EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Is it possible and desirable to find a Deep Powder ski that thinks it's a GS/Carving ski
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is it possible and desirable to find a Deep Powder ski that thinks it's a GS/Carving ski

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
I live in Utah and ski Brighton, Snowbird, & Alta.  I am 5'8" 185lbs.  I want to build a 2 ski quiver and my skinny ski is the Head Monster 82 171cm.  On non-epic days, I love to carve high speed, high G turns through the packed snow and crud.  I enjoy the steeps and trees, but never go out of my way to ski a mogul field.  I really enjoy the solid edge hold and damped feeling I get on the Monsters at any speed. 
I am looking for a 100mm underfoot or greater ski for deep powder days.
My current fat ski is a Rossi Bandit B4 185cm and it feels OK in the powder but doesn't offer great floatation so I think I can better.  It has a 26M turning radius and I am not happy with its performance on any kind of packed snow.  Unless I am going 40mph I don't feel like the ski wants to carve at all, I can't seem to engage the inside ski, and I feel like the ski just wants to go straight down the hill all the time.  The skis have a fresh tune and base grind, and I keep steady pressure on the front of my skis so I'm not sure if I just don't like large radius turns or if I'm doing something wrong.  I have no problem carving any size turn that I want on the Monsters, which have a 17M radius, and want to have a Powder ski that will give me a similar feeling.   
Some of the candidates I'm considering are:

09/10 Line Prophet 100 182cm 18m turn radius
09 Blizzard Titan Argos 180cm 28?m radius
07/08 Dynastar Legend Pro Rider 176cm 26?m radius
08 Dynastar Huge Trouble 185cm 33m radius

I am concerned from reviews that I have read that the Dynastar LP may give me the same feeling I get on hard snow as the B4 because of the large turn radius, but I have not demo'd any of this gear yet.  I have not considered fully rockered skis like the K2 Hellbent because I would plan on skiing my fat ski for the entire day on powder days and I am concerned I would end up skidding back to the lifts on a ski with no camber. 

I also would prefer a wood core and a ski that doesn't feel like a noodle.  I have found that I can demo the Line Prophet and a Solomon Czar at the local REI, but I don't know anyone who has the other models to demo. 
post #2 of 20
 camber doesnt make a ski carve

with that said I wouldnt pick any of the ski mentioned for utah Epic days but your choices are great choices for your need IMO. 

None of the skis you mentioned are noodles the P100 is the softest and the LP is the stiffest.

Try them out but IMO you should go much fatter with rockers and forget your preconceived notions about what a ski needs to carve. For instance a Katana caa lay railroad tracks down and is full reverse camber design.

on technique advice you shouldnt be on the inside ski at all on any of these skis that just asking for trouble on a straighter cut powder ski on hardpack
post #3 of 20
You might look at a pre rockered gotama if you can still find one.  They make great every day ski that handles both deep snow and still will carve back on the groomed.    If you can't find an older model people say the new katanas outperform the new rockered gotama in almost every way so maybe try one of those.

K2 obsethed might also be something to look at.  Not quite as powder specific as the hellbent you mentioned.  You will have no problems riding this one on the groomed back to the chair or just around the mountain after the goods are tracked out.  Be aware these run longer than the stated size.  189 obsethed/hellbent probably is as tall as a 195 in any other vendors ski so the 179 would probably be around your desidered low to mid 180's length from your example list.


there are certainly more skis that could be recomended *cough*pmgear lhasa pow*cough* but most I could think of would be more job specific than one might want in a 2 ski quiver.
post #4 of 20
I've always been really impressed with how well my 185 Nordica Blowers ski on groomers.  110mm underfoot, 26m radius, wood core, titanal sheet, and a pow friendly flex.
post #5 of 20
Armada JJ
post #6 of 20
I've got 15 days on Icelantic Shamans 184cm. These will rail big GS turns on the groomers like you wouldn't believe. Absolutely idiot proof in the deep. I had to retire my 190cm Gotamas.I was shocked because the Goats were my go to ski for years. I ski mostly at Mammoth with a lot of heavy dense Sierra snow. I weigh 200lbs. The Shamans make me feel like a 12 year old. I'm skiing terrain again that I haven't been on in years just because these Shamans are soooo fun and easy going. From trees to big open how fast can you go bowls the Shamans make it easy. It took me a while to get over how goofy looking  they are. Kinda like an ugly dog with a heart of gold. My hard snow ski is a 177cm Mantra. Really good for Billygoating  around the mountain in any kind of hard snow.
post #7 of 20
A nomination for Huge Trouble. very versatile. now Sixth Sense
post #8 of 20
Volkl G4/ax4..As good as it ever got for your specs. Find some,learns some skills,then enjoy the ride! Face it Epic days are few and far between and don't last long these days with virtualy everyone" shreeeeding ("smearing") the POW with snowboards and fat skis. Most of the time if you're trying to avoid the groomed you're on broken/irregular snow in which case a superior crud ski is what is needed. When ski manufacturers figured out that most would prefer to catch fish with a worm on a hook rather than learning  to use a fly rod they stopped making real skis and we have the age of the "quiver". Good marketing! I'm not trying to be an elitist jerk, it's just that shouldn't more attention be payed to  improving athletic skills for dealing with variable snow conditions,then in looking for equipment to mask our deficiencies. After all this is a "sport" and at the recreational level predominently a balance sport and balance training isn't rocket science.Tipdive means you're out of balance not that you're on the "wrong" ski. Yes I have ridden newer skis, granted not many (so I could be wrong on my whole premise!) and I haven't found anything close to old Volkl G4/AX4's that can take on the world as it usually presents itself.
 
post #9 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebl-cc View Post

Volkl G4/ax4..As good as it ever got for your specs. Find some,learns some skills,then enjoy the ride! Face it Epic days are few and far between and don't last long these days with virtualy everyone" shreeeeding ("smearing") the POW with snowboards and fat skis. Most of the time if you're trying to avoid the groomed you're on broken/irregular snow in which case a superior crud ski is what is needed. When ski manufacturers figured out that most would prefer to catch fish with a worm on a hook rather than learning  to use a fly rod they stopped making real skis and we have the age of the "quiver". Good marketing! I'm not trying to be an elitist jerk, it's just that shouldn't more attention be payed to  improving athletic skills for dealing with variable snow conditions,then in looking for equipment to mask our deficiencies. After all this is a "sport" and at the recreational level predominently a balance sport and balance training isn't rocket science.Tipdive means you're out of balance not that you're on the "wrong" ski. Yes I have ridden newer skis, granted not many (so I could be wrong on my whole premise!) and I haven't found anything close to old Volkl G4/AX4's that can take on the world as it usually presents itself.
 

 

when you athletic skills are maxed out, and then you get on something better you become better.

If i was able to make a clone of myself and one of me was on rockered skis and the other on what you recommend, the version of me with rockered skis would ski the trees faster and have more fun.
post #10 of 20
Even 20 years ago it was easy to tell that GS skis worked better in powder than SG skis.

Sounds like your main problem with the B4s are that the sidecut limits how sharp a turn you can carve on the hardpack at low speeds (I've been told that you do have that there ).  It is the sidecut that is doing that; it would require that you tip them to a much higher angle for a given turn.  At 40 mph even if your banking your turns you can get to that angle.  At low speeds you need much more counter balance and counter rotation to enable that counter balance.  It makes perfect sense to opt for a smaller radius rather than pretzelize yourself.  Since deep powder skis produce turn shape from sidecut differently, most of the fat skis don't have much sidecut, but maybe there is one out there (not being anywhere near powder, I'm not up on these skis)

If I were in your position, I would give the Atomic Blog a try; the rocker might require a little tipping to engage the tip and tail, but probably not as much getting the B4 to arc an 15 m turn.
post #11 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

Even 20 years ago it was easy to tell that GS skis worked better in powder than SG skis.

Sounds like your main problem with the B4s are that the sidecut limits how sharp a turn you can carve on the hardpack at low speeds (I've been told that you do have that there ).  It is the sidecut that is doing that; it would require that you tip them to a much higher angle for a given turn.  At 40 mph even if your banking your turns you can get to that angle.  At low speeds you need much more counter balance and counter rotation to enable that counter balance.  It makes perfect sense to opt for a smaller radius rather than pretzelize yourself.  Since deep powder skis produce turn shape from sidecut differently, most of the fat skis don't have much sidecut, but maybe there is one out there (not being anywhere near powder, I'm not up on these skis)

If I were in your position, I would give the Atomic Blog a try; the rocker might require a little tipping to engage the tip and tail, but probably not as much getting the B4 to arc an 15 m turn.
The Blog is my daily driver ATM. Mainly due to lack of anything else actually. But I have to say it rails some nice turns. At this point I can say I have skied it in pretty much every condition, and I couldn't be happier with them. Though they have rocker in the tip and tail, there is plenty of camber and sidecut to make them fun on the groom. 
post #12 of 20
If you are buying a ski for epic days, don't even worry about its hard snow performance. You will just be pushing yourself into a compromise you won't really be happy with. Definitely go demo a ski built for deep soft snow on a deep soft day. After all, you are going to be skiing your 82s most of the time anyway which is already a great choice for most of your skiing. 
post #13 of 20
 A ski like the JJ, CRJ or S7 might be what your looking for. They will give you the best combination of hard pack performance while still being able to pivot and smear in the deep . Unless it's a ski like this than small sidecuts are undesirable in the deep. They are typically way to "hooky".  There is a reason most pow specific skis have a 35m+ turning radius.
post #14 of 20
I like the huge for resort skiing on a less than epic  powderday. They can lay down a clean carve at 40mph and will be better in pow than anything else you have listed. They are good but not great for deep untracked powder compared to a purpose built powder ski like a praxis powder. They actually can pivot and smear a little in the trees.

If you can't get a clean carve out of your current  skis and the problem is that the inside skis doesn't engage, it sounds like you are doing it wrong...
post #15 of 20

You need a few pairs of skis.

I have been finishing my days with a few runs on the groomers on a real pair of race stock GS skis.  Anyone who thinks some fat ski performs like they do is smoking something.  Even my all mountain carvers, like the dynastar contact 4x4 or atomic m:ex are toys by comparison---you can get carve out them but it is nothing like the power and responce from the real thing.  Even on packed powder, the difference is dramatic.

 

I hear the monster 82 is pretty good.  Don't expect something fatter to offer the same action.  Just use them where appropriate and accept their limitations.

post #16 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travis May View Post

 A ski like the JJ, CRJ or S7 might be what your looking for. They will give you the best combination of hard pack performance while still being able to pivot and smear in the deep . Unless it's a ski like this than small sidecuts are undesirable in the deep. They are typically way to "hooky".  There is a reason most pow specific skis have a 35m+ turning radius.
Does rocker make an otherwise hooky  high-sidecut ski less hooky?
post #17 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travis May View Post

 A ski like the JJ, CRJ or S7 might be what your looking for. They will give you the best combination of hard pack performance while still being able to pivot and smear in the deep . Unless it's a ski like this than small sidecuts are undesirable in the deep. They are typically way to "hooky".  There is a reason most pow specific skis have a 35m+ turning radius.
Agree with Travis.  S7s are hard to find for your size.  At your size, a 188 CRJ would be great - 188mm waist, 28m radius for the cambered part, rocker tip/tail.  I had the 188s, but since I'm pretty light, I'm going with the 180s.  Much better on deeper days than my 07 Gotama; about the same on hardpack.  Much more stable at speed than the S7s, too. 

See: 
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=147634
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187328
post #18 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post



Does rocker make an otherwise hooky  high-sidecut ski less hooky?
 
Where you have a tapered tip and rocker ahead of the cambered section and a rockered tail, yes, it does prevent it from being hooky (at least when I rode the S7s and CRJs).  The problem with an S7, at least in 188, is that the TR is 17.5 and the cambered section feels pretty short and overall the ski is pretty soft.  Works fine in fresh; not as good as a ski like the CRJ in the cut up/crud, IMO.  Similar design, but with less sidecut and a slightly stiffer, but not burly, construction worked better for me.
post #19 of 20
Thread Starter 
After reading some more reviews, and shopping for demo skis, I found a great deal on some Huge Troubles with some PX14's mounted 1.5cm back, that fit my boots.  At 115 wide I will likely reserve them for storm days and for sloppy seconds after the storms.  I haven't owned a full twin-tip ski before and was surprised by what I found when I laid the 185cm HT's next to my 171cm IM82's.  If I line up the bindings, the edge length is exactly the same all the way up to the initial curve of the tip and tail, but the curved section just extend a few more inches past where the IM82s end.  I was also surprised that the HT's with racing bindings are actually lighter than my 82mm wide skis.
post #20 of 20
Nicely done.  I've got a pair of HT's with PX14's that I've been very very happy with so far.  I think they'll be perfect for what you were describing you wanted.
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 › Is it possible and desirable to find a Deep Powder ski that thinks it's a GS/Carving ski