or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Carving vs All-Mountain
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Carving vs All-Mountain

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 

Greets..first timer..go easy!  Long story short, I've really only skied on one ski for most of my ski life.  Dynastar Speed 63, 63mm underfoot.  I skied when I was younger, stopped for a good number of years, then started up again on these skis.  I didn't think I was a very good skier but it turns out I was a 6 or 7, probably 7 or 8 now.  I like these Dynastars because they seem to be a very stiff, fun carving ski.  I can put a lot of pressure on them and they carve well and release a lot of energy back when completing the turn.  I've skied in Austria, Utah, BC, Alberta, Colorado, Northeast, everywhere on these skis.  I have to admit, I have had some problems in 2' powder in Colorado with them..and in some 2" thick crust powder in Utah they seemed to be a little difficult to get turned.  But I do like the zip they have.

 

So my question is, what am I missing with an all-mountain ski?  I am considering buying a new ski but what am I getting?  Will I notice much difference?  Do good all-mountain skis have good carving ability as well?  Is the powder float THAT much better to warrant it?  I always say I'll just rent some powder skis if I needed them but that hasn't happened and I rarely find powder. I've searched and read some threads on here and they're all over the map.  I just don't have any experience on any other ski to make sense of some of the chatter.  Is it a case of 90% skier, 10% ski?  Or vice versa?

 

Thanks in advance!

post #2 of 17

If you can get something like these, you won't be sorry.  They will carve a turn as well, no problem.  You may have to get used to them for a week or so, but it will be a good choice.  These have a good sintered base unlike Dynastar's in the same arena.   The new technology in shape, rocker, and early rise etc. can change your "life"  Go for it!

Here is the link to the skis:   http://www.rossignol.com/US/US/sin-7_RACQJ01_product_alpine-men-skis-freeride.html

 

Good luck!

 

Edit :

 

 

 

Another edit:  This line may be more all around.

 

 

 

Here is the Experience in action.  Piste and powder.

 


Edited by Jacques - 10/29/13 at 3:14pm
post #3 of 17

Welcome to Epic!

 

There is definitely a difference between skis and the new technology has improved the carving ability of the wider all-mountain skis, but it is still mostly about the skier.  

 

If you really enjoy carving, then there is nothing wrong with owning a skinny/shaped carving ski as your everyday ski but you may find you are able to perform better in powder/mixed soft snow conditions with a 2nd ski that is 90-100+.  Put another way, there may be some convergence in the technologies, but a 100+ under foot skis is not going carve SL turns the way an SL race ski will and an SL race ski will not perform the same as a 100+ ski in powder/crud.  If you are only going to own 1 ski, you have to figure out what is more important to you.

post #4 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree30 View Post
 

Welcome to Epic!

 

There is definitely a difference between skis and the new technology has improved the carving ability of the wider all-mountain skis, but it is still mostly about the skier.  

 

If you really enjoy carving, then there is nothing wrong with owning a skinny/shaped carving ski as your everyday ski but you may find you are able to perform better in powder/mixed soft snow conditions with a 2nd ski that is 90-100+.  Put another way, there may be some convergence in the technologies, but a 100+ under foot skis is not going carve SL turns the way an SL race ski will and an SL race ski will not perform the same as a 100+ ski in powder/crud.  If you are only going to own 1 ski, you have to figure out what is more important to you.


I don't know.  Seem skis like the Experience line are pretty good all the way around. The folks I have talked to with them seem to love them.  Plus he would still have his others anyway.  I have a bunch of skis. from 62 waist to 115 waist.  Pure carve piste. to powder reverse super twin rockers.  If he wants to try something new, don't you think that something along the line of the Experience line from any maker would be a good place to start?

post #5 of 17
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the welcome!  :-)  I chatted briefly with a Rossi sales guy and he did say the Experience 88 was a good all-rounder and that you could pound on it on hard stuff and it wouldn't give up.  I may not keep my old skis and I probably wouldn't fly with 2 pairs anyway.  Being in the East, if I drive I'm pretty much on hard-pack anyway so there'd be no point in bringing 2 pairs I suppose.  Although that's an option.  Are all-mountains more stable or comfortable on crud and chopped up powder?  I have to pull the tips up in deep powder with the 63's to be able to enjoy them.  Do people wish they had 63's on hard-pack if they only have all-mountains?

