<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Todd M.:
More sidecut gives more choices, choices you can also still ignore if you want. You get more options, you don't lose any (though the skill blends to utilize these options may change)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hi Todd - Not to be a nitpicker, but I'm not so sure I would make quite such a bold statement about sidecut. There is always a point of diminishing returns in everything, and in the case of an extreme forebody sidecut like this ski has, I'm trying to find out if the mfgrs have reached this point yet.
Some examples - For a given length, waist, tail width, and type of construction, an extremely wide tip:
1) Increases the amount of mass swinging far from the center of the ski (ie, the polar moment of inertia), thereby slowing down swiveling moves (ie, decreasing your options, especially in the bumps);
2) Likely makes the ski less suitable for crud and other irregular snow since the forebody is essentially trying to carve around each little terrain irregularity (ie, again, decreasing one's options);
3) Likely makes the ski less suitable for very high speeds because its too responsive (ie, another decrease of options).
These and similar effects may or may not be important with this particular ski, but that's exactly what I'm trying to learn since I haven't had a chance to ski them yet. I'm particularly interested in any on-the-snow comparisons to narrower, short, hard snow skis like the t-power Viper slaloms as well as the 9x pps and X pps GS skis by anyone who has skied both the 9.12 and one or more of these other skis.
Tom / PM