• Women skiers, this is the place for you -- an online community without the male-orientation you'll find in conventional ski magazines and internet ski forums. At TheSkiDiva.com, you can connect with other women to talk about skiing in a way that you can relate to, about things that you find of interest. Be sure to join our community to participate (women only, please!). Registration is fast and simple. Just be sure to add webmaster@theskidiva.com to your address book so your registration activation emails won't be routed as spam. And please give careful consideration to your user name -- it will not be changed once your registration is confirmed.

On women's skis

ski diva

Administrator
Staff member
#1
A VERY interesting article on women's skis by Jackson Hogen, publisher of RealSkiers.com. What do you think?

The State of the Women's Ski Market

Much as I loathe the idea of contributing to the demise of my native tongue, I hereby bow before the Zeitgeist of brevity. For those whose reading habits consist of a diet of small doses, behold the conclusions of my two-part examination of the current women's ski market, delivered in the modern idiom of the bullet-point list:
• The wider the ski, the fewer the distinctions between a men's model a women's model.
• The women's models that are the least like any in the corresponding men's collection tend to be the products of extensive field testing.
• In the U.S., the Women's All-Mountain East category dominates sales. In Europe, Women's Technical skis continue to be important.
• While there are athlete-specific skis made for elite female racers, there is no such thing as a made-for-women race ski.
• The world market for women's skis over 100mm wide at the waist isn't big enough to support the cost of women-specific tooling.
• The best women's skis for hard snow fall in the Technical genre (64mm-74mm waist); most Women's Frontside skis are second and third tier models in the same series and therefore less suited to the strong skier.

Of Width and Women

One of the design objectives of almost any made-for-women ski is to trim away any excess fat so that it's lighter. Because women are, as a rule, lighter than men, the women-specific ski aims to be softer flexing, so it will take less pressure to bow. These twin targets are also on the list of design criteria for any Big Mountain or Powder ski; any ski wide enough to float on top of two feet of powder would weigh a ton if it weren't modified to compensate for all the extra material required to make it that fat. Same deal with flex: if you turn a long, wide ski into a rail, it becomes extremely unforgiving.

In other words, the wider the ski, the less difference there's likely to be between the unisex model and any made-for-women model that mirrors it. Because the design criteria for a men's and women's fat ski converge, the widest women's skis tend to be identical to their parallel men's models.

This may seem like a lazy rationalization, but in most cases it's the only sensible solution as the market for women's skis over 100mm underfoot is petite in size. To make separate tooling for women's models simply doesn't pencil.

Case in point: several years ago, Head took the unusual tack of introducing an entire line of women's skis with zero reference to any men's model. The Joy collection covered the full spectrum of waist widths, including the 98mm Great Joy and the 110mm Big Joy. In my opinion, the widest Joys were also the best and they were inarguably the only skis in their respective genres made from scratch for women.

Fast forward to today, and the Big Joy and Great Joy are no more. Despite heaps of critical hosannas, the Big Joy took more than a year to liquidate its first production run and the Great Joy never caught the sales wave it deserved. No other brand has made so highly specialized a women's fat ski since.


Field Testing Drives Adaptations

While women's and men's skis made for soft snow tend to be similar when not the same, the opposite is true of skis made for hard snow. Setting the gender-neutral Non-FIS Race genre aside, the two hard snow categories are Technical (waist 67mm-74mm) and Frontside (75mm-84mm). Most brands treat these genres as a unified family, with the narrowest Technical model as the flagship and the wider skis as step-down models to match different ability levels and price points. Remember, the Frontside category is where virtually all skiers begin, so it has the most rungs on the pricing ladder.

The Technical and Frontside categories are where ski makers devote the most time, money and ingenuity to making truly womanized models. The most highly specialized women's line is the Head Joy collection, as since its inception it has never derived its construction, shape or tooling from a unisex template. Völkl uses an armada of woman testers to empirically define each of its Flair models' sidecut and binding position. The bindings aren't moved forward relative to a unisex position as both the shape and mounting point are created together.

A similar protocol links the R&D department at Elan - directed by the only female product design chief in the ski world, Melanja Korosec - with an extensive field testing arm, called W Studio, that's been part of the R&D process for sixteen years. Elan's new Wingman series grew out of a design feature - carbon rods embedded in channels in the core - originally created for a women's ski.

The most successful women's ski of all time, Blizzard's Black Pearl 88, accelerated its sales when it adopted a women-specific construction that was field tested by a squad assembled to provide feedback on all women's products. Called Women 2 Women, this international panel is now under the direction of Leslie Baker-Brown, who was instrumental in integrating W2W feedback into the R&D process. The stupendous sales of the Black Pearl and its spin-off models have inspired all major suppliers to focus more resources on their women's collections.

