or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Powder Skis In Colorado

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 

Im coming out to CO from NY for the 1st time and I was wondering if I should bring out my Armada El Rey 178s or if I should rent a pair of powder skis when I land.  I plan on doing mostly tree skiing in the A-Basin, Keystone, Loveland area, do you guys know any good shops that rent those fat skis that seem to surf over that Colorado fluffy goodness

post #2 of 15
Not that familiar with that ski, but it looks like it is 89 under foot and should be great for the conditions we currently have.

Mile
post #3 of 15

Yeah, that should be fine unless there is a huge dump (which does seem to happen with increasing frequency this season).  You can rent in many places ... Virgin Islands used to have really good rates.... But I haven't been in the rental market in a while.

post #4 of 15
Thread Starter 
I dont know if this will factor in at all but im a real small guy at 6'2 250lbs, lol. Would that effect my east coast skis out west like will I sink in the trees??
post #5 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kase-1 View Post

I dont know if this will factor in at all but im a real small guy at 6'2 250lbs, lol. Would that effect my east coast skis out west like will I sink in the trees??

Big sticks will really help. You have more weight to float, so a wider ski would be appropriate. I am 220 lbs, ski a 118 waist ski, and honestly could go fatter on deep days.

If the snow is soft, absolutely get on a pair of surfy 5 points, some of which I recommended in your other thread. They rule tree skiing in an unfair way.
post #6 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by anachronism View Post


Big sticks will really help. You have more weight to float, so a wider ski would be appropriate. I am 220 lbs, ski a 118 waist ski, and honestly could go fatter on deep days.

If the snow is soft, absolutely get on a pair of surfy 5 points, some of which I recommended in your other thread. They rule tree skiing in an unfair way.


Thanks a ton, you rock Anachronism.  The fattest skis ive ever rode were the Armada's that I use back east and I want to say they have an 89 or 87 waist, Ive always wanted to try a pair of 'big boy skis' but typically the conditions are not worth it, damned fickle east coast winters

post #7 of 15
Thread Starter 

BTW, what is the difference between a 5 points ski and a normal ski?? I just dont want to go into a ski shop and sound like im talking out of my ass and I couldnt find anything on google.

post #8 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kase-1 View Post
 

BTW, what is the difference between a 5 points ski and a normal ski?? I just dont want to go into a ski shop and sound like im talking out of my ass and I couldnt find anything on google.

 

Here is a recent post on that subject

 

Basically, a 5 point ski refers to a ski with heavy amounts of rocker in the tip and tails, coupled with tapered tip and tails. Instead of the widest points of the ski being right at the tip and right at the tail, the fattest points are moved inbounds to where the rocker profile starts. The ski only has sidecut inside the rockered portion.

 

Getting the fat part of the ski off of the tips and tails allows the ski to surf- the tip and tails can be pivoted at will without catching the ski. You can course correct at any instant you want- just steer the skis to where you want them to go and they follow. You can use pivot maneuvers that would absolutely punish you with a conventional ski. They still ski deep snow just like any fat ski, it is just that you have the additional tools in the toolbox.

 

In deep trees this allows anybody to be a more aggressive skier and ramp up their game, because 1) you no longer have to worry about missing the gap in the trees (just steer right in if your turn shape is too tight or loose) and 2) you can throw the skis sideways and dump speed in a heartbeat if you come around a tree to find a thick wall of a tree stand (or cliff, fallen tree, insert obstacle of choice) in front of you.

 

The other benefit over a rockered ski with a traditional tip and tail is on hard snow, the effective tip (the fat part of the ski) is still in contact with the snow and can be driven. Once you get used to these, you can rail them. In my eyes, these types of skis are the most versatile skis that have ever existed. A good ski in the category kills powder, trees, crud, moguls and performs decently well enough on hard snow to rail. A great all mountain western ski. Maybe not out east, but maybe one of these in a 90 waist would kill it out there too.

 

You can tell a ski is a 5 point if the fattest part of the ski is not at the tip. Rossignol was the first major manufacturer to build these with the S7. If you ask any shop for an S7 type ski, anybody that has any understanding of ski tech should understand. The Rossignol 7 series (Squad 7, Soul 7, etc.) are all skis like this. http://www.rossignol.com/US/US/alpine-men-skis-freeride.html

 

As I mentioned because you ski Armada, the TST and JJ are this, as well as most of Armada's fatter goods.

 

Other names- 5 dimension, "funshape," clownshoes.

 

Go long with these skis. For your size, if you are really the core MRG, Sugarbush, Jay skier tree skier you claim ;) , you want a 190cm+ 40-50% of the length of these skis is rockered, so they feel increibly manageable even in long lengths. I ski a 189 and again, could go longer.

post #9 of 15

Regarding the capabilities of these skis, I know I pointed you at my recent trip report.

 

Here is one of the videos from that day. I know this area well, and in the open upper section, I'm having fun with it, nice and fast and loose.

 

Right at :15, I throw a huge pivot smear in 3-5 feet of untouched snow to brake before going into the trees. You can see me just haul the skis over all the way sideways while my direction of travel is still straight down the fall line. On a conventional set of skis, I would have twisted right out of the bindings trying something like that. On these skis, I did it without even thinking about it, and only found it because I was sure I would find an example of something like that in my footage.

 

post #10 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by anachronism View Post
 

 

Here is a recent post on that subject

 

Basically, a 5 point ski refers to a ski with heavy amounts of rocker in the tip and tails, coupled with tapered tip and tails. Instead of the widest points of the ski being right at the tip and right at the tail, the fattest points are moved inbounds to where the rocker profile starts. The ski only has sidecut inside the rockered portion.

 

Getting the fat part of the ski off of the tips and tails allows the ski to surf- the tip and tails can be pivoted at will without catching the ski. You can course correct at any instant you want- just steer the skis to where you want them to go and they follow. You can use pivot maneuvers that would absolutely punish you with a conventional ski. They still ski deep snow just like any fat ski, it is just that you have the additional tools in the toolbox.

 

In deep trees this allows anybody to be a more aggressive skier and ramp up their game, because 1) you no longer have to worry about missing the gap in the trees (just steer right in if your turn shape is too tight or loose) and 2) you can throw the skis sideways and dump speed in a heartbeat if you come around a tree to find a thick wall of a tree stand (or cliff, fallen tree, insert obstacle of choice) in front of you.

 

The other benefit over a rockered ski with a traditional tip and tail is on hard snow, the effective tip (the fat part of the ski) is still in contact with the snow and can be driven. Once you get used to these, you can rail them. In my eyes, these types of skis are the most versatile skis that have ever existed. A good ski in the category kills powder, trees, crud, moguls and performs decently well enough on hard snow to rail. A great all mountain western ski. Maybe not out east, but maybe one of these in a 90 waist would kill it out there too.

 

You can tell a ski is a 5 point if the fattest part of the ski is not at the tip. Rossignol was the first major manufacturer to build these with the S7. If you ask any shop for an S7 type ski, anybody that has any understanding of ski tech should understand. The Rossignol 7 series (Squad 7, Soul 7, etc.) are all skis like this. http://www.rossignol.com/US/US/alpine-men-skis-freeride.html

 

As I mentioned because you ski Armada, the TST and JJ are this, as well as most of Armada's fatter goods.

 

Other names- 5 dimension, "funshape," clownshoes.

 

Go long with these skis. For your size, if you are really the core MRG, Sugarbush, Jay skier tree skier you claim ;) , you want a 190cm+ 40-50% of the length of these skis is rockered, so they feel increibly manageable even in long lengths. I ski a 189 and again, could go longer.


You sir are an outstanding contributor and I cannot thank you enough for your imput on numerous posts.

 

I am defitnely going to try one of these kind of skis, Ive always wanted to try the fat skis but the conditions are RARELY ideal for more than a day or 2 so I have always passed.  Since now Im going to try 'the big leagues' I figure I might as well try some big league skis.  I know I KEEP asking you questions but is there any specific ski shop in the Denver-Georgetown-Idaho Springs area that you would recomend or should I just check out a random 1 in that area and ask the right questions.  And lastly, do most ski shops out there carry powder skis, because next to none rent them out here, then again NYC isnt really associated with skiing, LOL

post #11 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by anachronism View Post
 

Regarding the capabilities of these skis, I know I pointed you at my recent trip report.

 

Here is one of the videos from that day. I know this area well, and in the open upper section, I'm having fun with it, nice and fast and loose.

 

Right at :15, I throw a huge pivot smear in 3-5 feet of untouched snow to brake before going into the trees. You can see me just haul the skis over all the way sideways while my direction of travel is still straight down the fall line. On a conventional set of skis, I would have twisted right out of the bindings trying something like that. On these skis, I did it without even thinking about it, and only found it because I was sure I would find an example of something like that in my footage.

 


Oh man, your videos make me cry tears of joy and happiness.  I cant wait to touch that fine Colorado champagne snow, it looks like you guys ski in fluffy suds of soap as opposed to the slushy, sticky, heavy east coast snow.... How am I going to sleep a wink between now and March 1st, LOL

post #12 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by anachronism View Post
 

 

 

 

Go long with these skis. For your size, if you are really the core MRG, Sugarbush, Jay skier tree skier you claim ;) , you want a 190cm+ 40-50% of the length of these skis is rockered, so they feel increibly manageable even in long lengths. I ski a 189 and again, could go longer.

MRG, Jay, Sugarbush are my bread and butter.  I learned to ski on a crappy NY metro mountain filled with ice, people that dont know what they are doing, and endless lines at the lift any day of the week.  In my early and now late LATE 20s I realized its worth the 6hr drive for real mountains, and its not expensive too.  Once we got bored with the park we became tree rats, now all we use the groomed trails for is getting from the lift the the trees. :)

 

 I feel like the jump from 189 (or 187, I forget what I ski, LOL) to 190 wont be too crazy. 

post #13 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by anachronism View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kase-1 View Post

I dont know if this will factor in at all but im a real small guy at 6'2 250lbs, lol. Would that effect my east coast skis out west like will I sink in the trees??

Big sticks will really help. You have more weight to float, so a wider ski would be appropriate. I am 220 lbs, ski a 118 waist ski, and honestly could go fatter on deep days.

If the snow is soft, absolutely get on a pair of surfy 5 points, some of which I recommended in your other thread. They rule tree skiing in an unfair way.

 

To add to the data points, I am 5'5 and 195, and I do not float at all on my Celebrity 100s (165, twin tip).  I start getting some float on my Sick Day 110s (172, 5 point, tip wider than tail).  I have unambiguous and total float on my Gypsies (125 underfoot, 170, rockered / "nearly symmetrical").

 

I am not a fast skier in powder, so a more aggressive skier, or someone on longer skis, might not need as much width.

post #14 of 15
Thread Starter 
Wound up getting quite rossignol sin7 188mm's from Breeze in Dumont cant wait to put em to use. We are going Abasin tomorrow, then Steamboat tues, wends, and thursday then driving back to the denver and probably going to winter park on friday before we leave
post #15 of 15

Pm me if you want a guide tomorrow...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion