EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Looking for wider skis with deep sidecuts
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Looking for wider skis with deep sidecuts - Page 2

post #31 of 52
Thread Starter 
     Quote:
Originally Posted by cstreu1026 View Post

I've skied the Sultan 85, Watea 84, and Gotama at 40+ mph on midwestern hardpack without a problem.  I'm not sure how much more edge grip you would need unless you planning on racing with them.
 

None of those skis have really deep sidecuts.  Stay with me here - do you understand torsional stiffness and why it becomes increasingly difficult for the ski to resist those twisting forces when the ski sidecut gets deeper (I'm talking 14m or less)?
post #32 of 52
If you went with the iM 78 (Peak 78), you might find that the 171 is TOO turny at 14.6m radius..
I'm  5''7", 155 lbs, and went up to the 177 for this reason..
This WAS, for my skiing, as close to a 1-quiver ski as there is for Tahoe with an occasional real fat rental for DEEP days (only 1 day), until I got involved with the 08 Dstar LP, 176 which became my real 1-quiver ski..
post #33 of 52
I guess I don't see why you think a laminate construction would have any less torsional strength than any of the gimicky designs trotted out by manufacturers over the yeards.  I skied Atomic skis with their Beta construction for years including skis with a turn radius of 10-11 meters and saw no loss of edge grip going skis with more traditional construction.  I think it's entirely possible that it could be true on a single ski or even a single manufacturer but I think it's wrong to rule out all skis with that type construction due to some preconceived notion. 

Originally Posted by Noodler View Post

     Quote:


None of those skis have really deep sidecuts.  Stay with me here - do you understand torsional stiffness and why it becomes increasingly difficult for the ski to resist those twisting forces when the ski sidecut gets deeper (I'm talking 14m or less)?
 
post #34 of 52
Why are you looking for a fat ski with deep sidecut?  What attributes are you looking for in the ski that will help you accomplish your goal(s)?  Some of these are hinted at, but just thought I'd ask a more direct question ...
post #35 of 52
 Yes, I am wondering a bit about what you are looking for.  Fat waist skis are nice in crud and powder but they don't get on edge as quickly on hard surfaces.  You want torsional stiffness, but you find the Phantom 87 too stiff.
 
"Rossi Phantom SC 87 which is 86mm underfoot and has a 14m radius at 170cm and a 16m radius at 178cm.  Unfortunately it's also a damn stiff ski so I'm debating on taking a chance on the 178cm (for unknown reasons I never demoed this ski, but I did ride the SC 97).  I wish Rossi had made an effort to tune the flex pattern to the different available ski lengths."

I demoed the Phantom 87 recently and I didn't think it was too stiff for anything but tight bumps.  I also have the Scott Misson in a 183 length.  It turns very quick.  If anything slows the turns down, it is the weight which is average for a 183 length. I personally go with the concept of a stiff ski for hard snow (short radius for quicker turns) and a soft ski for soft snow (softer flex for quicker turns).  It is very difficult to find one ski for truly all conditions.
post #36 of 52
If you know exactly what you want you could always try 333 skis.  Personally I wouldnt take the risk.
I am in the same boat as you I think.  I want a ski with a low turn radius, with rocker or early rise, good for both powder and the groomers, 90 -110mm, AND the right size (I am about 164 cm).  Tough to find what I want in that size.  Have you looked at the s7?  Somebody mentioned the obsethed too, plus scott

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler View Post

This has been a real exercise in frustration.  At this point I'm ready to start a ski company because no one is building what I want!

I want a deep sidecut (<16m) on a wider (>80mm) freeride-oriented ski.  Except for Virus and Indigo (very high-end boutique skis with limited distribution) no one is building these skis.

The closest thing I've found is the Rossi Phantom SC 87 which is 86mm underfoot and has a 14m radius at 170cm and a 16m radius at 178cm.  Unfortunately it's also a damn stiff ski so I'm debating on taking a chance on the 178cm (for unknown reasons I never demoed this ski, but I did ride the SC 97).  I wish Rossi had made an effort to tune the flex pattern to the different available ski lengths.  The 170cm would be suitable for a 250 lbs. person IMO!  It flexed like a 2x4.  The 186cm had a nice flex pattern, but it's way too long for my purposes.

The Scott Mission and Crusade also advertise really deep sidecuts, but I think they're fudging the truth a bit.  When I plug their dimensions into my sidecut calculator I don't see how they could possibly be anywhere close to what they publish.
 
post #37 of 52
Take your VXLs and mash on them a bit more,you'll get yer <18

I love that ski.
post #38 of 52
Thread Starter 
I would love to have a deeper sidecut version of the VXL - that would be absolute heaven.

So some of you are asking what my motives are here.  Well let's just say that I've found a new "religion" for my skiing and have ventured back to the world of really quick slalom turns.  I love skiing in that style again after years of GS/Super-G sized turns.  I actually purchased two sets of skinny skis this season - Elan SL Race WaveFlex and Stockli Spirit Pro II.  BUT - I'm really an off-piste guy at heart.  I accidentally got into a situation this year at Vail where I was stuck with my Elan Race skis on my feet, but skied them off-piste.  I could get the job done, but it was a bit more work than I really wanted (we were dealing with about 6-10" of chop and crud in most places).  I also ran some laps on the Stockli Spirits on the ungroomed stuff at Loveland and had a blast, but also realized that the best of both worlds would be a wider freeride-oriented deep sidecut carving machine that still has some float.

Most of the "super carvers" that we have now (Nordica HR series, Volkl AC, etc.) are generally not my cup of tea when it comes to off-piste skiing.  The ones that have the torsional stiffness I want are also usually also very stiff lengthwise (they're "expert" skis ) - not what I want.  Some manufacturers have figured out how to make a torsionally stiff ski without also making it overbearing in its longitudinal stiffness.  I've found that after years of thinking that I preferred stiff skis that what I really like is a ski that will work for me over a greater range of speeds and readily bend into a deep arc without having to do 30+ mph.

So I just want a ski that comes around really quick.  I've found that for me there's really no substitute for sidecut when I want a ski to make really quick turns.  I hate having to "force" a ski around through skidding/pivoting moves if it's not giving me the tighter turn that I want.  Those moves just don't work off the groomers.  I also want a ski with some decent degree of float as a daily driver in CO.  For me that's been an 85mm-95mm underfoot ski.  I want to combine these two attributes into my ultimate set of "go to" skis.
post #39 of 52
Thread Starter 
     Quote:
Originally Posted by PimpinPanda View Post

If you know exactly what you want you could always try 333 skis.  Personally I wouldnt take the risk.


Yeah, I've read the 333 ski threads on TGR and followed that soap opera for awhile.  I won't be going down that road any time soon!
post #40 of 52
Thread Starter 
    Quote:
Originally Posted by Dgudaitis View Post

 Yes, I am wondering a bit about what you are looking for.  Fat waist skis are nice in crud and powder but they don't get on edge as quickly on hard surfaces.  You want torsional stiffness, but you find the Phantom 87 too stiff.
 

I've found that for me the edge-to-edge quickness is fine all the way up to about 90-95mm underfoot.  Then I start to notice it a bit.  There's no doubt that a skinnier ski is quicker, but at the same time I like the feeling of more "meat" under my feet.
post #41 of 52
Can't say I've skied or even seen them but the movement jam might be what you're  looking for
       http://www.movementskis.com/products-skis-jam.html
The quoted radius seems higher then the sidecut would indicate- I think it's 51mm tip to waist!
post #42 of 52
 The Movement Jam (aka last year's Yaka Jam) is loads of fun.  I agree that it seems to meet the criteria.  Haven't skied the Source but heard good things about it.
post #43 of 52
Thread Starter 
Wow - the Movement Jam is the deepest sidecut widest ski I've found yet.  Thanks for  "enlightening" me.  Strange how I missed it considering I was aware of other Movement skis.

By my calculations the Jam is running at about a 14m radius for the 173cm ski with an 85mm waist (although advertised as a 16m ski).  It has more sidecut than my Stockli Spirits and almost as much as my Elan SLs.  Has anyone actually ridden these?  I'd love to hear more about them.
post #44 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExoticSkis View Post




In the < 18m radius crowd...

SkiLogik Ullr's Chariot 2009-2010
145-101-134 15m radius @ 178cm


I do not think it has a rocker like he wants (nor a early rise)
post #45 of 52
 I just demoed a bunch of skis fitting this profile - 6 to be exact.  I think just judging skis on radius is an oversimplification.  For example, some skis seem to have quicker turn in than others, and some have more rebound out of the turn.  Those contribute to how "turny" something feels, but aren't quantified on a spec sheet.  You gotta ski them.  And as much as a quick radius is nice, as you pick up speed, your turn is going to lengthen out a bit.  Given that most people who buy a ski with 90+ underfoot want to haul some @$$, something with a 13,14 radius isn't going to have the stability most people would want.

From my experience the Nomad Savage Ti is one to look at, the Rossi Phantom SC87 is a pretty fast turner, and the Nordica Enforcers (which I just bought in the 177 length) are quite quick in the 169.  If you can bend them, all of those skis can come around very quick.  I didn't think the Phantom was overly stiff, but then again the last 5 pairs of skis I owned were race stock GS or SL skis (most recently Rossi), so that's something I'm used to.  And even coming from a real slalom ski, I felt all three of those were quite quick, especially considering their girth.
 
Quote:
I guess I don't see why you think a laminate construction would have any less torsional strength than any of the gimicky designs trotted out by manufacturers over the yeards.  I skied Atomic skis with their Beta construction for years including skis with a turn radius of 10-11 meters and saw no loss of edge grip going skis with more traditional construction.  I think it's entirely possible that it could be true on a single ski or even a single manufacturer but I think it's wrong to rule out all skis with that type construction due to some preconceived notion. 

I agree with this.  Almost all race stock skis have always foregone all the gimmicky vibration absorbing arms and construction techniques found on the consumer skis and have traditional sandwich construction.  Atomic being one big exception, and Salomon being another (when Salomon still made race skis).  If sandwich construction provides inferior torsional stiffness, which is crucial for tight radius turns, I don't see why it would still be used on world cup slalom skis.  So I wouldn't rule it out.
post #46 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler View Post
The Scott Mission and Crusade also advertise really deep sidecuts, but I think they're fudging the truth a bit.  When I plug their dimensions into my sidecut calculator I don't see how they could possibly be anywhere close to what they publish.
No fudging. Most Scott skis, like Kastle MX's and 4FRNT's, have dual radii. Scott tends to advertise the front curve, while Kastle publishes the rear. Thus a 88MX is listed at 20 m, but it initiates more like 15 m. 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

Moving along into the 21st century... ;)

Line EP Pro

DPS Wailer 112RP

Line Sir Francis Bacon (will get more real rocker next year)

Armada JJ

Rossignol S7
^^^ What he said. There are plenty of fat rockered skis out there with radii under 18 m, and they can do a lot more than smear. By apparently limiting your quest to traditional midfats under 100 mm you're missing a lot of fun. 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler View Post
None of those skis have really deep sidecuts.  Stay with me here - do you understand torsional stiffness and why it becomes increasingly difficult for the ski to resist those twisting forces when the ski sidecut gets deeper (I'm talking 14m or less)?
Sierra Jim started a thread last year about why the most desirable skis had a balance of torsional and longitudinal stiffness. Worth rereading. You really might not want a ski with the dimensions and stiffness patterns (soft longitudinally, very stiff laterally) you long for. 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler View Post
So I just want a ski that comes around really quick.  I've found that for me there's really no substitute for sidecut when I want a ski to make really quick turns.  I hate having to "force" a ski around through skidding/pivoting moves if it's not giving me the tighter turn that I want.  Those moves just don't work off the groomers.
Why not deepen the radius by bending the ski and changing its track? That's the way all skis turn in powder, whether you're also pivoting, smearing, or whatever; the sidecut is irrelevant except when it induces hooking. And according to my LIII instructors, that's also a more versatile and precise way to ski groomed, compared to riding the sidecut around. Or am I missing something here?

In sum, can appreciate your quest for lots of tight turns in soft snow; enjoy turning more than straightlining myself. Hypercarvers like Supershapes (or I bet the new Titans) are serious fun on groomers. But you will be able to turn more tightly in soft snow with a 176 S7 than any Stockli or Nordica or whatever you're tried or imagined. And it will be a true tip 'em over turn, not a skid or smear (although that works too.) Trust me on this one. Better, give it a try. 
post #47 of 52
Icelantic Shaman or Nomad (And Nomad Sft) my favorite ski. 146-111-136
post #48 of 52
Look at Scott and Nordica
post #49 of 52
Sounds like a 177 Rossi S3 or a 177 Blizzard The One would work.  Rocker tip/tail cuts down size, but alllows float off piste/pivoting in moguls/tight areas.  Midsection camber/sidecut provides stiffness/desired TR.
post #50 of 52
     Quote:
Originally Posted by PimpinPanda View Post


I do not think it has a rocker like he wants (nor a early rise)
 
     Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler View Post

     Quote:


You are the man!  Thanks so much for reminding me that Ski Logik has these.  I was even the one who started the other Ski Logik thread after SIA!  I think I would actually go with The Rave model at a 92mm waist.  I just wonder how well they hold an edge in high power, high speed arcing.
 

Nope...Ullr's Chariot and Rave do not have rocker fore or aft...conventional camber skis.

The current incarnation of Ullr's Chariot and Rave hold an excellent edge in high-pressure, higher-speed arcs.  They are actually a bit stiff according to my experience and some reviews by enough other people to have Mazz pressing some re-flexed versions...supposed to be some slightly-revised Raves coming to Sallanches, France before the end of the month for some testing I hope...planning to get some rides on them and see if their behavior changes...I just hurriedly read the initial post and did not think about rocker or early-rise...

Review of the SkiLogiks over here...

post #51 of 52

Well here it is a couple years later and it looks like the Head Rev 90 and Rev 105 might be the ski you were asking for......looks like you were slightly ahead of your time?

post #52 of 52
Thread Starter 

Yes, that's certainly true.  Head really does have something "different" available, compared to most of the other manufacturers.  Honestly, Head has been the primary choice of skiers who like to "turn a lot" for many years.  When the SuperShape first came out it was almost like having a ski that automatically made the turn for you.  Only the Metron B5 comes to mind as another ski with a crazy deep sidecut back then.  It will be interesting to see how well received the new Rev series is over this season.

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 › Looking for wider skis with deep sidecuts