EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Economics of ski purchases
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Economics of ski purchases - Page 2

post #31 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier219 View Post
Maybe Phil can help me, but I am having a hard time justifying another pair of skis to myself. I have three "active" pair right now (the old straight boards in the garage don't count) -- a carver, a mid-fat, and a fat. Conceivably these cover the whole spectrum for me, and they are all unique and different to the point where I always know what ski to pick on a given day. But I have this odd lust to add a pair of Heads to my lineup -- either iM77 between the carver and mid-fat, or iM82 between the mid-fat and fat. These new skis would crowd the quiver and sort of overlap the capabilities I already have. So I am having a hard time pulling the trigger. But damn I want them! So Phil, how does one bring oneself to buy skis in such a predicament? Help a brother out.
First...you shouldn't have trouble deciding If you need another pair..but more so WHICH pair to buy. But I need more info...what are the three skis you have, size, dimensions and age. Plus where your skiing will be done and what type you like to do.
post #32 of 45
IF you need it, you can use the fact that you tune and wax your own gear, and buy season passes (never mind the overhead on these things - think of all the money you're saving! ahem). And if you don't already, well, there's some more stuff to go buy. Predicament solved.
post #33 of 45
For the finincially conscious, I have the following advice:

Blow your first wad o dough on getting good boots and getting properly fitted boots from a boot adjusting dude.

Next, demo for a bit and see what kind of skis you like. Look at how much money you're blowing on demoing skis. Pick your favorite skis and figure out how many demo rentals the cost.

Ask youself if you'll ski on those skis enough to make your money back before you'll want another pair. (Disreguard accident potential, its and accident afterall.) If you only ski once a year for 4 days on your annual trip to park city, getting a smorgasboard of skis from the demo shop for the conditions of the day may be more fun than pointing the powder skis you bought down an ice sheet.

Be sure to factor in how much you would pay to not lug skis vs how much you would pay not to sit in a rental shop.

This may help you both find the skis you like most and keep you from blowing money on skis that turn out to be crap for you.
post #34 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Pugliese View Post
First...you shouldn't have trouble deciding If you need another pair..but more so WHICH pair to buy. But I need more info...what are the three skis you have, size, dimensions and age. Plus where your skiing will be done and what type you like to do.
OK, give me the diagnosis. Current skis are:

2004/2005 Fischer RX-8 180cm, 66mm waist -- hardpack carver
2004/2005 Elan M666 184cm, 76mm waist -- all mountain mid-fat
2005/2006 Volkl Karma 185cm, 88mm waist -- powder and spring snow

Age 37, 6'1", 190lb, level 8-9 but not great in bumps. East coast skiing predominantly (~30 days a year) and maybe a week out West this year if I can pull it off. Here's what I am thinking -- the iM77 is a better carving mid-fat than the M666, and would fit in-between the M666 and RX-8. The iM82, on the other hand, fits between the M666 and Karma, and would be a slightly better all-mountain ski than the Karma. I am leaning towards the iM77 myself.
post #35 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star View Post
The im88's only made it ~20 days last year, before I broke the tail...
Does this surprise anybody?

That said I've got a nasty crushed edge section on my 88s too and don't recall hitting anything with the edges that could have done that. I am suspect of their build quality overall.
post #36 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier219 View Post
OK, give me the diagnosis. Current skis are:

2004/2005 Fischer RX-8 180cm, 66mm waist -- hardpack carver
2004/2005 Elan M666 184cm, 76mm waist -- all mountain mid-fat
2005/2006 Volkl Karma 185cm, 88mm waist -- powder and spring snow

Age 37, 6'1", 190lb, level 8-9 but not great in bumps. East coast skiing predominantly (~30 days a year) and maybe a week out West this year if I can pull it off. Here's what I am thinking -- the iM77 is a better carving mid-fat than the M666, and would fit in-between the M666 and RX-8. The iM82, on the other hand, fits between the M666 and Karma, and would be a slightly better all-mountain ski than the Karma. I am leaning towards the iM77 myself.
The IM77 is very similar to the 666, and the im82 is very similar to the Karma... a lot of overlap if you took either route. You've got two great midfats already, you should look into something in the high 90s/mid 100s as a dedicated pow ski- maybe a Supermojo if you want a Head.
post #37 of 45

Skis and $

First, I'm an old guy and have only X number of good years left. So I worked all my life and now if I want skis, boots, trips etc. I just do it because I'm not going to take it with me. I'll leave my heirs all my ski's, then maybe they'll get off their fat asses and get some exercise.

Second, Highway Star "SHUT UP"!!!!!! Your ski damaging exploits are about as interesting as watching grass grow in January.
post #38 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier219 View Post
OK, give me the diagnosis. Current skis are:

2004/2005 Fischer RX-8 180cm, 66mm waist -- hardpack carver
2004/2005 Elan M666 184cm, 76mm waist -- all mountain mid-fat
2005/2006 Volkl Karma 185cm, 88mm waist -- powder and spring snow

Age 37, 6'1", 190lb, level 8-9 but not great in bumps. East coast skiing predominantly (~30 days a year) and maybe a week out West this year if I can pull it off. Here's what I am thinking -- the iM77 is a better carving mid-fat than the M666, and would fit in-between the M666 and RX-8. The iM82, on the other hand, fits between the M666 and Karma, and would be a slightly better all-mountain ski than the Karma. I am leaning towards the iM77 myself.
I would say either a ski that will help you in the bumps that will still be fun like a Supercharger, Sweet Daddy or Fugative or (as mentioned) a 100mm waisted ski.
post #39 of 45
dchan...ssh...there is something wrong with the web site.

