New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Weight of Skis - Page 2

post #31 of 53

I believe in the happy compromise.  A setup that is too light leaves me feeling unstable and bouncing over the mountain whereas I prefer to feel more "glued" to the mountain.  Most people would find my ski setups heavy, but I like a heavier setup because it also forces me to ski better (I can't just flip the skis around and "cheat" on my technique).

post #32 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by hirustler View Post
 first with light rental bindings

This is umpossible.  Rental bindings should be outlawed, then lynched from the nearest tree.

post #33 of 53

I demoed skis.  Obviously I did not rent bindings.  Can't recall what bindings the demos had.  But when I bought the same skis and put Barons on them, they felt completely different.  Far worse. 

post #34 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiing-in-Jackson View Post

This is umpossible.  Rental bindings should be outlawed, then lynched from the nearest tree.

 

 

Marker Squire/Griffon/Jester rentals are the closest to their retail counterparts as any rental option, weight is only marginally different.

post #35 of 53

You no longer have to compromise.     Lay down a nice steak substrate*, well bedded in roast potato, caulk it with Cab Sav, then top finish with cheesecake and icewine martinis. 

Unstable and bouncing no longer.   Repeat as necessary. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler View Post

I believe in the happy compromise.  A setup that is too light leaves me feeling unstable and bouncing over the mountain whereas I prefer to feel more "glued" to the mountain. 

 

 

*in extremely unstable or bouncy cases, surface preparation with aperitifs and amuse-bouche may be required

post #36 of 53

Liquidfeet, I am the best skier on Lake GNAR!

 

Noodler, I like bouncing down the hill.

 

I'm renting from Philpug if he sends skis out with those light Marker bingings (which I happily run on one of my Goodes)!

 

Eric

post #37 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 

 

Marker Squire/Griffon/Jester rentals are the closest to their retail counterparts as any rental option, weight is only marginally different.


Excellent and correct.  Thanks for pointing that out.

post #38 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post

 

 

If someone has trouble carrying a shopping bag with 2-3  2liter soda bottles to their car, we know that the underlying cause is a lack of strength in shoulders, arm and core.

 

 

 

I would say the underlying problem is that they're making poor health choices- multiple 2 liters of soda when they can barely lift a grocery bag?  Oh the shame!  wink.gif

post #39 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Do Work View Post

 

 

I would say the underlying problem is that they're making poor health choices- multiple 2 liters of soda when they can barely lift a grocery bag?  Oh the shame!  wink.gif

 

Quite right, seltzer and club soda are so much lighter.

post #40 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post

 

Quite right, seltzer and club soda are so much lighter.


There's water in the tap (faucet??).

post #41 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squawker View Post


There's water in the tap (faucet??).

 

Oh, please, have you ever seen one of these people carrying a tap and fittings out to the car, not to mention the tools needed?   Pitiful doesn't even begin to describe it. 

post #42 of 53

"Tap and fittings"?! Keg handling does not correlate to ski fitness. Now we have to be strong enough to lug kegs around or we're "pitiful"? Rough crowd.

 

To counter too much thread drift, I hear they are making a light carbon fiber keg. Maybe I can lift one of those - but only if it has good beer in it.

 

Eric

post #43 of 53

Thirsty crowd.

post #44 of 53

I have heavy-ish skis.  They are great at some things: damp, stable, great crud-buster, doesn't get me bounced around on uneven cut-up crud.  A pain in the ass, though, for moguls where I really want something lighter and livelier, which is next on my quiver list. 

 

That said, I would not expect the weight difference between a "heavy" skis and a "light" ski to make a lot of difference as far as my legs hanging from the chairlift.   If your legs are getting tired from the oppressive weight of legs, boots, bindings and skis, a lot of chairlifts have this thing called a safety bar with leg rests. Just saying.....

 

 

I'm not a racer, but it seems to me that heavy damp skis would be better for downhill and Super G  (not just the increased length) and a very light lively ski for slalom, with a GS ski somewhere in-between.  Racer people, any insights?


Edited by DesiredUsername - 9/18/12 at 4:56pm
post #45 of 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesiredUsername View Post

 

 

That said, I would not expect the weight difference between a "heavy" skis and a "light" ski to make a lot of difference as far as my legs hanging from the chairlift.   If your legs are getting tired from the oppressive weight of legs, boots, bindings and skis, a lot of chairlifts have this thing called a safety bar with leg rests. Just saying.....

 

I have *still* not heard an explanation of how this leg fatigue happens - what muscle is being activated when the leg dangles off the chair?

post #46 of 53

Aahh to be young and not arthritic. It's not a muscle thing, it's a joint and tendon thing. Our legs were meant to be stood on, not pulled apart by massive weights. Heavy skis make my knees ache on the chairlift. I'll trade the GNAR points for a footrest safety bar any day.

 

Skis, boots and bindings should be light, beer should be heavy!

