Originally Posted by SKINUT59
I like that a damper ski is less affected by surface irregularities( we have alot of those in Ontario) but is it harder to make them do what you want than a lively ski?
Dampness in and of itself does not make it harder to make the skis do what you want them to do. Granted, most damp skis are not as quick to flick around as most less damp skis, but it's not a major problem.
However, some properties that lend themselves to dampness, like extra weight do make it harder to make the ski change direction quickly. And it is hard to make a ski that is both damp and lively. A light springy ski is fun to bounce around on, and it is hard to have that characteristic and stability at speed too.
The biggest problem most people have with the "damp" skis is that in addition to having dampness they also have the other properties of a high performance ski. People who want a ski to be stable at 45+ mph, also want other attributes in their skis, like a very tenacious grip due to lots of torsional rigidity, and a stiff flex. IF you don't know what you're doing, you will have difficulty using brute force to overcome any mistakes that you make. If you want a Kästle SG to turn, you pretty much have to put it on edge; doing the twist won't be of much use.
It's mostly more a matter of what it feels like doing something than actual ability to do something with the ski. I have found that Fisher skis seem to have a good balance between liveliness and dampness (mind you I've only tried RC4s and RX8s). Atomics feel more damp than lively. Solomons are lively. Dynastars have a good balance too.