Floating My Boat(s)

[byronm]

Back after many years, demoing with demo options severely limited...I read and re-read reviews, did a few pagan chants, tarot cards, stared into a caldron and ultimately bought a pair of 76mm waisted skis w/out a test drive.
 
Took advantage of end of season price cuts on a ski that will theoretically aid me in learning modern technique AND be forgiving of my misgivings. I now have one arrow in my quiver. Allbeit, bindings yet to be mounted and boards yet to be tested on slope. Eager to try my new sticks. No more demo hassles for now anyway.
 
Hoping for a great year next year, eyeing other potential end of season deals (on perhaps a wider ski) for varied conditions, off piste. I began speculating on waiste width and where I should go with the next step.
 
Maybe two arrows?
 
I am a 140 lb. intermediate, currently skiing at moderate speeds mostly on piste but would "eventually" like to learn to ski deeper powder, moderate trees and bumps w/out going pow.
 
After reading the below article on "float", which made alot of sense. I am now questioning whether something in the 90mm range such as P Flite would be "too little, too much, just right or irrelevent" at this point.
 
http://www.epicski.com/a/powder-skis-and-skier-size
 
I would appreciate any thoughts....thx

[jim-ratliff]

Did I miss the part where you revealed what you bought, and what length?

[byronm]

BlizzardMag 7.6 170cm sorry bout that

[LivingProof]

Byron,
I would not even think about changing skis during the first year. Just go ski and work to improve your technique. Enjoy the ride as you figure out how improve in varying conditions. Those skis will work fine in less than 12 inches of new snow. Above that amount, unless it is very light, learning powder skills is a little different ballgame. Float requires velocity that you may not have in 3D powder. When you are ready for a powder ski, a ski purchased now would probably not be what you want.

Put your focus in technique.

 

[byronm]

Point well taken...I got a bit over excited with the first ski purchase in a long time and the prospect of being fully outfitted "finally".
 
On a bit of budget, I should be focused on skiing and improving rather than more shopping. Another ski purchase would be better translated into days on the slope and some lessons.
 
LP...Thanks for reminding me to chew the elephant a bite at time.

[meput]

Byron,
Congrats on the new skis. Let us know what you think of your new purchase after you have had a chance to try them out.

[byronm]

Thx Meput...will do...

[byronm]

How profound "figure out how to ski in varying conditions" and "focus on technique" turned out to be today!!
 
Just got back from a day trip. New skis werent ready so I ended up  having to demo what was available (K2 Photons).
 
Looking forward to 4-6" of new snow. First run (untracked moderate blue) had me licking my chops. Started good with light powder.
 
Then...mid run turned to wind swept with a slight crust over 6"...lower part, wind groomed 1" over hard pack. Worst part, I didnt recognize the transitions until too late. Result was two pretty sporty wrecks on the first run of the day. First one stung... second one smarted....and perhaps set the stage. 
 
Moved to another part of the hill out of the wind, sticking to mechanical groomed and worked on "technique" mostly just trying to find a feel for center. Got by but was still a bit out of sorts.
 
Sun came out and began to make the snow on other ungroomed tracked and heavy. After a time, I tried some of those but leg fatigue cut that short and drove me back to groomed. 
 
Couldn't even speculate about the demo ski's performance as mine was pretty much poo. Tough day, 0 confidence...never did really get it together.
 
Good dose of reality, corroborating your comments LP.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[bushwacka]

First totally ignore the epicski post. applied science and theoretical science are quite often different.

A great skier can make nearly any ski work in nearly any conditions for as long as they can concentrate on that and have the energy to do it. but most of us are not great, even one that kinda of are IMO want every bit of help you can get. For me I like to dictate the the mountain and not ever have the mountain dictate back to me.

IMO your not an awesome skier yet, and the learning curve is quite steep on anything less than perfect groom. If you want to perfect your skills on groomers and overall be limited where you can do even after your pretty good stick with what you got and keep going with it. Snow always changes and anything less than prefect technique on carvers in weird snow will be punished. Punished to the point of the falling, being tense and just overall getting more tired.

If you want to be a better all around skier keep what you have and work your short turns on nice groomers days but buy something else. Buy something much different that what you have. 98mm-100mm with tip and tail rocker should be you min for your next skis. A 98mm ski can still carve on most soft groomed surface fine but is real game changer when there is any 3d snow. Even dust on crust.

The saying on here 76mm "should be good up to 12 inches of snow" even assuming that snow is perfect low density snow is IMO complete hogwash. IN as little as 3-5 inches of snow(and 1-2 inches of wet snow or sleet) a fatter ski can start making the snow feel like powder and getting you off the hard bottom.  Even perfect low density powder eventually becomes something less than above and then the long fatter ski starts to come in handy.

take your own experince for example a wider ski might have caused you not to fall.

[LivingProof]

If you want to be a better all around skier keep what you have and work your short turns on nice groomers days but buy something else.

The saying on here 76mm "should be good up to 12 inches of snow" even assuming that snow is perfect low density snow is IMO complete hogwash.

When I returned to skiing, my first shaped ski was similar to what Byron bought. At that time it was considered "all mountain" and semi-perfect for powder skiing. I learned what it was and, also, what it was not. Changed skis many times since, but, I'd still take that ski out in a minimal powder day - and smile. There is a whole history of people who skied skinny skis in powder, and, just smiled all day long.

To this day, I dislike skiing a wide ski. Yeah, I'm a groomer skier at the southern edge of eastern skiing, but, why put up some oversized, overweight, under-responsive board when a narrow ski just does everything so much easier. Why fight a ski on every turn when there is no fresh pow? Your skills and midset are far different, not much middle ground to discuss. Not attempting to tell you what to do, actually, I respect what you do and where you ski. All I can testify to is that on minor powder days, I see a whole bunch of people skiing narrow skies and just slaying it. Sure, they ski on blue groomers, but, who cares? I did demo a really fat ski on some pow in Jackson Hole. Might have as well turned up a $50 dollar bill and burned it.

Byron will find his own way. He may make mistakes along the way, will probably change skis like most of us have done, will probably find that there is not magic in any one ski in all conditions. That's part of the game we call skiing. But, someplace along the way, he'll find it's a lot more about your skills and dedication that it is about the ski you happen to be on.

[Liam]

What do you consider to be a fat ski?  Bushwacker was only talking about a ski in the high 90's in the waist, which is hardly fat by today's standards.  And more and more, people find out there are very few trade offs and quite a number of benefits on skiing a wider ski.  Especially today's more performance oriented models.  I think that if Byron sticks with a sub-80mm waisted ski as his only ski, he is missing out on the most beneficial designs today's ski companies have to offer the average (yep, average) skier. 

Even if you went a little narrower than what Bush is suggesting: Like the Rossi Experience 88, Kastle 88, The Elan Apex, The Bliz Bushwhacker, heck even the Head 84 or 94 you'd have a ski that would offer up a lot more performance and comfort in more situations than a hard-snow focused ski in the mid 70's (or less).  And, with the performance that is packed into today's skis in the 90's, (the legend 94, Atomic Savage ti, Bliz Bonafide,Ross Experience 98, Nordica Steadfast, the list goes on) and the range of terrain these skis excel at, I cannot see the value in going any skinnier-especially if you have only one ski.  Unless you mean to only ski low angle groomers and very small resorts all the time.

There is a backwards thinking being put forth here, that the skinny carving ski is the norm and something in the 90's is a 'specialty ski' for special circumstances.  I think with today's designs, the exact opposite is true and should guide your future purchasing choices:  The ski in the mid 90's is the more sensible everyday 'normal' ski, and the thinner, carving ski is the specialist tool (for hard snow, hard charging).

With the paltry amount of snow we've had this season, I got tired and bored of skiing carvers and switched a week ago to skiing my fatter skis full time to keep things interesting.  Honestly, I like the way they ski and with a few modest adjustments, they perform as well as my thinner skis on firmer snow.  And today when the snow turned very spring-like (again!  It's been April all season!), they're vastly superior.

That whole skis 'in' the powder vs. on the powder is a little over stated.  Even on skis 110mm in width, you don't really just skim on the surface, you are still in the powder (your skis will pop in and out of the snow).  If skiing 'in' the powder is really your goal, get a pair of old straight skis--which you won't, and why would you?  Nobody really wants to be that IN the powder!

Oh, the Bliz 7.6 mag is a very nice all around groomer carver ski (as much as groomer skiing can be refered to as 'all around' that is). Not very demanding but capable.  And, in firm bumps it will perform adequately (if you are one of those carve across the top type bump skiers).

[byronm]

Admittedly, I was a bit intimidated by wider skis during my testing phase, convinced that if I did not learn modern carve technique soundly with a ski biased towards carving.....I would be "scarving" for the rest of my life.
 
Demoing a number of skis (nothing much wider than 80mm) limited my "overall" scope but fit for the genre I was "starting" with.
 
Truth be told...I always figured to be a two ski (at least) quiver guy eventually. Way too spoiled (says the Ms. anyway) not to be. She may be referring to the line of putters and bags of clubs here and there....  
 
Fact is, most of my skiing will liikely be on piste of varying slope, in the "hopefully" short term, until my skill set progresses. So a little narrower seemed a good starting point. However, I don't want to be strictly limited to any terrain if not by skill level and understand how various equipment can help the learning curve.

No illusions about a silver bullet ski out there for someone "at my current skill level" but as I struggled in the heavy snow (that day) while my daughter gleefully surfed by on one board, I was wishing for other options.
 
Undoubtedly, I will go through the learning curve in skiing as well as gear buying.
 
The good news??  Unusual this time of year, 8.5" new snow today up north. Bad news....Jury duty tomorrow, but if I bring in and eat some jeep parts...perhaps a section 8 will allow me to head that way. If not, the next day for sure.
 
(tempted to rent some wider skis if not for just experience sake and/or options to my skis if the conditions turn out to be...or transition into the same as monday)
 
Thx folks for the support and intelligent discourse..
 
 

[bushwacka]

When I returned to skiing, my first shaped ski was similar to what Byron bought. At that time it was considered "all mountain" and semi-perfect for powder skiing. I learned what it was and, also, what it was not. Changed skis many times since, but, I'd still take that ski out in a minimal powder day - and smile. There is a whole history of people who skied skinny skis in powder, and, just smiled all day long.

To this day, I dislike skiing a wide ski. Yeah, I'm a groomer skier at the southern edge of eastern skiing, but, why put up some oversized, overweight, under-responsive board when a narrow ski just does everything so much easier. Why fight a ski on every turn when there is no fresh pow? Your skills and midset are far different, not much middle ground to discuss. Not attempting to tell you what to do, actually, I respect what you do and where you ski. All I can testify to is that on minor powder days, I see a whole bunch of people skiing narrow skies and just slaying it. Sure, they ski on blue groomers, but, who cares? I did demo a really fat ski on some pow in Jackson Hole. Might have as well turned up a $50 dollar bill and burned it.

Byron will find his own way. He may make mistakes along the way, will probably change skis like most of us have done, will probably find that there is not magic in any one ski in all conditions. That's part of the game we call skiing. But, someplace along the way, he'll find it's a lot more about your skills and dedication that it is about the ski you happen to be on.

do you not own a Sultan 94 and a pair of Rossi S7s?

I find alot of the time that the limiting factor for people who come ski with me are not their skills but their ski choice.

I do not see people ripping woods on narrow skis here at Stowe untill its been skied out, and then their narrow ski is 85mmish and usually straightish and rockered but soft.

Down where your at I have no idea why you would try to ski a wide board as your only ski, it would be harder. In fact in Pa my quiver was this. SL ski, GS race ski, 85mm twin tip for both park and any soft snow. I have no idea why your on a MX88 in fact. IMO that ski would be quite boring and cumbersome down there. I know it works but when its all groomered/bumps I liked SL skis.

The thing is saw bryoon skis and he is not awesome but with what he decribed and his current skill he could have skied the conditions he was talking about. Would it be pretty? no. but he wouldnt be on the ground and being frustrated.

[bushwacka]

I don't like fat skis in 2" of pow. I don't like them in 6" of pow. I really don't like them until the depth gets closer to a foot and only if the pow is heavy. I think its because I like skiing IN the pow rather than on it.

I still haven't found a ski with true rocker that I enjoy all over the place. Rocker is OK in uncut deep pow, but once it gets cut up I prefer a more traditional design.

Eh here in the powder is not only no fun because you tend to hit hard icey bumps, but also pretty dangerous due to submerged wood and rocks and gullies. In as little as 6 inches of the right type of snow will start to skim the surface and miss all that iceiness.


at 2:23 in the video above is upper starr on a 14 inches powder day. 40  degree pitch and covered with weird icey bump under neath all that snow that you now can not see. The people ahead of me are co workers of mine and all on 170 ish 90mm skis on(hardly skinny) but they were stuck in the snow floundering and dealing with icey bump while I just went faster and made it ski like wide open powder field on a 186cm 110mm ski with full rocker. If I have to deal with ICE I never want to be anywhere near it.

[Gary]

Hey Bush...does the chick in the maroon jacket have any speed limit?  She can dance!

Great point on skiing rockers over pow over ice bumps...obvious to me in that section you referred to.

But hey.....western conditions can be more forgiving, more space, more lines....but even there...I too love my DPS.

Using them here in the east with 4-8" of snow....it's just plain ole silly happy face effortless fun!