New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

1 ski challenge

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
I have had this bouncing inside my head about what skis would be the best all-around skis to use..Here is my contest.

You can only use one pair of skis for all 4 contests
We'll say the payout is 50,00.00 just for grins

#1 1st Day 10-15"" of boot to knee powder, down a 1/2 mile 35 degree bowl, half open, half trees

#2 1/2 mile of bumps, upperside is soft snow, lower will be hardpack
#3 1/2 Mile slalom race hardpack
#4 You have to give full day lessons to 5yr olds ..

Give me the ski you would use if 1-3 were black runs
Give me the ski you would use if 1-3 were blue runs


Just wanting to know which pair ski s you think would do the best at these 4 disciplines..Its late, and I gotta think of something..

BTW, if anyone cares there is going to be a live feed from Taos on the competition ..You can find the link on TGR if this does not work. Starts at 9:00am
http://www.its-happening-in-taos.com...%20video2.html


Lee
post #2 of 26
Dynastar Contact 11 165 or 172.
post #3 of 26
I don't do #3 or #4, but my every day skiing is #1 and #2. I pretty much stick with Salomon Guns and I've been really happy with them as an all-purpose ski. I really don't believe in the whole 'quiver' thing - I tend to have a solid pair and stick with them for 75% of my skiing - currently those are the Guns. (The other 25% is Teledaddy's, Karhu's, and some other general skis I beat up while working.)
post #4 of 26
I would use my 177cm Head SuperShape Magnums. Those skis wouldn't even notice the 10-15" of powder and they're so much better at the other stuff that it isn't even a difficult decision. If the powder were twice that deep, I'd have to think a little bit.

I agree with tetonpwdrjunkie on the Contact 11's. That would be my second choice.
post #5 of 26
Thread Starter 
Vinn,

Even if you don't do three or four..You can substitute..I know you cruise down groomers..Just think of a long groomer..
#4 just think of having to cruise with a little one all day...The guns seem like a great ski

Bob,
I'm going to have to try the SS...What is your powder ski?

Actually this question was to narrow down what I will demo when I get to T-ride in a couple weeks, and thought that if someone would use a certain pair of skis for these different disciplines, then I would try to demo them. The SS, and the contacts keep popping up..

Thanks for the replies

Lee
post #6 of 26
I might also use a Nordica Top Fuel. I think that the Dynastar is a bit more versitle though.
post #7 of 26
177cm Head Supershape Magnums FTW!

Seriously, it's a perfect ski for this kind of challenge.
post #8 of 26
Nordica Dobermann SLR. 165cm.
post #9 of 26
Nice challenge....Bob, why the Supershape Magnums over say the iM88s?
post #10 of 26
I'm with Heluva, just 'cause that happens to be a ski I own too. But for sure I'd think about what I need to do tackle the hardpack first, and worry about the powder later. I'd enjoy the pow a lot more on my SL's than I would the ice on my twintips.
post #11 of 26
I'm with Heluva and Prickly.... Especially if you are a trained Slalom racer. You would give up some in the first 2 events, but in the slalom you would put so much time on everyone it would be worth it.
post #12 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeX View Post

Bob,
I'm going to have to try the SS...What is your powder ski?

Lee
My DEEP powder ski this season is the Head Mojo 105 in the 191 length. That's *mostly* because the Head guys wanted me to ski that one instead of the iM88 this year. Truth be known, I like the 88 better unless the snow is super deep or REALLY junky, but that only happens about three days a season. Otherwise, I think the 88 skis a wider range of conditions (including pretty deep powder) than the 105.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie-Rich View Post
Nice challenge....Bob, why the Supershape Magnums over say the iM88s?
Because the challenge includes this:

#1 1st Day 10-15"" of boot to knee powder, down a 1/2 mile 35 degree bowl, half open, half trees
#2 1/2 mile of bumps, upperside is soft snow, lower will be hardpack
#3 1/2 Mile slalom race hardpack
#4 You have to give full day lessons to 5yr olds ..

In #1, The advantage goes to the 88, but not by as much as many people might believe. I've skied my Magnums plenty of times in 10-15" of powder this winter and they work just fine. If the new snow was *twice* that deep, then the the scales would tip much more heavily to the 88.

In #2, I just think that the Magnum is a fun mogul ski. It's smooth and responsive and comes around really fast.

In #3, there's absolutely no comparison. Much as I like the 88 as a hard-snow ski, it's nowhere near as quick in short turns as the Magnum. As U.P. and Helluva have already said, this is the event of the four where performance will really show. I - also - would much rather ski a slalom race ski in 15" of powder than ski a mid-fat or fat in a slalom race course. I'm pretty convinced that anybody that says otherwise hasn't actually skied a real slalom race ski.

In #4, I don't think it matters enough to be a serious part of the equation. Of the two you're asking me about, I think the 88 *might* be slightly better at low-speed turns and skidding, but not so much as to make a big difference.

So, there you have it. That's my $.02.
post #13 of 26
Head RD SL, I have used it in all those scenarios, even #4, and have lived to tell the tale.
post #14 of 26
Bob, you're right about the SL ski being an edge - especially a proper race ski. And I'm happy as a clam to ski any ski type in powder. I mean, I used to ski narrow boards in powder all the time back when "shape" in a SL ski was a 30-meter sidecut, so.... perhaps less float on the 165 (especially with my 6' 4" frame), but the edge in the SL course would be substantial.
post #15 of 26
Who needs to float that much in the Powder in order to enjoy it anyway? Definitely gotta go with a mid-fat ski.

K2 Apache Recon
post #16 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters View Post
I - also - would much rather ski a slalom race ski in 15" of powder than ski a mid-fat or fat in a slalom race course. I'm pretty convinced that anybody that says otherwise hasn't actually skied a real slalom race ski.
Absolutely. But winning isn't that important to me (read: there will be better athletes than me there), and there are a few skis out there with plenty of shape, a bit more length than a men's SL ski, and 10mm extra in the waist. I hear Atomic had a whole successful line of them, but then they faded harder than pet rocks and the internet-people decided they weren't cool. I'd pick one of those just to be different.

This guy in a 171.
post #17 of 26
I will have to go with my Fischer WC SCs. They are soft enough for bumps now that they've been broken in. They rip slalom turns, and at my weight are manageable if not great in powder.

Why didn't you include a DH course?
post #18 of 26
Thread Starter 
Ghost..

After I posted, I noticed I was having a 50,000 purse, with lessons for a 5 yr old..Not smart, but in my defense, look at the time of my post and hopefully you will understand..The reason, I put the kids in, is because skiing with a small child in tow can wear you out pretty quick if you are not on comfy sticks..

If it pleases the court


#1 1st Day 10-15"" of boot to knee powder, down a 1/2 mile 35 degree bowl, half open, half trees

#2 1/2 mile of bumps, upperside is soft snow, lower will be hardpack

#3 1/2 Mile slalom race hardpack

#4 1 mile DH course

Give me the ski you would use if 1-3 were black runs
Give me the ski you would use if 1-3 were blue runs


Would it really change anything?
post #19 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters View Post
I - also - would much rather ski a slalom race ski in 15" of powder than ski a mid-fat or fat in a slalom race course. I'm pretty convinced that anybody that says otherwise hasn't actually skied a real slalom race ski.

+1 here on the SLs
I skied a season of USSA freestyle bumps on K2 710 FO Slalom skis (190 cm). They also were "skiable" in powder, but not ideal. I also taught 5 year olds on them when I didn't have time to grab the rock skis from the locker.

Did I mention that they were fantastic in the bumps? Go with a good pair of SL skis.
post #20 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeX View Post
Ghost..

After I posted, I noticed I was having a 50,000 purse, with lessons for a 5 yr old..Not smart, but in my defense, look at the time of my post and hopefully you will understand..The reason, I put the kids in, is because skiing with a small child in tow can wear you out pretty quick if you are not on comfy sticks..

If it pleases the court


#1 1st Day 10-15"" of boot to knee powder, down a 1/2 mile 35 degree bowl, half open, half trees

#2 1/2 mile of bumps, upperside is soft snow, lower will be hardpack

#3 1/2 Mile slalom race hardpack

#4 1 mile DH course

Give me the ski you would use if 1-3 were black runs
Give me the ski you would use if 1-3 were blue runs


Would it really change anything?
Heh. Nice try, but no. Not for me.

Personally, I'd rather run a DH course on slalom skis than a slalom course on DH skis.

Intriguing thought, though. I wonder if some of the more experienced "real" racers have any contrary opinions?
post #21 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Peters View Post
Heh. Nice try, but no. Not for me.

Personally, I'd rather run a DH course on slalom skis than a slalom course on DH skis.

Intriguing thought, though. I wonder if some of the more experienced "real" racers have any contrary opinions?
Glen Plake sometimes skis bumps in 223 cm downhilll skis, but that's Plake man::
post #22 of 26
Not a racer, but I agree with Bob. I actually did make about 5 slalom runs early this year on some 191 GS skis. Hooked tips three times, ate it twice. There was a time when I actually skied slalom on pretty similar slightly longer skis...I don't think courses were offset as much. By run 5 I remembered that round and smooth wasn't really how it was supposed to work.

Whether or not the DH changes anything I suppose depends on the course. I've seen DH courses I wouldn't be too scared to tuck on SL skis, but then some of them I wouldn't try with DH skis...

Maybe the right thing would be an ol' 195ish SL ski...
post #23 of 26
Throwing in the DH changes my vote to either SX12 or Head SS speed from what I've tried. The new WC Speed could be better. I could do it on the SCs, but all in all the longer radius of a cheater GS would be better.
post #24 of 26
189cm Seth straightline the powder run and straightline the bump field and they arent bad short turners either. Yes I have skied on real SL skis, its jsut that in a 1/2 mile in powder the time diffenece would be huge VS someone on Sl skis.

and I have taught 5 year olds on them as well.

my other choice would be 175cm Fisher Progressor but one thing your not factoring into is a great skier will be great on anything...given a choice I would take the powder field everytime so and would be able to last longer on the big sticks than a little SL ski.
post #25 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post
189cm Seth straightline the powder run and straightline the bump field
I could probably get a pretty close second place time on my old SGs. The slalom is where they would lose out.
post #26 of 26
BlueHouse MR171
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion