or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

wide turny skis?

post #1 of 46
Thread Starter 

Looking for stiff 170-176 (or thereabout) slalom radius (around 14m) skis > 90 underfoot. Does such a beast exist?

post #2 of 46
Ullr Chariots/Ski Logik.
Edited by slider - 2/5/15 at 3:02pm
post #3 of 46

Digression alert!

But a question: why are you focusing on such a short turn radius?  I ask because I myself used to be hung up on TR.  But then I got a pair of Head Rock n Roll's.  95 underfoot with a stated TR of 19m.  What I found was what good skiers have always known: that if you pressure the ski enough, you can bend it to shorten up the turn radius.  


I can carve/scarve pretty tight short radius turns down the side of skied-off trails in these and they haven't held me back any (in the right snow conditions).  The only place TR seems to really matter is if I get into park-n-ride mode.

post #4 of 46
Originally Posted by bwana View Post

Looking for stiff 170-176 (or thereabout) slalom radius (around 14m) skis > 90 underfoot. Does such a beast exist?



To answer your question, the the iSupershape Magnum or Rally.

post #5 of 46
Thread Starter 

the rally is 76 underfoot.but to give you a better idea of my problem, it is this:

i was born with one leg longer(shorter?) than the other. My pelvis is canted up and rotated back on the side of the longer leg. This has resulted in a condition called kyphoscoliosis. I have lived with it my entire life and now at age 55, it starts to hurt with certain postures/motions. Nothing can be done. Although I ski, mountain bike, walk and work - I have my limits. In skiing, I am more limited to being more in the back seat. This allows my quads to do the work and isolates my pelvis and lower back from the stresses of carved turns and bumps. If I lean forward and really put my weight over the tips, I can ski a groomer this way but properly carved turns in 3D snow send an electric shock into my back.As a result, my turn initiation is poor and most of my turn is at the end. What you might see if someone is not forward on the skis. I never knew I was an 'adaptive' skier until recently.


As a result of not being able to be forward ( I can push my shin into the boot tongue, but bending the boot plastic puts me into my electric shock zone), I cannot manage larger, wider skis like the fx94. That stiffer ski has a 20 m radius, Because I cannot adequately engage the tips early, I cannot get the ski to do all the work it should. And wider skis have a large footprint that requires more force to bend and shape in a turn. Your quads end up doing more work if you are in the back seat. Reducing the force on the quads can be achieved by shortening the ski but a wide base is still needed to do crud and powder. So that's why I asked about wide turny skis I want to use on my trip out west.


I loved the iRally from head - even in a 163 length, it was stable at speed! but the irally gets bogged down in powder even though it has a wide shovel. It certainly doesn't surf like the fx 94 in the fresh (we had two storms here in one week! I actually skied Pipedream at Killington in one foot of fresh powder- an experience I'll never forget!) Pure fresh powder skiing on the fx94 was a dream but once the crud appeared later in the day, it became more work. The mx 83 is a better crud avoider/buster for me. I enjoy proper carving but as I age, it's getting harder to do. Rather ironic that my skeletal decrepitude is forcing more thigh muscle development.


So I am looking for a ski to use out west next month. I mostly ski the northeast and the latigo I demoed this year was a nice surprise - playful and with personality. But useless in the crud- tips get deflected and the narrow base (~76) doesn't surf. thanks for your interest and understanding. I think these lumbar deformities exist in a lot more people than they realize. For years, I thought I just had a stiff back. When I looked at my XRAY, even I could see the asymmetry. The pressures on those narrow little intervertebral disks are incredible. And when you realize that the fulcrum patch is 1 cm, it's like trying to put all your bodyweight on 1 finger. Add the stresses of a carved turn, and that little gummy washer deforms beyond its bounds.

post #6 of 46
A short turn radius in a wide ski has kind of gone out of fashion because they don't work well all all for powder skiing.
A ski with tip and tail rocker might work for the problems you describe, since you can slide them around a little bit easier.
You can find some 15-18m powder skis, but >14m probably is going to be hard to find.
post #7 of 46
Originally Posted by markojp View Post

To answer your question, the the iSupershape Magnum or Rally.

Neither of those is >90 underfoot
post #8 of 46

Not aware of any wider ski with that tight a radius, but the Head Rev 105 comes in at 16.0 in the 181 length, so I'm guessing the next length down come in at ~ 15.something, comparable to the Ullr's chariot.

post #9 of 46
Originally Posted by bwana View Post

Looking for stiff 170-176 (or thereabout) slalom radius (around 14m) skis > 90 underfoot. Does such a beast exist?

Searched around and found these: http://www.head.com/ski/products/skis/big-mountain/venturi-95/7976/?region=us


Head Venturi 95. 16.0m radius in 181, 14.1m radius in 171.


Dunno if they are stiff though.


Also these are wide (110mm) but with a short radius 15m in 173cm http://www.icelanticskis.com/14-15-icelantic/14-15-hardgoods/14-15-retail-skis/icelantic/14-15-shaman-sid-282

post #10 of 46

Reverse Side Cut

For normal skis side cut is used to make it easier to turn. You simply roll the ski on edge, add some pressure to the ski and it carves around. In recent years ski manufacturers have been adding significant amounts of side cut to their skis greatly facilitating the ski experience for everyone. This is true. ON HARD SNOW!

