or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A question (Fat Skis)

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 

I've been lurking here all winter and finally decided to join in.

My husband and I bought a seasons pass for Whistler Blackcomb this year and have skid more this year than in previous years. About 27 times for me, and its not over. It would have been more if it weren't for the bad snow year here!

In 2001 I bought Volkl G3's and they changed my skiing! I was stable! I could go fast!

I never liked to cruise because I never felt stable but have always been an ok intermediate/advanced skier that liked moguls, steeps and all the terrain Whistler has to offer, if they weren't icy.

Last December we took the Dave Murray Ski Course. Wow. I now enjoy hard icy conditions... Good thing considering that was in abundance this year. I really learned how to ski the shaped skis and my ability really improved!

Now I'm considering my next addition to the Quiver.

I'm 5"9', 150lbs.

I need FAT Skiis!

I'm considering the Rossignal Bandit XXX.

I was told the Volkl Explosiv may be too stiff for me, The Head Monsters were another option. I demoed the Bandit XXX's and really liked them. Very different from the Volkl's... I'd like to demo the Head Monsters.

Will the B3's be different that the Bandit XXX?


post #2 of 17
This is my thought; not opinion and not advice. I ski on Head skis, not a whole lot different than the Monsters in many respects. Head makes one of the best skis for ice and stability. Their new lineup also tends to be heavier than many other manufacturers. You might consider this when considering this ski.

[ April 07, 2003, 08:30 PM: Message edited by: FlipFlopFly ]
post #3 of 17
What do you want the skis to do for you? What is 'Fat' these days? If 'Fat' refers to a ski like the Atomic Big Daddy at 107mm waist, then almost everything else is narrow. If you could rephrase your question with a few other specifics other than ability and personal info, then a recommendation can be made.
post #4 of 17
There's a reason the Bandit XX and XXX are so popular. They're the best.

I second getting more info from you on what you want these skis for. Will they truly be a dedicated powder ski, or an all mountain ski.

Next year's Bandit XX and XXX, to be called the B2 and B3 are exceptional skis. I've skied them both. The B2 is 3 mm wider at the tip and tail and 2 at the waist. The result? A little more sidecut, about an 18m turning radius, and simply great powder performance. But, you don't lose much, hardly anything on the groomed, or hardpack. I skied them in Vail in 24in new and they were sensational in the untracked or the crud. The following week I had them in the east on some very hardpack/icy conditions. Frankly, I was worried about them but they proved to be fabulous there too.

The B3 next year is also a little wider, but it has LESS sidecut. They felt it was a bit too turny for the powder. I'd only get it if you really want a dedicated powder ski. Otherwise, I'd demo the new B2. You'll probably buy it.

Head has been resurrected from the dead. Virually gone from the scene a few years ago they are now making some nice skis.

Hope this helps.

post #5 of 17
Thread Starter 
I would like a fatter ski for powder and crud. Especially on those coastal 0oC powder days.

My Volkl G3's are great cruising and all mountain skis, so I need something to complement.

I've heard the Head Monster iM 85 are good in heavy crud and powder but they may be too stiff for me. I really should demo them at the next opportunity. What's up with 'Intellifibers'??? how long does it last in a ski?

So the Bandit XXX and the B3 will be very different then?

post #6 of 17
Moved to Gear Forum.
post #7 of 17
I prefer stiff skis ie, monsters, G4 or Bigs, but a lot of chicks dig the pocket rockets. Since you already have a good mid fat and will be skiing W/B. I would tend to go full fat, even fatter than the B3.
post #8 of 17
Icancruz, I also have G3's and to go with them I have Atomic EX's with the centrix binding. Both skis feel alot alike. I have both in 177cm. The centrix binding can be moved on the ski, I move mine back for the powder days, then back to one of the forward positions for other conditiond as the snow gets cut up. I took the EX's out to W/B last year and skied them for 6 days there. I didn't need them all the time but I didn't want to carry two pair out with me.
Because you live there (lucky you), you may even want to step up to something like the Pocket Rocket or maybe even fatter. By the way my son is talking about selling his PR's in 165cm and getting them in 175cm. He skied the 165's at W/B.

You've only skied 27 days with a season pass to W/B, please, work less ski more. I'm over 70 days here in the east, no out west trip this year.

I'm jealous, enjoy W/B
post #9 of 17
Thread Starter 
We had a late start to the season and with the spring conditions in Jan/Feb I opted to ride my bike instead of skiing on more than a few weekends! Its nice to have that option here!

What is the skinny on the Intellifibres in the Head Monster iM 85?

Gimic or real?

What is the functional difference between the Rossignal XXX and the B3?
post #10 of 17
Be sure to demo the Pocket Rocket. The monster 85 is really stiff, if you've ruled out the V-Explosive for stiffness, the 85 should go to. On the other hand, it can't hurt to try them all. Then you will know if they really are too stiff.
post #11 of 17
There seems to be a trend in skiing that Everyone is going to a wider ski. Adding a wider ski to a quiver is n't a bad Idea But do you really need one? Need and want are to diffrent things. Yes you do get float in a wider ski for Powder days. But lets be honest here How many real Powder days do you get to ski in a year? For me real Powder starts when it is over your Boot cuffs. Anything less is Hero Powder. At most Mountains Pow is skied out by the end of the day and then your hunting for it. The locals aren't about to tell you where to find it either. I have skied Powder with a K2 four waist of 65 as I recall and had a blast. same with a mid fat with a 70 mm waist. I live here in Utah and get to ski a lot and I only had my chubbs out 2 times this season 2 days when I felt I really needed a fat ski. All the other days I was on My R:ex and Most ski days on my K2 Modx. I don't think a wider ski is going to be a better crud buster then a good midfat ski of 68 to 75 mm waist. Sure my Atomic R:ex is a great crud buster but so is the Atomic 11:20. Both skis excell in Crud. If I could have only one ski It would be the 11:20. Thank God I am not limited to just one ski. One of the best Crud busting skis I have ever been on is a Volant can't recall the model but it was about 72 mm under foot. It was vary damp and heavey but that ski could run on lumpy Mash Potato crud like it was on a just groomed run. Vary stable at eye watering speed in vary nasty conditions. Ok that said I'll chime in with what is one of the best all time Fat skis ever made,The Volant Chubb. Vary stable and User Freindly. I just saw that Volant has brought back the Chubb as a mid season release. It should be in ski shops next season. Another vary nice fat ski is the Rossi xxx. But it is not IMHO the best crud ski the shovel is just to soft for my taste.
post #12 of 17
Has anyone out there rally been on a BAD fat ski? I can't say that I have. I would say that length is most critical, here. What size G3's do you ride on? If you get a G4 or Monster, they will likely be wider versions of your G3. In fact, if that is what you are after, you might not be on your G3's much at all. On the other hand, the point brought up by others, that a wide but softer ski might be in order, could also apply. You said that you tried the XXX, but in what size? If it was the 178, them you got a bit of a softer version (IMO). As far as I know, the G4 or Monster don't soften as length shortens. Just something to keep in mind. To echo what WVSkier said, the B3 will have less sidecut and make the ski much different.

I say grab a XXX for a low price and enjoy whatever pow we get until the end of the season.
post #13 of 17
I'll agree with Utah49 here. I was at Killington this weekend, and I saw some guy just ripping down Superstar, which was a combination of powder bumps and just plain ice on the steeper parts. When I got close to the guy, I could see that he was skiing on an old pair of K24's. And it's not the first time I've seen somebody that really stood out on the mountain in tough conditions wearing the old red white and blues. I was recently at Snowmass, and woke up to about 16 inches of fresh powder. The only skies that I had with me were a pair of Crossmax 10's, which are hardly considered a fat ski by today's standards, and I was really surprised at how easily I could navigate that deep snow with them, and being from the East, I'm far from an accomplised powder skier. I've had a wider ski in my quiver for the past five or six years, mainly for late spring conditions, but the skis have seem to become so much better in the last few years that the widest waisted ski that I now own is the Crossmax with a 69mm waist. I have been demoing a lot of the midfats lately, but the more I ski them, the more I realise that I'm just not as happy with them for an everyday ski (in the East, anyway). I recently bought a pair of the Head iC 180's (116-65-101) for an everyday ski, found them to be a great Eastern ski. I bought them with the idea of also buying a midfat as a second pair for the deeper days, but to my surprise, these Heads seem to handle the deep and mushy stuff with ease, too, despite a 65mm waist. Just makes me think that the ski companies figure if they keep making them wider and wider, a lot of people are going to decide that they just can't live without them. I can't help but wonder when I sit back and watch an old Warren Miller film how these guys ever managed to ski the way they did on those old, skinny, straight skis of yesteryear.
Don't get me wrong, I'm far from being a retro-grouch, I love the new stuff, I buy a new pair every year just to keep up with the new technology, and if I'm just playing into the ski company's hands, so be it, it's what I enjoy doing. And if I lived out West, I would certainly have a fat pair as a backup. Just wanted to say that I think there is a lot of merit to Utah49's previous post.

[ April 09, 2003, 10:39 AM: Message edited by: Mac ]
post #14 of 17
Originally posted by Bandit Man:
As far as I know, the G4 or Monster don't soften as length shortens.
Interesting point. I know that Atomic, Rossi & Dynastar do change the flex and/or sidecut on the different lengths, which why it's important to demo the different lengths. But I'd be interested to know if they do that on the G4 or Monster. Anyone have input on this?
post #15 of 17
Thread Starter 
Utah49 -
I would consider fatter skiis during conditions such as right now at W/B (I know I should be there today!!arg)

( http://www.whistler-blackcomb.com/weather/snowreport/

New 24 Hours 48 Hours 7Days Snowbase
43 cm 54 cm 95 cm 111 cm 350 cm
17 in 21 in 37 in 44 in 138 in

-7oC alpine, 1oC in the Villiage)

When its gets skiid out and becomes heavy chunder powder. Since it is not as cold here as it is in Utah, and our snow tends to be a bit wetter, fatter skiis might have more use?

Banditman - I ski on 177 Volkl G3's, I tried the 178 Bandit XXX.
post #16 of 17
Last demo day I was at the Volkl rep said they do not soften as they get shorter. I think in some models they make the very longest model stiffer though.

Since you already have a good all-purpose ski, I'd get something truly fat for powder days. Yes, you only use it half a dozen times a year in a bad season, but they're fun. I have Big Stix 106, but anything really wide (I'd say approaching a 100mm waist and above) and relatively soft will do. I wouldn't recommend Explosives unless you've demoed them and decide that's what you like, since they're relatively stiff and heavy. You can also pick up older models of super fat skis on e-bay pretty cheap - since many models haven't changed that much recently. Might be a good way to go to start with (cheaply) since really fat skis aren't always easy to find to demo.
post #17 of 17
One thing to keep in mind when skiing in heavy wet spring snow, is that the snow can be sticky and grabby. A wider ski can surf this gluppy mess or it can provide more surface area for that grabby wet snow to cling to. Make sure the base is structured and you keep the skis well waxed. I also apply a coat of some sort of silicon speed coat over the wax. I do this first thing in the morning then at lunch or when I feel the skis start to grab again.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion