Sorry if this is a lame and repeated thread--but it is something I've been thinking about as I think about gearing up for next season...
I am a primarily a lift served skier--as I suspect is most of this board. (not too many authentic Bob Petersen's out there). Any way, like most of you, I wear a shell and layers; yes I know that is the common wisdom.
But is it really the optimal solution if you are not really hiking, not really sweating and not skiing in wet weather? For me and I suspect most of us, the most truly adverse conditions we face occur when we are sitting on the chair in howling wind and driving snow--and I'm not sure that calls for a 3L Gortex pro super sealed shell. Its likely better to have maximum warmth and a really great hood…as in an insulated jacket with reasonably good waterproof attributes.Remember these new neo-shell shells are marvels of technology--but what they are really good at is being light weight, breathable and waterproof. None of which you need on a lift when it is howling and snowing. By the way, I know for a fact that the manufacturers agree with that last statement.
Oh --but what about spring days you ask when you don't need that insulted jacket? C'mon..spring days take care of themselves..anything works. I think for most of the real l issue is 1.) cold 2.) wind and 3.) some moisture
So my question is--aren't jackets really better for most of us? Isn't it possible that all of us lift served skiers wearing the latest neo- plasma shells are just trying to rock the back country vibe and doing our selves a disservice in the process.
Thoughts on this world beating question…:-) David