Originally Posted by cc1
Wide skis don't work for east coast bumps......
1. Rarely are bumps powdery and spaced on the east coast so lift is not a necessity.......what usually happens is it snows somewhat dense snow, this gets skied off, packed out and the result is ice, space, bump......or drops off bumps formed by snowboarders who don't turn but go heelside and pile snow up that forms drops offs and flat spots. This type of skiing requires a quick edge grip at crucial moments, typically without any flow through a chopped up mogul run. Wide skis are of no advantage in this situation. Softer longitudinal flex with a torsionally stiff ski underfoot might work fine.
2. Wide skis lack quick edge changes and crucial grip required in the typical icy bump runs of the eastern skiing terrain. Lift is not the desire......edge grip is crucial along w/quick edge changes.
I think something that's longitudinally compliant, torsionally firm, softer tip to more firm tail (not too firm), and quick edge to edge is key. What ski that? You got me but one thing I know is that it's not wider than 80mm, and that's probably too wide for typical eastern bump skiing.
Well...I've watched some very solid skiers who are members here rip east coast bumps on skis in the 88-98 range. Including in trees, where conditions tend to be more unforgiving when you miss a turn than the typical groomer bumps. I think we're conflating two points. The first is that if you zipper groomer bumps, or slither through the troughs, then you want something like a Hart F17. Or a Stockli AR. Narrow, modest sidecut, softer tail, etc. But if you use other styles that aren't so dependent on edge to edge, like pivoting or rolling around the shoulders or taking some air here and there, then a good bump ski isn't so much about width and edge to edge speed as it is about flex and rear ends. Most people here engage in magical thinking about fairly stiff rockered skis with even stiffer tails; they're great in bumps. Well, no. They cannot be. Because you can't bend a ski that stiff at the velocities bumps demand. Yes, rocker helps, but it isn't a replacement for a flexier design and softer tail that flows with the terrain. Stiff rocker, in this sense, becomes limiting. It gives you one curve to work with. Suggestion: Try a wider, moderate flex wider ski with a twin tail and a decently high early rise tip, and report back. Something like a Soul Rider or Sin 7 or a Prophet 90 or Fischer Big Stix 98. Or the new Soul 7, for that matter. OTOH, these skis won't carve as effortlessly as a stiff rocker, or smash crud, or feel planted at speed. Not macho skis.
So OP, be advised that these skis are deficient, compared to a stiff ski. Less versatile for the east. Yep. Truth. They're more specialized. But is that a negative? Depends. What's ironic to me is that many choose gear that's optimized for powder, even if it's rare, because that's what gives them their peak experience. And they deal with the ice and such. Or they choose a ski for the most common regional phenomenon, hardpack, and find a silver lining for other conditions. Yet how often do people here argue for optimizing gear specifically for bumps and trees, even though bumps are typically found alongside the hardback, or on black and double blacks, everywhere you can ski, and are faaarrrr more common than boot top pow. Which after two hours is mostly in the trees anyway? Guess no one has peak experiences in bumps or trees...
Edited by beyond - 12/17/13 at 6:52pm