or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › First day of Pow Sking with Pow Skies, weirdest experience
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

First day of Pow Sking with Pow Skies, weirdest experience

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
Heyy Pows,

I have been sking for at least 15 years now and being honest i am quite a good skier on piste and some fresh snow (not deep Pow). Had Salomon Scream Hot 165 cm, have been sking with them since thei out i think 2009? My max speed is 120km/h and i think i am advanced....
Anyhow, i have been going into pow in the last years so i really thought of it and bam, just got of Salomon CZAR 182CM. Was really exited to try them and today was my first day. I am a bit dissapointed frown.gif....

Was sking today and somehow i become a complete beginer, it was the weirdest feeling.... Had about 3 extreme falls due to speed (i though i was managing it) and i couldent.... I have no clue what was happening it wasent me at all...

So i need your help!
Ill give you a few assumptions that might be the problem, whoever has experinece please help out.

Info of me: 172-173cm weight 74kg, 15 years sking, havent skies last year at all!

1. My tallest skies were 165cm, just got the CZAR which are whey taller 182cm(did i overdoit?)
2. Havent skies at all last year this is my first day of sking, havent workedout ethier since 3 months.
3. My bindings are mounted at the progresive ski line on Ski.
4.Is it a weird feeling untill you get used to it or so?

Thank you in advance....
post #2 of 28
--There are things you can get away with on piste that you can't off piste.
-- You went wider (way wider), longer, it was your first day on skis for the season. These probably have early rise (didn't check). You thought you were going to just jump on them? If you'd been doing a lot of biking, maybe your first day back it would be fine to jump on skis this different from your old skis. Me, I'd want to find my legs first.
-- You don't say if this was in powder or what. But these are wide skis. Many of us (there's always an argument) would tell you skis this wide do better in the element that they were designed for. Which is not groomers and hardpack.
--You say you're good, but good is not the same as fast. Nor do the years skiing tell us a thing without a days per year to go with it. People skiing 8 days a year rarely make any progress, by the time they have figured out how to ski, it's the end of their season. I've been skiing since December 1971, and have put in 60-80 days a season for the last 12 years, 20-40 days a year before that. Yet I'd tell you I'm a level 7, maybe a 7.5 by the end of the season. So, years are sort of meaningless, especially if it's close to 100% on groomed runs. To learn you need variety and challenge. You've just "added some variety" by getting some skis a lot different than your old skis. It's going to take a while to figure out how to make this new tool work. It's going to be good for you, which means it'll take work.

First, I'd get back on the old skis until you're feeling a bit cocky again. The day that happens, jump to the new ones, and experiment with where your weight is, and making technically good turns on runs you think are beneath you. Play with the ski until you figure out what works before moving up. Expect this process to take some time.
post #3 of 28
120 km/hr=75mph+165cm skis=No!
You can't even ski soft snow.
You need to reassess your skill level.
Get some lessons.
post #4 of 28
Per post 1, the new ones are 182cm.
Edited by sibhusky - 1/16/16 at 3:10pm
post #5 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by slider View Post

120 km/hr=75mph+165cm skis=No!
You can't even ski soft snow.
You need to reassess your skill level.
Get some lessons.

This. No doubt about it!
post #6 of 28
Thread Starter 
Sibhusky,

Thank you indeed. Great comments.

Yes it was powder relativly deep snow, untouched. At first the question started to further understand if i got the wrong ski size, however i see much more is into it. Ussually i dont make more than 20 ski days a year.

Thank you indeed for your answer.
post #7 of 28

At your height and weight, a 182cm shouldn't be too long, but a lot depends on your level of athleticism, ability, and possibly age. It's also a big jump from a 165cm at any width. The progressive mount will likely place you further forward than you're used to, which could have played a part too. In my experience, a more forward mount will make the ski feel shorter, which in your case, might be a plus, but can also place more weight on the front of the ski, which can lead to burying the tip in soft snow, cartwheel, tomahawk, etc. The progressive mount also places you more forward on the ski's sidecut, which might favor a slightly different turn style; more pivot than carve, but might not be that noticeable.

 

The Czar also has a looooooong turn radius at 44.7m for the 182cm; literally double the turning radius of the Scream Hot. I'd be very surprised if that difference, along with the 182cm length weren't causing you fits.

 

Just spit-balling some ideas here. Hard to really pinpoint the problem based on the description, but those are the things I'd be looking at first, along with a lesson.

