or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Review: 2014 The Ski by Bobbie Burns and Scott
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review: 2014 The Ski by Bobbie Burns and Scott - Page 4

post #91 of 117

Oh, so exciting! I love my The SKI's so much, I was hoping they'd come out with a powder ski to replace my five year old Atomic Centuries. Do you think they'd make a good replacement?

post #92 of 117
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom View Post
 

Oh, so exciting! I love my The SKI's so much, I was hoping they'd come out with a powder ski to replace my five year old Atomic Centuries. Do you think they'd make a good replacement?

Ask and ye shall receive...

 


The Ski Sagebrush, 100mm underfoot. 

post #93 of 117

I have been skiing my The Ski for the last few weeks now in dry to several inch conditions. And loving them. Initially I struggled with them, I think because I was just used to a much fatter ski, but by the "days actually skied upon" metric, I may have to start calling these my daily driver.

post #94 of 117

Hi Phil, what a great review! I am thinking about getting The Ski... my plan is to put Rottefella NTN Freedom bindings on them, and this will be my first telemark setup. I would also like to take these skis on backcountry day trips, but will ski in-bounds with them the majority of the time. I come from a strong freestyle background, so my ultimate goal is to be able to ski moguls on telemark skis. Do you think The Ski would be good for a telemark setup and my intended uses? Also, I have had a hard time finding many reviews or accolades for The Ski. Is this possibly because Scott is in Switzerland and doesn't market too much in the states, and should it even be relevant to my decision?

post #95 of 117
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by saanne View Post
 

Hi Phil, what a great review! I am thinking about getting The Ski... my plan is to put Rottefella NTN Freedom bindings on them, and this will be my first telemark setup. I would also like to take these skis on backcountry day trips, but will ski in-bounds with them the majority of the time. I come from a strong freestyle background, so my ultimate goal is to be able to ski moguls on telemark skis. Do you think The Ski would be good for a telemark setup and my intended uses? Also, I have had a hard time finding many reviews or accolades for The Ski. Is this possibly because Scott is in Switzerland and doesn't market too much in the states, and should it even be relevant to my decision?

We just came back from SIA and we did ski the new The Ski (and Black Majics and Sagebrushs). There were quite a few of all of these skis set up with AT/Tele bindings on them. I will say that they are light and playful so I think it could be a great option for you. 

post #96 of 117

Thank you Phil! I am sold, The Ski is for me. One last question; I am an aggressive expert skier, but I am also pretty tiny at 5'5" and 115lbs. Considering I will be using these for telemark and (hopefully) moguls, should I get the 155s or 165s?

post #97 of 117
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by saanne View Post
 

Thank you Phil! I am sold, The Ski is for me. One last question; I am an aggressive expert skier, but I am also pretty tiny at 5'5" and 115lbs. Considering I will be using these for telemark and (hopefully) moguls, should I get the 155s or 165s?

I am not a Tele skier but the 165 would be for your height and 155 for your weight. It is a real easy ski to ski so really depends on how you want it to react. 

post #98 of 117


Saane,

I am 5'4" and 118 lbs and ski the 165 The Ski, albeit alpine, not tele . When I demoed they only had the 175 and I was able to ski it without any problem. I'm a pretty advanced skier, but also advanced in age :)

 

--- if that helps

 

@Philpug  How would you compare the Sagebrush to:

 

Atomic Century (my current soft snow ski which I still like a lot, but it's well used)

Volkl One (a ski I demoed & liked and selling for a good price now)

 

Should I hold out for the Scotts? Would they make a good "powder" ski for a lightweight skier like me?

post #99 of 117

PSA: Copper Rocker at the base of the American Eagle lift in Copper's Center Village has a nice selection of demos.   My cousin loved them on a firm, bumpy day last week.  He's got tiny feet so we couldn't trade, unfortunately, but I'm going to try to get on a pair.

