or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

R.O.I. on your skis? - Page 2

post #31 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesiredUsername View Post

Where I ski the snow tends to stick to topsheets. That is good because no one can see what skis I am using and judge me harshly, further damaging my fragile ego.


I don't really care that much what folks think of what I ski, how I ski, or what kind of a skier I am; I ski for me, not for them.

post #32 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesiredUsername View Post

Where I ski the snow tends to stick to topsheets. That is good because no one can see what skis I am using and judge me harshly, further damaging my fragile ego.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
 


I don't really care that much what folks think of what I ski, how I ski, or what kind of a skier I am; I ski for me, not for them.

 

I ma fairly certain @DesiredUsername is just being sarcastic.  Well done....  

post #33 of 42
ROI for me is having a ski that responds predictably to my inputs, within what it is designed to do. I have slightly overlapping all mountain skis, one 85 and the other 105, that each cover a wide range of conditions.

The 85 is quicker edge to edge and in the bumps. The 105 more surfy and better in deeper snow. However I expect them both to "feel" balanced, grip when I put them on edge in PNW snow, release easily when I need.

Pivot slips are a good way to tell if these traits are present for me. Evaluating any new ski I also want the ski to be damp enough to not rattle my bones when going through crud. I more looking for that full body massage.

The trickiest part is often bumps, since there is a rhythm that requires quick edge engagement and release, without being jarring or alternately too loose and sloppy. I want to feel like I'm dancing.

Lastly, there is this quality that Dawgcatching sometimes refers to, a feeling of confidence, whether from just trusting the skis or some elusive feel to the skis that meshes well with bio mechanical structure of the individual (my description); body type, height, weight, range of motion; etc.

I hate to say it but it's almost like, "I may not know much about what I like but I know it when I ski it."
post #34 of 42

It is also the duty of skiers everywhere to cover their top sheets with snow and bring that snow back up to the top of the hill when they ride the lift ;)

post #35 of 42

My quiver of skis is all over the spectrum:

 

Rossi E98 180cm- This ski is pretty demanding, but super rewarding at high speed. It only likes carved turns, and I have to stay on it all the time.

 

Rossi Soul 7 188cm- This ski is not demanding at all. Super easy to turn, really fun in anything soft. However, when conditions get hard or choppy it does not cope well. It also isn't very stable at higher speeds (above 40 MPH).

 

Atomic Automatic 117 186 cm- This ski is a great balance in that it doesn't demand a lot to be fun, but I can still push it pretty hard.

 

Line Supernatural 108 186 cm- Haven't skied on this one yet, but based on all the reviews it is a "forgiving charger". Definitely looking to make these my daily driver so I hope that's true.

 

Overall I think I like skis that require a bit more effort from me, but in turn have higher top ends and capabilities. While it's nice to have my Soul 7's for soft days, most of the time I am skiing resort conditions. This means that I have to deal with chop and irregular snow and I find that beefier skis handle these conditions better

post #36 of 42

I think the performance is definitely crucial here, everything besides should not matter much to real skiers :)

post #37 of 42
I like the feel like your feet thing. I can think of one pair of skis I've demoed in the past couple of years that fit this exactly. Only reason I don't own them is a fear that if a ski feels that natural there must be a flaw somewhere and I suspect it's somewhere in the oomph department.
post #38 of 42

^^^ Like the old RX8s, they felt like they were not even there, but they worked.

post #39 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Lee View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by oldschoolskier View Post

Regardless of what I slope ski, I expect a ski to perform if and when I want it to, the way I want it to at the top end.

So I adapt to the ski regardless of the conditions.  That said, if a ski lets me down when I push it it's not the ski for me. So for me I've always tended towards race skis, as they have more than enough top end performance for anything I can do.

Skill wise and effort wise, if you can ski it the same slow as you ski it fast you are doing something right so it should make no difference.

For me, there's more to it than just skiing slow or fast. There are, for example, tight trees, chutes, steeps where you really don't want to slip or fall, sastrugi, slop, corn, wind buff, etc. etc. and I want to be able to open it up when everything is nice. But like I said earlier, graphics aren't that important.

Agreed I just expressed it very simple terms. As long as a ski performs as I require it is the ski for me. Unfortunately, my terrain access limits my desires, some day again smile.gif
post #40 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesiredUsername View Post

Lastly, there is this quality that Dawgcatching sometimes refers to, a feeling of confidence, whether from just trusting the skis or some elusive feel to the skis that meshes well with bio mechanical structure of the individual (my description); body type, height, weight, range of motion; etc.

