Jim
1. your right most have some really big skis, even at stowe some people I ski with have 130-150mm underfoot monsters that would make no sense unless you were us. With that said I would say our 100mm skis our the ones that come out to play most often. For me I feel I can ski better than 95 percent of people on piste on them, and puts me in the 1 percent category off trail. The 100 mm waist width many of which our actually 98mm is by far the most versatile skis you can buy. With sharp edges on 98mm skis I never have an issue getting an edge on any surface.
Good, and what I expected.
But you can then apply the "calculator" information to determine that his wife could get more float out of 85-95 waist widths than you and your friends get from 100mm waists. (all other factors being equal).
And I use that to support my contention that she's fine with the skis she has, unless she demos something in the 95-100 range that she falls in love with.
And I agree with what you said, I don't think she should go above 100.
Gary, what does Alice use for her powder ski?
Lynn's are 84mm Fischer Muanga's.
this is why I HATE the calculator and it not because the math isnt solid because it is.
The reason why we use 100 mm ski most of the time is the largest ski any of can use and still have great(in our opinions) edge grip. Doesnt matter what size or sex we all use that same waist width. It has more to do with compromise for edge grip than how much float we needed. Like I said you can never have enough float. If I was 100 lb there is no way I would be on anything less than 100 mm for an everyday ski. Because my edge quickness would still be the same as a 170lb person but I could float that much better.
An example from last year. One of my new best friend in stowe was a D1 racer, that was and still is damn good at skiing. she had never been on skier wider than 65mm till last year. After countless demos from everything from 75mm to 110mm she settled on 98 "the Crushes" , the deal on blizzards end up winning over the Bridges she also liked alot. she is barely 120lb and 5'2 she loved the float of the bigger skis she tried but did not like what they did to her knees on groomers or the tradeoff.
she freeskis those crushes 100 percent of the time now. Any day, any time. she is glad to have the extra float(proportionately) when skiing with us.
I come from the Tim Allen school of engineering. get the most float you can no matter what.
I will be demo'ing some wider skis this year with an eye to upgrading my "powder ski" for next season.
My range would be 88-96mm at the widest.
No need for more than that given my height/weight.
Svend, keeps us updated on "the search".
As you know, I have a vested interest in Teryls' ski choices!
Her pans would probably help keep my demo list narrower.
* ADDENDUM*
Just saw posts made while typing mine.
Svend, I have found the Maungas very decent in powder > 12 inches.
I found it floaty enough. Now, I don't have that much powder experience, but they have served me well when lucky enough to experience a fresh dump.
They are quite soft too, which helps make bumps more manageable as well. (well, maybe not the rock hard trenches)
Jim skied behind me on a powder day at Alta in Catherines Area.
He said I was just slightly under the surface which led him on the chase for a better floater for himself!
L.
I come from the Tim Allen school of engineering. get the most float you can no matter what.
Josh: No you don't. Not really.
You just spent the whole post describing the constraints which kept her from getting the "most float
no matter what".
And it was a very well-reasoned and logical approach.
We should also all remember that 20-30 year old knees may not be the same as 40+ year old knees, especially if one is missing cartilage from ice hockey injury and surgery. 100mm may be pretty accepted in Bushwacka's circle of friends -- but that may vary for some of the rest of us.
Josh -- thanks for the feedback in your last post. That was quite helpful. Some solid advice and insight there wrt. 100mm skis. Good one.
Lynn -- will do! Anything we can do to ease your stress around ski demoing, we're always glad to be of service!
She is not looking for an overly stiff ski, but one that is well-balanced between power, edge grip, agility, lightness and floatation. She has her eye on demoing some Fischers (Watea 94, Koa 98), Kastle (LX92), Scott (Venture, Crusader), DPS (Wailer 105), Liberty (Helix), and I will make her aware of the Ski Logic line. Those are not on her radar yet.
So, Lynn.....tell me, how have your Fischer Muanga's worked for you in soft snow? Any words of wisdom for the inquisitive mind? Since you're considering an upgrade, it tells me that perhaps the Muangas aren't optimal and have some shortcomings that are making you look elsewhere (?).
Alice at 5'3 and 107lbs is on Atomic Heaven and Hells, 99 underfoot....heck man...she could float on water with those bad girls. AND yet, she wants to demo some rocker tips this season. She was not always that easy...hmmm...let me re-state....she was rather stubborn about trying any new skis.....until that 12" of wet snow at Jackson. Her Kastle MX78 just didn't give her what SHE needed in those conditions.
