Equipment for PMTS

PMTS Forum

Equipment for PMTS

Postby skugrud » Mon Feb 21, 2005 9:02 pm

I am new to this form and have been following ski technique since Stein originated the reverse shoulder technique and was an early convert to Harold's push to the pure carved turns. (I started laying "railroad tracks on my Salomon 2'S and have been at it ever since).

Lately I have become conversant in many of the PSIA forms, such as early edge initiation and so forth.

From my observation it seems that technique change follows equipment change. So my question is: Is there one ski design that makes skiing these forms easier? It seems that all the PSIA folks are on short salom with a turn radis or less than 13 M.

I am interested in some feedback and comments on this issue.

Thanks
skugrud
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2005 8:16 pm
Location: Minnesota

Postby Joseph » Tue Feb 22, 2005 8:01 am

I ski 3 skis.
Head iC160, size 170 (R 15)
Elan wood core 2000x's, size 188 (first generation shaped ski--R appox. 22+)
Blizzard straight skis, size 210 (R approx. half a mile)

I like to bend the ski.
It doesn't matter.

Joseph
Joseph
 

Postby jclayton » Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:32 pm

Eggsactly ,
Park and ride or railroad turns are easier on turny slaloms . Hardcharging carving turns are fun on any gutsy ski . Head chip slaloms are bgreat fun , I also use Volkl 724 pro's which are like a freight train on piste . Completely different but both exciting . I have to admit I don't get too excited about old straights but worth the challenge perhaps to show up defects . How do you find them Joseph ?
skinut ,among other things
User avatar
jclayton
 
Posts: 1019
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 12:37 pm
Location: mallorca ,spain

Postby milesb » Tue Feb 22, 2005 1:06 pm

I do 90% of my skiing on 11 year old 180 Volant Chubbs that have almost no sidecut and haven't been tuned in 6 years (because one is a little bent, no shop will run it through the machine). PMTS works great on them.
YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCH78E6wIKnq3Fg0eUf2MFng
User avatar
milesb
 
Posts: 981
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Joseph » Tue Feb 22, 2005 3:56 pm

I wouldn't tune those either Miles--time for a pair of M88's
JC, straight skis are everywhere and they are awesome. You can find them in almost anyone's basement. Ask around the ski area. I got mine at a ski area repair shop. They get tons just given to them when 15 year old bindings break. Joseph
Joseph
 

Postby Max » Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:20 pm

I ski the Atomic SL:9 in a 170cm and Atomic Metron B:5 in a 162cm. These skis both have a very tight turning radius and are terrific carving skis.

I'm thinking of adding a Head IM88 to the mix next year.
Max
 

Postby mkgil » Fri Feb 25, 2005 3:48 pm

milesb wrote:I do 90% of my skiing on 11 year old 180 Volant Chubbs that have almost no sidecut and haven't been tuned in 6 years (because one is a little bent, no shop will run it through the machine). PMTS works great on them.


Good to find another connoiseur of fine old performers. My Chubbs are the same age or a year older. (At my age, memory is the first to go.) In one of his earliest articles (perhaps in ACBAES--you know, the memory thing), Harald specifically mentions that the Chubb will work for PMTS despite its width.

May I suggest, milesb, that you get a pair of Volant Machete Sins at 175 for all mountain use so you can save the Chubbs for deep powder or truly nasty Cascade concrete? I'd hate for you to bend them out of function. The Sins are on the web (like REI) for under $200. As I've posted elsewhere, I think if Peter had demoed the 175s rather than the 185s, the review would have been as positive as the reviews in Ski Canada. I'm 5'10" and weigh 190; 175 is perfect for me. My wife is 5'8" and 145; 165 Machetes are perfect for her.

Michael
mkgil
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2004 1:57 pm

MaryAnn

Postby MaryAnn » Thu Mar 03, 2005 11:38 am

As long as you're recommending skis....I'll ask my question.

I'm still on my 185 cm 5500s. I am 5'3" and weigh 100. What I like about them is that I can ride through crud (lighter skis bounce me around too much) and they carve big GS turns really well.

However....they are heavy for my weight and strength, and bumps are really difficult on them.

Having watched some good skiers on the new parabolics, I think I can get that technique pretty quick, and would be able to "drop" my one-footed ski style if I didn't need it any more.

So....people have said I should go 150 cm in a parabolic which seems amazingly short. I tried, I think it was...K2-4s when they first came out, and hated them; it felt like I had trays on my feet, and they would not go straight. Big sweeping carves on groomed blues were impossible.

So. What is recommeded based on past likes and current wants (i.e., I'd like to be able to do bumps better, and have access to something other than big carved GS turns, but still have the damping and large radius capability.)

Many thanks for any input.

MA
MaryAnn
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:06 pm

Postby Max » Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:18 pm

Try to demo an Atomic SL9 in a 150 or one of the Atomic Metrons (not the B5, they would be too much for your weight). Maybe a Metron 10.

My wife is similar in size and she skis the Atomic SL9 in a 150.

Check out the ski reviews here:

http://www.techsupportforskiers.com/05_ ... atomic.htm
Max
 

Postby MaryAnn » Fri Mar 04, 2005 7:57 am

Is she a reasonably aggressive skier? I don't ski like a teenage guy, but I am not all that far behind.
MA
MaryAnn
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:06 pm

Head is the way to go

Postby Hobbit » Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:43 am

I was "Mr. Atomic" -- I have R-9, R-11 and R-Ex.
Then I became "Mr. Atomic Head" after I've got i.m 75.
Now my Atomic boards all went into the "rock ski" category.
Also I am unhappy with the Atomic bindings. I can't speak for the newest Atomic lines, but I had a couple of pre-releases (especially on R-9 "Device" bindings) with quite painfull memories.

Harald sells Head skis for a reason (and I did not buy mine from him).
There is a big difference between the way Head skis feel compared to anything else. Heads are softer (but not torsionally) and you have much more feel and feedback when you bend the ski. On higher speed they stiffen up and hold like nothing else.

Look for the Head "intelligent" skis preferrably with the chip technology and the side cut which fits your preferences on the mountain. Harald recommended i.C 160 for most skies and i.SL as an ultimate caver ski.
User avatar
Hobbit
Site Admin
 
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 6:45 am

Postby jclayton » Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:13 am

I love my Head chip slaloms but someone told me the chip comes off , i.e. the little gold bit in front of the bindings , ( and thus is a bit of a con ) I suspect that is not the chip just decoration . Anyone know ?
skinut ,among other things
User avatar
jclayton
 
Posts: 1019
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 12:37 pm
Location: mallorca ,spain

Postby Max » Fri Mar 04, 2005 7:59 pm

MaryAnn, the best bet is to demo different shapes and sizes to find one that fits your style. You may enjoy the agressive sidecut that is found on the Atomic SL and Metron series of skis. Then again, you may find that its not your thing. The 150cm size seems about right given your height and weight and the fact that you want to use it in bumps and shorter turns.

Hobbit,

I demoed the Head IM70, IM77 Chip, and the iSlalom.

Here's what I came away with. The Head skis were all smooth, handled well and were very stable at speed. For all mountain skiing I like both the IM77 and the Metron B5. If you like little turns from an agressive carver then the B5 is a great ski. If you enjoy larger radius turns from a more laid back ride then the IM77 is terrific. In fact, I could see wanting them both because they are so different to ride. I should note that I enjoy making short radius carved turns, no doubt that is why I like the Metron B5s (they are easily my favorite ski).

BTW, you might want to try the Metron B5 if you like Atomics. Its a carving monster that really shines in everything I've thrown at it.

I liked the iSlalom and was impressed with it. Its definitely a great carver. But I still prefer the feel of the Atomics. To me they are a more energetic ski.

Don't get me wrong, I really like the Heads and I plan on adding an IM88 to my quiver next season.
Max
 

Postby Hobbit » Fri Mar 04, 2005 10:40 pm

Max,

I agree that it's better to try before you buy.
It may not be that easy to get a demo for i.C 160 or i.SL or i.M 88 for that matter.

Also I feel that really getting used to the skis like Head "i" series might take some time and a few hours on demo won't let you do that (this of course depends on the skier skill level, so I am referring to my experience -- I am relatively new to this sport).

I ski on both Atomic's and Head's and I like Head skis better but it's a metter of personal taste. R9 is softer and R11 is a stiffer ski and they behave this way all the time. The i.* is like a blend of both -- it's soft on the slow speed and stiffer when you go fast. It's two skis in one. I am also considering i.M 88 for the next season.
User avatar
Hobbit
Site Admin
 
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 6:45 am

Postby Max » Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:04 pm

Hobbit,

I've never skied the R series, but from looking at the specs I think they are quite a bit different than the SL and Metron lineups.

The intellegence of the Head skis was one of the things I thought was very cool about them. I was impressed with the IM77 as it ploughed through all sorts of chopped up crud and didn't miss a beat. Even the IM70 (no chip) performed admirably in similar conditions. They are fun skis and I would be happy to own them. But neither is a short radius turning ski based on sidecut. I found that the Atomics (SL9 and B5) are much easier to coax into tight turns because they have a very aggressive sidecut.

Of couse the iSlalom cranks tiny turns all day, but I found that it was happiest on the groomed trails.
Max
 

Next

Return to Primary Movements Teaching System

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: jbotti and 40 guests