EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › The New goods: 2009/2010
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The New goods: 2009/2010 - Page 3

post #61 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Strato View Post
Not to argumentative, but this doesn't make sense.

When I see Hellbent's on the hill, I see daylight under much of the tip and tail.
So what. Yes, they look odd until you get used to the idea. But remember a 179 HB is really about a 185 cm ski. A little tip or tail in the air is no big deal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Strato View Post
I'm planning to buy pair of HB's for deep snow days. But, it defies logic to claim that this design can "slay it on most groomers".
Here's a piece of free advice. If you buy Hell Bents, mount them at least +6, preferably +7 or +7.5 -- and learn to ski them the way they are meant to be skied. Mounting further back makes for a more traditional feel & makes powder seem easier, but it really kills the ski in terms of overall handling.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Strato View Post

I've no doubt a full-rockered ski can be managed with some facility on hard snow.

But, they'll never "slay it". They're shaped like a canoe, for a specific, and necessary purpose.
Are you talking about Spat/Praxis Powder type skis, or Hell Bent class skis? If the former, there's a conversation to be had. If the latter, IMO you are just off base. Pay attention to how people who understand those skis use them...
post #62 of 85
When you demo on groomers, I'll pay attention.
post #63 of 85
Due to an utter lack of fresh snow, I've skied probably 8+ of the past 14 days on groomers --- with 189 Hell Bents. Other family members have been using 179 & 169 Hell Bents, and EP Pros...

Total family days on snow this year - maybe 80 give or take. Total family days not on rockered skis - zero. Everyone has alternative cambered choices on the wall. None of us have even considered them. The cambered skis will pretty much all be sold off in the not too distant future.
post #64 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Strato View Post
Real rockers are limited-use skis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Strato View Post
When you demo on groomers, I'll pay attention.
I will admit that arcing groomers is the only reason I'm keeping my Jet Fuels. (Hey, sometimes a few hours on cord under the sun or under the flood-lights is time well spent.)

To the rest of us, non-rockers are limited-use skis. The only trad-cam ski I will ever buy in the future will be a WC GS and/or SL... for groomers... specifically.

But yes, my Mavens do actually rip on groomers. Ironically, they are too soft up front, have too much sidecut, have too wide of a tail, etc... all kinds of 1st generation issues need fixing... yet they still lay trenches that make me look back up in disbelief that I just made turns that clean.

[/groomer-talk hijack finished]
post #65 of 85
Quote:
Total family days on snow this year - maybe 80 give or take. Total family days not on rockered skis - zero. Everyone has alternative cambered choices on the wall. None of us have even considered them. The cambered skis will pretty much all be sold off in the not too distant future.
As a counterpoint to this.

Our tuning crew and their loosely affiliated rat pack consists of about 25-30 young men and women. Many are freeride competitors, all have lived in Tahoe for some time, all regularly experience the Gnar, almost all jumped on the R/R concept early on.

Most now save them for certain circumstances, and a few have jumped completely off the bandwagon.

This much greater sampling is no more definitive than the smaller one quoted above. It simply illustrates that not all folks view these concept skis in the same way or with the same reverence.

SJ
post #66 of 85

a place in a quiver

Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
That's nice. Too bad you are wrong. It is that simple.
I'm lost here. why is this even a question, as most skiers now adhere to some form of quiver concept, skis for a particular purpose. here, lots of the kids have to make due with one ski (money issues), but they're kids and have bulletproof bodies and ton's of extra energy, so they can make one ski do it all very well, and when it sucks, they deal. In this case, they seem to buy a ski for the kind of skiing they enjoy most.
post #67 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Strato View Post
Real rockers are limited-use skis.

Perhaps if you live in PNW and only ski on fresh days, a rocker ski is all you need. I consider that limited-use.

For other uses, conventional skis, big or not, apply.

Fundamentals are fundamentals. That's why they call them that. It's what you do to ski.

