Skis for icey conditions

Post your questions/comments about Gear here

Skis for icey conditions

Postby sandflea195 » Sat Dec 24, 2005 3:30 pm

I currently have an Atomic B5 172. I'm looking for a thinner waisted ski for groomed and icey/cruddy days. I prefer slalom like turns, high energy and stability. I also want something good in bumps. Years ago I had some Volkl P20sl's that were incredible on ice, it made skiing on ice actually fun. I'm looking for something similar, but more forgiving so I can do bumps better. The only ski right now that I'm considering is the Fischer RX8. Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Mike
sandflea195
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 7:27 pm
Location: Salt Lake City

Great on ice

Postby Harald » Mon Dec 26, 2005 5:01 pm

We have great success early in the season when it is icy here in Colorado with the Head iSL or the Head RD SL, which is their World Cup racing ski. If you want to hold on smooth ice there are many skis in this category that will do the job, but if you ever have trouble with skis the Head warrantee is the best in the business. No questions asked, they will replace a ski if it is bent, chipped or delaminated. They rarely have the problem, but our customers love the service if they have a problem. In this day where top skis are 1000 dollars, you better be covered.
"Maximum Skiing information, Minimum BS
Harald
 
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 10:36 pm
Location: Dumont

Postby Mac » Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:11 pm

Aren't too many skis around short of all out race skis that are as good on ice as the Supershape. Had a chance to ski it one afternoon at Stowe last week after everything was pretty well skied off, and they were a joy to ski on. Any ski that you can make a decent controlled turn on the kind of boilerplate that we normally get to ski on here in the ice capital of the ski world is worth it's weight in gold. It's also nice because I could ski it in a shorter length than what I would normally ski on, and still feel totally comfortable. Also handled the crud better than what I thought it would. A great ski for eastern conditions.
Mac
 
Posts: 633
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 6:47 pm

Postby François » Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:13 pm

I found the Fischer WC SC does a better job than the RX8 on ice. It's not the quietest ski, but it does perform admirably.
François
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:08 pm

Postby sandflea195 » Sun Jan 08, 2006 6:05 am

Fran?ois wrote:I found the Fischer WC SC does a better job than the RX8 on ice. It's not the quietest ski, but it does perform admirably.


Thanks, I assume that your tried them both with the same length. What did you wind up buying?

Mike
sandflea195
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 7:27 pm
Location: Salt Lake City

How about Salomon Crossmax 10 Pilot

Postby linesplice » Sun Jan 15, 2006 6:04 pm

My experience with some new skiis is limited, but I can recommend two: The Salomon Crossmax 10 pilot's are a fantastic ski with tenacious grip on ice as well as hardpack. The Atomic SL-11.12 are wonderful as well, but a fairly stiff ski.
linesplice
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 5:56 pm
Location: New England

Postby François » Sun Jan 15, 2006 6:48 pm

sandflea195 wrote:
Fran?ois wrote:I found the Fischer WC SC does a better job than the RX8 on ice. It's not the quietest ski, but it does perform admirably.


Thanks, I assume that your tried them both with the same length. What did you wind up buying?

Mike


I tried the RX8 in a 170, and was looking for a spring deal on it, but there were no more to be found. I did however come across a great deal on the WC SC. I got the SC in a 165, without having skied it, believing that a closer to race ski would do better on hard ice. I have skied it now, and I was right.

The RX8 performed fairly well on ice, but when scraping it felt too "thin".
The SC feels more solid and does indeed work better on very hard ice. The RX8 seems to me to be, on the other hand, better than the WC at slower speeds. I posted a "first Impressions" reveiw of the Fischer WC SC and later added to it on this thread..

http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.ph ... cb&t=33360
François
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:08 pm

Postby sandflea195 » Mon Jan 16, 2006 12:13 pm

Thanks. I checked out your review, it was very informative. I also carry a gps when I ski to see how fast and how much vertical feet I've skied.

Mike
sandflea195
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 7:27 pm
Location: Salt Lake City

Re: How about Salomon Crossmax 10 Pilot

Postby sandflea195 » Mon Jan 16, 2006 12:14 pm

linesplice wrote:My experience with some new skiis is limited, but I can recommend two: The Salomon Crossmax 10 pilot's are a fantastic ski with tenacious grip on ice as well as hardpack. The Atomic SL-11.12 are wonderful as well, but a fairly stiff ski.


