or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Ski and Skiing Magazine Reviews Stink!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ski and Skiing Magazine Reviews Stink! - Page 2

post #31 of 35
Same here. Let my subscription run out years ago, and they keep sending them none the less. And they're not going to make any money off me from the advertising, either. I usually find that the products that get the most ink are the ones that I'm the least impressed with.
post #32 of 35
I agree with you on the Ski and Skiing mags, the reviews this year are bad, but the reviews have been bad for the last 2 years., They need a new format for the test articles, one that focuses on the details of the skis, testers opinions and the test results. Neato photos don't tell you anything on how a ski feels.
post #33 of 35
Re: Tests

1) A lot of skis only change their tops from year-to-year (2-3 year runs or longer if they "got it right"), yet their rankings in SKI or SKIING change a lot from year-to-year.  What gives?

2) A lot of skis are designed to be skidded and not carved for the general public.  Moving the bindings up or back a few cm completely changes the characteristics of the ski, but they skis are never tested that way.

3) The whole "one ski quiver" concept is bull.  An 86 cm waisted ski will never carve like a 66 cm slalom or gs ski.  Why rank "expert" skis on everything from moguls to ice to powder when most "experts" have more than one ski?

4)  Skis react very differently depending upon their length.  In fact, the difference the way a ski reacts may be greater due to the length rather than comparing manufacturer to manufacturer!  Why not test diffent length skis?

5)  Some of us try to buy equipment as if we are living in a one story whorehouse (no f     ing overhead).  Since skis a year or two old sell for a fraction of the new price, why not compare the skis year-to-year.  I can buy a brand new "older" GS ski for the groomers or a few inches of powder for less than $200, and it may be very similar to the manufacturers new model.  Why don't the ski tests compare this stuff from year-to-year? 

6) Why not test some of the custom stuff out there?  I ski mostly on Daleboots because they are laterally stiff and so damn comfortable (I use racing boots for the racing skis).  They have a lot of unique features and benefits, yet they are never reviewed in the magazines.
post #34 of 35

1) Skis that are progressive one year may be long-in-the-tooth two seasons later when compared to their peers.

2) If they tried different mount points... think about this for just a second- do you see an answer? They are testing a ski like you'd buy it (except with a 'special' tune...) moving the mount point off the manufacturer's mark would mean they aren't testing the ski the way most people will ski it.

3) They do test numerous categories... one happens to be 'one ski quiver', many people want a jack-of-all-trades ski.

4) There is a finite amount of time to test this stuff, knowledgeable ski testers have NO problem extrapolating what a shorter or longer length will feel like.

5) Do you know why magazines 'give away' their product (see poster above who let his subscription expire)? Because they make money from ad space. If they test skis to tell you what left-over is 'just as good' as a new product that would be... well that would be a very bad fiscal decision for the mags.

6) Custom... well if it's actually custom... see answer #2.  What would they say? "It fits like it was made for me... oh wait, it was made for me."
post #35 of 35
I get Ski for free,have been for a few years now. Don't know why but was told I received it compliments of Steamboat.
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 › Ski and Skiing Magazine Reviews Stink!