The top selling model at Atomic is also a women's ski, the Cloud 9. As Atomic is world's number one brand, the Cloud 9 is, in all probability, the best selling ski in the world. Like all Cloud models - indeed, all Atomic women's system skis - the Cloud 9 was built from scratch for women and extensively field tested to fine tune and validate the selection of materials, construction, sidecut and skier position. For system skis, ramp angle built into the binding interface is also a testable factor.

At the other end of the sales volume spectrum, Liberty's designer, Dan Chalfant, modifies the sidecut of his women's models in all their shorter lengths, reducing the ski's degree of tail flare to give the lighter skier more control over turn shape. The process of optimizing the performance of shorter skis may include a slight adjustment in binding position, but this is related more to the change in length than change in the skier's gender. All Liberty women's skis swap out poplar for Paulownia in the core, but otherwise borrow a unisex chassis. "You don't need a totally different ski for a women if you start with a good ski to begin with," Chalfant says.

Perhaps the best known women's test team is K2's Alliance, which has been doing the detail work on K2's women's models for over two decades. K2 was one of the first brands to recognize the importance of the women's market and invest in women's models in all categories.

Perennial industry powerhouse Rossignol also deploys a cadre of female testers to dial in its women's models. Their contributions to Rossi's current collection include an extra damping element in the tip of its new Nova series. Salomon, Nordica and Atomic also include field testing as an intrinsic part of their product development feedback loop.


All-Mountain East: Where the Action is

When one looks at the U.S. women's ski market as a whole, it's easy to see why so much sales activity is concentrated in the All-Mountain East (85mm - 94mm) genre. There's no such thing as a women's Non-FIS Race model, so you can scratch them off the list of options. Technical skis, while still a vital category in Europe, are all but invisible here. Frontside skis are mostly intermediate models that advancing women want to advance beyond. All-Mountain West models are wide enough to serve as a second pair of off-trail skis but too wide for most women to serve as an everyday ski. Big Mountain models only sell in big snow years and film stars and heli services use more women's Powder models than are sold to the paying public.

The category I elided over - All-Mountain East - is where the majority of female buyers are funneled. They're wide enough to float a light skier in soft snow, yet just narrow enough to be easy to tilt on edge. A woman's more vulnerable knees won't automatically feel the negative effects of ground reaction force on hard snow, which encourages their technical development.

The story behind a recent addition to the ranks of Women's All-Mountain East models, Völkl's Secret, illustrates the underpinnings of the category's dominance. Völkl recognized that the design of its new M5 Mantra represented a unique opportunity to optimize its women-specific counterpart. Of course Völkl could have simply made the 95mm-waisted M5 in women's sizes, as it does elsewhere in the WAME genre with the Kenja. But extensive testing revealed that a 92mm waist delivered tangibly better versatility for the target skier, so the Secret was made on this narrower chassis.

So why isn't the Kenja narrower than the Kendo, I hear my most insightful readers cry? Because as a ski's silhouette shrinks, so does the need to make it narrower still to suit a female pilot. Völkl's history with the Kenja and Secret 92 suggests that the boundary between "too wide" and "just right" for women lies somewhere near the top end of the All-Mountain East genre.

At the end of the day, building skis is a business and no brand has the financial incentive to create specialized constructions and tooling for every women's model they make. Economic efficiency is an unavoidable requirement that enforces some constraints on design. Simply put, to create every women's ski from scratch entails costs that are too high to serve a demand that is too low.

Now that you have a big-picture view of the women's ski market, you're better equipped to embark on next week's deep dive into the details. We'll look at the specs of 91 women's models to see what they reveal about the present and future of the women's market.
 

contesstant

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
#2
I strongly agree with the thought that the ideal width for women is 92mm and under (or approximately.)
 
#3
I can’t disagree either having fallen in love with the Sheeva 9 that’s 92 mm. Of course I like some fatter skis and skinnier based on conditions, but ~92 seems to be a really versatile size.
 

tinymoose

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
#6
According to this, I apparently only own Technical (Head Jr SLs) and Frontside (Yumis) skis based on the widths given above. lol
 

marzNC

Angel Diva
#7
Interesting to learn why the Head Great Joy and Big Joy quietly disappeared. The Wild Joy was 90mm, and became the widest Joy model. Even that has disappeared for 2020. That leaves the Total Joy @85mm as the widest model.

