EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Powder ski for little rippers, oh yeah!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Powder ski for little rippers, oh yeah!

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 

Icelantic, a brand that originally filled a niche for smaller skiers has gone the extra mile to accomodate small children. How awesome is that! I saw a pair at about 140 length (or shorter?), that was about 110 under foot. OMG, can you just see them on these skis, bouncing around like Bambi. Mom and Dad, step up. these are wonderfully made skis and will probably re-sell for mucho dough when your ripper is done with them. I just can't wait to see more of them on the hill on powder day.

post #2 of 10

http://www.icelanticboards.com/#/skis

 

look at "Scout" they are actually built for adults but if you want to get your kids powder boards go for it.

 

I have to disagree with any sentence that includes the concept "kid's skis' and "re-sale value" - most kids have no concept of caring for their gear or changing a turn shape to avoid rocks. IMHO there is no significant re-sale value in kid's skis.

post #3 of 10

Just remember, lighter skiers do not need a wide ski to float on snow. I would not put a developing skier on a powder ski.

 

My daughter used a Fischer RX9 with a 69mm wide-at-the-waist size to ski knee deep snow, and it was her first day in powder. She had the same float as me on a 101 wide-at-the-waist ski since I have 100 lbs more mass to float. Do the math, or better yet, review some of the posts from Physicsman.

 

She now uses a 86mm wide-at-the-waist ski. If she was to go wider, the K2 Phat Luv would be all thats needed.

 

I would put a large Jr. on a 159cm Fischer Watea 78.

 

Michael


Edited by WILDCAT - 2/22/2009 at 06:01 pm


Edited by WILDCAT - 2/22/2009 at 06:22 pm
post #4 of 10
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by WILDCAT View Post

 

Just remember, lighter skiers do not need a wide ski to float on snow. I would not put a developing skier on a powder ski...,,...

 

 


 

respectfully, totally disagree. and I did teach my son  to ski powder from age 4. I would have used these skis from about age 8, which is about 6 years earlier than was formerly  possible.

 

their weight also makes it more difficult for them to plow or drive through the snow and chunks.

 

I hope other parents are not influenced by your theory, engineering nonsense rather than on-snow experience, to the detriment of their kids.

post #5 of 10

Reality check:  Icelantic's skis are generally pretty burly. Despite the short length, the regular scout is stiff as heck & is a decent "fat carver" for a +/- 200 pound person.  The Scout SFT is perhaps more appropriate for smaller people (women, kids). There's been some coverage of this at TGR.

 

From what I've seen, the 2010 kids' goat is likely to be the hands down winner as next year's "little ripper powder ski". Too bad there are no mini-Hell Bents...

post #6 of 10
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew R View Post

 

 

..... IMHO there is no significant re-sale value in kid's skis.

it's really not the main point, as the kids are only that size and that joyous once in their life, and the moment passes in the wink of an eye.
 

 

AND, it's a new concept, so I guess you are guessing on that.

 

Spindrift: reality check: you don't know the model in question, do you? I wish I had it for you, but I just checked the kid and his folks out in the lift line. I'd say he was about 10 years old.

 

 

post #7 of 10
 

(Edit)


Edited by WILDCAT - 2/22/2009 at 07:52 pm
post #8 of 10

From Icelantic:

 

Quote:

The Scout SFT

 

Calling all Grommies!  This year Icelantic brings you The Scout SFT, built just like the traditional Scout, only with a softer flex for you youngsters and smaller adults.  In a world full of young, talented riders, why has no company designed a real big-mountain tool for you?  After all, you are the future of the sport - you’re leading the charge!  Built with the same top-of-the-line materials and construction, the Scout SFT cuts no corners, delivering the best performing junior free-ride ski on the market – period.  If you weigh less than 120 lbs and charge the whole mountain, check out our SFT – you won’t be disappointed!

 

 

I'm just saying don't mistake the Scout SFT for a regular Scout. IMO the regular one is way too stiff for a kid. 

post #9 of 10

I just bought my daughter a pair of the Line Celebrity Minis, which are about 80 underfoot.  By the end of the day she was hopping off jumps like a bunny and floating in the powder, which was impossible in her 60 width Roxys.  The Celebrity Minis are a fun light twin tip that's wide enough for most powder.  I was a little worried that it might impair her ability to learn how to carve, since she's six and is just starting to get the hang of parallel turns, but I don't think they will slow her down. 

post #10 of 10
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by valli View Post

 

I just bought my daughter a pair of the Line Celebrity Minis, which are about 80 underfoot.  By the end of the day she was hopping off jumps like a bunny and floating in the powder, which was impossible in her 60 width Roxys.  The Celebrity Minis are a fun light twin tip that's wide enough for most powder.  I was a little worried that it might impair her ability to learn how to carve, since she's six and is just starting to get the hang of parallel turns, but I don't think they will slow her down. 

that sounds totally cool. That's the majic I pictured when I heard about these new skis. I wonder what the equivalent to an adult 105 would be for a 60 lb kid. does 80 seem to do what the 105 does for an adult?
 

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 › Powder ski for little rippers, oh yeah!