or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Need Demo Advice on multiple skis
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Need Demo Advice on multiple skis - Page 2

post #31 of 35
Thread Starter 
Originally Posted by skier_j
84 wide just might not be to wide for eastern conditions for 74skier---assuming the edge grip is decent.

Briefly he says to remember that a "wide" waist is relative. I'm 5'5 and 150 in ski boots. Floatation for me might occur on a 70 waist in a 160.

The SAME floatation for 74skier might have to be 90+ and 190 or more in length.
skier j.

Thanks for helping to clarify my feelings on this!

I can definitely make a ski that is 75 waist do things that a smaller guy can't get it to do... And I would equate it to a ~65 waist on a guy 75-100 lbs lighter than me...

That said, it reminds me that I wanted to expand on my "class" of skis statement above.

I definitely don't think that I want to get into the 90 waist. I did ski on the Pocket Rockets out west, but those conditions would have been PREMO conditions in the east (they weren't powder, but they certainly weren't boilerplate!)

And I could make that ski edge, but that's just it. I had to MAKE it edge. I think that the Pocket Rocket would be more work than fun for me in the east. If I could buy a second pair in the 90-95 range for 'easter powder days' those would be awesome...

So, I think I could look to the following:

Class as 'low waisted' as a SX11 (66) or a 9X Oversize (68) or similar
Stick to what I know in a Monster iM 75 (74) or Recon (78) or similar
or go bigger Xtra Hot (80) or M:EX (84)
or go to a very 'progressive' shape in the Metron B5

Doesn't seem like I've narrowed it down much, but I think I am getting a better handle on my options (Then I can narrow further based on availability, price, etc)
post #32 of 35
Just as a suggestion to your class system, you might want to think about defining the classes by the ski’s intended use as opposed to waist width. Although width is largely a function of intended us, using that measure alone may cloud the issue.

Being strong and heavy isn’t much of an advantage in making wider skis perform, as wider skis will flex torsionally under the increased force a heavy person generates. This causes the edge to lose its hold on firmer surfaces. However, being both strong and heavy is an advantage in making a longer or stiffer ski perform. High performance skis are characterized by being stiffer both lengthwise and torsionally as well as having a more aggressive flex pattern (smaller sweet spot) than “lesser” skis, for quicker response to skier input. (excepting Freeride skis for the moment, as those skis are less stiff to be more forgiving of less than perfect landings when attempting difficult aerial maneuvers).

The current trend towards fat skis has largely been supported by the popularity growth of off piste and back country skiing, where skiers make a conscious decision to accept lower levels of edge grip on the marked ski trails, for increased floatation in deeper snow, allowing them to stay on top of the ever changing conditions that are found on un-maintained terrain. To the average skier, these are really “specialty” skis, in the same way that race skis are specialty skis.

One thing to keep in mind is that conditions in Europe and the North American west are vastly different from what you and I ski on in Vermont. The vast majority of skis are constructed to perform in conditions that are somewhere in between what is found in Europe and the Rockies, as globally, that is where the majority of skiers ski. Conditions in the east are hard and icy, which happen to be the same conditions you find on a race course. Even though race-inspired skis are “specialty” skis like their fatter stable mates, their specialty is to perform well on the conditions that Eastern skiers see on a regular basis, which is why I recommend them so highly.

That said, definitely give out other types of skis a try, if nothing else to confirm that the stiffer racing style skis are the best for you. It may also be that you prefer another category of ski over the racing style of ski, but whichever category suits you best, I am sure that given your weight it will be on the very top end of the stiffness spectrum.
post #33 of 35
Thread Starter 
Again, more good points.

I may be typing before I have had a chance to think through all of this information, but as you can see by the progression of this tread... This is a thought process in the works and I'm not opposed to hearing opinions in order to focus in on a few skis to test out...

I'll try to 'process' all of this info and post where my focus might end up...

Also, it is fine to try to say "I want to try this, that, & the other ski", but I may get to the mountain and not find those exact skis to demo, so I want to have options...

Thanks again!
post #34 of 35

Since you've got an open mind as to the type of ski you are interested in, and you haver 6 days to work with, you can probably demo almost all of the skis that you are interested in. You'll be able to kick out the ones that you don't like almost immediately, and can change skis after that 1st run. By the end of the 2nd or 3rd day, you'll have it down to a managable number of "contenders" that are worth more of your time.

Sounds like a fun week. I'm interested to hear your evaluation of each ski.
post #35 of 35
74 skier- add the 2005-06 Nordica Top Fuel to your demo list. This is the best ski I have ever been on. It's dimensions are 123/78/108 16m turning radius. It has a huge"sweet spot"-probably due to the new X binding plate. I am 5-11 and 225+ lbs, level 8, eastern skier.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Need Demo Advice on multiple skis