Is there any advantage to buying prior years' skis?

[MemilyG]

I kind of enjoy the luxury of reading a lot of people's reviews on a certain ski before I think about demoing/buying. It seems like you can get a pretty good idea by reading around after the ski has been out long enough to generate a buzz around it.

I probably will never buy current year's model skis because it's so much more expensive at retail price. Is there a true advantage to buying the current year's skis, and does technology change fast enough in one year to make a difference, or do you think buying the current model is more about keeping up with the trends?

Also, if you really enjoy the current model of a particular ski, do you mind buying last year's, or do you consider it to be like buying a different ski altogether?

Curious to see how other ladies think about this.

 

[Jilly]

I don't see anything wrong with buying NEW non-current skis. If the technology has changed then that's a different story. But if its only a comestic change - then the savings could/might be worth it. As you may have noticed not all the Diva's like this or next years graphics on some skis and are looking for last years etc. So its not always an advantage.

For example if you are considering the Heaven's Gate - buy this years, next years has eh gads - FLOWERS on it. Looks like last years Origins!

 

[pinto]

I kind of enjoy the luxury of reading a lot of people's reviews on a certain ski before I think about demoing/buying. It seems like you can get a pretty good idea by reading around after the ski has been out long enough to generate a buzz around it.

I probably will never buy current year's model skis because it's so much more expensive at retail price. Is there a true advantage to buying the current year's skis, and does technology change fast enough in one year to make a difference, or do you think buying the current model is more about keeping up with the trends?

Also, if you really enjoy the current model of a particular ski, do you mind buying last year's, or do you consider it to be like buying a different ski altogether?

Curious to see how other ladies think about this.

As with many things, it depends. I think sometimes technology does change things, but by and large I am a fan of "new old stock."

I have three pairs of skis in rotation, and I paid just over $1000 for everything by doing it that way. (And they aren't low end skis, either.) My Auras were $359, bindings $99; Queen Attivas $225, recycled bindings; Heads plus bindings $388.

Auras don't have new technology yet, and I'm sure the new technology on the replacements for the Queens and the Heads isn't worth $800 to me, or whatever the difference would be.

 

[Shellski]

The only advantage to me is price, reading other people's reviews doesn't really sway me. It's such an individual thing, just because 100 other people rave about a ski, doesn't mean I am going to like it.

 

[Squaw]

I'll chime in about the buzz: buzz and popularity make little difference. It is only about how the ski feels for you. And also, how it works in your local terrain. Weight, height, aggressiveness, technique / habits (good and bad) all contribute to whether a ski is right.

And a ski CAN change significantly from one year to the next.

But a NEW older model? Go for it if you have demo'd it and know you like it.

Jen

 

[CMCM]

Advantage? In a word: CHEAPER!! By reading reviews (for example, skipress has really good ones not influenced by advertisers) you can find out which current skis are exactly the same except for topsheet changes. You can then demo this year's ski (or even last year's if still available, although not usually...), then when you find something you like you might find a good deal on sale for the last year's version. I got Salomon Origins at the end of last spring...I paid around $399 for a ski that was $900 or so new. This year's Origins are exactly the same in terms of design, only the top sheet has changed. If someone wanted this ski, I imagine there are still some of last year's kicking around at a low price.

Also...some skis are the same as last year's but with a topsheet AND name change. Example: Last years Atomic Sugar Mama has become this year's Seventh Heaven. There are already some good buys on sierraskis...Here's a link to the 7th Heaven as an example, and there's a short review on it because the sierra ski people go out and test the skis they sell. https://www.sierraskis.com/2009-Atomic-Seventh-Heaven-w-310-44798.asp

Another thought: the skipress site is wonderful because you can easily find out exactly which skis had a substantial design change as opposed to a topsheet or name change. They review a ski when it is first released, and then don't do a review on it again until there is a big change. Example....K2 Burnin' Luv changed substantially this year, so there's review for 2009, but not for the preceding couple of years where it didn't change.

 

[tamlyn]

NOS is the way to go

1 or 2 year old models that are new skis are in most cases the best deal. They have a proven track record and the discounts are so deep it hardly seems to justify spending the exorbitant difference in price. Especially since after an all too short ski season will make your new skis "old" after about 3 months use. The only exception might be if there is a totally radical new design that is getting profound results and you are a competition skier. Even then when I was an A class skier I never paid for skis so it was a moot point.
Tami (gravity girl)