EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Fat skis with Short turn radiuses: What is the list?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fat skis with Short turn radiuses: What is the list?

post #1 of 46
4/9/10 at 12:04pm
Thread Starter 
Hi all!

I would like to hear suggestions for fat skis in the 95-105mm range which
have a radius under 22M. I specifically omitted 94mm cause I want a bit wider.

The list I have now is:

Atomic Enforcer with a 21M radius at 98mm
Line Prophet 100 with 18M radius at 100mm.

Thanks for any suggestions.
Reply
post #2 of 46
4/9/10 at 1:30pm
 Noodler had a longish thread about this. Search under his name. 
Reply
post #3 of 46
4/10/10 at 8:36am
ZAG Heli Gold
Volkl Mantra
Virus Soulcarver 73
Virus Apokalypse 77
Rossi Phantom SC 97
Nordica Enforcer
Line Prophet 100
Line Prophet 115
Ski Logik Ullr's Chariot
Ski Logik Howitzer
Icelantic Nomad
Icelantic Shaman
Rossi S6
ON3P Billy Goat
Elan 1111
Reply
post #4 of 46
4/10/10 at 8:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler View Post

ZAG Heli Gold
Volkl Mantra
Virus Soulcarver 73
Virus Apokalypse 77
Rossi Phantom SC 97
Nordica Enforcer
Line Prophet 100
Line Prophet 115
Ski Logik Ullr's Chariot
Ski Logik Howitzer
Icelantic Nomad
Icelantic Shaman
Rossi S6
ON3P Billy Goat
Elan 1111

 
Deleted
Reply
post #5 of 46
4/10/10 at 3:22pm
     Quote:
Originally Posted by bumpfreaq View Post

Deleted
 

That one wasn't on my list.
Reply
post #6 of 46
4/10/10 at 3:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterGoa View Post

Hi all!

I would like to hear suggestions for fat skis in the 95-105mm range which
have a radius under 22M. I specifically omitted 94mm cause I want a bit wider.

The list I have now is:

Atomic Enforcer with a 21M radius at 98mm
Line Prophet 100 with 18M radius at 100mm.

Thanks for any suggestions.

Though the Kastle MX98's radius is beyond your range, the 174cm sure felt to me that is was tighter than 20m. YMMV.

Quote:
Ski- geometry: The DUAL RADIUS PISTE makes the MX98 a responsive on and off-piste. The narrower turning radius in the shovel creates agile steering characteristics. The tail possesses a bit wider turning radius. With a different turning radius in the tip and tail,this construction equips the MX98 for all snow conditions. The sidecut geometry creates precision performance.
fast_grip_shovel_en.png
dual_radius_piste_en.png

The FX94 is also worth looking at even though it's 1mm below your range.
Reply
post #7 of 46
4/11/10 at 9:34am
Thread Starter 
Thank all for the replies!

That is a great list Noodler!

I have a lot of reading to do :P
Reply
post #8 of 46
4/12/10 at 6:19am
I'd never heard of Ski Logik so I looked them up. Wow, they some pretty interesting stuff.  I might just have to look for a pair for next season.  Ullr's Chariot looks particularly tempting.
Reply
post #9 of 46
4/15/10 at 11:35am
The airlines lost my skis (McConkey designed "Machetes") last season while in Mt. Bachelor so I demo'd a pair of Icelantic Shamans. It was a deep pow day and the Shamans (160-110-130) were unbelievably great. Couldn't believe the responsiveness for such a large ski. Would highly recommend a pair of these for someone tackling the deep pow / crud busting / etc... and also looking for quick turning capabilities. http://www.icelanticboards.com/
Reply
post #10 of 46
4/22/10 at 12:23pm
I bought Rossignol s7 176 for that reason. Small turns in powder. Mounted them for powder. They turn small and slow if I want. 5' 9.5", 141 lbs. They have a turning radius of 17.5 I beleive.
Reply
post #11 of 46
4/23/10 at 6:03pm
 The Icelantic Shamans are either 110 or 115 underfoot and have a radius of only 15 - really tight for that wide a ski. I don't know of anything tighter.  But definitely demo them first, you'll either love these skis or hate them.
Reply
post #12 of 46
4/23/10 at 8:34pm
The Shaman is 110 underfoot and is a very odd ski when compared to most everything else out there.  The majority of its sidecut radius is accounted for in the tip cut (50mm) with a very little tail cut (20mm).  So this design takes the pintail idea to the extreme.  Unfortunately I've never skied them in deeper 3D conditions (where they supposedly excel), but on hard pack I did not like how their geometry played out.
Reply
post #13 of 46
4/24/10 at 11:13pm
One other to add: High Society Freerides - ~102 underfoot. I think the 187's have a 17 radius. Ski shape resembles older Gotamas I'm pretty sure the Armada JJ meets your criteria Lastly, have to second the Shamans. Love mine and ski them all then time under all conditions
Reply
post #14 of 46
4/25/10 at 11:52am
Here is someone skiing Shamans off the top of Mt Bachelor.
Is it the ski or the skier?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFJdQx4YloU
Reply
post #15 of 46
4/25/10 at 5:09pm
I think it's the skier, since the 4 year old kid was doing better than he was, LOL! 
Reply
post #16 of 46
4/25/10 at 5:42pm
@ mT*BAchElor that's a good skier.
Reply
post #17 of 46
4/25/10 at 8:37pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoeLarryCheese View Post

Here is someone skiing Shamans off the top of Mt Bachelor.
Is it the ski or the skier?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFJdQx4YloU
 
That guy was so defensive, he actually faces the slope while turning...

And I think he totally missed that little ridge...
Reply
post #18 of 46
4/25/10 at 9:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoeLarryCheese View Post

Here is someone skiing Shamans off the top of Mt Bachelor.
Is it the ski or the skier?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFJdQx4YloU
 

Skier haha that guys sucks!!!
Reply
post #19 of 46
4/26/10 at 10:57am

He had the guts to go off where I wouldn't go. Sometimes out there it is more important to hang out with someone that goes first! (kinda like always hiking in bear country with someone that runs slower than you. . . )

He was a nice guy, a kid studying for his PhD, and he was showing me around the top. No worries, once he graduates he will be able to buy tons of ski lessons from all the *experts* out there.

Reply
post #20 of 46
4/27/10 at 6:47am
Thread Starter 
He is learning to ski, which is great, but I think he should be a little more patient
and allowing for a learning curve.

The reason I say this is because he was totally overwelmed by the slope he was on.

If he breaks something early in the learning process, he could leave skiing altogether and all is lost...
Reply
post #21 of 46
4/27/10 at 8:04am

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoeLarryCheese View Post

Here is someone skiing Shamans off the top of Mt Bachelor.
Is it the ski or the skier?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFJdQx4YloU
 

Icelantic Shamans are short and stiff.  A longer, softer ski (like an Obsethed) wouldn't have punished him when he got backseat (which I assume is what led to his fall). 

Everybody gets in over their heads, or should, at times.  It's how you progress. 
Reply
post #22 of 46
4/27/10 at 1:09pm
First of all anything between 90mm and 100mm is a considered a midfat ski...Not a full blown fat ski...
Reply
post #23 of 46
4/27/10 at 1:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier232 View Post

First of all anything between 90mm and 100mm is a considered a midfat ski...Not a full blown fat ski...

Ummmm........that would depend upon the consider(er).............

SJ
Start Haus Insider

Bringing World Cup caliber ski equipment and service to all skiers - from pro ski racers to everyday all mountain skiers and into the...

» Get the latest news and updates at the Start Haus sponsor page.
Reply
post #24 of 46
4/28/10 at 7:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post




Ummmm........that would depend upon the consider(er).............

SJ

 


   Yeah I am just saying that anything 90mm to 100mm with traditional camber you are not going get the float you want. If he really wants a powder specific ski he should go  bigger then 100mm. This is just my opinion...
Reply
post #25 of 46
4/28/10 at 8:44am
 Shaman's come in 184..... stiffer, yes but plenty long  http://www.icelanticboards.com/#/skis/detail/shaman

Next season's Keeper is a sweet ski. 150-119-136 18m tr @ 178. early rise tip/tail, moderate flex, between a SFT and regular.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acrophobia View Post



Icelantic Shamans are short and stiff.  A longer, softer ski (like an Obsethed) wouldn't have punished him when he got backseat (which I assume is what led to his fall). 

