or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Gender uncertainty and my feminine side... Help me Sigmund
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gender uncertainty and my feminine side... Help me Sigmund

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 
I think I have issues and need some advice. A little about me. 38 years old, 5’9” 210lbs, I do not ski fast or steep. I like blue groomers, blue bumps, and wide open glades. I rarely catch a powder day. My current everyday skis are Atomic SX:10s in 170.

I spent the week at Winter Park and yesterday it was the fourth blue sky day in a row. I had been hoping for powder so I could try out my new Metron EX’s. I had a coupon for demo’s so decided to spend the day demoing different skis. I tried several Salomon and Rossie (Zenith and X-wing’s) models as well as some twin tips. However, the skis that really caught my attention were the Rossie B2’s. I knew nothing about the B2’s except they received good reviews on this site. I asked for a 170 something and all the “Euro” behind the counter could find were 166’s.

I took them out and the first run was up the Zephyr and down Cranmer to the Eskimo. They were amazing. They could do short turns as well as longer ones. They were fine with my speed limit which is not that fast. I took the Eskimo up and came down a little bump run and they were even better in the bumps. I then took the Eskimo back up and came down Hughs. They performed better than my SX:10s on this run as well. I was ready to buy. I took them back, and went next door to the Rossie store only to find out…

THE EURO IDIOT GAVE ME WOMEN’S SKIS!!!!!!

I couldn’t believe it. When in the Rossie store, the men’s B’2’s were a darker blue. I had been on the lighter shaded one. I was pissed. I went back to the demo center and the Euro was on a smoke break or something and another person helped me. He clearly agreed that they were women’s skis and did not know how I was given them. I asked for a men’s pair and was given a pair of 174’s.

Here is the difficult part for me to deal with. The men’s 174’s were not even close to as agile, smooth, or any other adjective you can think of as the womens. Don't get me wrong. They were good skis... the women's were amazing They did not have a men’s model in 166 for me to try. The specs are the same for both models, it appears that the flex is a little stiffer in the mens.

My question is two fold:
1) If anyone has skied these, will I find a marked difference between men’s 166’s and the ones I tried?
2) I have migrated towards stiffer skis since I am a bigger guy, maybe I should be looking for something with less flex. If this is the case, what would you recommend? Older is not bad either. I was thinking B1's or something of that nature.

The best part about the women’s B2’s was that, even though they were softer, they held their edges quite nicely when pushed, and were not squirrely. Please offer advice. Should I go ahead and order the men’s 166 and be done with it?
post #2 of 24
If you liked them what does it matter because you can always spraypaint the tops and even if you dont want to spraypaint them I know there are a few men out there in the backcountry skiing K2 Dawn Patrols with tele or AT bindings and for petes sake the Dawn Patrols have happy hawaiian flowers and other girly stuff on the topsheets. I guess what Im saying is I think its how they ski not how they look that really matter to your skiing enjoyment and Ive never bought a ski based on its looks and havent not bought a ski based on its looks either.

The only thing Id be worried about is overdriving that womens ski because the womens skis generally are made for lighter weights and most skis currently on the market are sized based on the skiers weight and so the womens models probably dont come in a size big enough to handle your 200 lbs. At the same time if you dont ever ski very fast or aggressively then you might not run into the overdriving issue.
post #3 of 24
There's an alternative that will save your masculinity, and probably your wallet at the same time: Go with the tele version, the Dirty Bird.

Same specs as the B2W and B2, softer than the men's (like the B2W), MSRP is $250 cheaper (Backcountry.com charges $175 less, $425 vs. $600), and IMHO, the retro graphics look much cooler.

post #4 of 24
If you like the B2W, buy them. If they turn out too soft and you end up outgrowing them, then you have upped you skiing level and it's worth the price. If not, then you don't need the extra performance that comes with a less forgiving ski. Just be careful out there and explore their limits gradually.
post #5 of 24
This is exactly the problem with the "women's" label. A lot of women can and do ski circles around 50% or more of guys, and they use the "men's' version.

A lot of guys can and should benefit from the properties of skis that the marketing people insist on labeling as "women's" skis.

Balderdash! Categorize the frickin skis for their physical properties and let the customers and the sales people work out what they need and want.

No "gender identity" issue here, pal. Buy the skis you like to ski, and if anyone gives you crap, you know where to kick.
post #6 of 24
I don't care if they've got Pink Flowers. If ya Rip no worries,eh.:
post #7 of 24
Thread Starter 
Thanks to those who offered advice. I have found I can get the women's version for about $200 less than the mens. As for outgrowing them, I am not too worried about this as I have skied the same way and terrain for awhile now. I have no wish to push the limits any farther.

On another note, I am now intrigued by the B1. Has anybody skied them compared to the B2? If so, is the flex pattern a little softer? This might be the ski I am looking for, but they do not make them anymore so I cannot demo.
post #8 of 24
I have not skied the B1, but the current model is supposedly unworthy of the Bandit line.
post #9 of 24
My wife had bought the tele version of the B2 (which was the T3, and now I think the Sickbird) for backcountry skiing with AT bindings. She then bought fatter skis so we decided to mount the T3s for alpine skiing. I checked into the differences between the B2, her tele version T3, and the womens B2w. What I found out was that the B2w has one less layer of metal than the B2, which makes it softer. The tele version is identical to the B2 except that it has a thinner layer of metal giving it a stiffness between the regular B2 and the women's model B2w. She is 120 lbs. and skis them in a 170 and loves them as an all-mountain ski, but she hits it pretty hard. They are smooth in the bumps and on hard snow.

The tele models are usually cheaper than their alpine counterparts and offer a softer alternative to basically the identical ski. I would think with your weight you would find the 166s in a B2w too soft, unless you really do ski slow. You might want to consider the Sickbirds as a slightly stiffer alternative. Remember, if you get a twin-tip they will ski like a shorter ski.
post #10 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot View Post
I would think with your weight you would find the 166s in a B2w too soft, unless you really do ski slow.
I thought the exact same thing, so I went out and tried the B2w's again. They fit my style perfectly. I really like my Atomic SX:10's, but these do everything better, except go fast. That is not a big deal with me as I do not like to go fast. On my Atomics, I can be on a blue/black run like Sleeper, and they will feel great even though I am moving above my speed limit. It is like the skis are pushing me to go faster than I want to. One other thing I noticed is that on steeper, icier runs, the Atomics can chatter and make my feet tired. The B2's did not chatter as much, and my feet felt fine, however, I was making shorter turns.

If you have ever seen the guy on the slope doing the slow, smushy/carved turns, usually on older Dynastars, I try to ski like him. You will also see the same guy in the bumps. He is not zipper-lining, but doing slower, controlled turns (over one, around one...). That is also how I try to ski. My other love is the glades, hence the migration towards shorter skis.

As I stated earlier, I think I have been looking at stiffer skis thinking it was a necessity due to my weight. I am now thinking that a less-stiff ski, with torsional strength, will fit me better. I would have liked to try the B2w's in a 174, but they did not have any. I will definitly check out the tele versions.
post #11 of 24
Interesting matt about the Atomics chattering on Ice. I have never well maybe never isn't the right word but Atomics have always held an edge effectively for me on hard conditions. Good luck on your search for the perfect ski.
post #12 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by oboe View Post
This is exactly the problem with the "women's" label. A lot of women can and do ski circles around 50% or more of guys, and they use the "men's' version.

A lot of guys can and should benefit from the properties of skis that the marketing people insist on labeling as "women's" skis.
There's no problem with the women's label. It enables women to get the same constructed ski in a lighter, softer version. If they didn't think tehy could sell skis and market them in this way then they wouldn't be avalable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by matt7180 View Post
On my Atomics, One other thing I noticed is that on steeper, icier runs, the Atomics can chatter and make my feet tired. The B2's did not chatter as much, and my feet felt fine, however, I was making shorter turns.
Chatter is driver error
post #13 of 24
The atomic sx10 will chatter if you are trying to turn them tighter than they want to turn, they are really not a short radius carver. I have tried Bandits, but I don't remember which bandit it was; it was before I knew there were different species of bandits. The one I tried was a lot softer than an SX10, and you could certainly bend it into a tighter shape without any problems. It sounds like you ski very slowly and won't run into problems with it, or the B2W. Just don't expect it to turn your 200+ pounds on a dime. I noticed sportmart http://www.sportmart.ca/store/2produ...DNJBWGR791 E7 had the older bandit on sale in a flyer this week.
post #14 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
The atomic sx10 will chatter if you are trying to turn them tighter than they want to turn, they are really not a short radius carver. I have tried Bandits, but I don't remember which bandit it was; it was before I knew there were different species of bandits. The one I tried was a lot softer than an SX10, and you could certainly bend it into a tighter shape without any problems. It sounds like you ski very slowly and won't run into problems with it, or the B2W. Just don't expect it to turn your 200+ pounds on a dime. I noticed sportmart http://www.sportmart.ca/store/2produ...DNJBWGR791 E7 had the older bandit on sale in a flyer this week.
That would explain why the sx:10's feel better the faster I go; I am making longer turns. It also explains why it can be tiresome forcing them into shorter turns.
post #15 of 24
Another thing about the SX10 is that it tries really hard to carve, so if you force it sideways at all it grips for an instant and then you overpower it, then it grips, then you force it lose, in a rapid cycle. The softer ski just doesn't have a chance; it's always being overpowered by you. The next time your on the SXs try and make sure you only travel in the direction the edge is pointing while controlling where it points by how far you tip it.
post #16 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by volklskier1 View Post
There's no problem with the women's label. It enables women to get the same constructed ski in a lighter, softer version. If they didn't think tehy could sell skis and market them in this way then they wouldn't be avalable.
. . . . and that's exactly my point. It's marketing, it's sales, it's crap. Is there some reason those slighly lighter, slightly softer versions should be available to all who want them but would rather not ski on "pink flowers"? Bull$hit, bull$hit, bull$hit.

and of course women all need heel lifters in their boots. and no man ever needs that. feh. just feh. and, it cannot be gainsaid, bull$hit.
post #17 of 24
So, can I get this right - a guy in a shop gave you a pair of skis, and you liked them a lot, so you call him a "Euro Idiot"?

