Are my skis holding me back?

[Ken]

John,
Some skis are built to carve and some are built to skid. Some do both fairly well. PMTS, of course, wants carvers.

Look at http://www.techsupportforskiers.com/ for good ski reviews including listing where the skis are suitable for carving, skidding, or both.

With your size and weight, consider some modern skis in the 160s. I was skiing well on Head Monster I. M72, 170 cm, and Head i.SuperShape 165 cm., fast and steep moguls and powder. I'm 6', 210#.


Ken

[JohnMoore]

John,
Some skis are built to carve and some are built to skid. Some do both fairly well. PMTS, of course, wants carvers.

Look at http://www.techsupportforskiers.com/ for good ski reviews including listing where the skis are suitable for carving, skidding, or both.

Is it really true that manufacturers design the skis for skidding? I would have though the whole point of 'carving skis', as shaped skis are frequently known as, is that they are designed for carving? Or is it just the beginners' skis which are designed for skidding, on the basis that most beginners learn to control their speed that way (unless they learn via PMTS!).

[Harald]

This is a timely discussion and JohnB again, as he so often does, brings the correct cards to the table. One of my articles for the latest PMTS newsletter is ?How the wrong skis can ruin you skiing experience?

Diana and I ski on narrow skis in the general slalom category. We have access to skis that are wider, but we save them for powder days on big mountains. The reason we use narrower skis is because they are easier to ski on and they require less effort. They offer huge performance and they are more fun. Wide skis require more tipping effort even on packed snow, (they are impossible on hard snow) as they hurt the knees when skied with carving movements.

If I have a true powder day (12 plus inches) at Big Sky, for example, I would take out a pair of Monster 88 or the new M82, I have a pair in reserve for those occasions. I ski over 150 days a year, yet I rarely have the opportunity to ski more than 6 days in real powder. I can?t image anyone needing a ski that is wider than 72mm and a turning radius over 14, if they ski less than 40 days a year.

I saw skiers, at our recent all mountain camp skiing on ridicules widths (75mm plus) and lengths. They were working twice as hard as I was, yet I have years of ski experience beyond theirs. They often get fatigued early because to ski these wide skis they must lift and push them around.

Real PMTS movements are based on skiing with balance; these wide skis require highly developed levels of balance. I started the first day with a Monster 72, which I like, but when I found the snow was packed hard, I went back to my Super Shapes. When it did snow the next two days, I stayed with my Super Shapes as the mountain is not really big enough for long wide skis.

If skiers want to learn to ski correctly, first they should be on skis that make good technique easy to learn. I often take my private clients out on junior race slalom skis (150mm) to learn carving and correct movements for balancing. (The more shaped the ski the easier to stay balanced and achieve body angles.) We recommend iSL or Super Shapes to our learning PMTS skiers. When they change over, on every occasion they realize the ease and benefits of this type of ski. They also learn more quickly and they have more fun doing it.

I find the trend to wide skis and or longer skis ridicules and a marketing ploy by the magazines, ski manufactures and ski shops. Don?t get sucked in.

[JohnMoore]

Wow, that's pretty clear cut! Thanks. I'll look out for some Supershapes when I'm in Red Mountain. Otherwise, does the i.c.160 come into the favourable category you're talking about?

[RadRab]

Bs"D

Whoa, HH has done it again! He just blasted up-main-stream against the whole world, shattering misconceptions, deceptions, and sterring his flock safetly around the serious errors of the less well instructed. Thank you.

We can't do it on our own. We need to hear it from someone with the shoulders to make these definative statements. Even if we thought we had a discenting theory, we wouldn't be confident enough in ourselves to act on it - all the more so when we are blind sided by revolution (or, actually, a bringing back to conventional wisdom). Harald gives us that confidence to know we are going in the right direction. Its precious.

But, I don't understand one thing. Since a person who has two pairs of skis - a slalom ski and a powder only ski (either because he gets enough powder or can afford to have it even for one day), then this is the situation that even you agree a wider ski is beneficial in. Again, as long as you use it only in soft snow. But then why do you use and recommend the im88 whose unique greatness seems to lie in its hardpack groomer versatility? On anything except a true powder day, you will be on your Supershapes. If your second ski will only be for powder alone, why not already use an even more deicated for powder design - at least then a wider, softer in the tip, more evenly flexed, shallower sidecuted ski?

I have been spending too much time trying to figure out if I should stick with my 8800 to compliment my Supershapes, or go to the im88 or Volkl Mantra or the like, gaining that groomer versatility since, besides heliskiing, there really is no pure powder day. But, according to what you have revealed to us today (a wider/longer ski should only be used in powder), I should either stay with the 8800, or go to an even more dedicated design and just save them only for those very few days. Actually, those who have discussed this with me on the gear forum know that I have been saying that since the Supershapes are so versatile, also handling moderate powder, you don't need something like the im88. And, when the real powder day comes, there are better real powder skis (unless you want it for fast big turn big mountain style powder skiing).

So, could you please elaborate on your choice of the im88?

[Max_501]

I have been spending too much time trying to figure out if I should stick with my 8800 to compliment my Supershapes, or go to the im88 or Volkl Mantra or the like, gaining that groomer versatility since, besides heliskiing, there really is no pure powder day.

So, could you please elaborate on your choice of the im88?

