New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Need advice...

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
I have not skiied since 1990...until today. Skis are SX11s in 180, and I have a few questions. It seems the only way I can get them to turn with my present technique (likely very rusty) is to completely unweight the inside ski and put all of my weight on the outside skis edge, I was able to make some pretty good turns today, to the point where I could be going back uphill, but something is not right, whereas I used to carve for fun...it feels like I HAVE to to prevent them from gettiing away from me, as soon as I start hitting bumps at speed, the skis get all bent out of shape and toss me on my butt I busted 3 good times today...forgot how much fun falling was..yay. One thing is the greens here almost correlate to the bluesd I am used ot back east. Any advice for getting confidence in the bumps at speed..i see tons of other people basically straightlining most of the slopes effortlessy where I am just struggling to keep my friggin speed in check. I have no problems turning or stopping. Don't worry, I use the term "carve" loosely..I have no illisuons that I careve..99.9 percent of my turns seem to be skidding.
post #2 of 25
(Hmm - for some reason this thread caught my eye)

WS - Skis have changed a lot in 14 years. Technique has changed a lot too. There's so much that has changed, it's too much to cover in a posting and you're liable to get way too many (and likely conflicting) suggestions in an online forum. But for starters, we do more two footed skiing (i.e. not so much radical unweighting) and more speed control through turn shape than through skidding. When you try to ski todays skis with yesterdays technique, you're going to get some very sorry performance out of your skis. The bottom line is that (in general) you need to do more edging and less (rotary) turning of the skis.

You can learn this stuff on your own or even through this forum, but you'll pick it up a lot faster in a lesson. When the shape skis first came out, many instructors took "lessons" to learn how to ski them effectively and how to teach the public how to ski them. A knowledgable and watchful eye and careful selection out of the grab bag of training drills can help you make the technique transition very quickly. It worked for us, it's worked for our students over the past few years and it will likely work for you.

There are a few different options for skiing the bumps at speed with confidence, but they kind of boil down to using either finesse or brute strength. With a 15 year absence from the sport, it sounds like you might need some work before you're ready to apply either approach.

Your mileage may vary. It's hard to know exactly what you're doing through the words you've given us. If we see video, we can help a lot more. From your other posts, it sounds like you damaged your skis fairly significantly too. This probably did not help your turns much. Find a good shop, ask them their opinion on getting your skis fixed. If their fixable, ok. (they'll probably say something like we can't make promises, it won't be good as new, the patch might not hold, etc.) If not, you've learned an expensive lesson about using "rock skis" during early season conditions. Then take a lesson. Either a group or private should be ok, but tell the instructor your story so that they know you need the transition from straight to shaped skis. I think you'll find this is the quickest way to get the fun back into your turns. In the meantime, welcome back. With a little patience, you'll find things have changed a lot for the better.
post #3 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedsprint
..... It seems the only way I can get them to turn with my present technique (likely very rusty) is to completely unweight the inside ski and put all of my weight on the outside skis edge, I was able to make some pretty good turns today, to the point where I could be going back uphill, but something is not right, whereas I used to carve for fun...it feels like I HAVE to to prevent them from gettiing away from me, as soon as I start hitting bumps at speed, the skis get all bent out of shape and toss me on my butt I..I have no illisuons that I careve.......99.9 percent of my turns seem to be skidding.
I haven't been on the SX11 (though I am considering it) and I don't know how much you weigh, so I'm only guessing here, but here goes.

Either your skis are so stiff and you are so light that you can only bend one of them at a time into the proper shape unless you go very very fast and use inertia OR by putting all your weight on the outside ski you are not bending them, but pushing them sideways (mostly with your heel).

The second case seems more likely. If that's the case, then, like rusty said, you need more edging. Experiment by putting them one edge(cross section view from the rear -------> / / to turn left _ _ to go straight, and \ \ to turn right). Don't try to skid them, let them pull you around the corner they want to make when you have them angled.

You may have noticed inadvertantly that when you did put them on edge they really turned; "got away from me" was what you posted. Get a feel for turning them by putting them on edge on a smooth groomed slope before going back into the bumps. Also notice how they behave differently at different speeds; they may just not like going slow.

Good luck
post #4 of 25
Thread Starter 
Thank you for the replies...yes I am pretty light, around 160 lbs. The rock thing still irritates me because the slpes looked gorgeous, whatever I hit was not visible. I do notice the faster I go the easier the skis are to turn, but as I said..all I am doing is skidding them to make them turn, which is obviously wrong.
post #5 of 25
Sorry to say, but you may want to consider getting a different ski. As you noticed, The SX11 turns much better at speed. It's way too strong/stiff, and IMO, just sucks as a moguls ski. A first ski back for someone with traditional technique should be able to skid better than the SX-11. And you'll find the new technique easier to learn. The SX-11 will probably hold you back.