 

I'd also be curious to know how you came to owning the Czars? They've been out of production for several years now, and probably would have been far from the first ski I would have recommended for you, especially given what you're coming from. 

post #8 of 28

^^^^^That, the Czars were never the easiest of skis to handle and you're a powder jong.  Skiing pow is totally different from skiing piste.  On piste I am an advanced skier.  I have likely one tenth of my days skiing pow (if I am lucky) so I consider myself very intermediate.  It is a different skill set for sure.  Get different skis and just keep practicing.  I use Atomic Automatics which are very easy to ski.

post #9 of 28

You are probably just over skiing the Czars.  After years of skiing on hardpack your natural reaction is too initiate your turns from the tips.  Stop it!  Just angulate and stomp down on the ski to turn.  Much less motion and much quicker reaction than trying to start a turn with the front of the ski.  The big tip rocker on the Czars keeps them up and turning easily in the deep snow, just park your weight in the middle of the ski and let it happen.  Think of skiing with your heels instead of the balls of your feet, and don't be afraid of using the tails to scrub speed in a hurry when needed.  This does not mean you should be driving from the backseat, just stay off the hood.

post #10 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by videoman333 View Post

 My max speed is 120km/h and i think i am advanced....

 

That you put these two things in the same sentence says something.  As others have implied, eschew speed in favor of control. Speed is one dimensional, speed is nothing.

 

/unless i'm waiting for you at the bottom

post #11 of 28

The problem is not the skis. They're fine for your size and for what you're using them for. Powder skis don't make you an instant powder skier. Skiing a few inches on narrow skis where you can feel the bottom and skiing deeper snow where you can't are much different. Practice, lessons, making sure you're in shape will help. BTW contrary to what some will tell you--skiing from the middle of the ski is not the way to do it on rockered powder skis like the Czar. The beauty of skis like that is that you can weight downhill into the turn without diving the tips. Much less tiring on the quads. The problem with skiing powder with a center stance is that pretty soon you're in the back seat, and that doesn't work for any ski in any condition. (My problem is that I learned to ski powder many years ago, when a centered stance was mandatory and it's hard breaking that habit.)

 

The other beauty with the wider skis is that you don't have to ski as fast to float them, so you can ski more in control until you master it. 

post #12 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by MT Skull View Post

 

 

The Czar also has a looooooong turn radius at 44.7m for the 182cm; literally double the turning radius of the Scream Hot. I'd be very surprised if that difference, along with the 182cm length weren't causing you fits.

 

Just spit-balling some ideas here. Hard to really pinpoint the problem based on the description, but those are the things I'd be looking at first, along with a lesson.

 

I'd also be curious to know how you came to owning the Czars? They've been out of production for several years now, and probably would have been far from the first ski I would have recommended for you, especially given what you're coming from. 

 

Yes. A ski like that is about the last I would recommend for a powder newbie (Go buy/rent a Soul 7 on powder days, OP).

 

The super long radius makes it of really questionable utility on piste, and it won't make things really intuitive in deep snow either. I suspect the Czar was a champ at plowing through crud, however. 

post #13 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by sibhusky View Post

-- You don't say if this was in powder or what. But these are wide skis. Many of us (there's always an argument) would tell you skis this wide do better in the element that they were designed for. Which is not groomers and hardpack.
 

 

I've never seen much of an argument on that front. The argument typically revolves around what you lose going to an all-mountain ski (80-90 waist east, 90-100 waist west) vs. a race ski compared to what you gain- and the same argument on what you lose going from an all-mountain ski to a powder ski vs. what you gain.

 

And then there is always folks that insist an SL ski is great for 100" of unconsolidated snow, and some dude that skis a 130 waist ski as a Killington daily driver. But kooks aren't an argument, in my book.

post #14 of 28

Well?

You've made your figurative bed, now sleep in it.  

Tho the Czar is not as painful as Hercules' intended resting spot.  I think you probably got a great deal and could not pass it up, I've bought many skis this way.

 

Ease around on them first.  Get used to how they will respond.  I recommend forsaking intentional edging and just smear them around allowing the designed sidecut to put whatever edge the ski wants down as you press P-tex down instead of that edge.  Relax and stand up, bend your knees a wee bit and feel that boot tongue on the shins.  In deeper stuff keep equal weight on the feet.  A narrower stance is always a good thing unless you're working on carving technique and need stability (anathema to a powder skier).

 

Turns should come easy, if you're muscling them around you're doing it wrong and a lesson is in order.  The stated turn radius is misleading, you can smear around almost any ski on a dime while the carving radius is more set, some skis vary the radius easily while others just want to do one, dunno how the Czar is in this respect.

