EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Does expensive gear have a placebo effect?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Does expensive gear have a placebo effect? - Page 2

post #31 of 47
Thread Starter 
Since posting this observation, it occurred to me that, in certain circumstances, it may not be what you actually pay, but what you don't pay that influences and complicates the perception of value. A couple years ago I bought a pair of used Tecnica XT17 plug boots for $50 and have loved them ever since. The fact that I only paid 1/10 or so of what they originally cost gives them even a greater allure -a much greater cost-benefit, if you will. In other words, I still think of them as a $500 boot even though I paid a fraction of that. So it is not the money I put out, but what the original cost was that influences my perceptions. If I was told that these boots actually retailed for $50 and that is what I paid for them, my impression of them might be profoundly different - in fact, I probably would not buy them because they do not "cost enough." I have heard it said that if you can not sell your house, raise the price so that people will believe they are getting more by paying more.
I just pulled the trigger on a pair of Blizzard Chronus which I got for half the $900 retail. While the price I paid will not in any way impact how they actually ski, it does impact how I think about them. Everyone gets pleasure from a good deal, and that can generate good vibes. But in the final analysis, am I skiing a $900 ski or a $450 ski? In my mind, I am getting the performance of a $900 ski for half the price, and that enhances the experience despite the fact, or in fact because I paid what I did. If they retailed for $450 and that is what I paid, it would be qute a different experience. But then, if they turned out to be monster performers, I would consider them, at $450, to be a steal and simply undervalued. Most interesting. I should just go skiing....
post #32 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by deliberate1 View Post
I should just go skiing....
We all should!!! It's snowing like crazy here, calling for a foot or more... time to dust off the Bandits and not touch a single gate all weekend!:
post #33 of 47

Most of my stuff...

...is Atomic race stock FIS-legal, which I usually get at race form prices. I usually get deals on race clothing, armor, wax, helmets, goggles, etc. So it's not the amount of money I spend on any piece of ski gear, it's the bang for the buck...
post #34 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by deliberate1 View Post
Since posting this observation, it occurred to me that, in certain circumstances, it may not be what you actually pay, but what you don't pay that influences and complicates the perception of value. A couple years ago I bought a pair of used Tecnica XT17 plug boots for $50 and have loved them ever since. The fact that I only paid 1/10 or so of what they originally cost gives them even a greater allure -a much greater cost-benefit, if you will. In other words, I still think of them as a $500 boot even though I paid a fraction of that. So it is not the money I put out, but what the original cost was that influences my perceptions. If I was told that these boots actually retailed for $50 and that is what I paid for them, my impression of them might be profoundly different - in fact, I probably would not buy them because they do not "cost enough." I have heard it said that if you can not sell your house, raise the price so that people will believe they are getting more by paying more.
I just pulled the trigger on a pair of Blizzard Chronus which I got for half the $900 retail. While the price I paid will not in any way impact how they actually ski, it does impact how I think about them. Everyone gets pleasure from a good deal, and that can generate good vibes. But in the final analysis, am I skiing a $900 ski or a $450 ski? In my mind, I am getting the performance of a $900 ski for half the price, and that enhances the experience despite the fact, or in fact because I paid what I did. If they retailed for $450 and that is what I paid, it would be qute a different experience. But then, if they turned out to be monster performers, I would consider them, at $450, to be a steal and simply undervalued. Most interesting. I should just go skiing....
Agreed, its not what I paid (I always get a deal), its knowing the value and or the level or quality of gear I have.
post #35 of 47

Ski VS Skier Performance Contribution

Hey gang, I have another scenerio to chew on. How much does equipment really factor in to performance in racing? I propose a different experiment.

World class racer skiing on 1979 150 cm Hart Gremlins (tuned and waxed of course).
Or say 180 cm?
VS:::

Someone like us (NASTAR gold usually, sometimes silver?) on the best equipment money can buy-tuned and waxed exactly the same.

I predict Bodie Miller or even one of the Mahres would massacre me!
post #36 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post
Hey gang, I have another scenerio to chew on. How much does equipment really factor in to performance in racing? I propose a different experiment.

World class racer skiing on 1979 150 cm Hart Gremlins (tuned and waxed of course).
Or say 180 cm?
VS:::

Someone like us (NASTAR gold usually, sometimes silver?) on the best equipment money can buy-tuned and waxed exactly the same.

I predict Bodie Miller or even one of the Mahres would massacre me!
:
post #37 of 47
New gear (not just expensive) definitely has a placebo effect.

My 183 goats are 4 years old, mounted with fritsches. They have moldy sidewalls but are generally very well maintained.

I rode some freshly waxed '09 181 Coombas mounted with an alpine binding. They actually had a longer running surface than my goats. I thought for sure that I would struggle going back to my old goats at the end of the day.

Wrong. I knew first run on the Coombas that my goats were better in new snow. More maneuverable, better float, etc. I took two more runs through the untracked trees to convince me other wise, but couldn't wait to get my goats back.

Put them side-by-side and most pow skiers would choose the newer, slightly longer Coomba over the beat up goat. Tragically, they don't ski as well.

I was happy at the end of the day.
post #38 of 47
High dollar gear is great if the driver can utilize them. But does it matter if you skid them around the turns?
post #39 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post
I always love that - if you don't like a Volkl someone automatically thinks you can't ski them. I can ski them just fine (sort of amusing that you would even ask that question, but whatever). I just don't like them. I think they are way over-hyped for the performance they deliver - especially anything that starts with AC or Tigershark.
thanks for the answer, you just don't like them. I only ask because Volkl is taking up more of my quiver every year. I ski a lot, 100 days a year. I do believe that the Mantra is one of the best skis out there. I ski that most days. The Gotama (albeit basically a K2 and very forgiving) is an awesome powder ski. I think Volkls are built well and perform better than most skis. That is my opinion and you have yours. FYI my ski for harder days is the Elan 777 which rides very well.
post #40 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by lloyd braun View Post
I think Volkls are built well and perform better than most skis.
Gaper.
post #41 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett View Post
Gaper.
loser!
post #42 of 47
Chinese.
post #43 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett View Post
Chinese.
tool
post #44 of 47
Unimaginative.
post #45 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post
Hey gang, I have another scenerio to chew on. How much does equipment really factor in to performance in racing? I propose a different experiment.

World class racer skiing on 1979 150 cm Hart Gremlins (tuned and waxed of course).
Or say 180 cm?
VS:::

Someone like us (NASTAR gold usually, sometimes silver?) on the best equipment money can buy-tuned and waxed exactly the same.

I predict Bodie Miller or even one of the Mahres would massacre me!
Can you beat them or not?
:
post #46 of 47
If it is one of those painfully straight and flat NASTAR courses, the dude on the old school gear will win. If it is one with actual turns, a "gold" skier on good gear would probably give them a run for their money...though I wouldn't bet on them winning.
post #47 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett View Post
If it is one of those painfully straight and flat NASTAR courses, the dude on the old school gear will win. If it is one with actual turns, a "gold" skier on good gear would probably give them a run for their money...though I wouldn't bet on them winning.
Fair enough, some ice really would help us out if the pro had to ski on 150s:. If they get 180s I think we're toast.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Does expensive gear have a placebo effect?