Since you've busted the SX-11, You should probably go shorter. Definately go softer. Suggest you demo these:

Dynastar (157/165) Omecarve 9, Skicross 9, Elan S8 160/168.
post #6 of 25
Thread Starter 
Thank you for the advice, I need to find out when the next demo day is.
post #7 of 25
Thread Starter 
Well my local store sent off the skis to atomic to see about warranty repair if applicable, and I noticed they had some leftover straight looking skis from several seasons ago that didnt sell. One of them was a set of dynastars max8 T192s for 80 bucks..never used. I know they are longer, but for 80 bucks...that is the price of 2 ski rentals on base so I figure I can't go wrong if they are totally horrible. They seem to have alot of flex compared to the SX11s and are quite a bit narrower. Again for 80 bucks they are worth a shot to me especially since atomic will have mine for awhile either way. They also have considerably less sidecut, or so it appears. I will take ya'lls advice and get some refresher lessons, thanks for tolerating my squid questions. -Tony
post #8 of 25
To be perfectly honest, I would suggest not spending the money on the Dynastars if you have any aspirations about learning to carve now that you've started skiing again. They may sound like a good deal, but would hold you back, just in a different way than the SX11's. Yes, they would suit your traditional style of skiing more, but they are not very shaped by today's standards and the length would be a handful in the bumps. They are not a high-performance ski. I agree with Big E's list. Go for a shorter, more forgiving carver and you'll be much happier.
post #9 of 25
Thread Starter 
How do the short carvers work at speed in the bumps? Are they pretty stable? Right now I want something that is stable as all hell at speed that is not upset by sudden crud/bump changes to the slope...truth be told..forgive me..I am not too worried about carving the perfect turn..just want to get out there and have fun going fast.
post #10 of 25
I ski in the East on 160's that are plenty stable at speed and I typically ski pretty fast all the time. I haven't skied enough different skis, nor do I ski often enough to make any real specific recommendations, but to help with your search I would suggest giving us more details about yourself, ie: weight, ability (even from 14 years ago), where you ski, how you ski, etc.

I'm curious how you ended up with the SX11's. If it was based on the shop's recommendation I'd say they did you a real disservice especially considering your long layoff from the sport.
post #11 of 25
Thread Starter 
Thank you for the quick reply, to answer your questions. I am 5'10, about 160 lbs. When I used to ski my father worked for stratton mountain so every day after school I got to ski for hours..easily 4-5 times a week including weekends. I used to be pretty good according to my instructor at the time, so I figured I could handle some stiffer shaped skis after some practice and the SX11s seem to have gotten good reviews. When I make my turns, I usually just pressure the inside egdes and the skis just turn effortlessly, but when I need to checkmy speed because i get going to fast when I leave them pointed I skid them by almost completely unweighting the ski in the direction I want to go and whipping them sideways and putting all of my weight on the higher edge of the outside ski..usually spraying alot of snow. Almost like drifting a car...but I find that enjoyable..I LOVE sliding the skis sideways across the trails and such, that is the type of skiing I have always done. Carve the slower turns and really heal over sideways skidding the begeezus out of them for the fast stuff.
post #12 of 25
First, add the Head i160 to the list. You'll probably really like it.

The Omecarve 9 has been raved about at www.skispressworld.com as a great all around ski, moguls included. The Elan S-8 is easy to turn and can help you learn to carve properly.

You have to clarify something:

What do you mean by "at speed in the bumps"? What's your bump skiing style? Does at speed mean world class zipper-line or slowly/smoothly skiing through? OR is a bump just a pile of crud?
post #13 of 25
Thread Starter 
I think what I am describing is crud, I want to be able to straightline it through all of that crap with rock solid stability, or like the areas where there will be smallish moguls from where the snowboarders have made jumps and crap, on smooth stuff I have no problems with straightlining, but if the trail gets at all bumpy, I lose it if I try and keep the pace up, the skis will catch some random egde and go flying sideways and here I am sliding on my back in an explosion of snow and equipment..to quote my friend from yesterday.
post #14 of 25
Seems like you have two choices: ski faster, or get a shorter radius ski so you can carve short-enough turns to check your speed through bumps. If you insist on checking your speed by half-skidding then you may need to look at skipressworld and find a stable ski that has the least sidecut. Nevertheles, I found the Rossignol 9S Oversize could be made to do just about anything I wanted it to quite well (except highspeed LR turns). It seemed quite flexible and forgiving to me, but if you've been over-skied once, maybe you should try it first.

They probably advised the SX11 for you because you told them you wanted highspeed stability and good performance at LR turns. We all want it all.
post #15 of 25
Thread Starter 
Well the local shop has two overstock dynastar skis leftover for cheap. A set of max 8 in 192 for 80 bucks, and a set of Dynastar speed SX in 178, for 199, how will the 192 max 8 feel compared to the SX11 in 180? I still think for slightly more than the price of a lift ticket during season..I can find a use for these things eventually..unless you tell me they are absolutely horrible at speed, but wouldnt the longer length make them fairly stable?
post #16 of 25
Thread Starter 
I really like what i have read about one of the ones ya'll reccomended..the Omecarve 9
post #17 of 25
No matter what you get, you have to pay some attention to the terrain. Don't bother with the cheap Dynastars. They are simply too long for you. And the added length will make it easy to trip up. Ever wonder why they are so cheap and still there?

If you insist on ignoring the cut-up stuff and plowing like a tank, you will have to sacrifice something else, like ease of turning. There are skis that will do that, but, they can also make learning much harder. If I were you, I would not try to buy my last ski first. I'd buy something versatile that you can learn to carve with, and also learn to choose turn locations more wisely.

The three I suggested, are all very good. The Rossi 9s oversize may be too much ski right now. That's not meant to be nasty, it's just that the 9S expects that you know how to control speed with turn shape. That's much easier to learn, but not a gimme, on a more versatile ski.

Whatever you do, you should demo all three, as close to 165 or less. (Head i160 at 160 NOT at 170 that's too long for you from Head. Elan S8 at 160 or maybe 168).

Any of those should keep you happy for quite a while, but it's better to try before you buy.

Good luck!
post #18 of 25
Thread Starter 
I know you are not trying to be nasty, no worries , so you think the omecarve 9 in a 165 will work..I am guessing so since I am pretty light @ 160lbs...They also offer it in a 172 which a few articles claim is more stable...will it be fairly stable when I want to get stupid with it? Thanks again for bearing with my questions.
post #19 of 25
Things have changed with respect to length. I have been skiing since the mid - 60s and through the 80s skied on race oriented, 205+ cm skis. I still ski a 186 in powder, but my daily ski is a 168 cm Volkl Supersport 6*. Pretty amazing if you think about all the preconceptions I had to leave behind to go that short. I am 6'2" 200 lbs and have not yet overpowered this ski. This is a fast stable ski that can rail blue cruisers, tackle the double blacks or black moguls in control or straightline when necessary and still check speed quickly and predictably. This may not be the right ski for you, but it can't hurt to try a few different skis before committing money to another pair.

It would be best if you could demo some skis in different lengths. With today's equipment, longer is not necessarily better for stability and dampness at speed. The ability to push speed seems more to come from within rather than equipment limits. Shorter advanced skis bring versatility to manuever in tight spots and moguls while maintaining the capabilty for high speed and carving. Leave the prejudice about needing a long ski behind and try out some of the shorter all-mountain skis. You really need to experience a variety of skis; especially considering how much equipment has changed since the early 90s. It may take several days to adjust to the increased turn response and edge hold, but it sounds like you hit it off pretty well with the SX11s.

Hope your warranty issue works out. Good luck.
post #20 of 25
Thread Starter 
Thanks for your advice, that Volkl is a bit spendy for me at the moment from a cursory search, I have read nothing but good reviews about the Omecarve 9 in these forums about its ability to handle the bumps and such and it has even been suggested in this thread, Cupolos has it with bindings for like 349 on ebay, I am going to get it in a 165, I took ya'lls advice and told the shop I do not want those leftover 192s even though they seemed like a deal. He is is seeing how much he can do the Omecarve 9s for, if he can come fairly close to to online I will pay the extra bucks to support the local shop. Again, thanks everyone. I am going skiing this friday with a group from base, the rentals are already reserved and cannot be changed last minute since the base agency in charge has weird hours, so I will be stuck wrestling around a rather used 181 rental ski, might trade with my buddy who reserved a 168, since the bindings are adjustable for different boots easily.
post #21 of 25
I second that advice about the Head i.C160 - absolutely great ski. Pretty much anyone can ski it and be very happy. Great carver, and it really goes through crud without any effort. I've skiied it at 163cm for the past two seasons, and it's never failed me, whether I'm demonstrating low level skiing (ie lots of skidding, which you seem to want), or laying down railroad tracks, or breezing through bad crud.
post #22 of 25
I noticed a policy in a ski shop last year. I think it was Head or Salomon, but I'm not sure. The policy was a guarantee that if you don't like the ski (and don't ruin it) you can exchange it for full credit on another model. Might be something to look into.
post #23 of 25
Thread Starter 
Kinda like a reciept intensive demo week..that's not a bad idea
post #24 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by wickedsprint
I know you are not trying to be nasty, no worries , so you think the omecarve 9 in a 165 will work..I am guessing so since I am pretty light @ 160lbs...They also offer it in a 172 which a few articles claim is more stable...will it be fairly stable when I want to get stupid with it? Thanks again for bearing with my questions.
Answer:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soup Nazi
No 172 for you!
post #25 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
I noticed a policy in a ski shop last year. I think it was Head or Salomon, but I'm not sure. The policy was a guarantee that if you don't like the ski (and don't ruin it) you can exchange it for full credit on another model. Might be something to look into.
Atomic is doing this with Metrons this year.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching