or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Let's play a game....build (MY) new quiver
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Let's play a game....build (MY) new quiver - Page 3

post #61 of 90
Thread Starter 
Spin:

Good comments and no disagreement from me. I have skied the 'Bent a fair bit and have one available if I choose to use it.

I wonder about that "skis skinnier" thing though. Mebbeso....heck I can't say. This experiment is sort of a personal indulgence. It'll give me an opportunity to gain some info and I can certainly add to the knowledge base as I go b/c now that I'm in the mountains, it'll be easy to borrow something different for a couple of days.

I'm not really in pursuit of finding that something is the "ultimate" (besides, that could change on a weekly basis) The experimentation within this category is to build a first hand knowledge baseline upon which I can build additional information as I go.

SJ
post #62 of 90
Jim, since it's a personal indulgence meant to increase your knowledge base, you have kinda left the feminine side out of this quest. If you are going to break any rules of your quiver game, would you give the Line Pandora a shot as a fat ski & evaluate for women? After all, many women have asked your expertise simply because you get on women's skies and review. We respect that. Besides, I'd really like to try that ski out, and the graphics are really pretty ! Soooo, you could mount them with demo bindings, & if they don't suit you,,, you'd have a demo available for women. Course you might have to try them in two sizes......
post #63 of 90
Just wondering if you saw Dawgcatching's review of the Huge Trouble last year. If so, do you concur with the recommendation to mount well back of the factory line?
post #64 of 90
I'd expect any time SJ has spent on Elizabeths would xfer directly to a typical woman's experience with the Pandora.

SJ - My nerdball hypothesis as to why they ski "skinnier" under many conditions is that you do not have to deform the ski to roll it. Think about a highly cambered super-stiff ski. You are not just rolling it, but guiding/putting force into the ski to bend it. The force needed to flatten it is typically not much, but the force required to flex it into its turning shape can be a whole bunch. A well designed (IMO) fully rockered (or rc) sidecut ski has it's basic turn radius defined by the "default" existing shape of the ski. So when you choose to roll it over - that is all you are doing... And as the contact surface or edge grows from the center, the ski naturally engages into a turn.

Another side effect is that you do not have to drive the tip to engage & deform the ski. The best skier in my family skied Hell Bents all season last year and he often left his boots loose. He'd just roll the skis over & they'd rail into a killer carve.

The consensus in my family is that something like the rumored rockered Bacon or a Volkl at +/- 110 patterned on the Kuro/Chopstick rocker model could be a great 1 ski quiver for our neck of the woods (although my perviously mentioned youngest kid thinks HB/BP class skis are fine for that too...).

Obviously this is just my usual comment from the peanut gallery...
post #65 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
I'd expect any time SJ has spent on Elizabeths would xfer directly to a typical woman's experience with the Pandora.
Man spindrift, do you realize the break through statement you just made ? Same manufacturer, same dimensions, core's a bit different & lighter, translate men's version review to the women's ski. It's all good. It could really cut the ski reviews & time to do that right in 1/2 and leave a lot more time for skiing. So let's reverse that, skip the men's ski reviews, review the womens ski's & just say the men's are heavier, maybe burlier & directly translate that. Either way it saves time.
post #66 of 90
Thread Starter 
Catch all:

Spin; I see your point although I'm not sure I'd translate it into skiing skinnier but that's just semantics. (t'will be easier for sure within the proper snow depth context) Re: The skinny Kuro idea; I think that's roughly what the S7 is except it doesn't say Volkl on the topsheet. One goal of this long term evaluation is to determine whether RCS has any value to me as a daily driver.

9/11; I have skied the Pandora but it is so soft that it's just not a fair test for my 195#. We are currently not a Line dealer so I will only be able to pay peripheral attention to the brand until that changes. I skied the Liz in the proper size but like so many other 1 shot demos, it was in the wrong conditions so no real valid conclusions there. FWIW: There will be a Roxy model in RCS after the first of the year. I suspect it will be very similar to the S7 however.

Cirque: I did see that review but had forgotten the Caveat about binding position. I am fairly critical on that subject and the HT felt great to me every time I skied it. However, I have to say I didn't notice where the rep set me up. I may borrow one of his demos and play around before I mount up my personal pair. (I was also considering putting a demo binding on that ski as well)

SJ
post #67 of 90
Thanks Jim. I also got that I either need to pack on the pounds or make my own comparisons.
post #68 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
I'm pretty convinced that the newer shapes change the waist generalization game. I have my own theories about why. But the big take away for me is that many rockered skis ski "skinnier" than you'd expect. That's not saying that they are slalom carvers - just that some time on them starts poking holes in the generalizations & preconceived notions.
The one way that I think my Praxis ski "skinnier" is the relative lack of tip smack issues, thanks to the reverse sidecut.
post #69 of 90
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 911over View Post
Thanks Jim. I also got that I either need to pack on the pounds or make my own comparisons.
As you know, I ski a LOT of womens skis over the course of the various intros I go to. Many expert models are stout enough that I can can form a relative opinion as to how they compare and what the characteristics are. Realistically, most are not what I'd choose to ski on all day (although a few, given the proper length........)

SJ
post #70 of 90
Jim, your honesty is one reason why we love you. As for the rest of what you said, pretty sure I'd say the same, from a girls point of view course.
post #71 of 90

I wish to lodge a formal protest.....

Rules: New stuff must include no more than one ski from any brand. Must be chosen from the following brands; Blizzard, Dynastar, Fischer, K2, Nordica, Rossi.



Parameters:

Wider (105 and up....2 choices)

Middle (90 to 100.....2 choices)

Narrow (75-90.........1 choice)


Here's the lineup:

Wide: Rossi S7, Huge Trouble
Middle: Blizzi Argos
Narrow: Watea 84

....If it turns out that the Argos is not a fit for whatever reason, I will fall back and pick up a Watea 94 ....

....Ya gotz ta read them rulezzz.......


Well,

a) We have two skis from Fischer in this list of five

b) Titan Argos has 101 mm waist.

This contest was fixed. I have lost all respect.....already had the prize money spent....
post #72 of 90
Thread Starter 
Quote:
This contest was fixed. I have lost all respect.....already had the prize money spent....
Of COURSE it was fixed. I said my picks were done out front. I wanted to see the informed guesses and then see if anybody could talk me outta my choices.

However:

(A) The Fischer 94 is a backup that will only get called up if the Blizzi fails les miserables at what I want it for. So....It don't count.
(B) I said that the dimensions were approximate.
(C) JHS got more right than you did and HE has already spent the prize money. I guess that means that you get the booby prize.

Sorry dude...no recount for you....................

SJ
post #73 of 90
Must have been the French judge....
post #74 of 90
pontoon
xxl
S7
hellcat
Blizzard's GS or SG
post #75 of 90
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by samurai View Post
pontoon
xxl
S7
hellcat
Blizzard's GS or SG
  • Pontoon: I've skied the 'Toon enough to know it's not my cuppa.
  • XXL: Even the 187 is too stiff for the speeds that I prefer in tight spots.
  • S7: On the list (My alternate shape training wheels)
  • 'Cat: A contender although a little shapey and grippy for it's width. Had I gone there, it would have been the 'Diver.
  • GS or SG: Admittedly, they'd be fun but really impractical for my preferences in Tahoe.
SJ
post #76 of 90
Thanks SJ, but that money was spent a long time ago...

But feel free to contribute to my 'get my watea 84's mounted' fund.
post #77 of 90
Jim, what's your BSL? If you're around a 325, feel free to play on my Praxis some day.
post #78 of 90
Jim,

As someone whose is concerning a Huge Trouble & S7 I"m following this closely. Unfortunately, I won't have the opportunity to demo either.

These are replacing Volkl Sanouks in my quiver. Looking for powder performance but I need something stiffer than the Sanouk to handle crud & day-end cut-up.

I'm 5'9", 165 lbs, aggressive & experienced skier, 35+ days mostly at Vail yearly.

Thoughts on BT v. S7?
post #79 of 90
Thread Starter 
I have skied the HT in several conditions and it's been good enough for me to switch from my Gotama, Sugar Daddy combo. I have not skied the S7 in proper conditions so it will be a learning experience. It will be a great opportunity for me to compare rockered vs non over the long haul to see which I like better.

SJ
post #80 of 90
The thing to note is that AFAIK the HT is flat (non-cambered). So it should be loose, but ski fairly conventionally. When I saw them in use, they seemed a great charging style ski.

The S7 is a recurve style hybrid. They seem to have a ton of camber underfoot. Which makes me wonder how much of their "rockered" and early taper characteristics will show up (or not) under certain conditions. Looks like a cool ski though.

I'd be really curious to hear from anyone who gets a chance to ski them back to back.
post #81 of 90
Thanks guys.

I'm in a quandry over this one. Wish I could demo, but big ski demos like this are tough in Vail.

I can also get a good deal on the HT but not the S7 which is a factor.

Jim...are you selling skis again via the web these days?
post #82 of 90
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
The thing to note is that AFAIK the HT is flat (non-cambered). So it should be loose, but ski fairly conventionally. When I saw them in use, they seemed a great charging style ski.

The S7 is a recurve style hybrid. They seem to have a ton of camber underfoot. Which makes me wonder how much of their "rockered" and early taper characteristics will show up (or not) under certain conditions. Looks like a cool ski though.

I'd be really curious to hear from anyone who gets a chance to ski them back to back.
The HT does have camber but so little that it didn't feel cambered. I liked the overall feel of the HT better than the Katana (flat) or my Goats so I know it'll do what I want it to. Beleive me, it was going to take a lot to get me to sell my Goats, but the HT convinced me. I'm not a charger these days but the HT felt very manageable to me so I'd say it's a ski that allows charging (up to point I'm sure) but doesn't demand it.

The long term exposure to the S7 will sort of tell the tale for me....I just don't know at this time. Certainly on most powder days, I'll be taking both.

SJ
post #83 of 90
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Squeaky Wheel View Post
Thanks guys.

I'm in a quandry over this one. Wish I could demo, but big ski demos like this are tough in Vail.

I can also get a good deal on the HT but not the S7 which is a factor.

Jim...are you selling skis again via the web these days?
On line selling is a ways away for us although we are working on it. In the meantime we will do some phone business etc. I am working on some deals now that will allow me some leeway for early season stuff. Nothing is in the door yet and it will never be as vast as before but I'm working on a few programs for skis that I really like. As an example, some HTs are coming. There will be others as we go along.

SJ

SJ
post #84 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinedad View Post
I actually have a couple of pairs in the sub-75mm range, but only one of them got any use last year, and that was before I got my AMC79s. I'll still probably use them as rock skis in the early season, but they'll be back home by New Year's.
I thought Tahoe got sun for weeks on end? I have only skied there on 4 different trips, but 1st time it hadn't snowed in 2 weeks and was in the high 40's, second trip was basically the same with a cooler sunny day thrown in, 3rd trip was a little warmer, and 4th trip was cooler, but it handn't snowed in 3 weeks or so. It actually snows in Tahoe???

I would love to have a 4x4 as my firm-snow day ski. When I was down there last spring, the Elan 82's I brought were fine, but I had more fun on the Progressor, at least on the groomers (too stiff for the bumps). I bet the 4x4 will do what the Progressor did for me on groomers, but be a little more all-mountain oriented, provided it hasn't snowed a ton. Last year, when I had the 888's and also the Cold Heats and Progressors, I ended up on the 888's most days, brought out the Progressors on sunny days (very rare last season) and skied the Cold Heats occasionally, but probably they were overlap for me and I could have done without them.
post #85 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
The thing to note is that AFAIK the HT is flat (non-cambered). So it should be loose, but ski fairly conventionally. When I saw them in use, they seemed a great charging style ski.
That is what I found. The faster I skied them, provided it was in at least cruddy and or soft bumpy snow, the better they got. The Cross-under move that Holiday helped me hone works really well on these skis, as they release so easily. They didn't do groomers worth a crap, but who cares?
post #86 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post
I thought Tahoe got sun for weeks on end? I have only skied there on 4 different trips, but 1st time it hadn't snowed in 2 weeks and was in the high 40's, second trip was basically the same with a cooler sunny day thrown in, 3rd trip was a little warmer, and 4th trip was cooler, but it handn't snowed in 3 weeks or so. It actually snows in Tahoe???
In that case, please warn me before your next trip so I can stay away.

Yes, it snows in Tahoe. This is the best stretch I can remember, dutifully preserved by Squaw:
Quote:
Apr 17, 2006 14-16"
Apr 16, 2006 24-28"
Apr 12, 2006 10-12"
Apr 11, 2006 3-5"
Apr 10, 2006 11-14"
Apr 8, 2006 4-5"
Apr 5, 2006 8-10"
Apr 4, 2006 14-18"
Apr 3, 2006 6-8"
Apr 1, 2006 22-24"
Mar 31, 2006 2-3"
Mar 28, 2006 6-8"
Mar 27, 2006 3"
Mar 24, 2006 16-19"
Mar 19, 2006 2-3"
Mar 16, 2006 8-10"
Mar 14, 2006 3-5"
Mar 13, 2006 28-35"
Mar 12, 2006 4-6"
Mar 11, 2006 6-8"
Mar 10, 2006 12-14"
Mar 9, 2006 14-18"
Mar 8, 2006 5-8"
Mar 7, 2006 5-7"
Mar 6, 2006 8-10"
Mar 5, 2006 4-6"
Mar 4, 2006 2-3"
Mar 3, 2006 10-12"
Mar 2, 2006 12-16"
Mar 1, 2006 4-6"
Feb 28, 2006 5-7"
Feb 27, 2006 3-5"
352" in seven weeks. Yes -- an average of 10" per day.

Best. Spring. Ever.
post #87 of 90
March 27th must've sucked .
JF
post #88 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4ster View Post
March 27th must've sucked .
JF
LOL
post #89 of 90
that streak is when you take time to thank patrollers for waking up at 4am every day to be dressed and ready to go with 30lbs of dynamite on their back by 6:30 so you can hoot and hollar by 9.
post #90 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinedad View Post

352" in seven weeks. Yes -- an average of 10" per day.

Best. Spring. Ever.
ahh thanks for that little trip down memory lane. Best spring ever and best winter ever for me personally. March 2006 may have been the best skiing month of my life.
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 › Let's play a game....build (MY) new quiver