 

Worst case scenario, sell the Czars and buy an easier to use ski, but there are many other creative ways to ski the Czars.

post #15 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buttinski View Post

 

Turns should come easy, if you're muscling them around you're doing it wrong and a lesson is in order.  The stated turn radius is misleading, you can smear around almost any ski on a dime while the carving radius is more set, some skis vary the radius easily while others just want to do one, dunno how the Czar is in this respect.

 

Worst case scenario, sell the Czars and buy an easier to use ski, but there are many other creative ways to ski the Czars.

True statement on the turn radius, but powder skis with a tight radius underfoot tend to feel much more responsive in 3d snow- especially at low speeds that a neophyte is going to be skiing. 

post #16 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by anachronism View Post
 

True statement on the turn radius, but powder skis with a tight radius underfoot tend to feel much more responsive in 3d snow- especially at low speeds that a neophyte is going to be skiing. 


I think it is more complicated than that. A tight radius ski with end to end sidecut is typically not going to be all that well behaved in powder. A tight radius ski that has a short sidecut length  with a modern 5-pointy shape is likely to play well (e.g. JJ, Boomerang, etc.)...

 

Of course, in true powder, the most responsive skis have a negative or infinite radius (depending on how you prefer to describe it).

post #17 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
 


I think it is more complicated than that. A tight radius ski with end to end sidecut is typically not going to be all that well behaved in powder. A tight radius ski that has a short sidecut length  with a modern 5-pointy shape is likely to play well (e.g. JJ, Boomerang, etc.)...

 

Of course, in true powder, the most responsive skis have a negative or infinite radius (depending on how you prefer to describe it).

 

Yes. When I say "tight sidecut underfoot," I am specifically referring to 5 points. Tip to tail sidecut is generally a hindrance as the tip and tails catch.

 

I think whether one wants a reverse sidecut or sidecut underfoot is a matter of preference these days. Reverse smears, sidecut can help track the skis around.

 

Prior to the advent of 5 points, full reverse sidecut was the hot ticket because it accomplished non-hooky tips and tails- which tapered tips and tails in a 5 point design accomplishes very well without the need for totally compromised hard-snow performance.

post #18 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by anachronism View Post
 

 

Yes. When I say "tight sidecut underfoot," I am specifically referring to 5 points. Tip to tail sidecut is generally a hindrance as the tip and tails catch.

 

I think whether one wants a reverse sidecut or sidecut underfoot is a matter of preference these days. Reverse smears, sidecut can help track the skis around.

 

Prior to the advent of 5 points, full reverse sidecut was the hot ticket because it accomplished non-hooky tips and tails- which tapered tips and tails in a 5 point design accomplishes very well without the need for totally compromised hard-snow performance.


Just to nerd out a bit more... Yes - I agree about full reverse, or not, being preference. While full reverse arguably is the more natural turner in powder, the modern 5 points take this into the realm of hair splitting and personal preference. I'm the family fan of reverse/reverse on good says. The other regular skiers in the family prefer 5 point. It is the source of endless debates over coffee. Though truth be told, when I might need some edge, 5 point it is.

 

As for how the reverse skis turn - if you have enough snow, they will arc with the best of them in powder, slush, etc.  "Enough" varies though - 2-4 inches of good cream cheese and you are good-to-go. Super dry fluff - well, that's a very different story...maybe more like 2-4feet :D But as long as you are not using edges on a real base at the bottom, they give up nothing.

 

As for the OP's post - It is hard to know what motivates a given purchase. But I view the Czar as falling into the big mountain shape category more than what I think of as a powder ski. If earlier speculation is correct and the purchase was deal driven, well, that is not always going to yield the best results. I know some folks who liked that ski. But not everyone did. Especially for a traditional style skier, mounting forward with the tip rocker I recall on that ski is likely to feel a bit weird.

post #19 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by anachronism View Post
 

True statement on the turn radius, but powder skis with a tight radius underfoot tend to feel much more responsive in 3d snow- especially at low speeds that a neophyte is going to be skiing. 

I very much prefer to take a big radius down to a dime than take a tight radius sidecut and make super G turns above 40 mph.

 

At least I have not found a short radius ski that is capable of attempting big speeds.  In powder my old Bonafides can flip a turn like snapping a finger.  

 

I was just doing the best turns of the year today.  Honestly I have no idea why nobody ever takes these thigh deep lines I find, maybe they have cooties or smell bad but nobody ventures in for some reason.:dunno 

post #20 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
 


Just to nerd out a bit more... Yes - I agree about full reverse, or not, being preference. While full reverse arguably is the more natural turner in powder, the modern 5 points take this into the realm of hair splitting and personal preference. I'm the family fan of reverse/reverse on good says. The other regular skiers in the family prefer 5 point. It is the source of endless debates over coffee. Though truth be told, when I might need some edge, 5 point it is.

