Too much vs. Not Enough Ski?

[volklgirl]

After years of teaching and just general observing, I have a theory.

A vast majority of women stuck at the intermediate level who say 'I don't like to go fast' or 'I only like to ski blues and easy blacks' actually have the skills to both ski faster and try steeper terrain. However, their usually too-short and too-soft women's intermediate skis hardly inspire confidence at either, so they're stuck there because of their equipment, not because of their abilities.

As several Divas have discovered this year, a ski that's supposedly 'too much' may actually be just right. Only by trying them out can you know for sure.

 

[abc]

As discussed in the "Great length debate" thread, the "right" ski has to do with HOW you ski. The skill level is only but one indicator. Some intermediates carve delicately across the slope, others slash their way down the fallline!

I would count myself as at least advance intermediate, if not advanced. But I'm into the more delicate carving and snaking around moguls. So I prefer softer skis. Where do I find them? On the "intermediate" rack! Are these skis "below my ability". I don't think so. I tried several of their "advance" sisters. I can bend them when I'm going full out. But otherwise, they all felt like unyielding 2x4s! :(

So, look past the intermediate vs. advance lable. Try them on and see what you really like.

But back to the original question of should you buy ski that you think you want to be. Never. You risk never get there because of the too much ski. Just remember it's not the lable, but how it actually ski that defines if a ski is too much, or just right.

 

[abc]

We had some long discussionson snowHeads last year about availability of decent skis that women can ski. In France in particular there is a tendency only to stock the beginners' and low intermediate women's skis and then you can't get decent unisex skis in short enough lengths. How many women are going to be able to ski a Head Supershape in a 170 FFS?

You're talking about regular rental shops, I presume. Just remember in the US, you pay extra to "demo" those high end skis. For those who just want to have a pair of planks to strap to their feet, they only get the mid-level stuff anyway.

I was in Switzerland last week and changed back and forth 3 pairs of skis. They gave me a Salomon Tornado, a pretty nice "all-mountain" ski; a Volkl Laser SC, an almost "racy" ski. Only when I ask for a softer ski that I got a Rush 9, which he warned maybe too soft. It was. If I "demo" them for all 5 days in the US, it would have cost me upward of $150. But there, I just pay the regular rental of a little over $100.

Sure, the two high end ones are unisex skis. But I'm fortunate enough to be just tall enough and heavy enough to fit the shortest of the unisex skis. I have to say I don't find enough difference between the unisex skis from the women-specifics. So I wouldn't hesitate to test and to own unisex skis. There ARE soft unisex skis if you can get pass the stigma of them being "intermediate" skis.

 

[SnowGlider]

Too much is as bad as too little ski

Someone recently asked me this, so I thought I'd put it out here for general discussion: Should you buy a ski for how you ski at the moment, or how you aspire to ski by the end of the season? And how do you know if a ski is too much (that is, beyond your capability) or not enough of a ski for you?

I stayed too long with a floppy intermediate ski. When I bought a stiffer ski (HEAD Lightning), my skiing went up a full level immediately. I had to learn to ski on edge for the first time, and to put more oomph into my turns.

But paradoxically, my skiing then plateaued for 2 years. I suspect that that's because the new ski was actually TOO stiff, and also too heavy. Because I wasn't able to turn it well enough, I got into the habit of SKIDDING as my primary style. The skis weren't nimble enough on steep terrain---I couldn't bring the tails around fast enough and found myself falling often.

I've only skied with my new Fischer Vision 70s a couple of times so I'm not sure yet what the longterm difference will be.

So my points, in answer to the original question, are:

1) Intermediates sometimes stay too long with a too-soft ski because they don't understand how that is limiting their progress. A ski that you can't ski on edge is not enough ski.

2) A ski that's too stiff can also impose limits. A ski that you can't turn is too much.

THE ULTIMATE ANSWER:

*** Fortunately many skis overlap levels, especially high intermediate to low advanced. That should resolve this whole dilemma for many people.

 

[eng_ch]

You're talking about regular rental shops, I presume. Just remember in the US, you pay extra to "demo" those high end skis. For those who just want to have a pair of planks to strap to their feet, they only get the mid-level stuff anyway.

Nope, they simply didn't have them - no amount of money can get skis they don't have

I was in Switzerland last week and changed back and forth 3 pairs of skis. They gave me a Salomon Tornado, a pretty nice "all-mountain" ski; a Volkl Laser SC, an almost "racy" ski. Only when I ask for a softer ski that I got a Rush 9, which he warned maybe too soft. It was. If I "demo" them for all 5 days in the US, it would have cost me upward of $150. But there, I just pay the regular rental of a little over $100.

Switzerland is often better. Laser SC - isn't that Stöckli?

 

[abc]

Nope, they simply didn't have them - no amount of money can get skis they don't have

I hear ya. But in the US, most rental shops only have one kind of skis, the lower intermediate skis, for both men and women. You have to go to the "demo" shops.

Europe don't seem to have the same setup. I found the rental option a little better but no idea how to access the high end stuff.

Switzerland is often better. Laser SC - isn't that Stöckli?

Yes, you're right.

 

[eng_ch]

But in the US, most rental shops only have one kind of skis, the lower intermediate skis, for both men and women. You have to go to the "demo" shops.

Oh, OK.

Europe don't seem to have the same setup. I found the rental option a little better but no idea how to access the high end stuff.

Sadly, usually purchase only. Strangely, many Swiss and French, having skied since before they could walk, don't seem to care what they ski on so many of the chain stores only have lower end stuff. You usually need to go to an independent, often away from the slopes to find what you're looking for.

 

[abc]

Argh, that's probably a mentality thing. Seems the continent aren't as "gear driven" as us Americans!

I'm an avid cyclist, and I follow the big bike races (when I'm not too busy riding myself). It's insteresting to see even the Euro pro's aren't really that into their equipment as their American counterparts. Lemond was the one, and Lance the other who really push the equipment front. They're Americans who can ride as well as the Euro pros. And personally, I think their attention to equipment probably made part of the difference of their success.

Back to skis. I haven't ski extensively in Europe. So my experience are of course limited. In Jungfrau, the big shop is InterSport, which has multiple locations spread out over the resort (Jungfrau is a rather sprawling resort that's hard to get around). They do have some nice stuff. The two I rented aren't exactly low-end, especially the Stokli. And my roommate had gone back for a different boot when her first pair rub her legs the wrong way.

I remember when I went to Austria (a good 10 years ago), the rental shop was quite small and quite friendly. I was given two or three different boots (not just different sizes) to try on to see which one fits better. Had it been an on mountain rental shop in the US, it would have been just one kind of boot. And if it hurts, your only options would be to go to a bigger size!

 

[SnownyNorth]

Thank-you for this thread- my new skis seem too advanced for me, but that is because I was doing so horribly on the short length. I would really like to have the chance at them in a more suitable length, but unfortunately they were the shop's last pair.
I am really appreciative of this information- I'll need to be informed when I exchange them.

 

[liquidfeet]

A vast majority of women stuck at the intermediate level who say 'I don't like to go fast' or 'I only like to ski blues and easy blacks' actually have the skills to both ski faster and try steeper terrain. However, their usually too-short and too-soft women's intermediate skis hardly inspire confidence at either, so they're stuck there because of their equipment, not because of their abilities.

This fits me totally. Two years ago I was on slalom skis that chattered wildly when I was trying to keep up with "the boyz," who were blasting their way down hard snow slopes in the east. I did it, but kept wondering if it was my technique that caused the chattering, or their skis were chattering too but they just didn't care. I really was skiing with barely a grip at very high speeds, and just assumed I didn't know how to handle it properly. I suspect anyone else experiencing the same would have chosen not to follow these guys. I was on Volkl "Pink Stars" at 154 in length. The turn radius was 12.5 meters.

Then I bought some used Atomics, R-11s, with titanium inside, 160 in length, and a turn radius of 16 meters. "The boyz" said I'd never be able to bend those skis and advised me not to buy them. Did it anyway. Well. Once on these skis, I could keep up with the guys and there was no chatter any more. I felt like I was in total control.

This change certainly wasn't due to any sudden increase in my skills. The skis, with a turn radius of 16, were made to make large turns while blasting down at mach speed. The Volkls at 12.5 were made to keep doing fast little turns, which is the slow way down. When I did those big turns, those slalom skis just couldn't handle the hard snow underfoot. I've come to the conclusion that turn radius is a very important but mostly hidden factor in a ski's performance, and wish shop salespersons would explain it as they talk with buyers.

Also, the titanium (instead of foam) provided more "dampness" when the snow was really hard, so there's another reason the skis didn't chatter. And the length too probably contributed to their performance. So a change in skis certainly can make a very big difference.

By the way, I was on these Atomics last week in 6" of real snow on top of groomed hard stuff. I was doing very short fast turns, zippering my way down the trails, and they were carving! I was bending those shovels a lot, and could feel it. I could not do that last year. So my conclusion -- new skis and lead to new skills, too!

 

[perma-grin]

Hi liquidfeet. I feel rude saying this (and I don't mean to be, so please don't take this that way) but that 4 star isn't ,and never was a Slalom ski. :( It's a soft all mountain ski with a shorter turn radius. Very different construction and side cut from a "Slalom ski". I can't say that I have much experience with chattery Slalom skis. When I do experience tail chatter it is usually my bad. (late at the gate, pushing against the snow instead of into the snow, usually proceeded by an ugly rotary pushoff! ) Slalom skis were designed to go from edge to edge very quickly. They also tend to be very stiff in the tail and quite firm in the forebody. They are designed for steep ,icy courses, With a big fat shovel and a very skinny waist. My P60 WC 's didn't chatter and neither do my Dobbie's . I wouldn't have wanted to ski them any bigger than a 155cm, in a 160cm I could more than likely rail them on edge but I wouldn't be bending them. And that would seriously limit my ability to change my turn shape to accomodate terrain changes. There is a big difference in bending a ski and just riding it. On the other hand I can seriously man-handle a longer Attiva 4 star! Chatter is a sign a weak torsional ridgidity, ( which Volklgirl covered really well in another thread.) or in some cases user error, feet in front of your hips. Not to say that some skis don't just plain old suck at speed! :p I have to admit that I really disliked, and was very disapointed with that Attiva 4 star! I felt it was mushy and Lifeless. I thought that Volkl rushed them to market and they where a trumped up "here honey ski". ( Here Honey it's pink! You'll love it!!) A skis construction has a lot to do with how it will handle speed, just because a ski was design with a short radius turn shape does not make it a "slalom ski". Manufactures love to use buzz word's the term's Slalom and GS tend to be tossed around be sales people and ski company's ways to freely. That is why so many of the cheesy recriational ski have the words "RACE"or "EQUIPE on them they are "Buzz Words". They are ment to get your attention. Most of those skis would never survive a race course. Please don't attributite the 4 stars lack of performance to being a slalom ski, because the problem was in the construction of that skis not the turn radius.:Cry:

 

[liquidfeet]

Well, OK, I used "slalom" to mean short turn radius. I didn't mean a real official slalom race ski, or even a "citizen" race ski, which has other specific characteristics built in to handle the gate thing. I just meant short turn radius. Granted, the Pink Stars were meant to be "all mountain skis", for people who wanted to make short turns all over the mountain. And with a very narrow waist, they are very quick to transition from one edge to another. But I wouldn't want to ski them on the back side, probably, even if the mfr calls them an all-mountain ski.

I'm listening, and interested. Here's what I think you just said:

They chattered for one of two reasons, either because of user error (back-seat-driving), or construction problems with torsional flex. They did NOT chatter because they were built to make short turns (12.5 meters), while I was making making VERY (for me) large turns (for speed - maybe 18-21 meter turns????).

I've heard that you can force a ski to make shorter turns than it is built to make by bending it, but you can't force it to make larger turns with good form. It just loses its grip. So you are saying that this is not true in this case? Honestly, I don't really know, and am just repeating stuff I've read. You sound like you know from experience what you're talking about, so I am interested in your answer.

 

[volklgirl]

LF - I haven't skied the Gamma 4 Star, but my guess is that you are correct in assigning the chatter to 1) exceeding their comfortable turn shape, and 2) exceeding their speed limit (ski length may be an issue as well - see my thread on the 6*). Basically you're a strong race-style skier trying to crank on a softer non-race ski. It should serve you well on lazy relaxed days, but will break loose and chatter when pushed beyond its comfort zone. Its an adequate ski for front-side skiing for all but the strongest skiers.

A true slalom ski can make those larger turns despite their tiny turn radius because of their heavy-weight construction, and torsional and longitudinal rigidity.....however, even they will chatter on larger turns at the highest speeds.

 

[pinto]

I'll agree about the pink stars ... I bought them to ski with my kids ... who were about 5 and 8 at the time. I found them to be perfect for skiing with the kids, because I could make nice short turns at low and medium speeds. They are very fun skis, but not very high performance. I made them flap more than once.