or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Ski Press - 2008 Ski Review Issue Posted
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski Press - 2008 Ski Review Issue Posted

post #1 of 18
Thread Starter 
post #2 of 18
Thanks for the heads up. Sadly I see that they've stuck with their "improved" flash reader from last year instead of posting them as PDFs they way they did the prior to that. Ski Press has the best reviews by far of the magazines, but they've made it infuriating to read online now. I suppose I shouldn't be complaining, great product for free both online and in physical form...
post #3 of 18
Hmm, how do I access the reviews?
post #4 of 18
Nordica really cleaned up in this review in the carvers category. The midfat section was the first review I came across that did not have a Nordica in first, second, or third place. I really prefer the format of this test over some of the tests that other magazines do.
post #5 of 18
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
Hmm, how do I access the reviews?
Try this:

post #6 of 18
figure it out! Duhhhhhh
post #7 of 18
Sadly, no junior ski reviews.
post #8 of 18
Thread Starter 
Originally Posted by CanuckInstructor View Post
Ski Press has the best reviews by far of the magazines
I agree
post #9 of 18
No race stock reviews...
post #10 of 18
Originally Posted by D(C) View Post
No race stock reviews...
I was pretty bummed to see those lacking... but everything else was pretty good IMO. I do miss seeing the race course tests comparing top speeds and runs.
post #11 of 18
Originally Posted by D(C) View Post
No race stock reviews...
That is a bummer, I didn't even realize it was missing till you pointed it out. Really a shame given they were the only ones to even bother with race skis anymore. Although I wouldn't put it out of the question to see them come up in a supplemental issue together with some junior race skis.

I also noticed that they're not listing the tester profiles either this year, which personally I found helpful since you can usually find a few coaches or instructors you've skied with and see which they ranked highest.
post #12 of 18

can you trust the reviews?

I did not want to post this, but i had to after reading the first review.
Please don't forget that the reviews are subjective even if the testers are trying to be objective. There are many factors which influence the tester's run such as: snow, terrain, ski tune, binding ramp, skier weight, technique etc. That said, the review i have read seemed...subjective. It was the review of the highest scoring ski in the Men's Groomers High Perf. SL category. It got a higher mark for Energy. Hmm... The testers probably had a very different experience with the ski than i did. I felt that the ski was "heavy" for an SL w/ a "lack of nimbleness". It was still quick, though... This is another review of the ski. Very different from what the guys from the mag said. For them, the '05 ski was the winner. If you did not know, the winner had been unchanged for 4 seasons now, except for the plate (and possibly binding). The ski itself (and sidecut i believe) are the same.
One more thing. Did you notice that the ski came last in the Women's SL category? Is it posible for a ski to win in the men's category and lose in the women's? I thought that the men said that it was very easy to turn etc. Their explanation is good for a laugh. Most women testers do not ski anything longer than 158? LOL. Then, they said that light weight women really liked the ski. That's exactly the opposite of what i had experienced. Can you trust the reviews?
post #13 of 18
Originally Posted by sywsyw View Post
Can you trust the reviews?
No, but the pictures are nice. The retail 9S is terrible anyway... everyone knows that.
post #14 of 18
Agree that the 9S wouldn't be my call for high energy, but it's always been liked by SPW - look at the last few years - as well as most Canadian and Euro reviewers, and it's a lot stiffer than the Bandits from 94 mm down, which most people assume by default define "Rossi."

As far as the women's, last year the 9S was under "Race Sl" (not race stock), also had a big difference between males (highest overall score) and females (good but not stellar). Having skied both the 158 and 165 in 05-06 models, I find an unusual difference in stability and power. Maybe the scores just reflect length. :

Overall, really miss the race ski reviews and wonder where some of the manufacturers from several years ago went to. Remember when they called it the "biggest ski test in North America" and had ridiculous numbers of skis to peruse? Somebody's piggy bank must be empty.
post #15 of 18
I felt that the "winner" from the SL category was a little stiff in the 165 (i weigh 155 lbs). Have not skied the 158.

I found race stock reviews on a website. I think that i even posted a thread with a link to that site. The reviews are no longer posted on the site but for anyone interested i can write down the scores for each ski. I have the scores for the SL skis.

I think that the reviews are good because the scores reflect what epicskiers have said about the skis. For example, the Rossi SL and Dynastar are easy to ski (for a race stock ski), the Dobermann SL is very demanding (just like in Heluva's reviews). The Volkl Racetiger is a little more demanding than the French skis but no where near the Dobermann.

I have info on the following skis:
Fischer WC SL and SC (retail)
Atomic SL 12 PB and ST 12 (both retail)
Blizzard Sigma SL Magnesium
Head WC i.SL RD
K2 Apache S ( i think it is race stock)
Nordica Dobermann SL R WC
Ogasaka Triun S (i guess it is race stock)
Dynastar Speed Omeglass Comp
Volkl Racetiger SL WC and SL Racing (retail)
Rossi RS WC Gold T-Box and R9S Oversize (retail)
Salomon Sl LAB ZZ2 and Equipe 3V Race (retail)
post #16 of 18
At the end of the day the only review you can trust is your own, however subjective it may be.
post #17 of 18
At least they haven't forgotten that carving ski's still actually exist and people still buy and ski them. Being from the midwest its important, to us a wide ski is something in the 68mm-70mm range! I actually bought a pair of the Rossignol 9S Overize last year based on theirs and Ski Canada's reviews, not all they were cracked up to be! Those Canadians love their Rossignols! Overall the Ski Press reviews are better than most, I really like their format.
post #18 of 18
I just leafed through a Skiing Magazine I got in the mail yesterday, and it would be a wonderful world if the majority instead of the minority of my ski days were in powder conditions. The ski tests I've seen so far this year all seem to profile a lot of "fat" skis suitable for the fluff. So, I 'm left to assume a majority of the skiers out there have accerss to big powder mounatins and are purchasing the gear to enjoy it. That's great and I'm happy for you if you fall into this category. I have to admit face shots sell skiing a lot better than groomed granular!
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 › Ski Press - 2008 Ski Review Issue Posted