In powder or soft snow side cut creates two distinct negative effects:


1.       “The Pool Cover”- Your weight is directly on top of the narrowest part of the ski. This type of weight distribution immediately puts you in a sinking into the snow situation similar to what happens to the pool cover when you try to run across it. This causes your tips and tails to float but the center of your skis where all your weight is sinks, bogs down and then you must plow through the snow. You will be forced to carve every turn and expend a lot of energy bouncing in and out of the snow.

Sinking/carving = Bad. Floating/sliding = Good.

2.       “The Unstable Hooker”- Skis become very unstable and much more difficult to control. In sun crust or wind affect you may have noticed the occasional Unstable Hooker. This is when you start a turn and your downhill ski hooks fast and hard up and across your uphill ski. You cross your tips, step on your downhill ski with your uphill and then stuff your face into mountain. Or at high speeds you may have noticed your skis trying to swim around a bit making it hard to control as you try to keep your tips up and out of the snow. The solution to this in the past has always been to maintain a wider stance in powder and to slow it down a bit.


This was written by Shane McConky when he released the Spatula.

post #11 of 46
Originally Posted by Gladeskier231 View Post

Neither of those is >90 underfoot

Doooh! My mistake. redface.gif
post #12 of 46
Venturi isnt stiff.
post #13 of 46
Line Prophets
post #14 of 46
Prophets are 18mish depending on length. Not the best choice if the OP feels pain when carving. The sick days are softer and more pivot/skid friendly.
post #15 of 46
Originally Posted by clink83 View Post

A short turn radius in a wide ski has kind of gone out of fashion because they don't work well all all for powder skiing.


Yea, they totally suck...



post #16 of 46
@ bwana have you tried increasing the height of the 1 ski with a plate.
post #17 of 46
Yeah my chariots suck too.
post #18 of 46
post #19 of 46
Originally Posted by jc-ski View Post

Yea, they totally suck...

Seriously, you need to look at the sidecut of the prophet series, they aren't >14m like the OP asked. If the OP has a hard time carving turns the prophet series is a bad choice because they really shine being locked on edge. There are better skis to slide/pivot on.
post #20 of 46

A Rossi Sin (98) or Soul 7 (104) in a 172 would give you a 16m radius side cut and ski very short i.e easy anyway, soft though?

post #21 of 46
Snala I was going to suggest the s7 too. I think that's a great choice too. Maby the sir Francis bacon or nomad rkr too.
post #22 of 46
Thread Starter 
Thank you everyone for your thoughtful suggestions. The problem with equalizing leg length by putting a lift in the shorter leg is that it does not correct the mechanics. I tried it once and even walking was painful with every step impact. Cycling and elliptical however is no problem. Trying to undo 55 years of deformity and skeletal compensation only adds stresses. However, skiing and walking are different so maybe I'll try it. Other things I have not tried are elevating both heels (changing ramp angle?),or moving bindings forward. Time for new boots soon so maybe I'll find a boot fitter in Breckinridge. The skilogics and the icelantics look interesting but I have to find a place to demo them. Nobody on the east coast carries them(why would they??)
post #23 of 46
Originally Posted by clink83 View Post

A short turn radius in a wide ski has kind of gone out of fashion because they don't work well all all for powder skiing.:bs:
post #24 of 46
Originally Posted by slider View Post

Yeah my chariots suck too.

:ROTFThumbs Up

post #25 of 46

That was my first thought.


Also, RAMP has a new ski, the Shebang, with a 7m radius. Seriously. Don't know if it's stiff, and you probably can't find it by next month,  but maybe that's the ticket.


@Philpug skied it, but I didn't.

post #26 of 46
Does it make sense to be looking at a more center mounted ski that is designed to be skied from centered stance (and accommodating of skiing off the tails by design from a freeride perspective) than focusing on radius? I am thinking about something like the Sollie Rocker2 or Nordica Soul Rider.

Skiing something in the -3cm from center range leaves a lot more tail to work with, and the ski really isn't going to respond to a bunch of tip pressure anyway, and these skis are turny due to reduced camber rather than radius.
post #27 of 46
Thread Starter 
@Naybreak, please elaborate. Do you mean centering the binding 3 cm forward? (-3cm?)
post #28 of 46
Atomicman care to show us some >14m powder skis in widths in the 90-120mm range in adult sizes then? If you can find them, I'm willing to bet they have a significant amount of rocker outside of that sidecut. If you look at a lot of the big mountain skis you'll see they have 30+m sidecuts a lot of the time.

Tight radiuses are great on a carver, but suck in powder. Let's face it, sidecut is worthless in 3d snow. But hey, what does Shane mcconky know, he hasn't changed the face of skiing more than any one man in the last 20 years or anything:)

The ullers chariot has a 15m sidecut BTW, which isn't a slalom radius. If you're going to make claims you should at least know the specs of your ski!
Edited by clink83 - 2/5/15 at 2:36pm
post #29 of 46

It's Ullrs Chariot. Have you skied this model? I have for 2 years in the PNW. It's damn quick for it's width and ski wet deep snow just fine. At 200# and 40 yrs of skiing I have some experience but by no means pretend to be an expert.

post #30 of 46
They look like a fun ski, but I don't think any local shops carry them.

A slalom radius is 10-13m. If you put that much shape on a soft snow ski it would be a hot mess. I thought the op said less than 14m because of the slalom part which is my fault.

My 165 slalom ski is 114.5/64/101.5..if you morphed that to a 94 underfoot it would be 145.5/94/131.5. You can see quickly that if you stretched the ski into a 175-185cm ski the dimensions would get unskiable fast. The shovel and tail would be huge!
Edited by clink83 - 2/5/15 at 4:12pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion