What's the Deal with Fatties - All the Time? - Page 2

Fat skis can be skied well on groomers (some better than others). Obviously they are not the best choice in most cases. I have yet to find a ski that can do it all perfectly. You choose a ski based on its strengths, and accept the compromises.

Most absurd statement of the thread,! You are living in some sort of fat Fantasyland! Yeah, I can't carve, that's the problem.:

Those of you who feel that fat skis like the Goats are needed to ski on powder well, should really learn how to ski in POW!

Why are some people bothered by skiers with backpacks? Perhaps they're just carrying some water and some spare clothing. Perhaps they're carrying some water and spare clothing for their wife. Or maybe they just don't go anywhere without their teddy bear, and it doesn't fit in their pockets!

I'm also curious why the ability of the skier carrying the backpack matters. As long as they can get on and off the lifts, it doesn't hurt anyone...

Dave

I said Supershape Speed, (177cm 16.6 Radius) which is quite a diifferent ski from the Supershape.

I would only ski the Gotama on a day with over a foot of new. And unless the snow is wretched you don't really need anything wider then 88mm which IMHO is about as wide as you can go and still have great edge grip and carvability. Anything fatter then that is a big compromise on the groomed for a slight increase in floatibility in the pow.

I agree that fat skis will carve. The techonogy has gone way beyond the old fat soft powder exclusive ski so that now many skis up to 110 waist will carve if you have the necessary skills, but I think the point (and attraction) is that you don't really need to carve them.

Just like snowboards, with 100mm waisted fatties you can smear your way down almost anything, including hardpack and bumps. The wide bottoms combined with twin tips are the perfect sideslip tool, and now there are rockered skis for smearing in almost any god-awful snow condition.

I think that fat skis are easier to use if you are not a really good skier, and for those who can carve them, they don't need anything else. I enjoy the carve and still use "narrow" skis, but my all-mountain ski is 20 mm fatter than it used to be.

it;s the evolution of skis. the fatter skis are becoming more versatile and some people are always looking for the skis that can "do it all"....well atleast 90% of the time of whatever they ski.

last year, i thought the Pontoons were going to be a promising direction but they are probably "not for the masses". maybe the icelantic skis are going to be the new standard. short and fat, they claim to be highly maneuverable yet still stable in powder and not horrible on hardpack.

Oooof, I hate getting in these debates, but.............( I also hate buts)
My Blizzard eos is a semi twin 88 waist. I love this ski and have tons of fun on it, but(another but no matter the tune I have on it, it will not excel on groomers. In fact, I think the Cronus(unisex version of the eos) is better, which I will assume is because of the extra layer of metal.

My Bro 174 Softs, 99 waist(which are plenty stiff for me) are surprisingly better on groomers, being an extremely versatile ski. IF I have to pick one pair of skis for a trip, its gonna be the Bro!!!

The one thing that can and does make a difference in this statement is the binding position.

Atomicman, where were the bindings mounted on the Gotamas you tried?

*this was posted without actually defining the word NEED.
c'mere and lemme 'splain what I really need

Hmm, are we looking solely at width here or Sidecut as Well? IMHO, there are a lot of very capable wider skis that are a lot of fun on groomed as well as soft snow. Watea94's for instance. 130-94-118 20m tr are a blast on almost any condition. It really depends on what you want to do on them; Ski fast? Straight line, GS, Carve super tight arc's, Bang gates or mix up turns, some bumps, play along the edges. Different skis for different uses but I think many time we forget to look at the performance envelope of the ski and just the width. It's really about what each of us likes. For me, I prefer wider skis now, the 94 is my every day for CO but Trek hit on above, wider skis are getting more versitile. That said, still a lot of fun (when there's no freshies) to take carver out and rip it up. Either way, ski what you like.

We had a really good year and I never felt the need for anything less than 92mm. I have plenty of skinnier skis, but I would rather not use them unless I have too.

Disclaimers
1. I dont ski fatties all the time....

2.I live in utah and almost never come away with not having a powder run any day.


I see the point alot of people who buy only one skis here buy something like a seth,gotama, enforcer, or LP. These skis the snow they want to ski better than anything else.

If I was limited to one ski it would buy my 189cm Seths but mounted with dukes. Are they the best in groomers or bumps? hell no, but can I ski them better than most other people you betch ya.

For true expert skiers it really come down to they can make due with whatever they have, I can ski my 170cm Progressor in deep snow, but its way hard work and really not as fun as my Seths or Thugs in that stuff. At the sametime since I like my knees I leave my Thugs in when there really isnt fresh snow to ski.

Ah, but if it were only that easy! Losing weight would be a matter of buying a couple of pairs of slalom boards. Bet that would change sales trends a little...

I have no idea where the bindings were mounted and don't think that would make a bit of difference. ( I don't like be mounted too far forward) It was the lateral awkwardness due to the distance from your boot to the edge i have issue with.

And of course fat skis have improved all around. No one is denying that. But to suggest that a 105mm comes anywhere close to a 63-68mm waisted 12-19M ski on the groomed is just folly.