I haven't skied any Salomon's, so I'll put it on my list. How are the Atomics in bumps?

Mike
sandflea195
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 7:27 pm
Location: Salt Lake City

Postby JohnMoore » Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:00 pm

Can anyone give me any tips on having my skis tuned specifically for icy conditions? What's the best edge/side angle to use with current skis for ice and hardpack?
JohnMoore
 
Posts: 437
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 1:44 pm
Location: Norfolk, England

Postby Max_501 » Mon Jan 16, 2006 6:06 pm

JohnMoore wrote:Can anyone give me any tips on having my skis tuned specifically for icy conditions? What's the best edge/side angle to use with current skis for ice and hardpack?


I like a 1 degree base and a 3 degree side. But you could also go half a degree on the base if you want it on edge a bit quicker.
User avatar
Max_501
 
Posts: 4124
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:39 pm

Postby JohnMoore » Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:11 am

Max_501 wrote:I like a 1 degree base and a 3 degree side. But you could also go half a degree on the base if you want it on edge a bit quicker.


What are the consequences of this setup for where it isn't icy? I presume there are disadvantages on softer snow, otherwise this would be the standard setup. I haven't seen anywhere where it gives the pros and cons of each kind of setup clearly.
JohnMoore
 
Posts: 437
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 1:44 pm
Location: Norfolk, England

Postby François » Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:44 pm

I've only had the benefit of the 1 degree base bevel on the "new" skis. I've tried 0.5 and 1 on my old SG skis. They came with 0.5, I tried out 1 and put them back to 0.5 degree base bevel. I also like to keep my skis razor sharp tip to tail (no detuning).

I suspect that on soft snow it makes little difference, but I've noticed quite a bit of difference on hardpack and ice. It seems that at 1 degree base bevel you can relax and not worry too much about what you're doing. If you get a little bit out of line or slightly off balance, it's not a problem. This is particularly useful with the new shaped skis, because they don't take off on you as the tips wander back and forth when your gliding straight ahead, not on edge.

At 1/2 a degree base bevel with the old race skis, if you don't pay attention your skis will seem to have a mind of their own. A slight tip to the ski and they will take off on a tangent. It's a little like the old sneeze in a Mercedes (or an old Chev Caprice in my case) at 130 mph, or in a Ford Mustang at the same speed. A slight miscue at the wheel can easily put you in the weeds if you have quick steering. At 1 degree base bevel it is also easier to ski sideways doing spins and skiing backwards and what-not while watching your family ski along behind you.

On the plus side for the lower angle, if you are skiing at high speed and want to minimise any delay between your commands and the ski's turning 1/2 degree base bevel pays off. It also allows you to feel the edge bite with only a slight tipping angle of the ski at lower speeds.
Last edited by François on Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
François
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:08 pm

Postby François » Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:50 pm

sandflea195 wrote:Thanks. I checked out your review, it was very informative. I also carry a gps when I ski to see how fast and how much vertical feet I've skied.

Mike


I've only had my GPS to the hill twice (excluding the bunny hill), having just gotten it last summer. The novelty still hasn't worn off yet. The data is almost like a picture souvenir; I upload the tracks onto my PC and recall the runs. I've got tracks from my summer canoe trip too. A thread on Epicski from another skier prompted me to buy one. In regards to skiing, it was a real eye-opener; I seemed to have been underestimating my speed all these years. It was a little disappointing not to have the SG ski data for the faster runs at Blue Mountain, still the WC SC data from Blue Mountain is pretty interesting.
Last edited by François on Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
François
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:08 pm

Postby Max_501 » Tue Jan 17, 2006 7:52 pm

JohnMoore wrote:What are the consequences of this setup for where it isn't icy? I presume there are disadvantages on softer snow, otherwise this would be the standard setup. I haven't seen anywhere where it gives the pros and cons of each kind of setup clearly.


No disadvantage for soft snow.
User avatar
Max_501
 
Posts: 4124
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 7:39 pm

Next

Return to Gear

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests