EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › PSA - Ski Press Reviews are up
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

PSA - Ski Press Reviews are up

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 
FYOCD

http://www.myvirtualpaper.com/doc/Sk...o1/2008091001/

some of you might find page 18 of interest.
post #2 of 15
You beat me to it...
post #3 of 15
The fattest ski I could find was the 100mm Dynastar Legend Pro Rider?!?

post #4 of 15

<100mm?

Maybe next issue will have the adult widths?
post #5 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by comprex View Post
some of you might find page 18 of interest.
Yup!

I saw this stuff in shops a week ago when we were biking at Vail.

All the day-glo colors we've sneered at here since escaping the 80's and mullets, are back in full force.

According to the shop babe (who seemed plugged-in), snowboarders are still doing muted earth tones, and plaid. The bubble-gum neon is driven by park'n pipe twin-tip skiers.

It all makes me wonder: who's pulling the strings?

Somebody had to convince the kids this was good.

???
post #6 of 15
Thanks for the link. Thoughts:
1. Really wish they would go back to putting everything online in PDF format. Made for much better reading. This flash thing is a pain to zoom in, scroll, zoom out. Better than last year's at least, where I had to reload every page 3 or 4 times to get it to work properly.

2. Their reviews seem to be trending towards what every other magazine has these days. Used to be Ski Press had a little more info on what type of skier was best suited to each ski. Also gone are the tester bios, which I liked for similar purposes - see who liked what and match up your skiing style as best you can (and a bonus for people who know some level 3 and 4 CSIA guys and gals, who tend to be most of the testers - very easy to match style to a particular ski).

3. Despite the opening blurb claiming they tested skis up to 120mm, I didn't anything close to that big in there. I guess they amalgamated it all into the 'Fat' and 'Fat Twin' categories, and the big boys lost out?

4. Related to the above, they seem to have trimmed down the categories a little, at least when it comes to fat skis. Also gone (as it was last year) is the race section. They were the only mag that would review true race stock stuff. Now they don't even seem to do the cheater stuff. I suppose partly a reflection that most manufacturer's hard snow carvers are evolving away from direct relatives of the race stuff.
post #7 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanuckInstructor View Post
Thanks for the link. Thoughts:
1. Really wish they would go back to putting everything online in PDF format. Made for much better reading. This flash thing is a pain to zoom in, scroll, zoom out. Better than last year's at least, where I had to reload every page 3 or 4 times to get it to work properly.
Yep. Their original format was -so- much nicer. And google-searchable. And I wish they'd bring back the archives; I'd love to reference some of the articles.

Quote:
2. Their reviews seem to be trending towards what every other magazine has these days. Used to be Ski Press had a little more info on what type of skier was best suited to each ski. Also gone are the tester bios, which I liked for similar purposes - see who liked what and match up your skiing style as best you can (and a bonus for people who know some level 3 and 4 CSIA guys and gals, who tend to be most of the testers - very easy to match style to a particular ski).
Maybe they'll show up on the international site under Industry infos just like the 2007/2008 profiles did.

See Here

Quote:
3. Despite the opening blurb claiming they tested skis up to 120mm, I didn't anything close to that big in there. I guess they amalgamated it all into the 'Fat' and 'Fat Twin' categories, and the big boys lost out?

4. Related to the above, they seem to have trimmed down the categories a little, at least when it comes to fat skis. Also gone (as it was last year) is the race section. They were the only mag that would review true race stock stuff. Now they don't even seem to do the cheater stuff. I suppose partly a reflection that most manufacturer's hard snow carvers are evolving away from direct relatives of the race stuff.
I don't think that's all of it, I would look to see another issue with those.
post #8 of 15
Yes, SkiPress reviews are always done in multiple issues.

Also, expanded views, including individual scoring lines, comes a bit later once that info is loaded onto the main page of the site (not in the magazine).

All summed, SkiPressWorld remains one of the most reliable, and well-exectuted formats for ski tests.
post #9 of 15
was that RR on page 23?
post #10 of 15
Thread Starter 
I'm still goggling at the (original flavor!) bubble gum puffys.


I want mine in cinnamon, I think.
post #11 of 15
Thanks for the heads up on the reviews! I've always found their reviews to be much more accurate than the other rags, I'm kind of wondering this time? A lot of these ski's must not be available in the USA, I'm not seeing a lot of the models tested on the manufactures sites.
post #12 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Strato View Post
All summed, SkiPressWorld remains one of the most reliable, and well-exectuted formats for ski tests.
Am I missing something. Seriously, those reviews are a bunch of crap. They don't tell you anything. Shallow...I'd be not happy if I paid for that
post #13 of 15
According to their news release, big mountain fats will be covered in the next issue. Would guess late October.

PJ, only seem shallow because unlike last year, no actual breakdown of scores by category like edge hold etc, or reviewer info. Ad in the reviews says supposedly you can log on and see actual breakdowns right now, with skis that didn't make the current cut next month. Probably list reviewers in "find my ski." All good. But the link is just to SP home, cannot find a way there to "log on." If they mean subscribe, might go for it, but they only list subscriptions for the print version. Not interested in using more trees for something I'd prefer online. Am I missing something idiotically obvious here, like I HAVE to get the print version to access the online info, or is the whole design in need of a webmaster?
post #14 of 15
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post
need of a webmaster?
There ya go. To see what they had last year, click on "Industry's Corner" then on "My Ski Finder" and start clicking on things.
post #15 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post
According to their news release, big mountain fats will be covered in the next issue. Would guess late October.

PJ, only seem shallow because unlike last year, no actual breakdown of scores by category like edge hold etc, or reviewer info. Ad in the reviews says supposedly you can log on and see actual breakdowns right now, with skis that didn't make the current cut next month. Probably list reviewers in "find my ski." All good. But the link is just to SP home, cannot find a way there to "log on." If they mean subscribe, might go for it, but they only list subscriptions for the print version. Not interested in using more trees for something I'd prefer online. Am I missing something idiotically obvious here, like I HAVE to get the print version to access the online info, or is the whole design in need of a webmaster?
Beyond; you are correct.

Normally, the detailed breakdown you mentioned is the reason why these reviews are more insightful than anything else.

They provide specific performance ratings in 8 to 10 categories. Most helpful.

As Comprex indicated, only last year's info is currently available. Regardless what the review says about logging-on, the 2009 info isn't available yet.

I suspect they're playing catch-up. I'm guessing we'll see it within 2 weeks.
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 › PSA - Ski Press Reviews are up