or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Yet another "what kind of ski?"!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Yet another "what kind of ski?"!

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
I'm looking to buy skis and am getting lost all the info out there, forums, reviews, etc! I'm definitly looking for some advice - I'm buying as a surprise for a guy who's about 5'9" and 165lbs - intermediate/advanced skiier, whose pretty aggressive - we mostly do North East (Hunter if we have to, VT when we can), mostly on piste, some bumps, some glades. I think he could benefit from a ski to help w/ technique. I have been looking at atomics - M8 - M10...any thoughts?? and the length too - not used to this super short ski stuff! any suggestions? thanks guys :-)
post #2 of 20
in no particular order

1. titanal
2. 165-170 cm
3. < 75 mm underfoot
4. 12-16 meter turn radius

your plight reminds me of me evertime i go to buy a bike!

it's nice of you to try and buy the guy skis, he'll probably be happier if you just level with him, tell him to go demo, and pick up the tab.
post #3 of 20
Hi SG,


What is your price range. Are you looking for a bargain from last year of a top-of-the-line 2006 model? Are you looking to wow him with the hottest ski or looking for a good cruiser ski?

Does your friend ski fast all the time or more moderately? Short & quick turns or long sweepers?

Any brand that he likes? Does he need bindings or do you want him to reuse what he has.

There are perfectly good new skis on the web for $200.00 or $1000.00 can be spent at retail for that top ski that everyone wants.

For example, this ski, the Head 160 in a 170cm length is a very good match for your description and is a universal ski for eastern skiing. http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-2003-HEAD-iC-160_W0QQitemZ5288751194QQcategoryZ62183QQssPageNam eZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem



Barrettscv

post #4 of 20
Thread Starter 
No brand preference, just the right type for him/his level. he actually only started skiing about 4 years ago while in college (late starter!), but improves every time we go. I'd say he skies more moderately than fast, but I think w/ improved technique he'll go a lot faster - he certainly has the confidence. Definitly looking for an older model - not brand new - and ideally would like to have bindings included. I would be psyched to find something good for under $400! He still tends to take wider turns.
thanks for the advice!
post #5 of 20
Hi SG,

One way to reduce the confusion is to do your research at http://www.techsupportforskiers.com/ Become a subscriber, it will save time and money.

Also, read the FAQ thread at the top of this forum.

Here are a few more items:

Head XRC a very good ski-cross design that is easy to ski, forgiving and high performing, includes matching bindings; http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-04-Head-i-XR... cmdZViewItem

Here is a K2 Apache X, a good all mountain cruiser design; http://cgi.ebay.com/K2-Apache-X-167c...QQcmdZViewItem

If you have any questions, feel free to PM me.

Barrettscv
post #6 of 20
Thread Starter 
this is probably a dumb question....but what effects do a larger or smaller "waist" size have? :
post #7 of 20
Wider waist = the ski is more versatile in more conditions. ie they are good in powder as well as good for groom and moguls! The ski is also a bit more stable.

when you get on narrower waists, the flippy fast edge to edge feeling is very nice, and narrower waists mean more of your weight is directed right down over the edges, for nice edge hold on ice. Downsides are that they sink in powder. For New England skiiers, big powder might not be such a condideration although I always preferred my midfats in two Vermont seasons.
post #8 of 20

Sorry, I can't resist

Skigrl:

Sorry, I can't pass on the opening. Wider or narrower waists are only noticed by shallower guys who primarily judge their "skis" by the outside looks and not the more important inner "ski".

Seriously, on a relatively narrow ski, the foot is closer to the edge of the ski and the ski will respond to less pressure. On a wider ski, the foot is farther from the edge and takes a little more effort to tip. This causes the ski to come up on edge a little more slowly and to return to flat more quickly and easily.

While this doesn't affect all of these really good skiers that reside here, the wider ski feel can be very reassuring to more intermediate level skiers. Newer skiers will usually feel like a narrower ski is a little twitchy while a wider ski will feel more stable or will track straight better. The reality is that this is because the newer skier usually struggles a little bit with balance and the narrow ski will respond to these smal variations in balance and begin to turn "on its own".

Therefore, a ski in the range of 68-74 mm in waist width may be better for a newer skier. Also, widths have been going up recently as materials allow a wider ski to not twist (when it bends). 5 years ago a 70mm waisted ski was called a mid-fat and was considered a versatile all-mountain ski, I would say that classification would now apply to 74-76 mm skis. I know, probably more than you really wanted to hear.

Since I like Head skis, I would suggest the XRC 1100 or 800, 163 cm length. But I also like the idea suggested by someone else. Give him a home-made gift certificate good for the ski of his choice or something like that.

My wife and I agreed that, while well-intentioned, she seldom had the background (she's not a skier) to try to buy ski gear (and computer things) for me. It puts both of us in an awkward position. I have to appreciate the effort while regretting that she spent so much on something that I really don't want.

The other thing is that well-fitted boots are more important than skis, and the people here can certainly point you towards good boot fitters who can then assist "both of you" in selecting an appropriate pair of boots for him.
post #9 of 20
definitely get a classic snowrider (maybe available through www.snowrider.at , www.spezialski.de or www.edelwiser.com).

Length 162, width 80mm, Sandwich double titanal, r=12m; available in Europe for around 400€ inclusive post and packaging or with your own favourite design for a bit more)

editet: link didn't work
post #10 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by skigrl
I have been looking at atomics - M8 - M10...any thoughts?? and the length too - not used to this super short ski stuff! any suggestions? thanks guys :-)
Sounds like he is progressing fairly fast. I would look to the 10 or even the 11. Skiing where you are skiing, Huntah and VT, a quick turning mid-fat like the Metrons you mentioned are a great choice. Keep an eye on Ebay for the best deals, I just picked up some Metron 10's for my son, $350.00 shipped. There are also some Atomic Neox's listed for the $130-150 range. So for $500.00 shipped you can get him a set-up that would have costed you a ton more last season at this time.
post #11 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Guy
it's nice of you to try and buy the guy skis, he'll probably be happier if you just level with him, tell him to go demo, and pick up the tab.
It seems that no one wants to be the rude one not answering but only recommending to demo.
It´s nice of them but I´d like to say the same RG did:
we mostly emphasize the importance of demoing. Sometimes it´s not easy to decide even for a knowledgeable skier. Buying skis as a gift/surprise is a rather risky job especially if you don´t know much about them.
Wouldn´t it be possible for you to use the info you get here and arrange some demo before you buy?
post #12 of 20
Thread Starter 
I definitly agree demoing would be the best way to do it - although we probably wont be able to hit the slopes till january, so its tough. (grad school does not let you have many hobbies!!), and we ski only about 4-5 times a year. I actually have a greater knowledge of ski equipment than he does (although thats not saying much!!), especially after lots of research and advice. But I think I may consider taking him to a few places and picking up the tab. although I did come up with a good way to gift wrap the skis so its not so obvious what they are....!
post #13 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by skigrl
I definitly agree demoing would be the best way to do it - although we probably wont be able to hit the slopes till january, so its tough.
Yes, the demo is not always possible.

I agree with my fellow bears that the demo is important. However, the demo is only part of the process. Every buyer needs to do some research to narrow the selection process before selecting the skis to demo. Also, if the buyer seeks to save money and purchase prior season equipment, a demo model may not be available. And, not everyone lives in a location convenient to a good test site. Many of us simply have busy lives and need to make a decision without a demo.

In this case; the selection process needs to error on the side on conservative decision making, good research and a little non biased advice.

There are many excellent skis that are usable by a wide range of skiers in a wide range of conditions. Often, these are not breakthrough models. Just good, solid design and construction that will stand the test of time.



Barrettscv
post #14 of 20
Thread Starter 
Thanks Barrettscv
post #15 of 20
Without further complicating the issue (or question) I would think he would be very happy on a M9 in a 164 or a 171 wouldn't be out of the question but for eastern skiing and bumps I'd still suggest the 164. M10 might be shooting higher than he needs and at his weight and ability the 9 would be an easy to handle versatile ski giving him lots of room to grow in ability. I don't really know the M8 so have no comment on it.

A demo would be great to do but for your purposes maybe not that practical. I'm confident that he would be very happy with this ski for some time to come.
post #16 of 20
Thread Starter 
Can you put R 614 bindings on an M10? found this on e-bay...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MEWA%3AIT&rd=1
post #17 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by gandalf
Skigrl:

Sorry, I can't pass on the opening. Wider or narrower waists are only noticed by shallower guys who primarily judge their "skis" by the outside looks and not the more important inner "ski".

Seriously, on a relatively narrow ski, the foot is closer to the edge of the ski and the ski will respond to less pressure. On a wider ski, the foot is farther from the edge and takes a little more effort to tip. This causes the ski to come up on edge a little more slowly and to return to flat more quickly and easily.
.
Sorry but that has to be the most eastern biased statement I have ever read. If you only ski on groomed an eastern narrow ski is fine.
post #18 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by gandalf
Sorry, I can't pass on the opening. Wider or narrower waists are only noticed by shallower guys who primarily judge their "skis" by the outside looks and not the more important inner "ski".

Seriously, on a relatively narrow ski, the foot is closer to the edge of the ski and the ski will respond to less pressure. On a wider ski, the foot is farther from the edge and takes a little more effort to tip. This causes the ski to come up on edge a little more slowly and to return to flat more quickly and easily.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dougw
Sorry but that has to be the most eastern biased statement I have ever read. If you only ski on groomed an eastern narrow ski is fine.
Doug: Sorry, I'm not sure which part of my post you are objecting to, but I certainly didn't mean for it to sound that way. The first sentence was just trying to reflect the irony I saw in the phraseology of her waist width question when so many guy are so shallow that they look at little about women except their figure.

The rest of the message (the part that starts with seriously) I perceived to be simple physics. A wider ski creates a longer lever arm between the center of force and the 'edge' of resistance. That means the leg has to exert more force at the same edge angle and that the foot has to move farther for the same change in edge angle which implies a slower response (assuming the foot always moves the same speed).

I certainly didn't mean to sound biased, nor did I mean to imply that narrower skis are better. I figured there were plenty of posts about the advantages of wider skis on softer snow and wanted to post a different bit of information (or maybe just opinion).
post #19 of 20
Read it again doug his first paragraph was just for a funny. Replace ski with woman. I think that was his attempt. I didn't click until the second read either.
post #20 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by skigrl
The plate has dimples to mark the drilling points for that binding. That is a heavier binding (built solid), you may not want to go there unless you actually need to run a din of 10 or higher.
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 › Yet another "what kind of ski?"!