Originally Posted by mudfoot
Skis with a significantly narrorwer tail than tip ride with the tails lower in deep snow, which leads to ruddering your turns, something we did back when everyone was on 210 cm GS skis for powder. I like my skis to ride more or less level with an even tip and tail flex in deep snow, regardless of its consistency. To me an asymetrical ski feels like one kind of ski with your weigth forward and another with your weight on the back. I prefer a more unified consistent feel. Different strokes for different folks.
The Gypsy has pretty consistent good reviews, and too dismiss all shop employees as being idiots who can't tell which ski they like is ridiculous. My point was that the Gypsy is generally recognized as good reverse camber powder ski, and it does not have a pintail. To say that the pintail is a more progressive design fails to recognize the reality of what many good skiers with a choice are skiing, regardless of whether they work in a ski shop or not.
not really (ride tails lower), and that's where we can draw our different conclusions.
I don't have any idea what a pintail design skis like with the weight on the back, got me there.
I didn't say shop employees were anything in particular, just that they don't represent knowledge automatically due to the fact that they work in a shop, as you inferred.
It would be interesting to take each brand and see what design they are putting forth as a powder ski, kind of a face off, and tally the numbers; bet pintails win out by a margin.
Gee, if only I knew more about what good skiers ride and think. Mostly they think about sex, not skis.
PS: just noticed you ski light continental snow in Colorado. This snow is so easy to push around, compared to dense coastal range snow, that the ski design choice or preference is definitely going to vary.
The first powder skis made were simply wider versions of all mountain or GS skis. Same construction and sidecut roughly. That's why I say the pintail is more progressive; it's a newer concept.