 

Thanks for the input, it's greatly appreciated.

post #6 of 17
The short answer to the "what are you missing question" is you are missing out on the greatly improved flexibility ( ability to perform in variable terrain) a modern ski affords. While there is no true one ski does it all answer, many skis cover a ton of territory, literally and figuratively. Today's good all mountain skis can bust crud, float and carve. Clearly a ski placed right in the middle will lack something at each end of the on piste / off piste spectrum. Some would suggest incorporating the type of terrain you will ski most into any decision. Most would suggest investing in a few demos to appreciate both the capabilities of new skis and their limitations. As a baseline, consider Skis between the low 80's and low 90's underfoot which will allow you to rip trenches as carving is important and still offer 'some' float on that rare powder you mentioned.

.
post #7 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott43 View Post
 

Thanks for the welcome!  :-)  I chatted briefly with a Rossi sales guy and he did say the Experience 88 was a good all-rounder and that you could pound on it on hard stuff and it wouldn't give up.  I may not keep my old skis and I probably wouldn't fly with 2 pairs anyway.  Being in the East, if I drive I'm pretty much on hard-pack anyway so there'd be no point in bringing 2 pairs I suppose.  Although that's an option.  Are all-mountains more stable or comfortable on crud and chopped up powder?  I have to pull the tips up in deep powder with the 63's to be able to enjoy them.  Do people wish they had 63's on hard-pack if they only have all-mountains?

 

Thanks for the input, it's greatly appreciated.


I hear you.  I skied much powder on SL skis. (very narrow waist, short).  It can be done.  Thing is as I think you are saying is that one needs to be low and in the back seat.  That's where the newer skis such as my Armada JJ's change everything.  To ski those in powder one needs to stay more upright and "centered" fore aft.  So what happens is you don't get tired out from working the legs so hard.  Now you can enjoy powder as well all day long.  It will take some time to get used to the way to ride them, but once you get it you will be happy.  If I was going to have one only ski to travel I would go for one of the Experience skis.  I have nothing to do with sales for anyone.  I'm just a ski bum who talks to and knows a lot of skiers.  I must have asked at least 25 folks how they liked theirs last season.  Everyone said they loved them.  These were folks who ski a lot and for many years.  Again other makers are doing similar things.  Main thing is it is time for you to move on.  I was like you for years.  Then I moved on, learned the new skis and never looked back.  You are going to fall in love with skiing all over again!   Go for it!

post #8 of 17
Thread Starter 

Thanks all for the input.  I've done some digging for deals and I have good prices on Atomic Blackeye Ti's, Head Rev 85 Pro's, Dynastar Outland 87's and 80's (not great prices for these two..), Rossignol Experience 83's, annnddd.....Line Prophet 90's.  Any of these standout?  Or am I overthinking this and just need to get off my 13 year old skis???  Keeping in mind I'm predominantly on hard-pack and can carve like a champ.  I read a few things about the Prophet 90's and most said they were quite a surprise.

 

Cheers!

post #9 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott43 View Post
 

Thanks all for the input.  I've done some digging for deals and I have good prices on Atomic Blackeye Ti's, Head Rev 85 Pro's, Dynastar Outland 87's and 80's (not great prices for these two..), Rossignol Experience 83's, annnddd.....Line Prophet 90's.  Any of these standout?  Or am I overthinking this and just need to get off my 13 year old skis???  Keeping in mind I'm predominantly on hard-pack and can carve like a champ.  I read a few things about the Prophet 90's and most said they were quite a surprise.

 

Cheers!

