EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › New Mid-Fats for the Wife
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Mid-Fats for the Wife

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 

I'm looking to purchase a set of midfats for my Wife.  She is currently skiing on a set of K2 Burnin Luvs.  She's a level 8-9 and we do most of skiing on the East Coast.  I'm looking to get her a pair of skis that will work well in powder, but they also need to be able to make short radius turns.

 

Any suggestions?

post #2 of 15

Nordica Conquer

post #3 of 15

My absolute most favourite mid-fat at the moment is the Kastle FX84.  When last years snow was marginal it skied well on the groomers and yet stood up to the 10-ish inches of powder we had on a trip to Vail.

 

But.......there are some really incredible options out there, some women specific and some unisex that will make her grin.

 

Is it possible for her to get a chance to demo?  Would she want to if she had the chance?

 

Some good midfats to go on her demo list:  

Blizzard Eos (good in powder, but gives up some performance on groomers)

Nordica Conquer (handles groomers and crud well, but gives up some in the deep powder)

K2 Lotta luv (which she may really like if she likes her burnin luvs, but she'll give up some performance on a powder day)

 

 

There are a few more I want to add to my own demo list to give first hand advice, but these are the ones I've skied.

 

All in all, if you have the $$ to spend, the Kastle FX84 freakin Rocks!!!

post #4 of 15
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the replies. The looked up the skis that you mentioned and they all seem to have large side cuts and seem to be geared towards carving vs a powder ski. (I couldn't find any info on the Blizzard Eos from their website).  She's looking for a ski that will rip the powder on one run and they be able to ski the groomers with the kids on her next run.

 

All of the skis were 84mm under foot, which for men's ski would barely be considered a midfat. Is 84mm considered wide for a women's ski?.  

 

post #5 of 15

Quote:

Originally Posted by SCWVA View Post

All of the skis were 84mm under foot, which for men's ski would barely be considered a midfat. Is 84mm considered wide for a women's ski?.  

 



Its all relative to her weight.

 

You said east coast, work well in pow, make short turns. It you are talking about 1' of WVA coldsmoke pow huge widths are not that vital.

 

To me, and I am 200+lbs,  most skis 90mm under foot (remember relative widths) work just fine in pow especially if I am skiing more in the trees balanced 2-feet with short turns. The reason to go fatter and eventually rockered is bucase you want to ski soft snow in a specific way -- different than people traditionally did so. 100mm under foot lets you ski with more long GS turns balance over outside leg (1 footed) and rocker give you more  smearing and jibby style of lines.

 

So it depends on what sort of pow skiing experience she wants.

 

My wife loves her im88s and skis them every where. but they are a few years old and I keep threatening to get her some Dynastar Edens (women version of the sultan 85) which I have and are quite good in pow for an 85 width ski. also lay down carves on "Utah ice" (which is about the same as easter hardpack).

post #6 of 15

I really enjoyed skiing on the Dynastar Mythic Rider last season.  It's been replaced by the Sultan this season.  I also have a good opinion of the Nordica Conqueror which is the woman's version of the Jet Fuel Ti which I own.  I found the Mythic Rider to be more versatile than the JF.  Both are 84mm skis.

post #7 of 15

My wife has a quiver of 4 skis - from 65mm to 94mm under foot. Her favorite is the Salmon Lady - 84mm under foot. 

In fact she had not ski on anything else for the last 1-1/2 seasons. Everything from killington ice, 18" spring crud @ snowbird, 2 ft of Vail powder to Taos's steep hard bumps.      

 

Now she travel out only one pair of ski. As she said - if it dump over 2 feet, I'll rent a pair of powder boards. 

 

Would have considered it for myself except the pink graphic with my ski boots.

post #8 of 15
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the replies, looks like I have a couple more skis to check out.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post

Quote:.............. It you are talking about 1' of WVA coldsmoke pow huge widths are not that vital.

 

..........


Hey Tromano,  - Looks like you didn't check out some of the reports on DCski from this past season.  WV had 251 1" dumps this past season.  :)  Yea, I know its not UT, but its still pretty good. 

 

 

 
 

post #9 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCWVA View Post

Thanks for the replies, looks like I have a couple more skis to check out.  

 


Hey Tromano,  - Looks like you didn't check out some of the reports on DCski from this past season.  WV had 251 1" dumps this past season.  " class="bbcode_smiley" height="1" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies//smile.gif" title=":)" width="1" />  Yea, I know its not UT, but its still pretty good. 

 

 

 
 


Sorry I means 1' == 1 foot.


I heard about the awesome winter form my family in DC and sister in law who skis at 7springs. Sounds like one for the history books to me.

post #10 of 15

Hey there,

 

Why not try the Fischer Watea 84 or 94 underfoot?

 

And NOT the Koa (female version is NOT as stiff as the male version)

 

It can ski groomers, ice, slush, moguls - really nimble - but fat enough that it can float over SOME powder.

Maybe try the 94 instead if powder is the main thing.  Basically you can do almost everything on these 2 widths of this ski!

 

There is a thread about the Watea - it's been solid for about 4 years now.

 

(Yeah - I own them, 84s 20010/2011 version - they ROCK - Skied my final day for the year today :( - LOVE my skis - as did someone who tried to steal them as well!

Thank you Burton retractable combo lock!)

post #11 of 15

I am a 135 lb male who can give you some ideas on this topic. When carving a turn on the edge of the ski, the bigger sidecut will make smaller sized turns. I have a 90mm wide ski that makes a 24m turn. So, I make GS turns when I get back to a groomer. I prefer small turns and now leave this ski at home.

 

I also have owned the Line Prophet 100s that at 172cm long and 100mm underfoot make a 16.6m turn. I loved the Prophet 100s but have found a better powder ski that makes smaller turns and initiates the turns easier than the P100s. I wanted a wider ski for Powder but could still make small turns. The skis that convinced me to sell the P100s are The Preachers by WhiteDot Freeride. I have skied two seasons on the the Preachers and love them. The Preachers at 169cm make a 14m turn and they just rock in powder and short turns on groomers. These skis can turn and float. I know have a pair of Preachers at 179cm for more stability at speed.

 

I was just reading the ski level description for 8-9 and it sounds like your wife would love them. These would very hard to find a Demo. Although, I am on the East Coast if you are interested but I doubt the binding would work for her boot.

 

http://www.whitedotusa.com/store/the-preacher.html

 

In my opinion, these would be great East Coast powder skis that let you play with the kids on groomers and turn tight in the trees. Let me know if you have any questions.

 

 

 

post #12 of 15

She might like the 169 Nordica Enforcer 98mm that I would love to sell with PX12 bindings for $300.  I loved the ski, but found it too short for me.  I skied them 6 times mostly in powder.  Stiff enough to do good turns on the groomer, a lot of fun in softer snow.  Could be a great east coast powder/crud ski for an aggressive woman.

post #13 of 15

Who would think a person trying to unload skis would be objective about what another skier needs? wierd. there is a classified forum.

post #14 of 15

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCWVA View Post

I'm looking to purchase a set of midfats for my Wife.  She is currently skiing on a set of K2 Burnin Luvs.  She's a level 8-9 and we do most of skiing on the East Coast.  I'm looking to get her a pair of skis that will work well in powder, but they also need to be able to make short radius turns.

 

Any suggestions?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCWVA View Post

Thanks for the replies. The looked up the skis that you mentioned and they all seem to have large side cuts and seem to be geared towards carving vs a powder ski. (I couldn't find any info on the Blizzard Eos from their website).  She's looking for a ski that will rip the powder on one run and they be able to ski the groomers with the kids on her next run.

 

All of the skis were 84mm under foot, which for men's ski would barely be considered a midfat. Is 84mm considered wide for a women's ski?.  

 

 

Some great individual suggestions so far, but more info about your wife’s profile and current gear would help. Please complete (on her behalf) the following questionnaire via post or direct message:

 

Skier Info:

  1. Age: 
  2. Height: 
  3. Weight: 
  4. Ability level (1-10):  8-9

 

Skiing Profile:

  1. How many days do you ski annually? 
  2. Which region or area do you ski the most?  East Coast
  3. What terrain are you 100% confidant skiing now? 
  4. What terrain or conditions would you like to handle better? 
  5. Looking for an all-around or special purpose ski?  Powder, quick turning, groomers w/kids

 

Foot & Leg Info:

  1. Street shoe size normally worn? 
  2. Heel width: narrow, average or wide? 
  3. Forefoot width (relative to heel): narrow, average or wide? 
  4. Arch/Instep profile while sitting: low, average or high? 
  5. Lower leg/calf size: small, average or large? 
  6. Natural stance/walking pattern: toes in, straight or toes out?

 

Boot Identification (current):

  1. Boot brand? 
  2. Boot model (words, letters or numbers on boot)? 
  3. Boot sole length in mm (molded on side of shell, near the sole)? 
  4. Boot problems (Describe)? 
  5. How old are these boots? 
  6. Do you like these boots and plan to keep using them? 

 

Ski Identification (current):

  1. Ski brand?  K2
  2. Ski model (words, letters or numbers on ski)?  Burnin Luvs
  3. Ski length in cm (or inches)? 
  4. Ski dimensions (tip-waist-tail) printed on ski? 
  5. How old are these skis? 
  6. Do you like these skis and plan to keep using them? 

 

Binding Identification (current):

  1. Binding brand? 
  2. Binding model (words, letters or numbers on binding)? 
  3. Binding DIN range (Toe or heel window, e.g. 3.5-10, 4-12, etc.)? 
  4. Binding came with ski or purchased separately? 
  5. How old are these bindings? 
  6. Do you like these bindings and plan to keep using them? 

 

If you’re wondering why the foot, leg and boot questions, your wife’s control and satisfaction with any ski will greatly depend on choosing a binding that compliments her foot, leg and boot stance. Reliable data now exists to match bindings and skis accordingly, at least increasing the odds she starts out in a decent “home base” position on her new sticks.

 

Based on information you’ve provided so far, I agree she should probably end up on a ski waist between 84 and 94 cm. The question remains…which ski and binding combinations will serve her best?

 

SkiBootJedi

post #15 of 15

94 wateas then :):)

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 › New Mid-Fats for the Wife