I hate to say it but it's almost like, "I may not know much about what I like but I know it when I ski it."

Both of these statements pretty much sum it up for me. Being a relatively lightweight skier(145-150 pounds) I'm generally not big enough to force a ski to do something it doesn't want to do, so I have to rely on technique. If I have a ski that doesn't require fairly precise inputs, I tend to get lazy about technique. So a ski like the Nordica FA 84EDT is excellent for me because it requires 100% of my attention or it will kick my butt. The Nordica Steadfast is not as demanding but it still requires a good deal of attention to get the most out of it. I have seen many people say the Atomic Ritual is for advanced skiers, but I don't consider it demanding at all. I'm adding a three skis(Nordica Soul Rider, Head Strong Instinct Ti and ON3P Billy Goats) to my collection this year that I have skied and really liked but when I demoed them, none seemed to demand the attention that either the Steadfast or FA require but they were all fun and most importantly they all did what I wanted them to do when I wanted them to do it. The Ritual will be up for sale since the Soul Rider is close to the same width. The FA and Head Instinct are only 1mm apart but they are very different skis. The Head is much lighter and a ski that I can ski in a wider variety of conditions than the FA. And I'll ski the Steadfast until it falls apart. Every one of the skis I will be skiing this season inspire confidence. That's one reason the Ritual is going away. It is a good ski and it always does what I want it to do, but for some odd reason it doesn't give me the level of confidence that I get from the other skis.
post #41 of 42

I'm light too so use shorter length firmer skis to get more feel through my feet, without trying to control supertankers, which gives me confidence and control. Rather than weight dominate a ski I prefer to let it do what it does and use foot speed and angles if the snow fits the ski. So probably cheating a bit using sidecut and width to determine which ski I use for the applicable snow type and ski field run width/size too.

Therefore My quiver now to cover every type of snow I get to play in is;

2013 Head Titan 163 - original full cambered one - turns super short, very quick to edge, has good edge hold up to stupid speeds so long as its turning and has kick and dampness, whether it's KERS is anybodiesys guess. Use at home here where it's hard surfaced and narrow/medium width runs 80% of the time.

2015 Head Monster 88 170 - turns medium and holds up to silly speeds too but does GS turns so easy and smooth and feels unflappable while doing it. I was worried this ski would be too much but its not, its quick, has good edge feel, fun and confidence inspiring, a hammer on your foot. Use this on hard and messy snow days here cruising...quickly, and on bigger wider runs overseas and light new snow.

2014 Rossignol Sin 7 180 - turns medium to short and holds on piste if its smooth much better than I thought it would although its not that firm at the ends and has a lot of rocker. Been quite fast on this at Whistler with a bit of room on piste and it feels secure so long as you tip it and the snow isn't down to scraped off hard pack levels. On soft snow and new snow its very easy to use traditionally carving or freestyle slashing, fun and basically a jack of all trades. It's really just a wide front side mid flex ski with a powder tip and tail which don't do anything till soft snow turns up. Use this on South Island New Zealand off piste new snow days and overseas any day with any new snow over 10 cms so I can go anywhere without flinching. Will be taking to Japan next year.

 

So short answer is I can't say one ski trait does it all as there always has to be some compromise but a summary ROI one liner would be:

A great ski is one that lets you confidently 'flip the bird' to gravity, while going at your individual buzz speed pulling turns on any terrain, and therefore results in an uncontrollable smile and an appreciable "comment out loud" at the time ;-)


Edited by snala - 9/24/15 at 12:13am
post #42 of 42

Strictly in terms of energy, I use a fair amount skiing, in the sense of attention and lot of hassling over technique and getting my body right. Very little cruising along. Unclear how that translates to calories. Prolly not so much. 

 

That said, I steer away from skis that only come alive at high energy/speeds. Because IMO it's like remembering that perfect powder instead of the other 20 non-powder days. Most of us, most of the time, ski at moderate speeds. Let's say under 40 mph. We only really let it out on those times and in those places where the snow and skier density allow it. We may remember those moments, if speed's our thing, but they're just that, moments. Do I want a ski that requires a bunch of input at a bunch of speed so it'll perform as designed, all for a small fraction of the time I actually ski? 

 

And my own things are steepness or trees, actually. Where high energy/high speed skis can get you in real trouble if you have to make a precise moderate speed turn in a chute, say, or instead of hitting a tree. 

 

So I want a ski that will respond to my energy investment precisely and quickly. Unclear if that means "easy" or "hard." And I own a range of skis going from flexy to stiff, depending on the task they're supposed to handle...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion