black Pearl last year.  Who would have thought?  I think the take home message is that there are a bunch of great new skis coming out and there is certainly one or more that will hit the mark for each of us.  Now, if we could just add about four extra feet of snow to Mission for next years event all will be well.

LT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philpug 

...and which mountain. 

I think this is the difficulty with these threads.  My home mountain is Mary Jane/WP.  So what happens as you weight performance to bumps as the 'all mountain' condition you want to least sacrifice?

It isn't that I love bumps, but they can be a gatekeeper to thin crowds in accessing other terrain and having to overwork in bumps is a non-starter.  I like Dawgcatching's AM definition, and I could describe my daily driver need as 'refined cruiser bump ski with some float'.  

The question is how much wider is realistic than current low 80's (lx82) to get more float without messing up 'refined cruiser bump ski', which I am very happy with now in my LX's.