EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Rockered: peformance in crud and moguls
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rockered: peformance in crud and moguls

post #1 of 14
Thread Starter 
So, I'm looking to get a ski one step wider than my Watea 94/186 cm.(and rockered) 

5'10", 200 lbs, ski medium - fast not crazy fast.

In deep snow just about any new ski in the category would be silly fun.

But it doesnt snow every day, even in Utah.

Looking for specific recomendations with regard to performance in:
 
      crud / cut up / chunked up / tracked out open bowls
    
     large moguls mixed with snow (ie 1-2 days after a dump)

    slushy spring conditions that change throughout the day.


I realize mostpeople buy this section of the ski market with the hopes of never skiing a mogul, but maybe some others out there have some thoughts.

Thanks
brad
post #2 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by docbrad66 View Post

 
      crud / cut up / chunked up / tracked out open bowls
    
     large moguls mixed with snow (ie 1-2 days after a dump)

    slushy spring conditions that change throughout the day.


 

This isn't making much sense unless you plan on replacing your Wateas with the ski in question. In a general sense, the ski you already have is as good or better than a say 105mm rockered ski in most the conditions you describe. Why not get a wider fully powder oriented ski for the deep days and use your Wateas for the conditions described above.

SJ
post #3 of 14
Thread Starter 
Thanks Jim,
 I am thinking of adding on, not replacing.  But within the category of fully powder oriented ski, i thought i'd see what peoples impression might be of that type of ski off piste but not untracked.

How much overlap would you say there is btwn the Huge Trouble and the Watea 94?
post #4 of 14
I think there is some sense to your way of thinking. Even on the best of days you may have to deal with some not best conditions and then it's nice to have the ski that is "least bad" at skiing them. I don't know what that ski is, but for one, it's not the Kuro.
post #5 of 14
Last year I skied about 25 skis of 95mm and up. Of those over half were some version or other of rocker. In the conditions you describe, the rockered skis all drifted toward to the bottom of the chart. OTH, on the deeper or untracked days, they rose to the top. It simply comes down to what you want the ski to do.

The Watea and the HT are a good 2fer for the west (meaning 2 fer everything). OTH there are a lot of other skis in the 110-120 range that could serve you well too. Some of those are rockered, some not. I own an HT and an S7 and each is more or less one of the reference skis within their respective categories. The S7 is hootin'-hollerin' fun on a deep day. Once the snow gets chopped and hacked, the S7 is less fun than the HT.

Since you are keeping the Watea as your daily western ski, the other one could well be rockered in that 115 or wider range. I see little value for you in a narrowish rockered ski.

SJ
post #6 of 14
QFT

Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

I see little value for you in a narrowish rockered ski.
 
post #7 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

The Watea and the HT are a good 2fer for the west (meaning 2 fer everything).

I don't have nearly the experience of SierraJim on as many different skis, but I can chime in here because this is my exact quiver.  I don't have very many days on my HT's yet, just got them towards the end of last season, but I think it does a pretty good job of what you're asking about, in terms of crud, etc performance.  SierraJim is right, though, it's all about trade-offs.

I'm fairly happy with this quiver because I like both skis, and they're both decent enough in the middle ground between them that I don't think I'll ever wind up in the position of bringing the wrong ski for the day and really wishing I had the other.  However, I actually think when it comes time to replace the watea's, I might go something *slightly* more frontside oriented, honestly.  The watea is a better soft snow ski than a hard snow/crud ski.  I bought it as a one-ski-quiver originally, but I think that now with the HT's too, I could get something that handles firmer and cruddier conditions a little better instead.  The HT's are pretty fun even in just a few inches of new snow.  We'll see how the winter shapes up, but here in the PNW I expect I'll probably be on the HT's more than the wateas.