Just as my race stock slaloms are a joke in powder! Hello?????

I never said i couldn't carve on them the goats, i said it was very awkward and a very long distance to an edge. Your boot is just to far from the edge to make them effective carvers. Can you carve on them, yes! Do they excel at carving , no.

I think it is pretty simple, use the right tool for the job. If it was a 2 foot pow day, Gotamas, no problem. Although if I was at an area that I had to ski a lot of groomed to get the freshies, Monster 88 way better.

Groomer day: GS or slalom race ski or a cheater GS ski all the way!

And again, the Monster 88 is the closest thing I have found to the do it all ski. You give up very little on both ends of the spectrum with that ski.

Damn, we finally agree on something!

maybe for you....... not so much for me...... again, I would much rather have the performance of my skis to favor powder and loose snow. I have no problems compromising groomer performance. it's what I like. I would love to get you on a pair of Shamans, 110 underfoot with a 15m TR. that's why I have a 3 ski quiver....

I'm sure I'm the type of skier you guys make fun of


You see that flat area way down in the pic? That is the system of groomers I must take to get to my next run. Down there people are complaining because of the lack of recent snow. You see my ski tips? They are 147mm wide and connected to a 127mm waist, oh yea they're also rockered. Now I know you can't see my backpack in this pic, but it is a pretty basic heli-pro w/ my shovel and probe because avalanches are always a possibility. Now consider this: When I'm done skiing 800ft of untracked steep and deep, I'll be the one on the groomers park and riding (not skidding) my skis while posing with a backpack. And little will I know it, but I'll also be the one being silently judged by the gaper on supershapes who thinks their is no powder.

Who cares what other people are on? Why does it bother you guys?

I'll stir the pot even more: here in the Alps, at least (and c'mon, you know it's true in the Northeast and probably some other places in the US, like Idaho maybe) there are many days when you could make the argument that offpiste--not just on groomers--your better, safer choice would be a racing ski. I've skied a lot of icy chutes over here on fat twin tips. Those same chutes ski a lot nicer on a pair of slalom boards.

Post-script: Phil, I love your definition of marked runs, "the system of groomers I must take to get to my next run." Excellent

Phil,
I think you and I agree more than not.
I would never consider taking my Eos or Bros in the nastar course, yet, I'll pick either of them over my Blizzard Mag SL's to have fun and play on.

If I have to pick a ski and stick with it for the whole day, its likely to be the Bro, not because its amazing on everything but it excels at a lot of things and will do okay on those things that its not designed for(dang, there I go, ending a sentence with a preposition again)

what;s i find related to this is sometimes the tool you choose for the day dictates how you ski whatever conditions you find. on my last trip to Stratton, i brought along my Salomon Scream limiteds thinking I was going to see alot of soft spring snow and loose crud. i usually use these skis out west. i didn;t really pay atention to their description when i bought them-the blurb said something about being good for telemark skiing? i only notice that the side cut is rather small and they look pretty straight. i much prefer wide arcs on these rather than "100 perfect turns".

for some reason, i don;t ski well in these on hardpack and ice. I just can;t get their edges to bite into ice leading to a real roller coaster ride on those conditions. and guess what? i got mid winter conditions, loose snow on skied off ice and, some loose powder. so i had to adjust my skiing a bit. i found myself using more mogul/powder skiing techniques (more centered on my skis, flat parts to the snow and less on edge since they didn;t bite) checking my speed with J-turns occasionally but mostly surfing over the crud and chop. If I had brought my "skinny" skis, i probably would have gotten away with merely "carving". it was an adjustment at first but by the end of the weekend, i had a good time.

the point is that as a skier, your skis can only do so much. you have to adjust. if a person choose his fat skis on a non powder day, they will survive with a little extra work. practice their non powder skills on their fats skis in non powder conditions might actually make them better as well. it might not be "fun" but "fun" is in the eye of the beholder.

I had a similar experience the other week at Kirkwood. For all intents and purposes, Kirkwood was wind scoured, boilerplate all of the mountain. There hasn't been a fresh deep storm in a month. However, for those who know where to look and how to get there, there is soft mid-winter pow to be found...but it's OB....so in the morning, me and my friends are carving around the front side on our fat skis and backpacks and we get on the lift and get the typical, "SO! You boys brought the fat skis out today eh! Little overkill!?".

We explained that we were hiking over this and that ridge, to ski this and that bowl, that should have fresh snow. He looked at us like we were from the moon.

Long story short....we had a great day OB and skied fresh lines. I guess when we returned to the front side later that day we were silently snickered at as well for having fat skis and backpacks filled with avi gear on a 'hard pack day'.

I never understand these threads........people go out to the mountains to slide around on snow and have a good time. Why care so much about what other people are sliding around on?

(Phil - that is great pic above. I am jealous)

Speaking only for myself, I transitioned from 180 Salomon Scream Pilot 8s (68mm or so waist) to 188 PM Gear Bro Softs (99mm waist) a few seasons back, expecting to use the Bros for soft days and the Screams the rest of the time. The Bros were so much better than the Screams in all conditions that I could barely stand to use the old skis for rock skis, and sold them a season and a half later with about a day or two of use in the interim.

