Myth Busting by Mr Skigirl

[skigirl]

I keep reading in different places where women comment that they can not ski a Woman's specific ski because they are to heavy for them. I have a review that Busts that Myth.

Mr Skigirl decided to try out my 152cm Fischer Vision 70 over the weekend. I have 2 pairs now a 152cm and a 146cm.

Mr Skigirl's stats: He is 5'8" and 210lbs. He has been a ski instructor for 26 years too. He is an excellent skier. He skis on the Fischer RC4 World Cup Slalom ski in a 160cm with a 10 meter radius. He loves this ski. He has demoed a lot of skis over the years and always skis a race ski because anythng less is not enough ski for him. Mr Skigirl is very honest when it comes to what he likes and does not like in a ski. When he does not like a ski I know it! :yell:

Mr Skigirl had a blast on the Vision 70. He pushed the ski very hard and it gave him everything he asked. He skied it very fast and it never hit a speed limit. He also never lost an edge on anything. He was amazed at how well it held an edge. He rides rails and this ski railed perfectly for him. You should have seen the trenches he left. He really had a lot of fun and wants all of you ladies to know that even at his size he never felt like he did not have enough ski under him.

He said it held a great edge and was very quick and very stable in any size turn at any speed. He said it has great rebound too. I saw that right in front of me, the ski popped him right off the ground

Trust me when I say that he really pushed this ski. He skied it for 3 hours and never wanted to go in and get his skis. The length was not short for him either.

If you need to see what kind of skier Mr Skigirl is just go to my website. There is a link under DOD, other stuff, Ski Pictures at Keystone.

My only point here is to say that you really need to try a ski before you discount it based on a label. All to often I read a comment that says, I can't ski that ski because it is a Woman's ski or it's labeled as an intermediate ski etc... try it before you trash it. Hey you never know you may just find something you love.

 

[SueNJ]

Way to go, Mr. Skigirl! And thank you for the ringing endorsement of women's skis for us heavier ladies!

I'm sure there are skis (both unisex and women-specific) that I'd overpower because of my weight (~170 lbs), but I do just fine on the skis I have. Since I'm 5'3", I tend to go for shorter skis, and all of mine are women-specific.

My SO recently was tempted to bid on a pair of brand new Fischer Vision 76 skis (164 cm) on eBay for himself--they had a buy-it-now of only $150, and before he could give it much thought, someone grabbed them. Even though he's an incredibly good skier, he prefers a slightly softer ski at times, one that he doesn't have to wrestle with and can just have fun on.

A few years back, we were up at Stowe for a few days, me for a women's clinic, and SO, along for the ride and to get some skiing in. He took my Volant Vertex 71 skis out for one day and had a blast on them, even though they were only 155 cm and women-specific.

 

[persee]

Indeed. It's true the opposite way as well. I skiied on K2 LottaLuvs the end of my second season - definitely an intermediate skier. These skis were rated as "expert" skis and I felt great on them despite the fact that I'm clearly not an expert even now! My Volkl Attiva AC3s are listed as Advanced/Expert skis and I'm what I'd now consider myself an advanced intermediate skier (so mid/high level 7) and I found these skis just great. They're listed as the top performance womens ski that Volkl makes yet they were not too much ski for me!

 

[perma-grin]

Wow, funny you should bring up this topic. I run into the"it's not enough ski for me" comment from female instructors that I have worked with over the last few seasons. And I have to admit sometimes it's really hard not to laugh out loud! It is such an out dated way of thinking, not to mention it's just a tad bit on the macho side. I think womens specific equipment is still being sterotyped to some degree as not enough for the "bigger or stronger female skiers". It was remarked to me just a few weeks ago (by a guy friend that I teach with)that I was skiing on a ski that wouldn't be "enough" ski for me if I "really pushed it". Well I really don't know how much more I could push this thing (firefox 162) I still ski very fast and hard in all conditions, but what I am pushing is turning fifty, menopause, loss of muscle and bone mass. Maybe in my 20's I would have been over skiing these skis, but I strongly doubt it! I find the more muscle that I loose,( and fat weight that I gain) the more I appeciate a ski that is built for me not a twenty something male racer with 8% body fat!! ( Although the dirty old lady in me wouldn't mind following him down the hill!!Lol)

 

[MaineSkiLady]

Loved this review! Hooray! I am not alone. DH and I switch skis all the time, just for fun and evaluation, due to the happy coincidence of his having small feet and my having gargantuan feet - so our boot sole lengths are the same. We just have to be mindful of the different DIN settings and not go too crazy unless we reset them. But, yeah, a guy CAN have a blast on a supposedly women's specific model. Mine did! And I've throughly enjoyed his skis as well. Just adds to the quiver !!