I just saw a thread where the words "economics", "ski purchases" & "Phil Pugliese" were all in the same thread. I think the site is moving words from thread to thread and thought I'd report it.

Thanks.....UL
post #40 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadpat View Post
Seriously, I think it is best to buy last year's model (close enough to this year, still new ski and you can shop for a good deal).
yes.
post #41 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takecontrol618 View Post
The IM77 is very similar to the 666, and the im82 is very similar to the Karma... a lot of overlap if you took either route. You've got two great midfats already, you should look into something in the high 90s/mid 100s as a dedicated pow ski- maybe a Supermojo if you want a Head.
You know, I was thinking about that, but would rarely get to use them in their element, and if I had to travel by air with one pair of skis that may need to handle multiple conditions somewhere else in the world, it wouldn't be a pow ski. The 88mm waist on the Karma is about as wide as I want for overall use -- wider skis often feel clumsy to me when skiing off-piste in trees and tight spaces. This is likely my fault and not the skis, but I do get the impression that narrower is more nimble in general.
post #42 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Pugliese View Post
I would say either a ski that will help you in the bumps that will still be fun like a Supercharger, Sweet Daddy or Fugative or (as mentioned) a 100mm waisted ski.
I am checking those out Phil, thanks for the recc.
post #43 of 45
As for justifying the cost of skis, this is my logic:
-Don't buy the current year since there are lots of deals on last year's.
Similar product with same technologies. Doing your homework pays off!
It's just cyclical, so why not benefit?
-Specific to skis: Buying older stock vs buying used costs a little more, but the same skis ought to last a little longer, plus there is the "peace of mind" issue. ^^Not experienced in judging edges, etc.
-Models that are a little too old, or lower end are totally disposable since
resale approaches nil, and I like to have middle of the road stuff.
^^Like a nice bmw, or toyota, value is retained over other models in the
same price range.

So, by getting a solid mid-price recent ski (1-2years old) maximizes my enjoyment since what I am not-spending (there is no saving) can be put towards skiing, I'll lose minimally over the long run whenever I sell the skis (two seasons).
That and I get $1000" worth of "old" ski vs $500 of "new" ski. Full price kills me since I believe that retail is for chumps. SOMETIMES there are must have items that have just come out, but to me they aren't skis.

Ex: A good "$1100" set-up for $500, use it for 2 years, when I sell
I don't lose that much compared to paying full price for current year setups.
Any associated "loses" is better than renting, since rentals are usually crappy, and you like/are used to the ones you own. So anything lost on skis that are a deal is negligible.

I demo'ed the supershapes last year, liked em alot, but no was was I dropping $1000+ 15% taxes + bindings for them.
However, after selling my atomic setup, I broke even.
And theoretically ahead since the # of times I didn't rent surpassed what I spent on boots
Dunno if that seems dry, but it makes sense to me. Skis are HIGHLY cyclical in the consumer market, and subject to trends like fashion, so why not get the same/similar ski, but last year's and with different graphics for a good bit less?
Plus with $500 I can make back the skis in a year

As for getting additional pairs - depends how often you use them vs rental demo/etc.
post #44 of 45
Just but them on the net and save the 60-70 % upfront !!


I bought a pr of '05 Atomic SX10's w/Neox 412 bindings for $550 in '05 Sticker price ($1200-1300 ), and then i just bought the '06 model with the Neox 412 binding for $299 saved some SERIOUS dinero and can sell the '05 at the end of the yr.

i used to buy skis locally but the shop went out of business now the nearest GOOD shop is 2.5 hr drive one way --so the net was the answer
post #45 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by trekchick View Post
Well its like this.
If you have a budget to buy ski gear, and you get a really, REALLY good deal, then you have more ski gear money to keep shopping. If your second, or third purchase takes you over the previous set budget, the original purchases don't get the blame. Are you following me so far?:

Now, second scenario:
If you get an 900.00 ski for 500.00, you didn't spend 500.00, you saved 400.00, which entitles you to keep looking for more gear.

Class is in recess for now, I will have more lessons later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldMember View Post
I've heard it mentioned, normally in dark bars, men's locker rooms, and other places of safe recluse, that there is a double-secret school of wifery that all mothers send their daughters to. Among other traits taught (i.e., it's always the man's fault, etc.), household finance is one of the most popular courses. Once married, the properly educated wife employs the techniques learned at the school of wifery and leave men in a constant state of conundrum in trying to define the logic of certain acts. Now while I've often wondered about the existence of the school, I've never seen any actual proof of its existence. However, with this post, I believe we may have stumbled upon one of the tenured instructors of the school...... This potential sighting piques the interest of many males and warrants further investigation into this mythical institution....
You may be on to something, but you'll never be able to prove it!:
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 › Economics of ski purchases