Instead for powder-oriented skiing there are the Kore W 93 and Kore W 99. I wonder what the differences are between the women's models and the Kore 99 and Kore 93, besides the lengths available. The Kore 93, 99, and 105 show up when using the Unisex filter on the Head website.
 

contesstant

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
#8
Interesting to learn why the Head Great Joy and Big Joy quietly disappeared. The Wild Joy was 90mm, and became the widest Joy model. Even that has disappeared for 2020. That leaves the Total Joy @85mm as the widest model.

Instead for powder-oriented skiing there are the Kore W 93 and Kore W 99. I wonder what the differences are between the women's models and the Kore 99 and Kore 93, besides the lengths available. The Kore 93, 99, and 105 show up when using the Unisex filter on the Head website.
My understanding is the 93 and the 105 are much more similar in feel and construction than the 99. I loved the 93 during ski testing last winter. I also loved the Total Joy--it has a smoother feel to it than previous versions. I'd like to get on the 105 to see if it could be my new powder-centric ski. What I really like about the Head skis in the Kore series is they taper the widths to match the lengths; the 93 I skied was actually 89 under foot. I believe in the 105 my length would be closer to 100 under foot which is an ideal powder and leftover powder width for me at my size. The fact that Head does narrow the widths to match the lengths lends more "evidence" that the article above has some merits, especially for women who fall into the "average" category for height and weight.
 

marzNC

Angel Diva
#9
The fact that Head does narrow the widths to match the lengths lends more "evidence" that the article above has some merits, especially for women who fall into the "average" category for height and weight.
Interesting.

All I know is that the Kore W 99 prototype that I demo'd at Sunapee (NH) last March was lots of fun on the groomers, which was the only terrain easily available. I took out the 162cm, which is about the length I usually get for skis around 100 underfoot. The demo binding was right on top of where the stats are printed so I assumed it was 99mm. Head didn't have any shorter Kore skis at the Alta Demo Day in April.
 

contesstant

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
#10
According to Head's website, the 99 at 162 is actually 95 underfoot. The 153 is 93 under foot.
The Kore 105 is 103 under foot in the 171 length. The 162 length dimensions are not shown, but I would assume it is 101 under foot based on the 2mm increments for the other lengths.
I love that they do this.
 
#11
Interesting to learn why the Head Great Joy and Big Joy quietly disappeared. The Wild Joy was 90mm, and became the widest Joy model. Even that has disappeared for 2020.
It is interesting as have demoed both the Great Joy (98) and the Wild Joy (90). Think the Big Joy was the widest model though. The Wild Joy is now on sale at STP with coupon for $299 and I am very tempted as I was when the Great Joy was on sale. That was the clue that they were probably discontinuing those models for 2020. Demoed the Great Joy in Portes du Soleil in 2017 and absolutely loved it in the cut up snow. I could not believe how it skied!
I demoed the Wild Joy in Tahoe in 2018 for a couple days and thought it was great fun. At 153 has a short TR and is 89 mm underfoot. Recently read reviews of the Wild Joy (just to see what the "experts" say) and the feeling is that is is a ski for hard chargers (not exactly me) and one must stay on top of the ski to get the most advantage. I loved it. Hmm could be a good Taos ski? There are two left in a 153 on STP.
Am curious about the Head Kore 93 W though. Think similar ski to Wild Joy - maybe even saw something on pugski comparing the two... @SnowHot would know. She probably did the review!
 

contesstant

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
#12
It is interesting as have demoed both the Great Joy (98) and the Wild Joy (90). Think the Big Joy was the widest model though. The Wild Joy is now on sale at STP with coupon for $299 and I am very tempted as I was when the Great Joy was on sale. That was the clue that they were probably discontinuing those models for 2020. Demoed the Great Joy in Portes du Soleil in 2017 and absolutely loved it in the cut up snow. I could not believe how it skied!
I demoed the Wild Joy in Tahoe in 2018 for a couple days and thought it was great fun. At 153 has a short TR and is 89 mm underfoot. Recently read reviews of the Wild Joy (just to see what the "experts" say) and the feeling is that is is a ski for hard chargers (not exactly me) and one must stay on top of the ski to get the most advantage. I loved it. Hmm could be a good Taos ski? There are two left in a 153 on STP.
Am curious about the Head Kore 93 W though. Think similar ski to Wild Joy - maybe even saw something on pugski comparing the two... @SnowHot would know. She probably did the review!
The Joy series vs. the Kore series are very different skis. The Kore shape lends to it being easier to skid and smear, whereas the sidecut and shape of the Joy series makes them more directional and wanting to lock into a turn. I loved the Kore 93 when I skied it last winter. I could have easily stayed on it all day. I also liked the new version of the Total Joy, but not quite as much as the Kore. But I do like to skid and smear much more than a more technically proficient skier.
 
