Most Important skis of the decades - Page 10

just my opinion, but i see the rossi s7 as being very much a "lets apply what worked in an axiom to what worked in a spatula, and minimize the negatives associated with each", opposed to your implied "lets stick sidecut on a spatula" mindset (at a grossly oversimplified level).

i do think that as a ski itself, the spatula is not exactly perfect, and heck neither are the "improved spatulas" (aka praxis pow/donner party/arg/lotus138/pontoon/kuro/etc).  what was truly revolutionary was the thinking behind the design, and the opening of an entire new design paradigm (which we 100% agree upon).

Quote:

Originally Posted by msolson 

just my opinion, but i see the rossi s7 as being very much a "lets apply what worked in an axiom to what worked in a spatula, and minimize the negatives associated with each", opposed to your implied "lets stick sidecut on a spatula" mindset (at a grossly oversimplified level [ I tried to keep things simple and avoid nerding out too badly - but I think it gets the core idea across... ]).

 

i do think that as a ski itself, the spatula is not exactly perfect, and heck neither are the "improved spatulas" (aka praxis pow/donner party/arg/lotus138/pontoon/kuro/etc).  what was truly revolutionary was the thinking behind the design, and the opening of an entire new design paradigm (which we 100% agree upon [ totally - and thanks for mentioning the Kuro too, forgot that one ]).

 

 

FWIW, I would not minimize the impact of the Hell Bent on the design thinking that led to the S7 either. I ran into the Rossi crew in LCC right after they had been skiing S7 protos and one-upping the Hell Bent figured prominently in the brief conversation I had with them (maybe because my whole family was skiing Hell Bents at that point).

It is perhaps worth noting that the HB added sidecut but not camber. And skied pretty darn well for that stage of the game....

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexzn 

Well, after using my DPS112RPs yesterday in very mixed conditions, I am very glad that the ski technology has evolved to this point in time.  Whatever the lineage is, and whoever takes the credit, it is undeniable that the modern shapes, construction, and flex patterns push the performance envelope very, very far.  This decade looks like a decade of the rockered ski.

I was thinking the same thing when I was skiing the Yvettes a couple days ago.  We've come a long way, Baby!

The most important skis of the decade are the ones I have on my feet  this season.

The evolution of ski shapes and technologies is ever changing.  Each technological advance and design advances come from it's predecessor and market influences. 

The marketeer  wants to exploit all the shapes that are popular to make money . It's our job to sort it out and make the best use of them.

very well put, alex.

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexzn 

S7 for bringing together all the design ideas into a first truly compelling package.

i have been thinking about this a bit more, and am convinced you are right.  

really the s7 is sorta similar to the k2 four in a sense.

the four was not the first at anything per-se, but it tied all aspects into a design that truly spoke to everyone.  bode could win nor-am races, and a beginner could learn to carve.  same with the s7. 

what truly was so interesting about these skis is that they both took a large scattering of existings designs and synthesized them into one cohesive package that was unlike anything else on the market that really worked for nearly everyone.  sure there are limitations, to everything and everyone.  

Should also be mentioned the Blizzard Thermo Technology from early '80 which change stiffness (chamber) when the temperature changes by using slightly different metal top and bottom sheets. 

Volkl P9 SL skis.

The Thremo Ski Technology  started in the early '80 and lasted into the mid '90 when the shaped skis started.  The primary advantage was flex control, softer ski during warmer weather crud and stiffer ski during cold blue ice conditions. This lead to better edge control.  (I've still got my original 2 thremo skis and on the oldest set this is very noticeable).

Now Skis such as Atomic are using a 2 piece system to progressively control the flex.

Advance in technology sure lead to some interesting develeopments.

I don't think it was the most import ski development, but it sure added pressure for other manufacturers to develop significantly better product or lose the lead to something this simple.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philpug 

Atomic's (and Nordica & Blizzards) two layer design do not lead back to Blizzard's Thermo, they are completely different. Heck, Atomic had their "Bionic" design with its two level core before the Thermo was introduced. 

 

As you say "it wasn't that important" in ski development and that is what this thread is about. The Thermo's, I have a pair here with the sherbet bases did ski well but Blizzard in that era was a second tier supplier, not to take anything away from their high end skis but unfortunately they couldn't play with the big boys even though they produced a very good product. The Thermo was their first ski that opened up their race skis to more skiers. Sure it was a technology that worked, but it didn't change the industry. 