Everybody gets in over their heads, or should, at times.  It's how you progress. 

 
Reply
post #26 of 46
4/28/10 at 11:01pm
Some you forgot/didn't know about:

1. Lib-Tech NAS Freeride is 99mm in the waist and has a 19 tr.

2. Prior Doughboy is 103-107 in the waist and has a tr ranging from 16 - 20

3. Voile Insane: 95 - 108 waist; 15.7 - 16.7 tr
    Voile Asylum: 110 - 116 waist; 15.8 - 17.9 tr



I've been looking for a 105 waisted ski with a 19-22 tr and the pickings are slim.

that said, tr isn't everything.

keep in mind that a ski with a longer tr will feel turnier given the type of flex, if it has rocker, and whether or not the tip is softer.

for example, i have a pair of Blizzard Titan 9's with a 20 tr. but they are really damp. conversely, i've skied the PM Gear Lhasa, which has a tr of about 33 and it feels a lot turnier and quicker edge-to-edge than my T9's because of it's poppy flex.
Reply
post #27 of 46
4/29/10 at 7:08am
Dookey- well said regarding TR!  can't agree more.
Reply
post #28 of 46
4/29/10 at 7:52am
Dookey, Finndog............
Quote:
 keep in mind that a ski with a longer tr will feel turnier given the type of flex, if it has rocker, and whether or not the tip is softer. 

for example, i have a pair of Blizzard Titan 9's with a 20 tr. but they are really damp. conversely, i've skied the PM Gear Lhasa, which has a tr of about 33 and it feels a lot turnier and quicker edge-to-edge than my T9's because of it's poppy flex.
Hmmmm.... I never really thought about it that way, but it makes sense.  So, than what's the point of listing "turn radius" of a ski if there's a different 'effective turn radius" ?  This topic is worthy of it's own thread if either of you care to elaborate.
Reply
post #29 of 46
4/29/10 at 8:14am
 ^
:)

also keep in mind that many sites will list the turn radius of a reverse camber as either "0" or something outrageous like "75"...and while the turn radius of a reverse camber probably is at either end of the extreme spectrum you need to realize that the ski's pivot factor will make it seem turnier (or at least more maneuverable).

the bottomline is that there are way more variables at work (something i didn't really learn/figure out until this season, mostly because i was so focused on getting a moderately fat ski with a short turning radius).

further examples would be the Stockli DP Pro and the Fischer Watea 101. Both have pretty burly TR's, but both also have moderate to soft tips. while i have never skied either, the owner of a local shop that carries them suggested them both because of the soft tip, which makes turn initiation easier and thus probably gives them a shorter TR than what the factory denotes.

believe me, it's confusing and frustrating and basically makes the search harder. i have a short list of skis in the 105 - 110 range with TRs of 18 - 25 that i am looking at for an AT set-up. but i'm also focusing on soft tips and snappy/poppy flex/feel (thus looking for skis that have carbon fiber or some type of wood known for its pop).

at any rate, good luck in the search. i'd say to come up with a list and then demo if/when/where possible.
Reply
post #30 of 46
4/29/10 at 8:41am
Don't get me wrong, the TR is relevant especially on groomed snow and where you are making true carved turns but there are diminishing returns if you skiing powder, left overs, off-piste conditions including trees and tight shots, steeps, etc, you are not carving and the TR can actually become detrimental, you don't want tips and tails hooking or not releasing. There are many who may argue and that's fine it's what works for you but, having the ability to use as many tools when the going gets tough and technical I want to be able to slash, slarve, or whatever I need to do. That said, I do ski and love Icelantic boards that do have substantial sidecut that fall into the 20 m TR. My powderboard this season is the nomad 146-111-136 20m tr. but my everyday tool will most likely be a kastle MX98 with 24m tr for anything else and then a MX78 for groomers. so its a mix of skis- different designs, flex and sidecut for the conditions.  Now if I can just learn how to ski, I won't need them! :)

Dookey is right on about flex and construction as well. Wood types, metal, no metal, flex patterns, torsional stability, weight all play a huge part. AND it's my personal opinion that the way that rockered skis are rated for TR is wrong and needs to be changed.
Reply
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 › Fat skis with Short turn radiuses: What is the list?