 

Eric

post #47 of 53

Ah, had no idea OP was  arthritic or of a certain age; tbh he sounds younger than me or most the crowd here.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by eleeski View Post

Aahh to be young and not arthritic. It's not a muscle thing, it's a joint and tendon thing. Our legs were meant to be stood on, not pulled apart by massive weights. Heavy skis make my knees ache on the chairlift. I'll trade the GNAR points for a footrest safety bar any day.

post #48 of 53

I tried to look up the weights of some skis to compare them, but it was actually pretty hard to find. I think they should list it along with the lengths and sidecuts under the "specs". I know my X-Wing Tornadoes are supposed to be "light" and I find that to be the case, but I just bought some heavier skis (haven't skied on them yet), and thats one aspect that I'm (very slightly) concerned about, since I'm used to quick turns in moguls and trees. I'd certainly be interested in comparing some numbers. Anyone know of a sight where you can do that easily?

post #49 of 53
Thread Starter 

It's me again the OP.

 

I guess I should add that I'm 50 now. I will tell you though that I'm pretty close to what(strength & endurance) I was in my 30's. If I had a little more free time than I would be. I'm definitely less agile and limber though(need more yoga and stretching).

 

Most of the lifts I ride do NOT have the "rests" for the skis. I know for sure that between my two skis(Sultan 85 in 172 and BW in 173) that the lighter ones allow my legs to maintain their strength much longer alleviated concerns of risking injury due to fatigue. Until I'm proven otherwise(more demo's??), all things being equal, lighter skis is the way to go. Again, one basis is quantity of runs vs quality.

 

Larry
 

post #50 of 53

As another 50-year old (who looks and acts much much younger biggrin.gif) I think my overall fitness and conditioning is more in my control than paying attention to the weight of my skis.   I will add that there is more to lessening fatigue that just the weight of the skis, or for that matter, the combination of boots/bindings/skis, which can add a lot of weight.  

 

That said, I think the construction of a ski can have a lot to do with fatigue as well.  Last year when I demoed the Head Rev 105, for example, I was blown away with how much better it absorbed bumps and shocks than anything I had tried.  I was less tired and I was able to ski a much longer run without stopping, on a familiar bumped out black diamond or double diamond run.  Head calls it intellifibers, supposedly piezoelectric fibers that respond to the sudden pressure from impacts like bumps and reduces the vibrations.   It wasn't the lightest ski I demo'd that day, and not necessarily my overall favorite in terms of fun fun fun fun fun, but I noticed a definite difference in my stamina for the length of a run.   I'm pretty sure if I had skied them all day I would notice a difference in how tired I got at the end of the day.

 

I'm not a shill for Head.  I wasn't expecting to like the ski as much as some others.  I'm still not sure if this is what I'll buy next.  But it made me think hard about selecting appropriate equipment for my needs and desires.  If something like this saves some impact on my knees, hips and other body parts, over some other product, it's a strong argument for skiing longevity.  

post #51 of 53

Weight is a difficult item to measure. The raw weight of the ski is one factor. Swing weight is also very important. Binding weight and boot weight can change the characteristics of the lightest ski. Add some sticky wet snow to the tops and what are you really feeling? The weight of a ski is only loosely correlated to how lively the ski feels on the snow. Still, having published weights of skis, bindings and boots would be useful.

 

I'm probably too hung up on weight. But my waterski experience drives my obsession. I have been building and competing on my own waterskis for decades. My engineering background led me to the most "efficient" builds - most easily measured by raw weight. My skis are substantially lighter than the factory skis. And I am able to execute advanced tricks solely by virtue of how light my skis are. Strong positive feedback.

 

Worse than that, my snow skiing style has adapted to light skis. Moguls are my passion. And if I want any powder at Squaw after that first KT chair, I am stuck in the tight trees. As I age, I ski slower (scared or coming to my senses?) so the advantages of the heavier skis are even less. Finally, old farts are more likely to be able to afford the higher costs associated with the complex engineering needed to make equipment light.

 

Larry, you claim to be an OP (old person) at 50? I'm so much older than you! Do some quad tighteners and wall sits and protect those knees from the ravages of excessive weight skis. And go for quality - you're old enough to have the quantity already.

 

Eric

Goode skis, Salomon TI bindings and Full Tilt boots - light and sweet! And I can carry them across the parking lot.

post #52 of 53

If you are skiing at Bear Moutain or mountain high or ski summit, then you are an east coast skier, living on the west coast.   But skiing at Mammoth is %100 West coast skiing.  Mammoth isn't the best but it's pretty damn good and it's got some great steeps.  

 

None of these videos are me! 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNKgyo_o-_s

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gt2ROlEswQ&feature=related

post #53 of 53
Thread Starter 

Yep, most of my skiing is Mtn High and Big Bear area. Even when I get to Mammoth, I try to stay on "groomed" runs. I can handle Cornice but only the groomed part smile.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion