More "what do you want in a ski?"

[altagirl]

I thought this was an interesting comment in the other thread:

"Even when manufacturers decide to make a "real" woman's ski, the designs for women tend to lag behind men's designs. The Gotomas are a case in point. These are great skis, but men's designs are rapidly moving away from the Gotoma type design. And yet it's taken several years for Volkl to begin to take what is now an older men's design and tweak it for women.

Except for the my 163 Auras, I have been drifting away from women's skis. While I still enjoy the Auras, I've primarily been skiing 169 HellBents and recently the 175 Praxis this season and have only skied the Auras twice on really hard pack days. I've been really lucky to be able to spend the rest of the season on powder and soft snow. Thank you la Nina!!

I've been enjoying the 169 HellBents (150-122-141). They perform great in powder, soft snow, cut up snow, and, surprisingly, on groomers, too. I like them less well on ice and icy moguls. While I really like the skis now, though, I did have a learning curve when I first used them. Their tips and tails are large enough that the first few times I skied them I kept knocking the skis together. Also, I had a challenging time getting them on edge. They're really wide, and they seem longer (more like 179) than their advertised length.

I was talking with one of my local shop guys yesterday, and he commented that for anyone much smaller than I am, the HellBents would be an inappropriate ski because the stance the person would have to use would just be too wide. He said they would look like they were riding a horse. Even for someone my size (5'7' and 150 pounds), I think the HellBents in a 159 and 140-112-131 would be a better ski.

I had the good fortune to get to ski the 175 Praxis in Utah in awesome powder. Praxis designed this ski to be shorter and smaller than their other skis. The 175's dimensions are 121-125-115. Even though the waist is wider than the HellBents, I've found that the smaller tips and tails make it a less demanding ski for me. The skis felt good to me the first time I skied them without demanding a big learning curve on my part. It's just easier for me to control my stance on these skis than it is on the HellBents. BTW, women and smaller men are the target market for the 175 Praxis. It's great to have a big powder ski like this where the manufacturer specifically designed it for smaller people. Keep in mind, though, that these skis have reverse side cut which makes them more challenging on traverses and groomers than the HellBents, which do have side cut."

And it made me think:

That really has been the case with women's gear. You get trickled down stuff - okay, this model was really hot as a unisex ski (or bike) so lets make a smaller, lighter version in girly colors and sell it as a women's model.

With the mountain bike I ordered this fall - (a Transition Syren) they really did some innovative thinking. The suspension design is all new, and they tried to move the linkage farther back to make it easier to wheelie/manual. It's got really low standover and a couple of other features to make it hopefully easier for women to ride. The thing I really love is that they made a totally NEW design. It's not a smaller version of the mens bike - it's a different bike unlike anything else. And it's also the first women's specific bike I've ever even considered, and I bought one.

So what do we actually want in skis? I mean, I know some companies seem better than others at producing smaller/lighter skis and that's great, but that's not the only thing we're dealing with here. What else?

I think a lot of women have balance point issues. Apparently some of us like skis mounted forward, others not. I think the problem is that we all don't seem to like the same thing. Rail mounted bindings seem like a nice solution - where you can adjust them back and forth to find the right point BUT - many of us don't want integrated bindings. And for an off-piste ski, a lot of people want to put AT bindings on them, so that's not the right solution.

I wonder if the bigger problem isn't that we don't KNOW what works best for us. If you go demo skis, no one ever tells you if they're boot center on the line or what... I don't even think most women are aware of this, or whether the ski they're demoing is forward or back and it makes a big difference. You can love or hate the same ski because of the mounting point. What if you could demo a ski, have them tell you - this is mounted on the line take it for a run, then lets try +2 and see if that's better or worse. Would it help sell womens skis that much more if you could demo them with standard and forward mounting and see if it helps you or not?

We've also talked about canting/Q angles and all that kind of stuff - is there something that can be done to the ski that would make it easier for those of us with wider hips to get the skis to edge right without having to learn to force it to work? I mean, I think I've got it figured out technique wise - but I'm wondering if my knees have paid the price... is there an easier way?

So I don't know - what sort of things would make a womens ski really revolutionary and new in it's own right without just being a tiny version of a mens ski?