These days, I have a versatile quiver, with widths from 66mm to 136mm, so on a hardpack day, I probably won't be on Bros. But if I were traveling to Utah or Colorado or what have you and had to chose one pair to take with me, it would probably be either my Bros or my 186 Fischer Big Stix 84s, depending on the snow forecast.

As for backpacks, until I joined patrol this year, I usually just left my shovel and probe in my Camelbak Menace out of habit. It's like a seatbelt. Now I have a larger BCA Stash BC for patrolling, so the shovel and probe usually stay there. So I'm thinking about picking up an extra shovel for the Camelbak. I also usually carry an extra layer, a change of gloves, snacks, and often lunch. Such is life.

Atomicman, sorry if I got the version of your Supershape wrong; it makes no difference to my point. Which was that some fats do surprisingly well on groomers, but that doesn't mean they'll replace (any good) carvers anytime soon. And incidentally, you're missing out on one of the major strengths of a fat ski, which is to make heavy chop/crud smooth and enjoyable. Yes, I can ski heavy crud on a 66 mm waist, but that doesn't mean it's as pleasant as on a 105. In fact, if it's a foot of light fresh powder, you don't need all that width and some don't even want it.

PhilT, relax about the backpack thing. You've got the causality backwards. If you're as good as I assume you are, no gaper (do all carvers now=gapers? Interesting logic, have to inform racers about this) is going to judge you a mediocre skier BECAUSE you're wearing a backpack. My joke was pointed the other way - people who wear whatever is cool, and obviously DON'T have the skiing cred to back it up. For better or worse, yes, I see plenty of guys in backpacks who can't seem to navigate basic hardpack or bumps. I doubt they'll rock in the backcountry. And no, you're not in this group...

You should. Maybe they'll stop wearing spandex on training days:. (exception:hot women racers should always wear spandex)

LMAO - Did the OP get your Gots? I was pretty happy skiing my Gots everywhere this year & having $$ to spend my ski days in Tahoe & Aspen. Really fun skis, even when the mountain's skied out. Meh - if you're having enough fun, you don't care if others are laughing cuz you're laughing too.

I love it... Another "Why isn't everyone else as cool as me" thread. Yeah, people put stuff in backpacks. Food, gloves, PB&J, and maybe have some space to put a layer if you take it off. Um, I'm not sure anyone would wear a backpack as a fashion item but as a gear whore myself, I think this may be a comment from someone who's reaching for something to piss and moan about... I think it looks stupid when people can't ski the planks they're on, whether it's a fatty or a progressor- it's just that fatties make it much more painfully obvious that they don't know how to ski. Look, the fact that they can't ski their planks means they won't be in your way on the DubD trails you'll no doubt be on, so be glad they're trying waaaaaaay too hard to be cool, and take solace in the notion that you can ski the equipment you brought and you actually "get it". Chuckle to yourself and move along... Besides, they may be doing a ski review for EpicSki, and will shortly be bashing that fat ski's ability on hardpack, you never know...

Beyond, you know I live in the Great Pacific Northwest and you think I am missing the virtues of a fatter ski. you have heard the term cascade concrete???

I never said anywhere to take a 66mm ski out offpiste.

But unless there is very deep new snow or wretched miserable heavy snow, I prefer an 88mm ski.

PhilT: what is with the condescending attitutude? You guys that hike for 30 minutes to get 30 turns on you 800 vertical feet, think you are that cool?

I can ski the off piste with the best of 'em, and do so and enjoy it, but not to the exclusion of skiing 7,500 vertical feet of groomers at Mach while you are wasting the day walking for 800 Ft. of 30 good turns and a miserable trail back to lift.

I feel sorry for ya really! I love pow, I love groomed. it really does not matter to me. I'll take whatever the mountain dishes!

Doesn't seem like you can enjoy a day of groomers. I can and do enjoy both and am fortunate to have an area I ski at that has patrolled and controlled tons of backcountry that is hikable & lift served.

Do I hike sometimes , yeah, do I ski groomers all day sometimes, yeah, do i ski steep and deep that is chair accessed, absolutely. Do I think I am way cooler then you because I like groomers and off-piste untracked, absolutley not!

It takes precision, and skill to ski groomers fast efficiently and effectively in control, how you can try to belittle anyone who enjoys that is a mystery to me!

Tyrone: There is definetly a difference between guys who are using there fatties to get to the more extreme stuff and guys who are sliding around on fatties on the groomed all day as goal!

Hiking out to untracked is no more a Holy grail of skiing, then making perfect clean carves on groomers!

It's all good!

unbelievable

What's unbelieveable is that you ski at Stevens

RELAX!

I am relaxed. YOUR condescending attitude has permeated throughout this entire thread. Totally typical of a crystal skier.

Patrolled and controlled lift served backcountry :?

Yep!