What does his nationality have to do with anything?

...more importantly, what would you have called him if you DIDN'T like the skis? :
post #18 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wear The Fox Hat View Post
So, can I get this right - a guy in a shop gave you a pair of skis, and you liked them a lot, so you call him a "Euro Idiot"?

What does his nationality have to do with anything?

...more importantly, what would you have called him if you DIDN'T like the skis? :
It does not matter what nationality the guy was… he was still an idiot for giving me the wrong boards. I mention Euro with tongue-in-cheek as I do not have a problem with any foreigners who come to the US to work. Most of the kids who come here to work the ski season are great. However, please learn the language before you make the venture. It took me ten minutes to explain to this guy that I wanted to demo skis… and he works in the rental/demo center.

Several years ago I wanted to work for a year in Europe. I was denied a work visa because I did not score high enough on the proficiency exam. I guarantee you I spoke the language much better than this guy. As a result, I can be a bit touchy about the issue.
post #19 of 24
Wrong?

How were they wrong (unless you mean the colour or graphics were "wrong" for you)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by matt7180 View Post
I took them out .... They were amazing. They could do short turns as well as longer ones. They were fine with my speed limit which is not that fast. I took the Eskimo up and came down a little bump run and they were even better in the bumps. I then took the Eskimo back up and came down Hughs. They performed better than my SX:10s on this run as well....

The men’s 174’s were not even close to as agile, smooth, or any other adjective you can think of as the womens. Don't get me wrong. They were good skis... the women's were amazing
Um, to me it sounds like they weren't wrong at all - quite the opposite - they were, um, "amazing".

(If you check elsewhere on here, you'll see I demoed the K2 Burning Luv recently, and if I was buying new piste skis this year, they would be on my shortlist)
post #20 of 24
volklskier1 is dead wrong on "driver error"; when jamming tight turns on ice it may indeed be the ski.

The difference is marked when it comes to "civilian race" (off the rack) and race stock or "upper end" civilain race skis.

If you are skiing at a high level and on the icy groomers, you may do well to change to a damped "race like" ski.
post #21 of 24
In the case of Matt7180, in Colorado soft stuff, chatter will not likley be an issue.

If you like zatt wommens ski good for you!

Ski it mitt out shame.

Ski in drag ... an nice furry wommenns Boggner mit zat fuzzy collar.

but ..... :

From personal experience, if you ski mit a cigar; don't light it. The smoke can be quite blinding und making you to be blinking and haffing tears in zee eyes!

Signed,

Sigmund ....
post #22 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yuki View Post
In the case of Matt7180, in Colorado soft stuff, chatter will not likley be an issue.

If you like zatt wommens ski good for you!

Ski it mitt out shame.

Ski in drag ... an nice furry wommenns Boggner mit zat fuzzy collar.

but ..... :

From personal experience, if you ski mit a cigar; don't light it. The smoke can be quite blinding und making you to be blinking and haffing tears in zee eyes!

Signed,

Sigmund ....
Thanks Sigmund,

Now about my mother...
post #23 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wear The Fox Hat View Post
Wrong?

How were they wrong (unless you mean the colour or graphics were "wrong" for you)?



Um, to me it sounds like they weren't wrong at all - quite the opposite - they were, um, "amazing".

(If you check elsewhere on here, you'll see I demoed the K2 Burning Luv recently, and if I was buying new piste skis this year, they would be on my shortlist)
It is called dumb-luck. I am glad the IDIOT made a mistake and I was able to try them as they were great skis. That does not detract from the fact that he made a mistake. I expect to be given women's skis only if I ask for them.

If you are trying to insinuate that he was able to process all of my skiing attributes simply at a glance, and deduce that the womens skis were best for me, than he just may be a genius. However, I will stick with my opinion that he did not know what the hell he was doing and grabbed the wrong ones. What happens when joe first-time-skier goes in and this genius gives him 176 Z9's or 182 B4's? That person will probably kill themselves trying to get down the hill.
post #24 of 24
matt7180, now about your musser ...... hmmmmmmmmmm???

zisss is gut! vee are making progress!

wait, I'll call her, she is making us lunch.

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 › Gender uncertainty and my feminine side... Help me Sigmund