or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › So I want to improve my skiing
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

So I want to improve my skiing - Page 2

post #31 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post

Pink slime? NoooOOOOOOOOOoooooooo!

Some day  I'm sure the snowmakers add a bit of bleach to make the 'snow' look white. Or if it's tinged brown that'l be the nicotine they add to make skiing addictive. biggrin.gif

post #32 of 46

parts is parts

 

I also bought the Elan Amphibios last season. If you are worried about early rise being somehow deficient over traditional cambered skis, demo the Amphibios. If you try them with early rise on the inside edge, cambered on the outside edge, then swap to compare, then you will form a sure opinion. Personally I can feel a difference, but not enough to bother checking if I'm putting them on the "right" way. I took a fatter pair of "standard" early rise skis to Snowbird at the end of the season last season and got accused of cheating in heavy fresh snow ( "are those early rise skis -you're not working hard in this stuff"  - well d'uh!). I used to occasionally enjoy putting on skinnier skis to ride deeper in the pow, but I'm smarter now.

 

I was afraid that early rise was going to ruin my arc to arc (cough) skiing. Didn't happen. The first 5 turns I ever took on early rise had me going "W(where)TF are the ski tips?????!!!!!" The next 5 turns was like "Oh - there they are - ok no big deal". After that I was just skiing. The current batch of early rise skis are just good skis that are easier to turn. If you get traditional cambered skis for your next pair, you better be getting a great deal because it is simply yesterday's tech. They are not harder or better to learn on. They are just a little more work to turn. If you can get a camaro and porche for the same price, why buy the camaro?

 

Fatter skis/Full rocker skis are more work on harder snow and less work on softer snow. Pick a ski for the snow you are predominantly on or start building a quiver. It's your choice. For the criteria you are looking at, your choice will have little impact on your ability to learn. The one criteria you aren't looking at that will make a difference is stiffness. Go too stiff and you'll be held back by an inability to bend the ski. Go too soft and you'll be held back by the ski washing out when you ask it perform at a high level. For most people simply getting a beginner/intermediate/advanced ski to match their beginner/intermediate/advanced skill is "good enough" to get stiffness "close enough". Another criteria is the size of the "sweet spot", but again most of the time this is nothing to worry about. I have a pair of Volk 6 stars that are stiff as a 2x4 with a tiny sweet spot. When my skiing is "on" the performance is mind boggling. When my skiing is off, I have to fight the skis on every turn. They were the right skis for me at the time because I needed to work on making the small adjustments to find a tiny sweet spot, but they are now retired. At the time, I would have recommended the Volkl 5 stars as a better learning ski for most advanced skiers because having a bigger sweet spot made it easier for skiers to find. Your vertical may vary.

post #33 of 46
Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRusty View Post

".....Personally I can feel a difference, but not enough to bother checking if I'm putting them on the "right" way...."

 

Ha! One thing - in order to be able to do that Rusty, you had to put your time in, a lot of time I guess, mastering basics ;-P Didn't you? As 4ster said above, once you get in the basics, you can adapt to almost anything (fore/aft, soft/stiff, rocker/camber, fat/skinny, heck even 2 different skis on left and right foot ) and still ski well demonstrating good technique. Not the other way around.

 

Good advise though about the sweet spot!

 

Cheers.

post #34 of 46
Last season I bought a pair of all mountain skis (Cham97). This acually improved my skiing technique. I thought I was damn good skier making carved short turns. The reality was quite different. I was lazy and the short radius turns was mostly my old SL skis radius 13 was skiing for me. After some days on the Chams working on the technique I tried my old "easier" skis again. What an improvement.

Im no ski coach but I would not be afraid of trying a wider ski with tip rocker.
Edited by emil - 8/8/13 at 11:38am
post #35 of 46

"Early rise" can mean anything in the world of marketing.

 

A crude application to a cambered ski would detract from that ski's performance no doubt.  But a well thought out, carefully crafted camber/rise profile keeps performance/sensitivity up while making the ski easier to live with.  

 

The Rossi Experience held base to base shows no rise at all, but squeezing the camber out the subtle rise appears.   The shop tech told me that I'd be disappointed in a demo, (I'm too large) but I will be trying them in a hundred some days anyway.

 

The new slinky low/no camber profiles definitely lose the pop and power of a good full camber ride, but (with good technique) style can morph into a slarvy smooth glide that is easier(faster).

 

Faster is not necessarily better, but easier is.

post #36 of 46

This is a fascinating topic for me. When the shape ski revolution came along, I found myself to be a traditionalist about ski shape. I held on to my long straight boards until about 2008. Maybe I was just jaded after having fallen for Spademan bindings, rear-entry boots, and strapless poles in the past, but I expected the shape ski movement to be the latest fad and soon we'd go back to the tried-and-true method of reaching up over our heads to determine proper ski length. I finally made the switch when there wasn't anything else to buy.

