Message #1036

[Barrettscv]

I reviewed HH article on powder and I'm willing to throw out a few counter points;

I lived in SLC for one winter back in the straight ski days and skiing powder on a 200cm Race stock K2 SL ski was almost impossible. I was a 180 Lbs at the time and these skis would not float and always tended to dive. This is partially due to the insufficient surface area of a narrow ski; but greater than this, the skis stiffness combined with large camber promoted terminal tip dive.

I also owned a well worn pair of 210cm metal laminate Dynamic's that were bent from mogul skiing, and these skied powder like a dream. The minimal camber, combined with the slight bend behind the tip provided good resistance to tip dive. The 210 length helped too.

Today, skinny skis are shorter and most are designed for ice & groomed runs. My Fischer WC RC (112-66-97) dives like a u-boat in knee-deep snow. The RX8 (115-66-98) is much better due to its not-just-for-racing flex pattern. But put me on a Dynastar Intuitive 74 (113-74-99) or Salomon Supermountains (110-78-100) or one of my newer wide skis ( I assume) and powder becomes a joy.

I agree that good powder skiing does not require a super-wide ski with ample surface area. Floating on powder is only one way to ski in deep snow. At 220 plus Lbs, I sink down in the snow on almost any ski, yet powder is always a joy as long as the tips stay horizontal.

I am surprised that a skinny ski is being recommended for powder. Not to show my disbelief, but HH weighs much less than many skiers and is one of the worlds most skilled. I'm not sure his experience with skinny skis in powder is universal.

Sincerely,

Michael