A quick pictorial comparison of my Goats vs. a Dynastar LTd

[jim-ratliff]

Hey Jim
You better watch those new? babies of yours in december. Ron is likely to "mark his territory" when you're not looking!
You know the kind of people he's been hanging out with!

OHHH    I've been wondering why Gary was pushing me to bring the SuperShape Magnums to Steamboat -- now I see the method in his madness.  He's wanting to mark my brand new skis.  -----     Thanks for the warning, 'cause I am for sure bringing the already used iM78's now.

[Gary]

You know JBotti, I've skied with Ron and he knows it's easier to use tipping rather than brushing, rotary or force...but you can and we do use tipping to engage the edges of fat, skinny, twin-ed, tweaked, and shorty skis....and sometimes when the situation requires we use all the other tricks of our ski skills to turn, slide, glide and float a ski.
Thing is I'm not sure that I agree that a shorter running length in a twin tip or directional twin automatically mean less stability because the other factor is the width of that ski. Now I'm not a physicist, but I guess if that WERE the case...I need to understand the data.
AND the application of the shorter ski vs the wider ski again at least with the guys I ski with would be condition driven....not just to take a pretty painted wide long plank out to ski groomed runs.

As far as huffy and insulting comments, if you follow our posts here, you'll see that there is never any huffy and insulting or negative comments about one's skiing .....it just doesn't happen here so no reason to even think that's harbored here.

The other beauty is that we can all agree to disagree and we all will have an opinion about things and it's great fun to discuss their merits. I for one didn't see where Ron was about to get all huffy and puffy....so, keeping things light and open minded is what makes this forum a pleasure to post on....at least for me.

I move to the next post...
G

[jbotti]

Jim, i guess I had lost track of your quiver. It turns out (as in the past) that we own alot of the same skis. I love my IM 78's that I ski in a 171. Most would say that they are too short for me, but in bumps or fresh snow over bumps, these skis really shine and the shorter length and tighter turn radius really helps.

I had my first pair of Super Shapes that over the years had become rock skis. I have kept them for using at Squaw. After this past season they were pretty totaled so I have replaced them with a pair of SS Magnums aslo in a 170.

Have you skied your Magnums yet? I think they are wonderful skis.

[Gary]

Jim right on one count...this is not the forum to criticize anyones skiing or even to intimate that very subject...
Having said that....Ron's does address the subtlety as I did ...one can tip the big boards to turn them...that's How we ski them. But, that may not be the only way we ski them.


The feeling you had with the turned up tails do allow the ski to release out of the turn easier and with twin tips....facilitate skiing backwards much easier for obvious reasons.

G

[Gary]

See Jim...ya gotta bring the SS Mags. to RSIII...

JBotti....I would agree with you that the new skis can be skied shorter than ski shop sales people like to push.

I posted a topic to this very nature and find going to a shorter length ups the control factor on inbound skiing. My powder skis are 177 length and always wondered what the shorter version would ski and float like. That will be a later test for me down the road.

Jim...bring the SS mags....how about putting it up to a vote?

G

[jim-ratliff]

JBotti:? Haven't skied the SuperShape Mags yet, I bought them on sale at the end of last season.? My iM78's are 177, I bought them at the end of prior season.? I like them a lot, but didn't use them locally.? Am hoping that the SS Magnum's aren't too much ski for me, its a bit of a concern when really good skiers like you and Gary and Ron love the SuperShapes so much.? I'm hoping that the Magnums are a little easier than the original SuperShape that Ron and Gary have skied.

Gary: Nope, mind is made up.? I am bringing the iM78's.? However, I will demo one day and let anyone here on the forum or at RealSkiers III vote on what 4 skis I should demo.?

All:? Confession time. I have suggested to many others to demo -- demo -- demo, but I have NEVER demoed a ski before buying it.? I have listened a lot to the assessment of others where I thought I could relate their experience to my preference in skis.



 

[jbotti]

Gary, I agree and I overreacted. This place has always been very friendly and I intend on helping to keep it that way.

I still think that my point is valid, although in the grand scheme it is nitpciking. I own IM88's that are twin tips, Fischer Atua's also twin tipped, Nordica Blowers (also twin tipped) and I like 2 of three a ton (have only skied the blowers twice bot times in the wrong conditions for the skis.

From a purely conceptual/theorectical? place, a flat tailed ski should give slightly more stability at speed than the exact same ski (in the same length) with twin tips, and the twin tips should be no eaiser to manuever in tight spots.

The problem is that all things are never equal. Im 88's are twin tips so we will never know how they will ski with a flat tail.

I will also say that in general, I prefer the flat tail. I feel more control and the ski retains more of what I am used to in my hard snow skis. This is why I think the Fischer Wateas are an improvement over the Atuas (specifically the (4's vs the Atuas). I vastly prefer the flat tail.

Again all is just my personal opinion.

Lastly, I generall have hated every K2 ski I have been on. Very very damp and lifeless. But now after reading reviews on Teton Gravity and reading the sepcs on Peter;s site and in Powder Mag, I think that they may have come up with the perfect combination of rocker, camber and sidecut for the ultimate resort powder ski (the Lotus 138 is still the ultimate heli ski, but with reverse camber and reverse sidecut it is just a bear getting back to the lift on hard snow).

So what ski am I talking about: The obSethed!! 138/105/125 with 14mm and 12mm respective tip and tail rocker with flat camber under foot. To me this looks like the perfect ski for big days at places like Squaw or any of the PNW resorts where the dumps are large but often heavy but you need to ski some harder snow to get back to the lift. The 4Frnt EHP's are a similar design, but they have 30-40mm of rocker, which IMO is too much, and it makes the ski real short and any hard snow.

I am not running out to buy these, but I would very much like to ski them sometime this season. If any mortals (too many of the kids on Teton ski at speeds that I will never ski, and for the most part many of these guys don't like to turn, and they take air 3-5x what I am willing to take) ski this please post a review so that we can hear your thoughts.

I recommend anyone looking for a new technology powder ski (deploying some amount of rocker, reverse camber or flat camber) to put this on the demo list.