What changes industry is something that is radically different and makes a serious advancement. Most steps however are not so drastic.  The marketing of these items is what makes the difference.  The reason I suggested them was that they did work (as you noted, later renditions not as well I will confirm).  This in turn pushes the other manufacturers (yes Atomic and Blizzard had a very strong rivalry in those days) to make advances that in both Marketing and/or Technology.  I believe Klammer started on Atomics and switched to Blizzards if my memory serves correctly (oh to many years ago) which I think aggravated the situation.

Blizzards marketing and sales in North America was not pushed, hence not as well know or sold.  I saw very few Blizzards skiing in North America, again that is Marketing.

Blizzard was a part of the sand that caused Pearls to form, which is why I mentioned them.  I was not trying to create a direct link in technology, just bring attention to a  thorn that spurs it on so to speak.

I hope that's a better answer.  (At the time I was a big fan, but that wained as product development started to wain).

Finally, I haven't made up my mind as to what the best new technology is yet, as I haven't followed/researched it is closely as I did when I was in my teens and early twenties.  I find the comments (you and others) make about skis very informative while for most part unbiased .

Glad you're around to do it as my time to do it is limited.  It is definitely changing my view of what I should be trying when the opportunity arises.  If I had the money and time there are few I'd love to ski with to get first hand experience and guidance.

Keep it up and Thanks,

Volkl Renntiger early 80's. I was in Europe then, how did they sell do in US then? They were the ski in Germany/Austria back then!

Back into this after a few years. Until this year would have continued to vote for the 4S simply because (using Alexzn's criterion extended by MO) it combined a number of successful design bits into the first ski that everyone from late beginner to expert could enjoy. But skiing fantasies that drive purchases have changed.

So I'd nominate the original Gotama, actually. The Goat as the G.O.A.T. Black topsheet with the tiny Buddha, wood sidewalls that grew mold and all. Why? Because even more than the 4S or the S7, it drove a new fantasy that now dominates modern skiing: You can ski off-piste. No matter who you are. Or where you are: Its design allowed respectable performance on groomers, in bumps, trees, freestyle, just about everywhere except sheer ice. Experts could slide out under the ropes on Goats, intermediates could feel like heros in the trees, people of all stripes could (gasp) ski switch in powder. And they were light, as in under 2000 g per ski at 183. No mistake that proto AT types tried to decide between Goats and Exploders; they were the class of the class. 

The S7 didn't radically change that fantasy, it just made it more "fun;" meaning still more forgiving, at some cost of higher end performance. It's more focused on a certain style of skiing in certain terrain. Not a ski for AT, not a ski for groomers. By contrast, the Goat opened up the backcountry to the emerging discipline of freestyle skiing, and in doing so it drew more people into thinking about getting away from the lifts. OK, most didn't, but the ski allowed them to plan to...

Quote:

Originally Posted by msolson 

really the s7 is sorta similar to the k2 four in a sense.

 

the four was not the first at anything per-se, but it tied all aspects into a design that truly spoke to everyone.  bode could win nor-am races, and a beginner could learn to carve.  same with the s7. 

 

what truly was so interesting about these skis is that they both took a large scattering of existings designs and synthesized them into one cohesive package that was unlike anything else on the market that really worked for nearly everyone.  sure there are limitations, to everything and everyone.  

 

The problem with the K2 IV (and you tell me if it applies to the S7) is that didn't /quite/ capture the imagination of truly /everyone/.     

I will grant you that the K2 IV integrated  /outlier/ designs into a cohesive package.      The K2 IV didn't, however, bring enough traditional usability (mainstream thinking, not outlier thinking) over into the cohesive package.         Designs that did that (Volkl P30+ series, for example) seriously won the market.

Outlier designs -> cohesive package of outliers -> toned down package with mainstream traditional flavor (and real technical advances) -> universal adoption

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexzn 

I think the Pocket Rocket was the first all-mountain fat ski, and IIRC it came out before the Gotama.  Volkl is not very good at innovating, but they are very good at marketing and perfecting other's design ideas (and as every generalization, it is inherently flawed).  
 

 

Chubbs and Explosivs and Snow Rangers were out before the PR got there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexzn 

I think influence is not always equals the sales numbers.

Fine, but I was debating the difference between "influence on racers" and "influence on broad swath of high-level adopters so that the on-mountain image actually shifts".     

Sales numbers are not really part of it.

