or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Minnesota Skis: 2 Different Shops tried to put me on Brahmas...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Minnesota Skis: 2 Different Shops tried to put me on Brahmas... - Page 2

post #31 of 37
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by axebiker View Post

And...who the heck pays $700 for skis these days??? Sheesh. Shop better/smarter. Cripes...tell me what you want, and I'll find you some deals. rolleyes.gif

 

Totally man, is it wise to buy them mounted and adjusted off the net?

post #32 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booron View Post

 

Totally man, is it wise to buy them mounted and adjusted off the net?

I bought my Atomic Rituals on eBay.  They were demo skis from last season and were mounted with demo bindings.  The bindings were not adjusted for anything.  I adjusted them for my boots and the proper DIN for me.  Some places might mount regular bindings if they know your BSL, and if they have a boot with the same BSL they could even set the forward pressure, and they can easily adjust the DIN to whatever you want.  If I was buying skis on the internet that weren't already mounted with demo bindings, I'm not sure I would want bindings mounted, unless they were integrated bindings.

post #33 of 37

Minnesota at Afton?

A question about Afton prompted me to look into skiers/hr/acre at various ski areas. Based on lift capacity and acreage.

You ever go to Mt. Kato? Is that amazingly crowded or are the stats not showing what it's like?

Based on raw dumb numbers, it should be 4x crowded as Afton.

 

part of it:

Originally Posted by Tog View Post
 

Minnesota:

Afton Alps:

350ft vert, 300 acres, 20,000/hour lift capacity= 67/acre/hour

Buck Hill:

310ft vert, 45 acres, 6,000/hr = 133/acre/hr

Mt. Kato

240ft vert, 55acres, 14,650/hr = 266/acre/hr

 

Why anyone would want a 187 at a 350 vert area is beyond me. I ski 165 slalom and a 176 84mm at a 2200 vert area. That 8.0 ti blizzard is a good ski. I could see that in a 174 or 180 for the OP. Even the 180 is way long though for the vert.

Why not buy a used slalom ski or that type?

post #34 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booron View Post

Totally man, is it wise to buy them mounted and adjusted off the net?

Lotsa variables, so not really a yes/no question. I mount my own anyway. Have been since 1995.
post #35 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post


Why anyone would want a 187 at a 350 vert area is beyond me. I ski 165 slalom and a 176 84mm at a 2200 vert area. That 8.0 ti blizzard is a good ski. I could see that in a 174 or 180 for the OP. Even the 180 is way long though for the vert.
Why not buy a used slalom ski or that type?
[/quote]

Short slalom skis are boring to some people. What you ski doesn't make a bit of difference to what others ski. Ski length should be suited to the SKIER, not the ski area.
post #36 of 37

Fair enough. If a 187 is good for 350ft vert at what point is it not? 150?

post #37 of 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post
 

Fair enough. If a 187 is good for 350ft vert at what point is it not? 150?


Length and width don't really vary with the vertical for me.  What matters is turn radius.  13 m radius for 250 m or less hill.  19 m radius or more (depending on taste) for a 450 m or higher hill.

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 › Minnesota Skis: 2 Different Shops tried to put me on Brahmas...