 

As for how the reverse skis turn - if you have enough snow, they will arc with the best of them in powder, slush, etc.  "Enough" varies though - 2-4 inches of good cream cheese and you are good-to-go. Super dry fluff - well, that's a very different story...maybe more like 2-4feet :D But as long as you are not using edges on a real base at the bottom, they give up nothing.

 

As for the OP's post - It is hard to know what motivates a given purchase. But I view the Czar as falling into the big mountain shape category more than what I think of as a powder ski. If earlier speculation is correct and the purchase was deal driven, well, that is not always going to yield the best results. I know some folks who liked that ski. But not everyone did. Especially for a traditional style skier, mounting forward with the tip rocker I recall on that ski is likely to feel a bit weird.

The Czar is a big charger, brutish and powerful they can be tamed a bit but that takes skill.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anachronism View Post
 

 

Yes. When I say "tight sidecut underfoot," I am specifically referring to 5 points. Tip to tail sidecut is generally a hindrance as the tip and tails catch.

 

I think whether one wants a reverse sidecut or sidecut underfoot is a matter of preference these days. Reverse smears, sidecut can help track the skis around.

 

Prior to the advent of 5 points, full reverse sidecut was the hot ticket because it accomplished non-hooky tips and tails- which tapered tips and tails in a 5 point design accomplishes very well without the need for totally compromised hard-snow performance.

I have been amusing and confounding myself with some Powertrack 89s this year.  It took a few times to dial in my boot placement (-.75 cm) and they are carving monsters, I have not found the subtleties to lurk in the fine line of smearing and carving like the Blizzards are so good at and am considering selling them and picking up some Brahmas to complement the old Bonafides.

Blizzard and the gimmiky flipcore so seem to flex with the shape to make for sweet smears and crisp carves with the slightest nuanced input, I've yet to try another ski that does this. 

post #21 of 28

You guys can argue the fine points of powder skis all you want. The fact remains that the sidecut/radius makes little difference in powder (I don't imagine those skis are much fun on the firm though), have no metal, have plenty of rocker, and are rated as an intermediate ski by multiple sellers. You do the OP no favors by helping him blame the skis. He can switch skis ad infinitum but at some point he will have to learn to ski powder. From a professional. 

post #22 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldgoat View Post
 

You guys can argue the fine points of powder skis all you want. The fact remains that the sidecut/radius makes little difference in powder (I don't imagine those skis are much fun on the firm though), have no metal, have plenty of rocker, and are rated as an intermediate ski by multiple sellers. You do the OP no favors by helping him blame the skis. He can switch skis ad infinitum but at some point he will have to learn to ski powder. From a professional. 

Sidecut does make a difference in the powder but not in a good way. No sidecut is perfect for deep snow. 

post #23 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldgoat View Post
 

You guys can argue the fine points of powder skis all you want. The fact remains that the sidecut/radius makes little difference in powder (I don't imagine those skis are much fun on the firm though), have no metal, have plenty of rocker, and are rated as an intermediate ski by multiple sellers. You do the OP no favors by helping him blame the skis. He can switch skis ad infinitum but at some point he will have to learn to ski powder. From a professional. 


I have no idea whether it is the ski or the OP. 

 

However, I'll note two things. First it is a simple fact that the overall nature of sidecut & radius has a huge impact on powder skiing. That is a significant part of why reverse/reverse and 5-point rockered skis came to be. Second, trying to teach people to ski powder on skis not designed for powder is simply abuse. There are skis that make learning to ski powder vastly easier.

post #24 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by videoman333 View Post

Heyy Pows,

I have been sking for at least 15 years now and being honest i am quite a good skier on piste and some fresh snow (not deep Pow). Had Salomon Scream Hot 165 cm, have been sking with them since thei out i think 2009? My max speed is 120km/h and i think i am advanced....
Anyhow, i have been going into pow in the last years so i really thought of it and bam, just got of Salomon CZAR 182CM. Was really exited to try them and today was my first day. I am a bit dissapointed frown.gif....

Was sking today and somehow i become a complete beginer, it was the weirdest feeling.... Had about 3 extreme falls due to speed (i though i was managing it) and i couldent.... I have no clue what was happening it wasent me at all...

So i need your help!
Ill give you a few assumptions that might be the problem, whoever has experinece please help out.

Info of me: 172-173cm weight 74kg, 15 years sking, havent skies last year at all!