RR, you answered your question in the paragraph above. As you pointed out...unless you are using a Heli as the lift you are going to spend plenty of time on groomed and chopped up snow on most powder days at most resorts. Given that reality, a ski like the IM88 that works so well in all of those conditions is a very satisfying ride.

BTW, if I had the 8800 I'd just stick with it until the ski was worn out.

[Harald]

Thanks Rad,

I rarely use the Monster 88 because at some point in the day you will encounter groomed slopes with hard snow and bumps coming off the powder slopes. The M88 does carve better than most wide skis, but this is all relative. It takes expertise and high speed to use these skis well.

When I see learning all mountain skiers showing up on 75 to 80mm skis, I hurt for them. I?m not trying to sell skis. I am trying to make skiers and guide them to good decisions. If I want to feel G forces carving at 15 mph, you can?t do it with M88?s. My knees begin to hurt after three runs on wide skis, unless the snow can be compressed under foot and there are wide open slopes ahead with few skiers.

[Harald]

BtW Super Shapes are great in powder under 12 inches deep and much easier to turn.

[onyxjl]

I have found a lot of truth in what Harald is saying.

I live in the midwest, but I own a pair of Head i.M 88s and Atomic SL:9s. The 88s were a gift, so there was no way I was going to turn them down. I had skied the 88s previously at Crystal Mt. Washington where they had plenty of new snow and some long runs to just cruise at high speeds. I loved them.

I recently brought them out to a ski resort in Wisconsin that has 180 ft. of vertical. On that particular day there was a blustery wind at the top of the slope, so you could barely get moving on the snow until halfway down the hill. In these conditions I could get in about 2 turns at the bottom of the hill where I had gathered enough speed to work the skis. Without the proper momentum the skis were difficult to work with.

So, I stuck them back in the car after a few runs and got out the SL:9s. It was like switching from a dump truck to a ferrari. Same conditions, same snow, same run but the skis are much more responsive at the slower speeds.

[Heyoka]

Wild.

i supershapes are this crazy great ski. Bitchin sidecut, expert ++ level ski. Oh my gawd ski.

Harald is recommending them to blue level skiers, putting beginning skiers on them. It just shows you, how far ahead of the curve...we are?? Also goes to show you, how versatile Head skis are. I mean, here's this ski they market to "experts". Harald is putting PMTS skiers on them, right from the get go.

That's so hot.

BTW, "new" supershapes just got here today. What a bitchin ski, I been on a i supershape jonez. I'll do my best to take better care of this pair.

[RadRab]

Bs"D

Thanks for the response, but I feel like you didn't answer the following part of the question:

On those rare occasions where a wide board is applicable (Max, Harald is basically saying that it IS only in Heliskiingish type situations w/ NO hardpack), then why choose the im88 vs a true powder ski?

According to what you have said, not only is the im88 not deserving of being the ski of the year, it really doesn't have a place at all (and I'm not arguing with this).
It isn't good whenever "at some point in the day you will encounter groomed slopes with hard snow and bumps coming off the powder slopes" - you will choose the great and versatile SS instead, and conversely, it isn't the best dedicated soft snow design.

[Harald]

I hope this answers your question, I?d rather ski the M88 than the Heli Guide or the Sugar Daddy type powder skis because the M88 is a laminate ski, better rebound, stable at high speed and it has more side cut, making it easier to turn in all situations, even in bottomless snow.

In addition, I don?t like to float on the top of powder, I prefer to ski in the powder compressing the snow and flexing to rebound. The super wide heli powder skis float on top, which allows relative beginner powder skiers to ski powder. I don?t like or need that type of ski, I prefer to feel the real essence of powder, which is the interaction of going down into it and coming back up to the surface for every turn. Staying on the top and swishing back and forth is like skidding on groomed slopes.

[RadRab]

Bs"D

Fantastic! Now that is an answer - and once again upside down stuff you only hear right here. And, I couldn't agree more.

Now my only problem is the im88 is back on the board

Actually, my 8800, although not as much in any of those catagories as the im88, is also not like the superwide/soft types you mentioned - more like the im88. That's why I chose them, and they are probably easier. ?

Thanks.

[Max_501]

It isn't good whenever "at some point in the day you will encounter groomed slopes with hard snow and bumps coming off the powder slopes".

RR, if you get a chance to demo the IM88 please let us know what you think. I demo'd them on two different days, one in 3 feet of heavy powder and the chopped up stuff after the first few runs and then on a mainly groomer day ripping GS carves. I found them to be quite enjoyable in all of that.

[Ken]

Is it really true that manufacturers design the skis for skidding? I would have though the whole point of 'carving skis', as shaped skis are frequently known as, is that they are designed for carving? Or is it just the beginners' skis which are designed for skidding, on the basis that most beginners learn to control their speed that way (unless they learn via PMTS!).

People that don't know better like to skid. They're taught to skid. They want skis that skid smoothly under their feet. They don't know what a carve is, so they don't know what some skis and the correct technique could do for them.

And, think small. Harald, not a heavy guy but a very strong skier, uses 170s. Unless you're much bigger, stronger, and heavier than he is, go shorter. If you're demo'ing, find a shop that will let you change skis throughout the day. Try short and shorter lengths. You'll be pleasantly surprised at how well modern short skis ski.


Ken