Head Rev 85 Pro's,  or  Atomic Blackeye Ti's,  That's where I would lean.  Then again the Rossignol Experience 83's good too.  Stay away from the Dynastars as they have an extruded base.

post #10 of 17

Other than full on racing skis and full rocker super fat powder skis everything else is an all mountain ski of some sort and every all mountain ski is a compromise. No all mountain ski will carve as well on boilerplate as a race ski. No all mountain ski will be as easy to ski in deep powder as a powder ski.  Of course, within the huge all mountain category there is a spectrum from skis that carve almost as well as race skis to skis that handle powder nearly as well as pure powder skis. Most people will find the compromises worth it to have a more versatile ski but different people will find the best compromise at different places along the spectrum. By going to a wider, softer ski with some degree of rocker at least in the tip,  you will find powder and other soft snow and especially crud easier to ski. How wide, how soft, how rockered would be best figuring out by demoing. 

post #11 of 17

I've been skiing since the mid-1950s and worked in ski shops when I was younger.  I've seen the evolution from skinny, stiff, breakable wooden skis to the marvels we enjoy today.  I skied several hundred days on Mt. Bachelor in the 1990s on 205-213 skis with 60mm waists and enjoyed it.  After all, that was what we had in the years before the shaped/wider revolution.

 

After no new skis since 2004, I really dug into it last season with research and demo days.  I ended up with the Experience 98, and I don't remember ever being so sad to come to season's end.  I wanna go again, today.

 

Having raced a fair amount over the years, I'm also pretty much oriented to hard carves for most of my skiing and wasn't sure how the wider boards would do that.  Never mind.  I was on Rossi RPM 17s, a fine frontside carver that's essentially a soft GS ski (184cm, 70mm underfoot).  Every new ski I tried was fully competent carving on the groomers, some spectacularly so.  I tried three Line Prophets, Blizzard Bonafide, the E98, Volkl RTM 84, and I had no complaints about any of them.  Different personalities, but all good.  I didn't care for the tip flap on the Bonafide (which otherwise is really solid and silky on the snow), and found myself really skiing fast on the Prophet 98.  I think my first ride on the E98 was hampered by mediocre tuning, as they felt a little sluggish..

 

When my local shop was closing out E98s and RTMs at half price, I went back to demo just those two at Squaw Valley's Gold Coast Demo Center (highly recommended; in and out in a flash right on the upper mountain).  The RTM is indeed a rabid carver, but I just didn't find a sweet spot off the groomed.  The E98 is a rocket ship on the pack and just blows through the crud and spring powder I was able to find late in the season.  That was what sold me on the E98: PLENTY of carving strength coupled with all-snow versatility.  At 180cm, they're a little bulky in deep moguls and tight spaces; the ski wants some speed to really come alive.

 

There is an adjustment going from waists in the 60s and 70s to the 100mm range, with the longer throw edge-to-edge, but it's easy for any competent skier, and the newer boots are also more oriented to lateral leverage than older designs, so the new gear works together.  The results on the snow will blow your mind.

 

Demo, demo, demo.

post #12 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott43 View Post
 

Thanks all for the input.  I've done some digging for deals and I have good prices on Atomic Blackeye Ti's, Head Rev 85 Pro's, Dynastar Outland 87's and 80's (not great prices for these two..), Rossignol Experience 83's, annnddd.....Line Prophet 90's.  Any of these standout?  Or am I overthinking this and just need to get off my 13 year old skis???  Keeping in mind I'm predominantly on hard-pack and can carve like a champ.  I read a few things about the Prophet 90's and most said they were quite a surprise.

 

Cheers!

Try the Nordica Steadfast and Elan Amphibio 88xti.  Steadfast has been my daily driver since the 2011-2 season.  I've skied the Elan and really liked it but couldn't demo it in anything deeper than about 3".  I demoed the Prophet 90 before buying the Steadfast.  I didn't find it nearly as responsive as the Steadfast, but that could have been a bad tune or just the way I ski.

post #13 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcyclist View Post
 

Try the Nordica Steadfast and Elan Amphibio 88xti.  Steadfast has been my daily driver since the 2011-2 season.  I've skied the Elan and really liked it but couldn't demo it in anything deeper than about 3".  I demoed the Prophet 90 before buying the Steadfast.  I didn't find it nearly as responsive as the Steadfast, but that could have been a bad tune or just the way I ski.

I agree for the steadfast and the 88 xti! I prefer the steadfast in trees and bumps but boy do that 88 xti can carve for an all mountain!

post #14 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott43 View Post
 

Thanks all for the input.  I've done some digging for deals and I have good prices on Atomic Blackeye Ti's, Head Rev 85 Pro's, Dynastar Outland 87's and 80's (not great prices for these two..), Rossignol Experience 83's, annnddd.....Line Prophet 90's.  Any of these standout?  Or am I overthinking this and just need to get off my 13 year old skis???  Keeping in mind I'm predominantly on hard-pack and can carve like a champ.  I read a few things about the Prophet 90's and most said they were quite a surprise.

 

Cheers!

I demoed the Prophets last year, and both the 90 and the 98 are quality rides.  I found myself going significantly faster with great confidence on the 98s at Squaw Valley on what are probably relatively soft conditions for an easterner (tilled old snow with hard and soft spots–we didn't have any powder to speak of last season).  I also loved the Blizzard Bonafide (everything but the tip flap) and the Experience 98.  I ended up buying the E98 because I got a great deal at my local shop and have always liked Rossi's skis going back to the original Strato in 1967.  With a half-dozen days last spring, I flat fell in love with this ski.  It wants some speed (as Sierra Jim correctly notes in his excellent review of 98-ish skis on this site) before it comes alive, but I have yet to find an upper limit or conditions it won't flourish in, so I imagine the E88, often touted as an easterner's version of the 98, might be a good choice for you.

 

One thing you can have no doubts about: the new skis will absolutely blow your mind if you've only skied on some old 65s.  Absolutely.  Go try a few at a good demo shop after researching online and in the magazines.  There is simply no comparison to equipment even ten years old.

post #15 of 17
Thread Starter 

Thanks everyone for the replies.  After all this info and some careful consideration, I found a pair of Dynastar Outland 80 XT's for $330 with bindings.  So that was that!  :-)  Not exactly crazy wide but quite a bit wider and different than my Speed 63's.  I look forward to giving them a try. 

post #16 of 17

Hi there,

 

I would recommend buying a ski for what you normally ski and the type of skiing you enjoy.  For example: if you really enjoy big G forces and ripping up groomers and hard snow, an "all-mountain" ski just won't be the same. Sure, you can carve a turn, but are giving up a lot of power.  Nothing like a real race carver or full-on race ski for really ripping turns.  If you enjoy skiing the entire mountain, then get a wider, softer ski, and gain some control and ease on firm snow, lose some on hard snow.  

 

Just watching the B10 championship game now, I saw a bunch of ads for the Nissan Rogue. They were emphasizing how "sporty" it was (at least that is how the wordless commercial played).  Keep in mind this is a compact SUV.  I recently picked up a low-mileage BMW 135i M-sport.  Well, the 135i is the race carver or sub 80mm ski in the world: incredibly fun to drive, but fairly practical (has 4 seats, my bike fits in the trunk, and it accepts a roof rack). The Rogue, being a compact SUV, is going to have more space, seating for 5.  Is it going to be even close to a 135i M-sport in terms of carving canyon roads?  No way, not even in the same solar system. But, if you need the extra space and ground clearance, then a 135i isn't going to be the car for you.  If the 135i's size is right, there is no car enthusiast I know of who buys a Rogue over it.  

 

There are some pretty good carvers up to 90mm. Above that, they become merely decent, especially if you compare them to a modern race carver or frontside focused ski.  I think you can get most of what you are looking for in that 80-90mm range, provided you get the right ski.  Then again, try and demo so you know for sure.  You might jump on a Dynastar Speed Course Ti, and a Dynastar Outland 87, and see the difference straight away, and whether you lean one way or the other.  Hard to say without trying a few skis. Staying with Dynastar, I bet the old Outland 80 Pro would have been a great choice. Too bad it is no longer available.

post #17 of 17

135 is an AWESOME car.  Best BMW for sale.

 

The Rogue is a piece or crap.  About as exciting as a Honda Civic.

 

Not really related I know, but maybe a better all-mountain ski would be a Cayenne?

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 › Carving vs All-Mountain