ski recs for an intermediate+ East Coast skier?

[Winooskiwinter]

Howdy! I'm a Vermont skier looking to level up my skis as I continue to develop as a skier.

I learned to ski just two years ago and immediately fell in love. I spent hours watching ski instruction videos and got out as much as I possibly could (I probably have ~30 ski days under my belt). I’m currently feeling comfortable on ungroomed blues and ended this season working on woods skiing and easier blacks. But honestly, I like nothing more than ripping down the mountain as fast as I possibly can.

I’ve been skiing on Rosignol React R2s. I’ve liked them, but I think I’m ready for a more intermediate/advanced ski. We have a lot of icy, cruddy days here in Vermont, but I’d also like a ski that does slightly better in powder for those rare but glorious Vermont powder days.

I tried the Volkl secrets at the end of this season, but they feel like too much ski for me at this point in my development.

I would love to hear any and all recommendations you might have for skis that fall in the upper-intermediate range and that would be good for East Coast skiing!

Also: I’m 5’ 9”, 150 lbs and my skis are 162, which I’ve heard is probably a little bit short for me.

 

[Jilly]

I know the first thing that is going to come up is the Black Pearl, but....

From your wish list, I would be looking for something in the 80-85mm range and slightly stiff. The stiffness will help on the ice. This would be an all mountain ski. I personally don't like that type of ski for our conditions. Others love it. I like to make pure carved arcs on those groomers at warp speed. So something with a large shovel and narrower waist would be similar to the React's. The Rossi Nova 10 would be a step up from the React in a similar ski.

 

[ilovepugs]

Welcome! We have a lot of Vermont skiers on this forum. I work in Winooski (but live close to Mad River Glen).

Consider the Icelantic Riveter (85mm underfoot), Volkl Yumi 84, or the Nordica Santa Ana 84. These are all on sale at the Alpine Shop. I think they are all slightly different in terms of stiffness and playfulness. The guy at Alpine Shop (Jamie) is pretty good and will talk to you about them.

You might get steered towards fatter skis by other folks, but from my standpoint it’s better to buy skis that will bring 95% joy 95% of the time than 100% joy 5% of the time when we have powder.

Happy hunting!

 

[newboots]

Former Vermont skier relocated to the Catskills. Wishing I were there . . .

Glad to have you!

 

[ski diva]

Welcome from me, too! I’m another Vermont skier, and the two skis I love for skiing around here are the Nordica Santa Ana 93’s and the Renoun Earharts. (No, I don’t find the 93’s too wide, though they do come in an 88, too.) Both of these are great all around skis, and work in any conditions.

 

[liquidfeet]

A few generalizations that might be worth thinking about when choosing a new ski:

1. On hard snow groomers, a ski with a waist under 80 will be able to hold better than a wider waisted ski if the skier knows how to edge a ski and weight it properly to get it to grip. This is because the skier can tip it faster up onto an edge. There's more control in that ability, because the skier can get it edged and gripping for more time during each turn. The ski will "want to" spend less time flat and skidding. This goes for all skiers, whether highly skilled or not. If a skier is working on building edging skills, a ski with a waist below 80 will be much easier to learn on. The wider the ski's waist, the more difficult it is to edge a ski --because it requires the skier's body to bend more radically. On hard snow, an edged wide-waisted ski also puts extra torque on the knee over time. The narrower the waist, the less the torque on that knee, on hard snow groomers.
2. On hard snow groomers, a ski with a waist over 80 will "want to" ski flat (or flatt-ish) for more time during each turn. Or it will "want to" stay flatter than a narrower ski. The skis with waists over 90 will "want to" stay even flatter for even longer during each turn. So the skidding will be more prevalent the wider the ski, and the gripping less prevalent. Exception: highly skilled skiers who can get a wide ski up on edge and laterally weight it properly so it grips.
3. On soft, ungroomed, penetrable snow at least 4" deep, the advantages of an under-80 waisted ski start to vanish. This loss of advantage increases as the snow gets deeper. If the snow is 8" or more deep, the flotation offered by skis over with waists over 80 helps.
4. On hard snow bumps, consider this: professional bump skiers use bump-specific skis with very narrow waists. However, most skiers don't have their skill-set. Trial-and-error will reveal to a skier who likes skiing bumps whether a narrower or wider ski will work best on hard snow bumps (what we most frequently find here in New England). Here in New England we get soft snow bumps infrequently, so that needs to be taken into account.

So the snow conditions that a skier will most frequently ski on, along with the skier's skill level and interest in building skills, matter when choosing a ski.

 

[scandium]

I know you are in the market for "a" new pair of skis, but given your love for speed as well as wanting a ski that might be better in powder, maybe consider getting a narrower groomer ski separate to an all-mountain leaning towards powder ski. In the latter category, I would put the Santa Anas (I personally quite like the SA93 and it can hold a decent edge when it's a solid day) on your demo list. The Volkl Kenja is great to rip down groomers if you're looking in the high 80s range, but not quite as floaty or easy to get around in ungroomed snow.