EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Should I try fatter skis?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Should I try fatter skis? - Page 3

post #61 of 66
Originally Posted by Toecutter View Post

Bottom line is that fat skis do work in the intended conditions. It's not just marketing.


Yeah, fat skis are fine off piste. The marketing lie is that fat skis perform well on groomers. Again, going back to what the OP wants, he said he was concerned a fat ski wouldn't perform well on piste. And given what he's used to, a fat ski will not perform well, or to even close to the same degree as a narrow waisted ski, on piste--unless he's actually just skittering down the mountain (and I'd like to give him much more credit than that). 


For me, I feel effective technique on a modern, narrow waisted ski negates any "training wheels" effect of a fat ski off-piste, and I still get to enjoy carving sensations on the cattracks back to the lift. And I enjoy the focus it takes to manage pressure underfoot in 3D snow. It's a different sensation from what you get on a fat ski.


Honestly, if the focus is on making things as easy as possible, I'd suggest most folks would be happier with a snowmobile. duck.gif


Anyway, I assume the OP now has enough info to move forward. 

post #62 of 66

I agree that truly fat skis (i.e., 115mm+)  aren't the right tool for groomers, but I think the focus is not on making things easier but rather on making things more fun.  


My suggestion to the OP was to take two pairs of skis if possible, one fat for powder and one for groomers, but if he definitely could pack only one pair then a 98mm (not fat in my book) is a nice compromise.

post #63 of 66


Originally Posted by Kardinal View Post

Wow. That's a great answer. Ill tell you basically I love my 78s. I ski forward, downhill and carve turns. I love going as fast as possible so much so that I am constantly being bitched at by my wife who is more of a sweeping cruiser. I like bumps but am still working hard on doing them faster.

I'm not sure if this plays into it but I was an ice hockey player for many years so edging and placing alot of trust in edges is second nature to me.

I cant imagine that anything 95+ underfoot is going to be comparable on Cord but maybe im wrong. I would just hate to lose that really responsive catapault feeling i get now on the hard stuff.

As far as off piste, I like to do it when I go west but I do have issues and feel like I'm a much worse skier in the deep stuff. That's kinda where this question came from. I'm never going to get good in powder where I live so I thought maybe getting a pair of fats would make trips out west more enjoyable.

Models ive looked at if anyone wants to offer experience:

Nordica Soul Rider

Head RockN Roll

Volkl Kendo and Mantra

Blizzard Bushwacker




Here's something on the  Kendo and Mantra. There's been gobs written about the Bushwacker. What was your height/weight?



Soul Rider:


Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post




This was a great front side ripper, at least for me!  Way above average for a ski like this! 


Working on a video review!  Suffice it to say these skis ripped, easily the best carver (for 90mm+ skis) I tried in that last 2 days of demoing, really confident in junk snow, tons of energy, predictable engagement and release, solid in weird off-piste snow.  I liked the turn entry: I could let the skis drift at the top of the turn as I was moving down the fall line but not really hitting the edges yet: when I was ready and had set up the turn, I just cranked that inside knee up and over, got edge angle, and boom, was flying across the fall line. They set up just like a nice GS race ski!  That roll down the fall line, drift a bit, hit the edges and angulate, boom, L-shape turn  Not hooky, not overly aggressive as carvers and edgy skis can be, but did exactly what I wanted, and no more. This is one of the only 95mm+ skis I have ever tried that I could truly ski every day on and be happy (Head Rock n' Roll, FX94, Stormrider 95 are the only others that come to mind).


It reminded me of the Blizzard The One; might be more or less the same ski. That was probably my favorite Blizzard of the last 5 years, good to see it is still around in one form or another!


The only downside I found was the 177cm length skied short off-piste.  At speed, I was getting bounced around a bit in rough snow.  177cm with a fairly long turned up tail is a pretty short ski; with that said, they were super quick and snappy, so much fun.




Originally Posted by Finndog View Post

Hey dawg, If I read your comments about my beloved Soul riders and I apologize if I missed a specific review but I am glad to read that you seemed to really enjoy the ski. I said this before and I'll say it again, its a great ski that just gets overlooked. Now with the new graphics that are more acceptable (Phil can actually look at the ski now biggrin.gif) I hope more folks give it a try. Dont let the softish tips fool you, this ski can hold a decent edge (its not meant to be a front side ripper) and won't fold under pressure.




post #64 of 66

Try this article




Among the opinions that the author claims is that basically, using skinny skis in powder or cut up powder is that skinny skis "should only be used by advanced or expert skiers who are confident enough to shred terrain at mach-looney speeds."

post #65 of 66

I love ripping groomers on fat skis. 

post #66 of 66
Thread Starter 
Tog, 6'3" 195.
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 › Should I try fatter skis?