(And I think we should leave graphics out of this thread completely - lets start a different one if we want to go into that...)

 

[mollmeister]

I wonder if the bigger problem isn't that we don't KNOW what works best for us. If you go demo skis, no one ever tells you if they're boot center on the line or what... I don't even think most women are aware of this, or whether the ski they're demoing is forward or back and it makes a big difference. You can love or hate the same ski because of the mounting point. What if you could demo a ski, have them tell you - this is mounted on the line take it for a run, then lets try +2 and see if that's better or worse. Would it help sell womens skis that much more if you could demo them with standard and forward mounting and see if it helps you or not?

This is a VERY interesting point, and something that occurred to me a couple weeks ago, when I was trying to hunt down some Auras to demo. I think I may have found a place to take them for a spin, and I am DEF going to ask about this.

 

[alaski]

I wonder if the bigger problem isn't that we don't KNOW what works best for us. If you go demo skis, no one ever tells you if they're boot center on the line or what...

That is so true. I don't even know where to start when I want to buy a new ski. There are few to no demo options here and frankly I don't want to spent an additional $500 demoing skis so I can pick a $700 pair of skis. Yikes! So I buy something that sounds and looks good and hope for the best. Most of the time I do OK; I can pretty much recognize a ski that will work for me on sight. Sometimes I screw up royally and suffer until I can get new skis.

I am an A/T skier so I rarely have the option to fool around with different mounting points. I agree that the solution would be for manufacturers to provide detailed information and several mounting options when demoing skis, but that will really only benefit people who have access to the big resorts that have demo days.

But I for one am glad for women's-specific skis - it's just a simple way to narrow down all the choices!

I think that marketing comes into play a lot. If no one had ever said that the Aura was the women's version of the Mantra, no one would worry about that. From all accounts the Aura is a great ski, so who's to say that it's not a revolutionary women's ski? Can one ski the Mantra and hate it, and then love the Aura? I don't know...

 

[ski diva]

I wonder if the bigger problem isn't that we don't KNOW what works best for us. If you go demo skis, no one ever tells you if they're boot center on the line or what... I don't even think most women are aware of this, or whether the ski they're demoing is forward or back and it makes a big difference. You can love or hate the same ski because of the mounting point. What if you could demo a ski, have them tell you - this is mounted on the line take it for a run, then lets try +2 and see if that's better or worse. Would it help sell womens skis that much more if you could demo them with standard and forward mounting and see if it helps you or not?

Altagirl, this is a terrific point and one that most of us never even think about. The mounting point can make a tremendous difference in whether or not we like a ski, yet most of the time this isn't even addressed.

Thanks for pointing this out.

 

[skigirl]

Have you my thread under Gear reviews called "Myth Busting by Mr Skigirl"? He skied my Fischer Vision 70s and loved them.

 

[ISki]

My theory is that women have an easier time skiing than men. I don't think women need a special ski, aside from the weight factor. It's the men who need help! :D

 

[abc]

I think a lot of women have balance point issues. Apparently some of us like skis mounted forward, others not. I think the problem is that we all don't seem to like the same thing. Rail mounted bindings seem like a nice solution - where you can adjust them back and forth to find the right point BUT - many of us don't want integrated bindings. And for an off-piste ski, a lot of people want to put AT bindings on them, so that's not the right solution.

Rail doesn't have to equate integrated bindings. There're "rail plates" you can mount on the ski and move the binding along the rail. Railflex is one such example. The concept can be used by others. You can also mount AT binding on them, though I think AT is really more of a fringe of the bulk of women ski buyers.

Still, many skis come with integrated binding and they sell as well as the flat one. So the point is moot.

I wonder if the bigger problem isn't that we don't KNOW what works best for us.

That goes for both men and women ski buyers. And will remain so for as long as there're casual skiers. How many mountain bike buyers knows the pivot location of a specific design is good for what kind of use???

 

[volklgirl]

If you go demo skis, no one ever tells you if they're boot center on the line or what... I don't even think most women are aware of this, or whether the ski they're demoing is forward or back and it makes a big difference. You can love or hate the same ski because of the mounting point. What if you could demo a ski, have them tell you - this is mounted on the line take it for a run, then lets try +2 and see if that's better or worse. Would it help sell womens skis that much more if you could demo them with standard and forward mounting and see if it helps you or not?

This was exactly what I liked about Jeannie Thoren's travelling demo fleet....every single ski had the Ess (now Atomic) binding that allows adjustment 1.5cm forward and backward of the mounting point. I believe all her skis were mounted forward so that the rear position actually put the binding back at the standard mounting point.

We've also talked about canting/Q angles and all that kind of stuff - is there something that can be done to the ski that would make it easier for those of us with wider hips to get the skis to edge right without having to learn to force it to work? I mean, I think I've got it figured out technique wise - but I'm wondering if my knees have paid the price... is there an easier way?

The adjustment for Q angle (which usually causes the "A-frame") is typically adressed by canting the boot sole to keep the knees out over the the center line of the boots so it doesn't matter what ski you're on.

 

[SnowHot]

I've demoed several skis by several manufacturers. The one thing I really liked about the Nordica guy is that he really paid attention to the skiers, as much as time would allow.
He actually made a point of adjusting bindings forward or back for skiers depending on how he saw them ski on the hill in front of his demo tent.

Very knowledgeable and eager to help the skier find the sweet spot. Not many demo guys take that extra effort.


Altagirl, I love the expansion of the previous threads thoughts.
What do I want?
A midfat ski that will blow through crud, and still have a nice flex to allow me to ski bumps and trees. I want the binding(if its system) to have an optional mounting point, and I want it to be something that my husband is jealous that I have it, and he doesn't.

 

[greekpeakskier]

I wonder if the bigger problem isn't that we don't KNOW what works best for us. If you go demo skis, no one ever tells you if they're boot center on the line or what... I don't even think most women are aware of this, or whether the ski they're demoing is forward or back and it makes a big difference. You can love or hate the same ski because of the mounting point. What if you could demo a ski, have them tell you - this is mounted on the line take it for a run, then lets try +2 and see if that's better or worse. Would it help sell womens skis that much more if you could demo them with standard and forward mounting and see if it helps you or not?

We've also talked about canting/Q angles and all that kind of stuff - is there something that can be done to the ski that would make it easier for those of us with wider hips to get the skis to edge right without having to learn to force it to work? I mean, I think I've got it figured out technique wise - but I'm wondering if my knees have paid the price... is there an easier way?

So I don't know - what sort of things would make a womens ski really revolutionary and new in it's own right without just being a tiny version of a mens ski?

I think you have hit the core of the issue: education would make the difference. educate women who ski who then bring these issues up over and over again as they go to buy skis.

Until i read this post or posts like this, i don't know what i need to ask for and what i should expect as i talk to. haylmom provided this great model in the other thread.

the canting/q angles idea sounds compelling (and i'll take my boots back in this week because of this discussion and ask for the canting), as does the option of adjustability -- not locking us into a balance point.


i've yet, in my two years of intensive skiing (i'm past 50 ski days this year), to encounter either a female sales rep OR a female instructor (there is apparantly one who comes on the weekend whose hand i shook one day).

The salesguys for both boots and skis have been HORRIBLE in every predictable way (guy who sold me victorys said they were nordica's top of the line and had a metal core. my boot guy carries no upper end women's boots). the guy instructors i've had, in contrast, have been absolutely spectacular (expect my skiing to improve and push me so it will).

those of us who are coming up to speed on technical knowledge really benefit from these discussions.

i'd like to see this thread with a variation on it as a sticky: educated points women should EXPECT to have answered as they go to buy skis and boots. for example, as i take my boots back in this week, trying to make sure that my hips are accomodated and that my heels don't rise, i ask for canting and a heel lift (?)

 

[MaineSkiLady]

We've also talked about canting/Q angles and all that kind of stuff - is there something that can be done to the ski that would make it easier for those of us with wider hips to get the skis to edge right without having to learn to force it to work? (?)

Take a look at this website/mfr, might be of interest to you:

https://biostance.com/company.html

 

[greekpeakskier]

the top part of my post above came from alta girls post. i just didn't hit the quote command correctly.