Sage, Seth or Shane likely learned a few basics before dropping into 55 degree slopes.
I highly recommend going and skiing a JJ and then reevaluate your position. Two bucks says it will change your mind. Just sayin'
post #68 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Que View Post
I highly recommend going and skiing a JJ and then reevaluate your position. Two bucks says it will change your mind. Just sayin'
maybe so, maybe not

My wife demo'd a JJ and hated it. She much prefers her 1080 guns
post #69 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
Can't post photos but have you seen the new Schizo bindings from Marker?

Pretty cool concept to be able to change location of binding mount position by 3 centimeters with the turn of a tooless screw!
Does that mean a plate on fat skis????.....I thought that was not a good concept????
post #70 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by samurai View Post
To the rest of us, non-rockers are limited-use skis.
Not sure who "the rest of us" refers to, unless it's a couple of people on this thread.

Here in CO, we see a few skiers, and some pretty good ones.

Some days we have 20,000 people at a resort. Some are gapers, and some are amazing.

I see plenty of RR's on deep snow days, in the bowls and trees. But, I've yet to see people doing front-side laps on RR's.

If "the rest of us" is meant to convey an immense army of RR-only users, I've yet to see them.
post #71 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
Due to an utter lack of fresh snow, I've skied probably 8+ of the past 14 days on groomers --- with 189 Hell Bents. Other family members have been using 179 & 169 Hell Bents, and EP Pros...

Total family days on snow this year - maybe 80 give or take. Total family days not on rockered skis - zero. Everyone has alternative cambered choices on the wall. None of us have even considered them. The cambered skis will pretty much all be sold off in the not too distant future.
If your lovely wife has Auras she wants to sell, have her give me a call or shoot me a PM.
post #72 of 85
http://snowhugger.com/2009/01/200920..._jimi_skis.htm

Looks like Head's got a reverse camber ski in next year's lineup. Funky topsheet.
post #73 of 85
Captain, the discussion is emphatically not about "RRs". Full reverse/reverse is clearly more at home in powder. Likewise the hybrids skewed heavily in the RR direction.

Rockered & hybrid skis with well designed/integrated sidecut are a different story. And that's the interesting discussion in terms of all-around utility. There are many excellent skiers who now believe that skis of this genre can be incredibly versatile. Moreso than any narrower conventional ski. At least in the the PNW (= western WA ) it is becoming reasonably common to see skis like Hell Bents, EP Pros, JJs, etc on groomers as well as off piste.

Again, time and the market will speak - especially as more people get the hang of how these should be skied...
post #74 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trekchick View Post
If your lovely wife has Auras she wants to sell, have her give me a call or shoot me a PM.
that is totally beautiful , never missed a beat, Johnny on the spot, always willing to help, flexibility in the face of revolution!
post #75 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trekchick View Post
If your lovely wife has Auras she wants to sell, have her give me a call or shoot me a PM.
You know where to find her...
post #76 of 85

NEW FISCHER WATEA and DYNASTAR INFO ETC>

Anyone know French?

http://www.skipass.com/articles/sais...tes-jour-2.php
post #77 of 85

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

 

I disagree about tips & rocker. One key is to let go of the notion of driving through the fronts of the skis -- and just roll them. They are already in a turning shape. I think the recurve/hybrid designs are mostly just an intermediate baby step. Obviously time will tell if I'm off base or not...

My understanding is that the Gotama is a rocker pattern roughly similar to the Kuro. But I can't say it's a fact. Personally, I wonder if they were too conservative w/ the overall shape (eg - more early taper might have been good...)

SJ -- funny, I was just involved in a discussion today about the need for a fully rockered kids ski. One of my kids (no longer little) was saying he hoped the kid version was fully rockered. So the little ones can learn "right" from the start...

 

I just got the the new Gotama, the rocker is very subtle and low profile.  The rocker is nowhere near the rocker of the Kuro.  Resembles the K2 Obsethed alot in overall dimensions and rocker. 

post #78 of 85

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crookedandrew View Post

 

 

 

I just got the the new Gotama, the rocker is very subtle and low profile.  The rocker is nowhere near the rocker of the Kuro.  Resembles the K2 Obsethed alot in overall dimensions and rocker. 

 

You must have gotten different goats than the ones I've seen. The goats are full reverse camber - what Volkl calls an ELP profile. No cambered section at all. Heck, not even really a flat section. The Obsetheds - at least that I've seen - have a cambered mid-section & rather minimal tip and tail rocker that kicks in pretty far out. The goat (and Kuro) rise from the foot...

 

Did I miss something? Or is there  radical change, other than perhaps a tweak to the degree of rocker, to the Obsethed that I've missed?

 

I agree about it being pretty subtle though.

post #79 of 85

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

 

Did I miss something? Or is there  radical change, other than perhaps a tweak to the degree of rocker, to the Obsethed that I've missed?

 

I agree about it being pretty subtle though.

 

No, you didn't miss anything at all. The Sethed is still a cambered center with early tip and tail rise. OTH, the 2010 Got is in fact rockered from the center. (more or less anyhow) Different deal.

 

SJ

post #80 of 85

Any info on the 2010 Head lineup?

Specifically, the Supershapes... any structural changes,etc.

post #81 of 85

Anyone got any info on the Head "the Jimi" its the replacement for the Supermojo 105, its suppose to be reverse camber and 115ish underfoot...

post #82 of 85

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by skiut420 View Post

 

Anyone got any info on the Head "the Jimi" its the replacement for the Supermojo 105, its suppose to be reverse camber and 115ish underfoot...

Posted in the other thread.

www.epicski.com/forum/thread/79447/09-10-head-skis

post #83 of 85

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brumos View Post

 

Any info on the 2010 Head lineup?

Specifically, the Supershapes... any structural changes,etc.

 

The Supershape line is completely unchanged this year; the topsheets have been updated, but only minimally, same basic idea and colours.

 

Race stuff is pretty similar, I think the dimensions are the same, no idea about possible construction tweaks, but likely pretty minor stuff.


 

The XRC and Xenon lines are gone, with that rough hole in the lineup filled by the new Icon lineup - 66 to 68 underfoot throughout the lineup, new "Torque Tuning" concept that seems to be another means of giving torsional stability without a stiff flex longitudinally. No idea how they ski, with the possible exception of the top of the line ski (which has a sandwich construction), I doubt they'll be very interesting for anyone beyond an improving intermediate skier.

 

The Monster line has been replaced by the Peak series, made a little more friendly for a wider audience, possibly to the detriment of high end performance, but that's discussed in other threads if you look around here and in the Gear Review forum.

 

The freeride/powder line has been renamed and given a new look, with a rockered ski added in, have a look at karpiel's link for a more in depth look.

 

Park stuff has been changed up. The new J.O. Pro is wider - 84 underfoot, with a similarly dimensioned ski, not sure what the difference is, but I suspect it'll be like the J.O. Pro and Mojo One of this year, same dimensions, different flex pattern. The Mojo Mix (entry level park ski) has been renamed the Black Jack 80.

 

Haven't poured through the material on the women's stuff, but from a quick glance, looks like they've added a new one, and changed another, I think women's versions of the Icon skis.

 

FYI, I haven't had a chance to ski any of the new stuff yet, just going off feedback from others, and some marketing material I've got, combined with a few years experience decoding Head catalogues and marketing speak.

post #84 of 85

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanuckInstructor View Post

 

 

 

The Supershape line is completely unchanged this year; the topsheets have been updated, but only minimally, same basic idea and colours.

Thanks. When you say, "unchanged this year" are you referring to '09 or '10?

 

post #85 of 85

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brumos View Post

 

 

Thanks. When you say, "unchanged this year" are you referring to '09 or '10?

 

 

Sorry, should have made it clearer, all of my comments were about the 2010 models.

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 › The New goods: 2009/2010