EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › B5 and Slalom Sidecuts in Big Turns
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

B5 and Slalom Sidecuts in Big Turns - Page 3

post #61 of 80
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Pugliese
Heh, Byron was following us all over Okemo.
Hey I didn't say I was topped out.



Catching air on the rollers is fun.
post #62 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scalce
Hey I didn't say I was topped out.



Catching air on the rollers is fun.
Neither did I, we had to wait for Byron.



(I know when Byron reads this he is going to join in )
post #63 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond
Love how some of you guys fling around terms like "ignorance" and "ridiculous" while misquoting people. I never stated that I was running flat, did I? You assumed that. I did for a few hundred feet, when I hit 54. In fact, most of the time I had a light edge on, as I did say, making very long radius turns. And it slowed the skis into the mid-high 40's, while stabilizing them a bit - although still had twitchy shovels and extreme fore/aft sensitivity. Nor did I say I was in a full tuck, which I think are adolescent outside a Super-G or downhill course. You and ssh assumed that. The point of my own experience was to argue it is possible to ski a short radius carver fast, and under control, but it isn't their strength. I didn't enjoy it even in a 14 m ski. Is that so "ridiculous?"

Some of you need to drink less coffee, slow down and actually think about the posts, before leaping onto your keyboard. Also nothing wrong with using less inflamatory language when you disagree. Called "civility," for those of you brought up on TV's shouting heads. We're not idiots just because we have a different take on something than you...
After "carefully" rereading your post. You say you never said you ran flat and then and i quote" I did for a few hundred feet, when I hit 54"
So you did run flat,WOW? and it was obvious from your first post that you did from the context of it. So, basically you are full of BS! your own post contradicts itself. did you run flat & get going 54 or didn't you! You might want to decide what you are talking about before jumping to your keyboard. Maybe you need some more coffee to think clearly!
post #64 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman
Yes!!! They are stable at fast speeds:


ON EDGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yep.
Keep 'em on edge.
And keep the "fast" below 60 or you will be scraped off the edge of the trail.
post #65 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scalce
Sometimes I like skiing so fast that the wind is so loud you can't hear anything and your shell turns into a parachute when you get out of your tuck.

and to imagine I've done it on Metron XIs

the horror

the horror
You know getting out of a tuck on the hill at ??? mph and sitting up (getting out of a crouch and as you let off and scan the horizon to see what made you slow down) on bike over the ton feels very similar.
post #66 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost
Yep.
Keep 'em on edge.
And keep the "fast" below 60 or you will be scraped off the edge of the trail.
Yep. And you'd better know how and when to tip. Can you imagine cranking over on a hypercarver at 45 or 50mph? You may be headed for the trees upside down!
post #67 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond
I never stated that I was running flat, did I? You assumed that. ... Nor did I say I was in a full tuck, which I think are adolescent outside a Super-G or downhill course. You and ssh assumed that. The point of my own experience was to argue it is possible to ski a short radius carver fast, and under control, but it isn't their strength. I didn't enjoy it even in a 14 m ski. Is that so "ridiculous?"
Actually, I didn't assume that you were, nor did I say that you were. I said that if I was choosing a ski for speed (running flat and in a tuck), I wouldn't pick the Metron (or any other smaller turn radius ski).

However, as you note, you can amp 'em up if you want to (and, I would argue, the M:b5 quite a bit more than a 6*).
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond
Some of you need to drink less coffee, slow down and actually think about the posts, before leaping onto your keyboard. Also nothing wrong with using less inflamatory language when you disagree. Called "civility," for those of you brought up on TV's shouting heads. We're not idiots just because we have a different take on something than you...
I agree with this completely.
post #68 of 80
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
Yep. And you'd better know how and when to tip. Can you imagine cranking over on a hypercarver at 45 or 50mph? You may be headed for the trees upside down!
Do you guys ever cringe when you think about some nasty wipeouts you have had?

I do

brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
post #69 of 80
Fortunately, it's been a long time since I've had a really nasty one... I'm going to try to keep it that way!
post #70 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
Fortunately, it's been a long time since I've had a really nasty one... I'm going to try to keep it that way!
I had one of my most painfull ones this past season. I am wearing a helmet now.
post #71 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman
I am just tired of hearing about the short coming of smaller radius skis. you can't generalize that much and there are many more issues that affect a skis characteristics. is radius a big yes! Are there others hell yes!

Well, maybe you should stop hyping the hell out for them then? Fact is, short radius skis suck for fast, agressive freeskiing, period. Some designs may work better than others at mitigating the shortcomings of a deep sidecut, but you still give up way too much to skis of a larger radius. Anybody who skis a 12m ski all around and thinks it is versitile, is not skiing the least bit fast or agressively - if there were, they would be on something else.
post #72 of 80
There are different ways of skiing the mountain in a dynamic way. A long radius, stiff fat ski is a great choice, and a narrow waisted super sidecut is another. I use one with a 25.5 radius and one with a 14.4 radius. I think these Atomic guys are simply saying, that their ski crosses into both worlds. That said, a dedicated long radius fat ski will be better at certain manuvers and conditions; and a 65 mm SL will also be better at its specialty. My observation of the Metrons is that they don't compromise a great deal to obtain a lot of versatility, and a lot of capability comes from the pilot, not the ski.
post #73 of 80
Here we go again. The pot has been stirred. The last "big ski" I had was a 198 cm K2 Merlin V1 . I never found the top end of this ski. But I never really enjoyed it like the smaller radius carvers I have skied since. But to each his own. I don't ski at 40-50 mph making long radius turns. So I have little appreciation for the skis and the type of skiing HS enjoys. I have the M11 and have skied the B5 a few times in the shorter 162 cm length. To say the ski is solid as a rock and substantial is an understatement , in a 172 cm I would have to believe these characteristics are even more amplified.

I think Beta Racer said he had a pair of B5 last year and he skis the whole stable of Atomic GS and SG skis. I'd like Beta Racer to weigh in on this discussion and provide his comments regarding any compromise in high speed larger radius turns the B5 gives up to the skis that are specifically designed for this type of skiing. A Man probably has close to the same quiver , but maybe this can be settled by somebody that hasn't becomes as engaged in this discussion. Nothing I'm sure will get settled, but WTH!
post #74 of 80
Cirquerider is right on. HS has once again overstated his case and demonstrated his lack of insight. If an ex-Olympian (Martin Bell) talks about the speed and stability of the Atomic Metron, I would suggest taking his insights over those of anyone with less obvious credentials (including me!).
post #75 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star
Fact is, short radius skis suck for fast, agressive freeskiing, period. Anybody who skis a 12m ski all around and thinks it is versitile, is not skiing the least bit fast or agressively - if there were, they would be on something else.
I guess for a good skier it doesn't matter. I used to think along roadkill's long ski lines until I saw a skier from the Japanese national team straight line Thunderbird at Mt. Bachelor on 157cm slalom skis. He cruised into the base with a few smooth long turns at over 60 mph. A good skier can enjoy a short, short radius ski without the need of stability crutch at high speeds.
post #76 of 80
I've never said that the 162 or 172 mm metron are unstable, except how their stablity is compromised by their sidecut and length. Of course they are fairly stable - they have a damp construction, a plastic plate, and a rediculously heavy binding. This is all to compensate for the short length and extreme sidecut.
post #77 of 80
The language is too imprecise "stable at fast speeds":

Stable, compared to what? A DH racing ski? A slalom race ski? A typical GS sidecut cruizer? My old 208 Kästle SGs (sidecut radius about 50 m)?

Fast, compared to what? a "speed skiing" meet? straightlining near cliffs in the outback? A blast on DH race course? typical GS racing speeds? typical "fast" skiers (35mp)?

I bet our disagreements would be less if we could define the terms better.
post #78 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star
Well, maybe you should stop hyping the hell out for them then? Fact is, short radius skis suck for fast, agressive freeskiing, period. Some designs may work better than others at mitigating the shortcomings of a deep sidecut, but you still give up way too much to skis of a larger radius. Anybody who skis a 12m ski all around and thinks it is versitile, is not skiing the least bit fast or agressively - if there were, they would be on something else.
I 86'd it!
post #79 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman
(words not worthy of our esteemed forum)!
Don't sugar coat it. Tell him what you really think!
post #80 of 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfydog
Don't sugar coat it. Tell him what you really think!
Sorry, I erased the post. Decided with the help of ssh that I don't want to stoop to his level!
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 › B5 and Slalom Sidecuts in Big Turns