 If K2 and Elan and S have all these shapes, and they're being used by racers, and being sold to beginners like hot cakes, but not being adopted by patrollers or high-level non-pros, then are you really exerting 'influence'?    Or is true influence when all these people finally realise that there is /no reason/ not to buy shapes because the (p30s for example) are better than the straight-sticks left on market, and they can still use their old traditional skills to ski all this new stuff?

What's more influential?    Making a door-sized hole in a wall?  Or putting a nice door in the hole, inviting a large number of people through, giving them tasty treats and then shutting the door behind them?

In a lot of ways, I think that the one that shuts the door is more influential than the one that drills through.    

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4ster 

Aamodt 90's, Girardelli & Zurbriggen 80's for sure belong on any list like this.

For me, the most memorable (pre-Bode) race remains Zurbriggen's '88 Calgary DH run.  His coach waiting '20 years' to use the wax he used, and then Pirmin's hip bumping ride to the gold... made me think of Danny Sullivan's 'spin and win' Indy race.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FairToMiddlin 

For me, the most memorable (pre-Bode) race remains Zurbriggen's '88 Calgary DH run.  His coach waiting '20 years' to use the wax he used, and then Pirmin's hip bumping ride to the gold... made me think of Danny Sullivan's 'spin and win' Indy race.

I've got it on video, now if anyone still owned a VCR that worked?

JF

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexzn 

I think the Pocket Rocket was the first all-mountain fat ski, and IIRC it came out before the Gotama.  Volkl is not very good at innovating, but they are very good at marketing and perfecting other's design ideas (and as every generalization, it is inherently flawed).  
 

Hmmm. Well, you're right that the PR came out earlier, 2002, methinks, than the Goat in 2004. But less clear to me that the two are in any way comparable, or that the PR was the first "all mountain" ski, or that it was the design idea for the Goat.

The PR, recall, was a scaled up TenEighty, 90 mm, marketed as a unique "fun ski" that could handle anything, foam core, extremely soft, extremely forgiving, and a blast in light soft snow or soft bumps at modest speeds. It was supposed to be a more accessible ski than the Super Mountain, which I also owned, and which handled like a runaway freight train in powder. And it was anything but original, since Sollie had been making foam cap skis for years that sold like there was no tomorrow. Recall the XScream? Anyone want to consider that super successful ski as influential in 2012?

So the PR was fun, for sure. But on ice or hard groomers at anything over 20 mph it was truly terrifying, and at any speed in irregular snow it would earn you a trip to the orthodontist for those lost fillings. It went on for, what, 4 more wildly successful years with only cosmetic changes, then gave rise to a succession of slightly more stabile and slightly fatter Sollies like the 1080 and the Gun. When Sollie got serious and stopped with the foam, the lineage stopped too. 

So if sheer numbers of skiers who bought them is your criterion, then yep the PR rules all. But as for your other arguments, well, Volkl introduced the Snow Ranger at ISPO, marketed as the first "all mountain" ski, back in 1994. It was specifically aimed at strong skiers who liked to go off-piste, with a decent taper (unusual for the time) and core/edges borrowed from the Renntiger R  for carving chops. Owned one, definitely was a revelation - both personally and in the skiing press - for its off-piste versatility and build quality, but ability to carve. "Glassy" was a term I recall be used to describe it. It opened up sidebounds to skiers; patrollers loved it. Your first claim, about the PR being an all mountain ski, let alone the first, does not hold.

Nor does your second claim, about Volkl not being very good at innovating. The original Goat was 15 mm wider than the PR, targeted to a different demographic, as a powder and backside ski for serious skiers, had an all wood core, and it evolved every year with changes to the sidewall, stiffer flex, and so on. If you want the lineage, here's Powder Magazine's comment in 2007: "The Gotama has assumed the place the Explosiv once held as Volkl’s flagship freeskiing ride. Fat and floaty, the Gotama shines in deep powder, but is reasonably lightweight and transitions easily to hard pack and groomers. There’s a reason this wood-core ski is ubiquitous at deep resorts like Jackson and Squaw." I'd make the case that the Snow Ranger begat the Explosiv, which split into two lineages: The Goat was Volkl's freeskiing backside twin model and the Mantra was its big mountain gun. Today, of course, the Chopstick is the dialed up Goat, and the Katana is the dialed up Mantra. So I see no connection to or influence by, Salomon here. It's a clear tree back to 1994. Or if you want to include the Renntiger R, 1983. I'm no longer much of a Volkl fan, but to call them good borrowers of other's ideas is so ahistorical its funny.

As for the Goat's influence, IMO, it was not in introducing vast numbers of recreational skiers to powder skiing - for sure the PR takes that title - but in driving the subsequent decade of freeski development. The reason you don't see any fat foam core cap twins is that they truly sucked for most activities other than cruising soft snow. So much for influence...

OK, in order: 1) The XScream was 106-68-96. It was first sold in 1998, and was a cap - recall that the plastic cap was invented by Salomon in 1990 as a derivation of Volant's earlier steel "three sided torsion box." - with a foam and wood core, mostly foam. I know this because a buddy that I gave my pair to lost one and cut open the other out of curiosity. It was never advertised as, or considered to be, a midfat, let alone a powder ski. (Recall that the Atomic Powder Plus was around by 1994.) No, XScreams didn't suck for groomers, since they were geared at on-piste intermediates to low advanced who wanted a light, easy to initiate ski that could handle a bit of groomer crud or light bumps. Its main trick was the dampening bars, initially at front and then at both ends, and idea it borrowed from the earlier external Rossignol VAS system. But it had neither extreme - ice or powder - in mind, and it was a real thrill ride at any speed over 30 mph. 

2) The Snow Ranger was 105-79-98. It was first sold in 1994, and was a vertical sidewall torsion box laminate with solid wood core and base/edges derived from the famous Renntigers of the early 70's to the late 80's. It was considered a serious (and stiff) "wider" ski for good skiers who wanted to explore off-piste (thus the name), and gained a reputation for being remarkably versatile. (As in, stabile at north of 40 mph on hardpack.) It was also one of the fatter skis of its day not aimed entirely at powder. Thus, the Snow Ranger preceded the XScream by 4 years, it was constructed very differently, it had a very different flex, it was 11 mm wider, and it was aimed at a very different user. But yeah, other than that, the radii show they were definitely similar...

3) Don't hate/trash Salomon at all. Owned a slew of Sollie products over the years, including said XScreams, S9000's (yep, early adopter ) , Pocket Rockets, and demoed a bunch more including the Gun, Gun Lab, Fury, Sandstorm, Shogun, and several X-Wings, think I posted a laudatory review of one of the latter a good while back here. Demoed it at Whistler, I recall, along with a B-5 that I hated. Oh yeah, and skied in nothing but Sollie boots for about 20 years, still use an old pair of their Lab plugs.

4) On the other hand, I'd bet everyone in the known universe (well, cannot speak for you) would agree that Salomon jumped the shark, recreational ski-wise, by the early-middle 2000's. Recall the Pilot system? Recall how the reviews of skis like the XScream and Pocket Rocket began to contain the preface, "If you're looking for an introduction to...?" and ski sites were full of complaints about foam cores going dead after 50 days? (Something K2 coulda told them.) Recall that foam, light n' easy skis like the B2 or PR also fell behind the tech curve several years before either company acknowledged it? Obviously, their skis continued to sell well for rentals and intermediates, obviously their racing products remained solid (well...), and obviously, they've come back nicely since they've turned into rebadged Atomics. But face it, Salomon skis pretty much fell off the edge of the world for a decent chunk of this century because they clung to what made them money in the 1990's. 

5) If you want to give credit to Salomon where it's due, you should mention that they invented the twin tip ski, and thus helped create park and freestyle skiing.

Well of course, I'm Rader than god.

You're right about the tail, it was really stiff compared to the front. Think that is why Salomon introduced the twin prolink design. But XScream owners remain weirdly loyal. And yeah, K2's did a lot of innovation back then. I owned a pair of Olin Sl's that I loved, think they were made by K2 in those days, no? 

You're also right that Sollie has never quite given itself up to its new Teutonic masters. Thus the Rocker2, BRR, other very French takes. May be why skis like the Shogun, still light n' quick, are popular. OTOH, bet that 20 BC's are bought for each Rocker2, and maybe 100 for each BRR. So not sure that adventurous spirit really gets 'em anywhere. But definitely think that being rebadged  Atomics doesn't help either. 

Yeah, lost in all this is that Dynastar (and Stockli) have made respectable "synthetic" cores all along, no issues with longevity. Metal probably helps, but seem to recall threads on why not all foams are/were created equal. Still, Rossignol and Salomon do not seen to have chosen their grail wisely, as the knight said. 

Hell, I argue with you as much as with my wife, so yes clearly we should do some turns...