 

post #100 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by tball View Post
 

PSA: Copper Rocker at the base of the American Eagle lift in Copper's Center Village has a nice selection of demos.   My cousin loved them on a firm, bumpy day last week.  He's got tiny feet so we couldn't trade, unfortunately, but I'm going to try to get on a pair.

 


I want those blue ones to go with my Yellow Pair. 

post #101 of 117
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom View Post
 


Saane,

I am 5'4" and 118 lbs and ski the 165 The Ski, albeit alpine, not tele . When I demoed they only had the 175 and I was able to ski it without any problem. I'm a pretty advanced skier, but also advanced in age :)

 

--- if that helps

 

@Philpug  How would you compare the Sagebrush to:

 

Atomic Century (my current soft snow ski which I still like a lot, but it's well used)

Volkl One (a ski I demoed & liked and selling for a good price now)

 

Should I hold out for the Scotts? Would they make a good "powder" ski for a lightweight skier like me?

Sorry, I missed this. 

 

The Sagebrush will go up against the Century, not so much the One, that is reverse camber with a lot of taper and much more soft snow designed. As far as the Sagebrush, there is a good chance there will be a pair of Sagebrushes in your size at A-Basin for Mothers Day. 

post #102 of 117
Nice!
post #103 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
 

The Sagebrush will go up against the Century, not so much the One, that is reverse camber with a lot of taper and much more soft snow designed. As far as the Sagebrush, there is a good chance there will be a pair of Sagebrushes in your size at A-Basin for Mothers Day. 

 

Is the Sagebrush a 100mm The Ski, or is it a different construction?  A 100mm ski that is both good in the bumps and can deal with leftover pow and crud would have been nice yesterday.  Seems like a 100mm The Ski would have been great.

post #104 of 117

The 90-ish version (original new The Ski) is only 8-10 mm narrower, depending on length. If you calculate how much difference that makes in float, answer is a little bit (equivalent to about 12 lbs in body weight), but I'd guess in most soft snow, skiing style and flex pattern makes more of an impact than 9 mm width. So other than filling up niches that the competition has, what's the rationale again? (Of course I get confused about companies offering both 76-78 mm and 80-83 mm models too, since the difference is basically indistinguishable. But I get confused about a lot of stuff...:o)

post #105 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom View Post
 


Saane,

I am 5'4" and 118 lbs and ski the 165 The Ski, albeit alpine, not tele . When I demoed they only had the 175 and I was able to ski it without any problem. I'm a pretty advanced skier, but also advanced in age :)

 

--- if that helps

 

@Philpug  How would you compare the Sagebrush to:

 

Atomic Century (my current soft snow ski which I still like a lot, but it's well used)

Volkl One (a ski I demoed & liked and selling for a good price now)

 

Should I hold out for the Scotts? Would they make a good "powder" ski for a lightweight skier like me?

Sorry, I missed this. 

 

The Sagebrush will go up against the Century, not so much the One, that is reverse camber with a lot of taper and much more soft snow designed. As far as the Sagebrush, there is a good chance there will be a pair of Sagebrushes in your size at A-Basin for Mothers Day. 

 

Meaning there will be one in my size, also? Actually I would love to check out the Sagebrush in 165 and 175 on Mother's Day ... assuming you're taking requests ;-)

post #106 of 117
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bounceswoosh View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom View Post
 


Saane,

I am 5'4" and 118 lbs and ski the 165 The Ski, albeit alpine, not tele . When I demoed they only had the 175 and I was able to ski it without any problem. I'm a pretty advanced skier, but also advanced in age :)

 

--- if that helps

 

@Philpug  How would you compare the Sagebrush to:

 

Atomic Century (my current soft snow ski which I still like a lot, but it's well used)

Volkl One (a ski I demoed & liked and selling for a good price now)

 

Should I hold out for the Scotts? Would they make a good "powder" ski for a lightweight skier like me?

Sorry, I missed this. 

 

The Sagebrush will go up against the Century, not so much the One, that is reverse camber with a lot of taper and much more soft snow designed. As far as the Sagebrush, there is a good chance there will be a pair of Sagebrushes in your size at A-Basin for Mothers Day. 

 

Meaning there will be one in my size, also? Actually I would love to check out the Sagebrush in 165 and 175 on Mother's Day ... assuming you're taking requests ;-)

The Sagebrushes will be 168 and 178's

post #107 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

 

Meaning there will be one in my size, also? Actually I would love to check out the Sagebrush in 165 and 175 on Mother's Day ... assuming you're taking requests ;-)

The Sagebrushes will be 168 and 178's

 

168 sounds poifect, and it sounds like you'll have them there ... if so, I'd love to take them on a spin ... 

post #108 of 117

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tball View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post
 

The Sagebrush will go up against the Century, not so much the One, that is reverse camber with a lot of taper and much more soft snow designed. As far as the Sagebrush, there is a good chance there will be a pair of Sagebrushes in your size at A-Basin for Mothers Day. 

 

Is the Sagebrush a 100mm The Ski, or is it a different construction?  A 100mm ski that is both good in the bumps and can deal with leftover pow and crud would have been nice yesterday.  Seems like a 100mm The Ski would have been great.


Different shape, and slightly stiffer.  

post #109 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post


The Ski and a new addition, The Sagebrush at 100 underfoot. Stay tuned for reviews in the near future.

 

Any initial thoughts on the Sagebrush? Very intrigued/curious!

post #110 of 117
Hi. I'm new here and have been reading lots and lots while looking for my daily drivers. Just moved to Park City, UT and spend most of my time at PC and DV. Probably 50-70% groomed, the rest variable. For true off piste I have some other sticks that I don't intend to use these for. I'm 6' 210#, advanced to expert and aggressive. At first I was leaning to the Line SN 100s or the Head Venturi 95s but these Scotts sound great for the conditions where I'll be doing 95% of my skiing. I can pick up a 2014/15 pair around half off retail so think The Ski in 185 should get a shot this year over the others?

Any opinions would be much appreciated!!
post #111 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcjer View Post

Hi. I'm new here and have been reading lots and lots while looking for my daily drivers. Just moved to Park City, UT and spend most of my time at PC and DV. Probably 50-70% groomed, the rest variable. For true off piste I have some other sticks that I don't intend to use these for. I'm 6' 210#, advanced to expert and aggressive. At first I was leaning to the Line SN 100s or the Head Venturi 95s but these Scotts sound great for the conditions where I'll be doing 95% of my skiing. I can pick up a 2014/15 pair around half off retail so think The Ski in 185 should get a shot this year over the others?

Any opinions would be much appreciated!!

 

The Ski is the very definition of a daily driver. They respond to, but do not require, power to ski well. As other reviews have mentioned, they're happy to bend into a wide variety of turn shapes with little added effort by the driver, and (particularly for their weight) are shockingly smooth and locked in on a variety of terrain. You can ski with finesse or power and be happy, though they aren't exactly oriented toward the latter. I probably wouldn't pick them up on a super firm/icy day. I'm not familiar with the other skis you reference, but I can vouch for The Ski. 


Edited by LiveJazz - 12/7/15 at 1:33pm
post #112 of 117

I'm looking to sell my yellow 165cm The Ski. I like it, but I need to do some quiver cleanup. If anyone is interested near the front range or I-70 corridor of Colorado, let me know!

post #113 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by pcjer View Post

Hi. I'm new here and have been reading lots and lots while looking for my daily drivers. Just moved to Park City, UT and spend most of my time at PC and DV. Probably 50-70% groomed, the rest variable. For true off piste I have some other sticks that I don't intend to use these for. I'm 6' 210#, advanced to expert and aggressive. At first I was leaning to the Line SN 100s or the Head Venturi 95s but these Scotts sound great for the conditions where I'll be doing 95% of my skiing. I can pick up a 2014/15 pair around half off retail so think The Ski in 185 should get a shot this year over the others?

Any opinions would be much appreciated!!

 

Enjoy those Qlabs!

post #114 of 117

I am intrigued by these things.  The only negative comment I've read (aside from not being for power skiers and not a super fast ski) is that they aren't really the best in hard or icy bumps.  Does anyone have any input on this?

I started this thread looking for a mogul-first, crud-second, speed-last all mountain ski and am always looking for whatever input I can find.  Thanks.

post #115 of 117
Comments are mostly correct; as with all things skis are a compromise, so The Ski is relatively relaxed, does well in bumps and surfs pow well. It does not have the edge grip of a GS ski, but is more than adequate for rock hard swiss and Italian groomers following 3 weeks of no snow and freeze thaw, mainly because you don't do 100kph+ on open pistes. It works fine imho for icy bumps as you don't do 100kph there either and setting of the edges onto the bump is a function of skier skill not so much the ski.

If you want something around 90mm and like straightlining black runs then something stiffer with metal like a bonafide or mantra is probably the answer, but if you are into moderate speeds say up to 80kph and bumps or then The Ski is a flattering ride. It's also a good entry point for getting off piste, though something over 110mm will be easier in the soft and sticky snow as it will allow more foot steering and sliding rather than forcing you to carve. Reportedly it's also good for telemarking as it has the right flex and width, plus you can install tech bindings and tour (old 175 model with white top sheet is ideal) although it's a bit heavier than a dedicated touring ski, but likely skis burliert too.

Bottom line is that you 'need' at least 5 pairs of skis to cover all bases, or The Ski is a good all rounder.
post #116 of 117

I just wrapped up an extended trip that had me on The Ski(s) about 8 days (kept getting pesky powder and having to take out the Gotamas instead). One day was at Deer Valley, where the bumps were surprisingly good, and the trail Rattler had very Mary Jane-ish bumps. Then, I got about 4 days at The Jane on The Ski(s) mid-March. I've been on about a three year quest for the best bump ski in all-mountain guise. I actually bought an ex demo pair of Bushwackers in 173 without actually knowing that they had a reputation for being good in the bumps. Then, I got really serious about bumps and started this thread:  http://www.epicski.com/t/124909/what-makes-a-good-bump-ski-for-ordinary-citizens hoping that I could maybe buy my bump turns. That thread led to a pair of Rock n Rolls in 166, which I like quite a lot. I object to paying full price for skis on principle, so waited a couple of seasons until the Scotts finally materialized ex demo in a Labor Day sale this past August, again in a 166 length. (I'm 5'8" and 140#, most comfortable on skis that are on either side of 170 cm)

 

So, what do I think? I like the Scotts the best in the bumps of all the skis that I have tried. It probably helps that my bump technique got amped up a couple of notches this season, now that I finally have my weight far enough forward to have a shot at actually following a zipper line (as much as a 64 y/o can). It also helps considerably that I spent some quality time with Blake Saunders at The Jane, who got me to understand just how much absorption matters, and how little of it I was doing. The Scotts are very supple in the bumps, and respond very well to nuanced (at least what passes for nuanced for me) input. By comparison, the Bushwackers are kind of a blunt instrument (though the 7 cm difference in length should not be forgotten). They are quick, and happily will do two turns on a bump if need be. They can rail on the groomers, again if given the correct instructions. I even took them in shin high untracked pow on a morning I didn't want to be on skis that would give me an unfair advantage over my powder newbie granddaughter. Heck, they reminded me that my first and second powder skis were 88 mm wide (Pocket Rockets and the original Monster 88s). They are definitely keepers, and the Bushwackers are kind of relegated to rock status now. The Rock n Rolls fit an altogether different, somewhat orphan, role in the quiver now as well. I kind of see the Rock n Rolls as matching what Mammoth might throw at me as a not-too-deep powder day progresses, when we are charging too hard for me to get to the car to change out pairs. Also, Mammoth bumps never get Jane-ish, so the 95 mm underfoot width is not a disadvantage.

post #117 of 117

Now may be a good time to mention that I have a 165cm The Ski (yellow) for sale!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › Review: 2014 The Ski by Bobbie Burns and Scott