So, I think the overlap between the two isn't that much, if you went the HT route, and the days when you're not sure which to bring, you could probably bring either and still have fun.
post #8 of 14
I was blown away by the Elan 1010 in the conditions you describe.  Chop, soft crud, soft moguls, new snow on top of icy moguls: it simply was the best ski for this type of skiing I tried.  I loaned mine out to 2 other people who also promptly bought a pair.  They are traditional camber (early rise I think) but fairly soft and laterally pretty stiff.  The rockered skis I tried were a bit floatier in crappy, hard-to release snow (where a rockered tip definitely comes in handy),  but not as good when the snow got tracked out or when ripping up soft groomers on the way back to the lift, and they weren't of the performance of the 1010 in soft moguls.  

For what you describe, I would lean toward a traditional, somewhat cambered ski, that is somewhat soft in flex, especially if you want the most versatile tool and something solid in bumps.   You can always get a wider rockered ski for big days (the 1010, for example, is probably best in 6-18" of new). There are several 100-110mm skis out there that are probably what you are looking for.  
post #9 of 14
I ski mostly Colorado front range resorts where the powder is usually gone before lunch and you are left with crud. The steep runs usually have moguls. I found the Icelantic Nomads to be a good ski for powder, crud, and moguls on days when it snows 5" or more for the colorado front range. I was sold on them during a powder day at Loveland where I tested them on the steep mogul runs off Chair 1 in powder and crud. The Nomads are very light so they pivot quickly in moguls despite their 110mm width (in a 181cm). They still have enough heft to ski crud. They are also pretty good in trees. You don't need a lot of speed to make them work (I'm 165 lbs) which is another plus for me.
post #10 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaobrien6 View Post

..................I actually think when it comes time to replace the watea's, I might go something *slightly* more frontside oriented, honestly.  The watea is a better soft snow ski than a hard snow/crud ski...................

Very good observation. No doubt that the Watea is soft snow biased. As a western OSQ it's great, but to fill a more "frontsideish" specific niche.......there be better stuff.

SJ
post #11 of 14
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post




Very good observation. No doubt that the Watea is soft snow biased. As a western OSQ it's great, but to fill a more "frontsideish" specific niche.......there be better stuff.

SJ

 
This makes a lotta sense.  I guess if keep the Watea, then full rocker may be a good compliment.  If get the Huge Trouble or Elan 1010, then, as Jim suggests, a more frontsideish ski would be a better complimen, ie replace the Watea with something else.

I like the versatility factor of the HT or 1010 vs rockered, but then I suspect the Watea would not come out too often...

hmm
post #12 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by docbrad66 View Post



This makes a lotta sense.  I guess if keep the Watea, then full rocker may be a good compliment.  If get the Huge Trouble or Elan 1010, then, as Jim suggests, a more frontsideish ski would be a better complimen, ie replace the Watea with something else.

I like the versatility factor of the HT or 1010 vs rockered, but then I suspect the Watea would not come out too often...

hmm
 

For sure, the Watea 94 is neither a frontsider nor a backsider it's a "tweener" or an OSQ. So, having said that, it would almost certainly get more use than any 115mm (ish) ski rockered or not. As the owner of two 115'ers, I certainly wouldn't take them out on a day with no new snow or only a sprinkle. The Watea would be way more fun on a day like that.

So....whattayado?

I'd say the buy the big ski that you want whether it's rockered or not. Just get the one that sounds good to you. If it's flat or conventional camber.....cool, it'll still be really good in deep snow and as versatile as a ski that big can reasonably be. If you want a rocker....cool as well. It is just different with a different skill set and priorities.

Once you have those two, you'll find out soon enough whether you want something more "frontsideish" than the Watea. Play around on no snow or shallow snow days with the Watea and the bigg'un. Then decide how close they really are...you'll figure it out.

SJ
post #13 of 14
 Let me throw out two words:

               Line Mothership

But be prepared to rock them hard.
post #14 of 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier219 View Post

 Let me throw out two words:

               Line Mothership

But be prepared to rock them hard.

Uhhhhh.....wellllllll.....that part is about right.

SJ
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 › Rockered: peformance in crud and moguls