 

Now I don't worry so much about a ski design making it too easy for me to ski. I just appreciate it. I am budget-constrained to stick with older models, but I suspect it's the same with the newer innovations. If they make skiing easier, you can do harder things and still try to improve. I'm no golfer, but let's try a golf analogy: if I could hit a golf ball 200 yards with a fancy new titanium club but only 150 yards with an old fashioned wooden one, I could either work on my swing until I could hit 200 with the wooden one, or work on my swing until I could hit 250 with the titanium one. The latter seems more fun to me.

post #37 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by CluelessGaper59 View Post
if I could hit a golf ball 200 yards with a fancy new titanium club but only 150 yards with an old fashioned wooden one, I could either work on my swing until I could hit 200 with the wooden one, or work on my swing until I could hit 250 with the titanium one. The latter seems more fun to me.

As long as you can still hit the fairway or the green. 

I agree that equipment that makes it easier & more fun is a plus.  I always recommend fat, rockered skis for deep snow & powder.  A bit of early rise certainly makes a ski more versatile & manageable when getting off piste or in variable conditions, but nothing trumps solid basics & fundamental mechanics to maximize the fun factor!

biggrin.gif

JF

post #38 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4ster View Post

A bit of early rise certainly makes a ski more versatile & manageable when getting off piste or in variable conditions, but nothing trumps solid basics & fundamental mechanics to maximize the fun factor!

biggrin.gif

JF

 

Well said Jim! icon14.gif

post #39 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4ster View Post

 nothing trumps solid basics & fundamental mechanics to maximize the fun factor!

biggrin.gif

JF

 

No argument there! Also, to torture my metaphor a bit more, even if you like your fancy new driver it doesn't mean you should use it to putt. I often see people with (what look to me like) absurdly wide, rockered skis on when it hasn't snowed in weeks and everything is groomed and hard-packed. I've never really gotten that.

post #40 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by CluelessGaper59 View Post

 

No argument there! Also, to torture my metaphor a bit more, even if you like your fancy new driver it doesn't mean you should use it to putt. I often see people with (what look to me like) absurdly wide, rockered skis on when it hasn't snowed in weeks and everything is groomed and hard-packed. I've never really gotten that.

 

Aug 9, 2013

 

Hi CG59:

 

But it looks so "COOL".  wink.gif  Until one starts sliding around on the hard pack.

 

Think snow,

 

CP

post #41 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by CluelessGaper59 View Post

This is a fascinating topic for me. When the shape ski revolution came along, I found myself to be a traditionalist about ski shape. I held on to my long straight boards until about 2008. Maybe I was just jaded after having fallen for Spademan bindings, rear-entry boots, and strapless poles in the past, but I expected the shape ski movement to be the latest fad and soon we'd go back to the tried-and-true method of reaching up over our heads to determine proper ski length. I finally made the switch when there wasn't anything else to buy.

 

Now I don't worry so much about a ski design making it too easy for me to ski. I just appreciate it. I am budget-constrained to stick with older models, but I suspect it's the same with the newer innovations. If they make skiing easier, you can do harder things and still try to improve. I'm no golfer, but let's try a golf analogy: if I could hit a golf ball 200 yards with a fancy new titanium club but only 150 yards with an old fashioned wooden one, I could either work on my swing until I could hit 200 with the wooden one, or work on my swing until I could hit 250 with the titanium one. The latter seems more fun to me.

 

Your comparison is more like comparing straight skis to shaped skis Vs.  5 years ago shaped skis to this years skis.  I would also think it was closer to having a golf club that (pretend) compensated for disconnects in your swing.  You get to hit the ball further than without the club, but you'll never hit the ball as far as you could if you fixed your swing.

 

In your analogy, a good golfer would be disadvantaged using the old clubs too.

post #42 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buttinski View Post

"Early rise" can mean anything in the world of marketing.

 

A crude application to a cambered ski would detract from that ski's performance no doubt.  But a well thought out, carefully crafted camber/rise profile keeps performance/sensitivity up while making the ski easier to live with.  

 

 

This fad too shall pass.  Just a few years ago the opposite claim was being made -- that exaggerated camber made it easier to ski -- for the Anton Gliders which had springs pushing the shovels down into the snow.  Even Wayne Wong was an advocate of this easier way to ski.

 

In Judeao-Christian tradition, there was a man named Samson who was granted supernatural strength by the creator.  The source of his extreme performance resided in Samson's hair.  As long as his hair remained intact, he was mighty; but once his hair was shorn he became a weakling.  Such was his power that Samson slew an entire enemy host with the jawbone of an ass and killed a lion with his bare hands.  Until he met Delilah and her scissors! 

 

Skis don't have hair; rather the key to their performance resides in their shovels / tips.  Adding marketing early rise to skis is like giving Samson's hair a touch up ... not much performance enhancement forthcoming.

 

duck.gif

post #43 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CluelessGaper59 View Post

This is a fascinating topic for me. When the shape ski revolution came along, I found myself to be a traditionalist about ski shape. I held on to my long straight boards until about 2008. Maybe I was just jaded after having fallen for Spademan bindings, rear-entry boots, and strapless poles in the past, but I expected the shape ski movement to be the latest fad and soon we'd go back to the tried-and-true method of reaching up over our heads to determine proper ski length. I finally made the switch when there wasn't anything else to buy.

 

Now I don't worry so much about a ski design making it too easy for me to ski. I just appreciate it. I am budget-constrained to stick with older models, but I suspect it's the same with the newer innovations. If they make skiing easier, you can do harder things and still try to improve. I'm no golfer, but let's try a golf analogy: if I could hit a golf ball 200 yards with a fancy new titanium club but only 150 yards with an old fashioned wooden one, I could either work on my swing until I could hit 200 with the wooden one, or work on my swing until I could hit 250 with the titanium one. The latter seems more fun to me.


I agree with your comment on technology however I am finding that late model traditional camber skis are hard to find and decent ones cost almost as much and in some cases more than last years models.  I believe that the problem for people who don't mind older skis is that in the last few years, due to the economy, the manufactures made fewer skis so we have a simple case of supply and demand.  I found a full camber ski on line that I would buy, a 10/11, that is $40 dollars less than a 12/13 tip rocker version of almost the same ski.  For me it boils down to what makes the most economic sense at a minimum the bindings are 3 years older and full camber skis could no longer be manufactured out side of race models soon or unaffordable high end models. So I might as well get the new tech now and get used to it. 

post #44 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiDolt View Post


I agree with your comment on technology however I am finding that late model traditional camber skis are hard to find and decent ones cost almost as much and in some cases more than last years models.  I believe that the problem for people who don't mind older skis is that in the last few years, due to the economy, the manufactures made fewer skis so we have a simple case of supply and demand.  I found a full camber ski on line that I would buy, a 10/11, that is $40 dollars less than a 12/13 tip rocker version of almost the same ski.  For me it boils down to what makes the most economic sense at a minimum the bindings are 3 years older and full camber skis could no longer be manufactured out side of race models soon or unaffordable high end models. So I might as well get the new tech now and get used to it. 

I have been skiing a pair of SkiLogik Ullr's Chariots Twin Tips for the past 2 seasons as my main "go to" ski,  They are traditional camber with a 101mm waist for a reasonable price.

 

http://www.epicski.com/products/2012-ski-logik-ullrs-chariot-ski

 

Sorry for the thread drift,

JF

post #45 of 46

Websites like Aso Gear and sports liquidators, levelnine sports, Denver ski have plenty of 20/10, 11/ 12 model skis that are priced cheap. I have my eye on a pair of Dynastar legend Edens that currently retail for over $800.00 for $249.00 with binding. Same side cut and construction, sans the rocker shovel. same with dynastar legends, head tt 80's Speed crosses,, head peaks, the list goes on. They are out there. depends what you want. I mean O2 had volkl mantras right now for $366.00! You have to kind of whittle it down to what brand and model you think you may want and do the searches. If I find a ski on line for cheap that my local shop carries I will always give the local shop a crack at trying to match or come close to the online price, out of courtesy to a local small business, and if they can come close I will buy locally, but a lot of older models are only available on line so if you don't mind skiing on a 3 year old ski you can usually get one for 40 cents on the dollar.

post #46 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfr View Post

 

Ha! One thing - in order to be able to do that Rusty, you had to put your time in, a lot of time I guess, mastering basics ;-P Didn't you? As 4ster said above, once you get in the basics, you can adapt to almost anything (fore/aft, soft/stiff, rocker/camber, fat/skinny, heck even 2 different skis on left and right foot ) and still ski well demonstrating good technique. Not the other way around.

 

Good advise though about the sweet spot!

 

Cheers.

A lot of time? Well yeah. But I am generally not a "gear"  guy. And I don't get enough days on snow to come close to some of the "gods" we have here on Epic. But doing goofy experments like putting a 120 cm on one foot and a 175cm on the other has taught me a little abiout how to adapt. So I can at least appreciate when things are hard to adapt to vs easy to adapt to, Early rise was as easy to adapt to as adapting to "fat" skis.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › So I want to improve my skiing