#13
The Joy series vs. the Kore series are very different skis. The Kore shape lends to it being easier to skid and smear, whereas the sidecut and shape of the Joy series makes them more directional and wanting to lock into a turn. I loved the Kore 93 when I skied it last winter. I could have easily stayed on it all day. I also liked the new version of the Total Joy, but not quite as much as the Kore. But I do like to skid and smear much more than a more technically proficient skier.
Did you try the Wild Joy or the Great Joy for comparison to the Kore 93 or 99? My understanding is the "number" on the Kore series is not exactly true to the width of the ski. Which is weird.
 

contesstant

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
#14
Did you try the Wild Joy or the Great Joy for comparison to the Kore 93 or 99? My understanding is the "number" on the Kore series is not exactly true to the width of the ski. Which is weird.
I tried one of them, can't remember which one. Yes, the widths taper down on the Kore series in relation to their length. I like that about them!
 
#15
I tried one of them, can't remember which one. Yes, the widths taper down on the Kore series in relation to their length. I like that about them!
Just read an entire thread on pugski that states the women's kore 93 doesn't make a 93 mm ski . They are 91 and then taper narrower. Now that is strange but nevertheless sounds like a great ski. But at $299 still considering the wild joy..
 
#16
I see the price as $399, @santacruz skier . Do you have a coupon applied? 'Tis a great deal. I'm not encroaching, promise, I'm looking at the longer length!

Interesting how all the dimensions vary by length on these skis too:
  • 153:
  • Tip width: 137mm
  • Waist width: 89mm
  • Tail width: 117mm
  • Turn radius: 11.8m
  • 158:
  • Tip width: 137mm
  • Waist width: 90mm
  • Tail width: 117mm
  • Turn radius: 12.7m
  • 163:
  • Tip width: 138mm
  • Waist width: 90mm
  • Tail width: 118mm
  • Turn radius: 13.6m
 
#17
I see the price as $399, @santacruz skier . Do you have a coupon applied? 'Tis a great deal. I'm not encroaching, promise, I'm looking at the longer length!

Interesting that the waist varies by length on these skis too:
  • 153:
  • Tip width: 137mm
  • Waist width: 89mm
  • Tail width: 117mm
  • Turn radius: 11.8m
  • 158:
  • Tip width: 137mm
  • Waist width: 90mm
  • Tail width: 117mm
  • Turn radius: 12.7m
  • 163:
  • Tip width: 138mm
  • Waist width: 90mm
  • Tail width: 118mm
  • Turn radius: 13.6m
Yes it automatically applied.. somehow can't see what it is on my iPhone. I'll look later if you want it. No worries there are 2 left!!
 
#19
Interesting that the waist varies by length on these skis too:
  • 153:
  • Tip width: 137mm
  • Waist width: 89mm
  • Tail width: 117mm
  • Turn radius: 11.8m
  • 158:
  • Tip width: 137mm
  • Waist width: 90mm
  • Tail width: 117mm
  • Turn radius: 12.7m
  • 163:
  • Tip width: 138mm
  • Waist width: 90mm
  • Tail width: 118mm
  • Turn radius: 13.6m
What really makes a difference is the fact that the Turn Radius is quite different between the different lengths, regardless of whether or not the widths are 1-2mm different.

When I first started demo'ing skis, I didn't pay much attention to Turn Radius. I just took out the shortest skis available. Sometimes that meant the skis were 5-10cm longer than optimal for a petite skier. Now when I demo, if the TR isn't marked on the skis I check out, I'll look it up later on.
 

contesstant

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
#20
Just read an entire thread on pugski that states the women's kore 93 doesn't make a 93 mm ski . They are 91 and then taper narrower. Now that is strange but nevertheless sounds like a great ski. But at $299 still considering the wild joy..
I was looking at Moment skis, too. The Sierra to be exact and they also have a narrower waist at the shorter lengths. I think where Head makes the mistake is to put the actual width in the name of the ski (as Phil alluded to on Pugski.) I don't put a TON of emphasis on width within a few mm if I'm looking for a ski for specific conditions. For instance, the Santa Ana 100 is, well, 100, and Sheeva 10 is, well, 102. Both targeted for the same conditions but they ski very differently (IMO.) That 2mm has no bearing whatsoever on which ski I'd choose. The length and traits of the ski are much more important to me. The Sheeva 10 at 172cm long to ME is a much easier ski to manage than the SA 100 in 169cm.

Anyway, since you loved the Joy and it's a deal, it seems a no-brainer to me! :clap:
 

Staff online

Members Online