 

[skigrl27]

Hmmm. Being a very recent purchaser of men's skis...I feel I must chime in here.

I cannot say anything for any other skis but what I have experience with. I demoed last year's Mantra, the Bridge and this year's Mantra. I loved the stiffness of this season's Mantra, as well as it's 133-96-116 shape, with an 18.2 sidecut radius. (The Aura's sidecut radius at my ski size was 21.1)

Unable to demo the Aura (the female version of the Mantra) I couldn't bring myself to buy the girl-version. Why go 20% less stiff, when you love the other ski anyway? So when people ask (and many have already) I tell them that I like the stiff, burly feel of the Mantra...so I bought them.

That being said - the K2 Nancy does nothing to debunk any girl-ski myths. It's supposedly the women's version of the K2 Seth Pistols. The Seth's are the top of the line burly men's powder park ski and have been a few seasons running. Now, if the boys were out there skiing on anything like the Nancys...there'd be a lot of pissed off Seth riders out there!! The Nancy is a noodly, flexy & super soft nightmare of a women's ski. Perhaps K2 messed up here?? I think so. False advertising and/or poor marketing. Don't make chick skis with kick ass graphics & GUNS on them and have them ski like wet noodles in the snow!! Now...I also ski the K2 Burnin' Luvs & these skis don't girl-down for anyone. I love them for groomers. They're stiff, quick & lots of fun.

Did Volkl mess up too with the Aura?? I don't know, but I wasn't going to take any chances. I ski men's skis - but would never tell people that I do so because chick skis "can't handle me" or any of that nonsense. I simply say: "I demoed them. They rip. I bought them."

 

[MaineSkiLady]

^^^Same here. Don't much care who they were intended for. They worked great for me, I bought 'em, I love 'em. And I so totally look, at first glance, like, NO WAY - I'm not that tall, I'm borderline skinny, and I'm OLD.

 

[lynseyf]

I am someone who has always preferred unisex skis although I haven't had a chance to ski many of the WS skis raved about on here and will definitely try these Fischers if I get a chance
I posted on the "what would you tell ski manufacturers" thread that I thought all skis should be unisex and to me your post just backs that up. these are obviously good skis so what is it exactly that makes them WS? Also as your husband enoyed them so much maybe more men or teenage boys would but they might never try them as they are WS.

The last ski test I went to one of my male friends who is a good skier loved the K2 Miss Demeanors, I thought they were quite fun by my favourite ski by far was the Nordica Dobermann Spitfire why should we be stereotyped into buying male or female skis. as a side note the Firefox which is so popular on here isn't available in Europe and when i looked at the Nordica website it has the exact same dimensions as the Dobermann Spitfire which I loved I was intrigued to know if the firefox is the WS version of the spitfire or if they are actually the same ski but rebranded for different markets, anyone have any inside Nordica info ???

 

[skigrl27]

I disagree about making all skis Unisex. Look around...look at our bodies, look at their bodies. We have boobs, we have hips - we carry a completely different center of gravity. Sometimes (and this is where I think WS skis screw up) we are lighter weight as well. But if you really look around, I think the weight issue is debatable.

That's the big intention of women's skis: 1) different center of gravity 2) made lighter to respond better to a "woman's frame"

I think #2 needs to be adjusted a bit. OR offer a wider range of flex in WS skis. I think time will tell, but let's hope there are some people in the ski manufacturing industry that reads these forums!!

 

[Gloria]

I've always been one to go for the unisex ski, but did go for my first pair of womens skis. I really only notice the difference in two places.
At high speed on hard surfaces, the tips and tails of the womens skis don't want to keep a clean arc, they want to bounce up and down, the only negative I've noticed. Where I am liking them over the unisex version is in the bumps. I find it is easier to use downward pressure on the ski to maintain speed in the bumps as opposed to skidding the tails. Which feels awsome and uses so much less energy as you can actually use the back peddle technique if you are keeping your skis falline as opposed to turning them across the mountain. Feels so much better on the knees too. So I don't know six of one half a dozen of the other. They both have their merits.