BUT....simply stated...her confidence level in 3d boot high and above quadtripled, she uses less energy making soft butter turns or steamroller crushing crud turns, it's a tool that elevates the FUN factor and reduces the Fatigue and Fear factor.
Recapping Gary's rule of 3 F's"
Fun (increases)
Faitigue (is reduced)
Fear (no where to be seen)
You will not find any of that in a calculator or formula....Now whatever that tool is, whatever she demo's and loves, "Gary's rule of 3" just might apply!
They do for me!
Svend...I believe for Terryl, her powder tool (I said Powder) should be soft at the shovel for climbing over things, wide enough to float, quick enough to turn, narrower tail than shovel for easy release, approx 16meters turn radius, generally forgiving and absorbing. Oh yeah...this works for me too!
Best, G
Yeah, I could see how the MX78's would be a bit of work in heavy wet snow. Yikes. No wonder you dragged her into the demo shop for a wide pair. Good move, and enlightenment seems to have followed
You know, when Whiteface got 36 inches of that heavy wet stuff a couple of years ago, Terryl skied her Dynastars in that for 6 hours per day for three days, and still had
gas in the tank.....er, that is....she still had energy to burn. Those skis were gold in those conditions.
But deep western powder is another matter entirely, and we're just not that experienced in that, hence the reason for my posts here. Judging by the responses, it seems like the best thing for her to do is just dive in to a big bowl full of the fluffy stuff and try 'em (will carry a snorkel just in case
), and then go to the demo shop and grab a wider pair and see how they feel too. Cross fingers for another dump in Jackson or Louise so she can really do a proper test.
Cheers,
Svend
Not wanting to burst that fat ski/snorkel dream, but I have found it really hard to get a hold of the skis I want to demo on a powder day!
They're out the door too quick.
Too many folks have the same idea.
L.
Lynn...I think a lot of that depends where you're at..
I know at Jackson and Park City....they have plenty of great skis for pow days...and numerous shops.
Where I've seen some limitations are at the actual demo shops up on the mountain....but in town, call ahead and reserve a pair. At least you've got insurance they'll be there when you arrive.
Svend...the MX78's wern't the right ski for her that day but my MX78's performed well for me...so it really depends on what the rider has to offer. Terryl is a powerful skier due to her hockey time on ice. She could muscle any ski around in the snow in most any conditions and even if it were the most difficult day for her life on the snow...she'd still be smilin' and never ever ever complain...I know I have that correct. It will be really interesting to hear her thoughts if she gets a chance to ski steep and deep this season and what her take is on something 100 plus, maybe even rockered might be. She may hate it or just maybe, her quivver just might expand..
oh boy!
Best, g
Svend,
Do you go to Jackson with G and Alice? If so, they can hook you up with our guru boot fitter, Stephen, who works in Jackson Hole Sports right at the base of the mountain. Stephen can get a reservation for a specific pair of skis, and, I think staff members can arrange a discount. In any case, you have to meet him and take a couple of runs with him and his family. He posts on Epic as "Skiing-in-Jackson" and is just fun to ski with.
With respect to demo days during a dump, my single experience was less than great. Jackson got uber crowded, the tram and gondi did not open for a few hours for avalanche control, AV was open but with 30 minute lift lines. The light was very flat, not the lightest snow and it was hard to get the velocity needed to make skis float. That's also a statement about my ability to ski 3D. It was also weeks end, and, I was tired. I did not do any research and the skis recommended were Solly Shoguns and not a very good powder ski, offering minor advantage over my 88's. Shame on me, but, I felt I wasted the better part of $50.
A personal belief is that skis in the 85-88 mm waist will work well enough in powder for most, but, the experience and skills of the individual rule in pow. JB's post on the need for velocity in powder makes a lot of sense to me. I'd love to be able to experience the magic of pow on a more frequent basis, that's just not going to happen enough to warrant a true powder ski.
The only way to know is to give your wife the opportunity to experience it herself. And good power hunting luck to all. It's an elusive animal.
Expand the quiver? No way! She has 3 pairs already. If one comes in, another goes out. We're running out of space in our basement for all this gear
Gary, that is true about her skiing style, but her technique in soft snow if much more finesse and less energy intensive than on groomers. That's how it should be, right? So she was able to ski 3 long days at Whiteface in 36 inches of heavy stuff, and still go skating on the oval at night. Me too, for that matter, and I was on my Mythics. To be clear, the snow was so heavy and dense, that float was just not an issue for a mid-80 mm ski. Others on narrow skis were struggling, however.
Svend,
Do you go to Jackson with G and Alice? If so, they can hook you up with our guru boot fitter, Stephen, who works in Jackson Hole Sports right at the base of the mountain. Stephen can get a reservation for a specific pair of skis, and, I think staff members can arrange a discount. In any case, you have to meet him and take a couple of runs with him and his family. He posts on Epic as "Skiing-in-Jackson" and is just fun to ski with.
Mike...no, I don't go to Jackson with G & A, but my wife does
Me, I have to stay home with our daughters.
That's great tip about Stephen -- thanks for that. We'll check out their lineup of demos and see if there is anything that would suit. The rental shop in the base lodge has Fischer and Dynastar -- the latter she tried last year; the former is on the hit list for this year. But she has a few others that she is keen to try as well.
And thanks for the insight re. the mid-80 width. Interesting feedback, and you're the first here to actually say so outright.
Bottom line, if she isn't totally wowed by the wider skis, or finds the trade-offs for going to 98mm just aren't worth it just for the extra float, then she will stick with what she has. To be clear, she really likes her present Dynastars, and it will take an exceptional ski to get her off of those. Heck, I've even heard of men skiing them, they are so good. In fact, Sierra Jim from Epic once said (back when they first came out) that if they made them in a men's version, he would own a pair, they're that good.
Mike...no, I don't go to Jackson with G & A, but my wife does Me, I have to stay home with our daughters.
And thanks for the insight re. the mid-80 width. Interesting feedback, and you're the first here to actually say so outright.
Svend,
It does not compute in my brain that my wife would be in Jackson while I look after daughters. You are a far better husband than I. And, again, note to self - Return to Jackson and ski with G & A.
Let me put some more words around my thinking. In the 5 years since returning to skiing, I've been west for 30 days. Once, I skied in an above knee dump. Maybe 6 to 8 days days, I've skied more than boot high, and, that's the range that I would argue is well within the capability of a high 80's ski, especially if it's designed for soft snow. I do not suggest an 85 would be as capable as a 100 in these conditions, but, how much easier the fatter ski performs is a question involving the competence of the individual skier. The phrase "good, better and best" comes to mind - pick the level you can live with. Also, as pow gets tracked out, the crossover advantages of a narrower ski begin to surface. There are pro's and con's and we all get to apply our own values. There is so much buzz this season about certain 100's, and, the hype will be present in future years for other skis.
So, I'm in agreement that the "wow" factor would have to be present to make a change.
Mike, it's always a pleasure to hear from you. The voice of calm reason and objectivity. Great insight -- thanks for that.
I hear you re. the "buzz" around wider skis. I am quite cognizant of, and have healthy skepticism regarding the industry's push for ever-wider boards. Back when I first started skiing -- just 5 years ago -- an "all-mountain" ski was 70 to 74 mm. Now, if you believe Ski Magazine reviews, it's 88 to 98 mm. Seriously? OK, if you lived near someplace like Alta, I could see that. But for the rest of us?
Hence my thought that a lot of people are on skis that are too wide for them -- they are being told that wide is the way to go. Then the 160 lb eastern intermediate skier ends up with a 90mm+ ski that can't hold an edge on our icy slopes. Or if it can, then it's way too stiff and heavy for them and they struggle to control it. I see a lot of these guys on our home hill. Not a pretty sight.
As for not going to Jackson -- hey, my wife needs to fly the coop for a week every now and then. Mental health break
Everyone here benefits
And staying behind with our daughters is no purgatory. They are just the best. Super pals. We have a great time together when Mom isn't home
I know I'll be missing some great skiing at Jackson, and get really antsy when I get the daily reports from there. But I get my treats when I head west for business and take weekends to ski -- this winter I'll be in Vancouver (Whistler), Kamloops (Sun Peaks), Edmonton (Jasper National Park / Marmot Basin) and Calgary (Banff National Park / Lake Louise, Sunshine). My boots are mandatory carry-on luggage on those trips. So, who am I to complain?
Cheers,
Svend
85mm skis will 'work' in powder, especially under a good skier...but is 'working' in powder all your wife is after??
I'll say it---she NEEDS (note my capitalization!
) a fatter ski. You guys seem to be committed, long-season skiers who travel and seek out quality, deeper snow conditions. A fatter ski, possibly (probably) one with some sort of rocker, increases the Gary 3 F factor...which spells out NEED to me.
I wouldn't sell the dynastar right away no matter what she buys, a good 85mm mid fat is handy to have.