1. My tallest skies were 165cm, just got the CZAR which are whey taller 182cm(did i overdoit?)
2. Havent skies at all last year this is my first day of sking, havent workedout ethier since 3 months.
3. My bindings are mounted at the progresive ski line on Ski.
4.Is it a weird feeling untill you get used to it or so?

Thank you in advance....

1. The 182 is fine for your size. I'm about the same size and I ski 180-185.

2. Physical condition can play a role, but probably not significant enough to be a big hindrance.

3. The progressive line is more centered on the ski which gives you more tail behind your feet. A little more familiarity with them mounted in that position and that will work it's way out.

4. It can feel weird because you are in an unfamiliar environment. I would say that your equipment is not an issue, your technique is and I will add that we all go through the same learning curve when we learn to ski deep powder.

 

I will elaborate some. On the groomers, your turns are initiated in the tip of the ski. We keep that pressure on the tongue of the boot to help the tip hook up and begin the turn. You may have noticed that if you are in the back seat on a groomer that it can be difficult to get the ski to start coming around. That is because the ski needs your weight forward to get that tip to do it's job. In powder it is a much different approach. In powder (boot deep plus), the tip really only serves to get the skis on top of the snow. Your weight should be very centered on the ski. Weight forward, skis dive and you take the header. Weight back, the tails wash and you loop out. Another aspect of skiing powder is that you don't really come through the fall line and finish the turn as you do on groomers. Most of your time is in the fall line and it is a subtle bounce from one turn to the next. Imagine a straight  line on the floor. Now imagine your feet together and hopping with both feet parallel to the line from one side of that line to the other. That is more the motion you are looking for. If you try to have the skis come all the way around through the fall line, the skis won't release the edge into the next turn and you go over the bars.

 

1. Stay centered on your skis

2. Stay in the fall line

3. Don't try to drive the skis through the fall line to complete the turn

4. After you have the first three down, speed is your friend

5. There is nothing on this earth that compares to skiing powder so deep that it flows over your shoulders :yahoo:

post #25 of 28
Except big angle high G turns on the groom.
post #26 of 28
Eh, I can't say I agree about not finishing turns in powder, or not driving the skis, or using hop turns. That's how you ski a skinnier cambered ski in powder, but its not quite how modern powder boards ski.
post #27 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldgoat View Post
 

You guys can argue the fine points of powder skis all you want. The fact remains that the sidecut/radius makes little difference in powder (I don't imagine those skis are much fun on the firm though), have no metal, have plenty of rocker, and are rated as an intermediate ski by multiple sellers. You do the OP no favors by helping him blame the skis. He can switch skis ad infinitum but at some point he will have to learn to ski powder. From a professional. 


I have no idea whether it is the ski or the OP. 

 

However, I'll note two things. First it is a simple fact that the overall nature of sidecut & radius has a huge impact on powder skiing. That is a significant part of why reverse/reverse and 5-point rockered skis came to be. Second, trying to teach people to ski powder on skis not designed for powder is simply abuse. There are skis that make learning to ski powder vastly easier.

My last powder skis were fairly straight with modest tip rocker and flat tails. My current skis have 5 point sidecut, a lot of tip rocker and some tail rocker. They both perform fine in powder. The old skis powered through crud better. The new skis are quicker in tight spots. The old ones are better on the groomed; the new ones not too bad. In powder--despite the difference in shape and radius--26 vs 19m, the difference between them is considerably less than huge.  My point is that while a different ski might work better for the OP (or might not, and the difference would certainly not be huge) they will not solve the kind of problems he describes. (Nor will giving advice like staying in the fall line when the OP describes being unable to control speed, or using techniques suited to old school equipment.) The OP needs to learn to ski powder, then he can decide if he needs different skis.

post #28 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by clink83 View Post

Eh, I can't say I agree about not finishing turns in powder, or not driving the skis, or using hop turns. That's how you ski a skinnier cambered ski in powder, but its not quite how modern powder boards ski.

It's not truly a hop turn. I was trying to describe the basic motion. I ski a Patron that is not full rocker and has camber under foot much like the Czar he bought and on lower angle terrain with a few inches of fresh, it skis pretty much like a traditional ski. As the pitch, speed and the depth of the snow increase, you are correct. You can get on top, get aggressive and rip powder like a groomer. Based on his description though, it sounds like the OP has some time to practice before he gets to that point. There is also the variability in what exactly constitutes "powder" for the OP. How it skis in 6 inches of fresh is quite different than how it skis in 2 feet of fresh and I don't think he will be trying to ski feet of snow for a little while, considering it was his first powder day.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › First day of Pow Sking with Pow Skies, weirdest experience