-
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 [email protected] 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.
When did wide become a trend?
- Thread starter TiffAlt
- Start date
MissySki
Angel Diva
This is 100% accurate!I have heard that you ski beautifully! Just saying
@tinymoose , I am going to hurt you the next time I see you if you keep selling yourself short!
mustski
Angel Diva
I think you both misunderstood me. I meant that narrow skis are much easier to carve with. As a result, most skis rated as advanced/expert - aside from race skis- tend to be fatter. There are differences between manufacturers for sure. You will rarely see a wider ski rated as beginner.
No I have not misunderstood you. Rossi Nova 14's are narrow, not a race ski, but are a serious advanced carving ski. Head, Supershapes, Salomon S/Force, Atomic Cloud 12, Atomic Redster 9S, Fisher RC4, Blizzard Phoenix R13, Elan Speed Magic. All of these. Add in my Hero's St Ti. Not race ski, but throughbreds.
As for wider than 80...Santa Anna 84, Elan Wingman 86 Ti, Atomic Maven 86C, everyone's favourite Yumi and Blaze 86. These are rated as beginner. You will not find a >100mm ski as a beginner ski. A beginner has no business on that wide of a ski.
Beginners actually need about 75mm underfoot. It gives them stability. They are still working on processing sliding on 2 sticks.
info from SkiTalk's ski guide.
MissySki
Angel Diva
But not everyone agrees with this assessment, and I think it's confusing for beginners on the site to have things stated as if they are fact. They are not, they are opinion. And some other very reputable sources have totally divergent opinions to this as well.
Blister Review _Best Skis for Beginners 22-23
mustski
Angel Diva
From Rossi website re Nova 14:
“ The race-inspired build of the women's Nova 14 Ti is tuned to deliver advanced skiers an even flex, smooth turn initiation and a powerful edge for effortless resort carving at any speed”
from the Head website: “The Supershape e-Original is a true on-piste super charger for the experienced slalom and carving enthusiast”
from Solomon: “with race inspired shapes and construction, our collection of S-Force skis …”
from the Atomic website: “The Cloud C12 Revoshock C has been one of the most popular piste skis in the best-selling Cloud range and contains the same Atomic technology as Redster racing skis.”
From Fischer: “The new Race Cut 4 is simply the best for the best, and has defined Fischer’s reputation throughout the racing world. The RC4 was developed with top world cup athletes to offer the precision and control you‘d expect from Fischer’s race department.”
From Elan: “The Speed Magic is the piste powerhouse designed with the new R2Frame wood core for expert level female skiers who come to the slopes with a racer's DNA and demand every ounce of precision and agility from her skis”
this was my point … other than the Blizzards, all the other narrow skis use the term “race” in their descriptions. They may not be “race” skis but they are in that family. Other carvers are rated as intermediate or intermediate - advanced. This creates the confusion that carvers are intermediate skis and all mountain (wider skis) are more advanced. I’m not claiming it as truth… just as confusing to the average consumer.
TiffAlt
Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I agree with these points and appreciate the guidance this community has provided me with a a new skier trying to wade through all of this.
I think everyone agrees that narrower skis are easier to get from edge to edge and as these are important things to learn for your skiing toolbox, beginners are better served with narrower skis. Unfortunately, here out West, even our rental skis are sometimes wider than that. Perhaps it's detrimental, but we still learn how to ski (and love it!) so there must be more than one path - it's a journey after all!
santacruz skier
Angel Diva
That being said, there are many petite divas who are not beginners that ski the beloved Yumi's......
TiffAlt
Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I think that's a wonderful way to describe this. Many reviews of the Yumi and Blaze have talked about how accessible they are for many skiers, versatile enough to reward even the less experienced.
Reviews though are very difficult, and I think many of you are getting at this. There are many facets that make a ski and many other facets to the skier themselves. It's not one thing, it's many and not all variables are knowable. This is why demoing is invaluable and why even though I can just buy a narrow ski online, I am trying so hard to find a few I can demo next season to see what works best for me.
As the divas have shown, there are many opinions, but all of you have told me that in the end, how well the ski works is based on me, my preferences and of course abilites - and that will be unique for all of us.
elemmac
Angel Diva
I very much disagree with rating any ski by skill level...it is a specification that I will never take into account when purchasing a ski or when recommending a ski.
A beginner ski for a 250lb person might be an advanced ski for a 100lb person. You can size skis up or down...a person that's 5' tall might find a 165 length to be an expert ski, but then size the same ski down to a 140, and it's super easy and forgiving. A cautious, non-aggressive, expert skier is going to have different needs than an adventurous, off-piste-loving, expert.
Just out of curiosity though, I looked up a couple of the skis being discussed that are loved by many advanced skiers here...
- Yumi 84 is classified by Volkl as: Advanced, Ambitious, Expert (the 80 underfoot version, leaves "expert" out)
- Blaze 86 is classified by Volkl as: Advanced, Ambitious
- Santa Ana 84 is classified by Nordica on a scale from beginner to expert... the bar is all the way at the end of "Expert", yet the description of the ski states that it was made for "intermediate and advanced" skiers.
I'm going to stop there, because the SA84 is a perfect example why I don't agree with classifying skis by skier ability...it really doesn't matter.
A beginner ski for a 250lb person might be an advanced ski for a 100lb person. You can size skis up or down...a person that's 5' tall might find a 165 length to be an expert ski, but then size the same ski down to a 140, and it's super easy and forgiving. A cautious, non-aggressive, expert skier is going to have different needs than an adventurous, off-piste-loving, expert.
Just out of curiosity though, I looked up a couple of the skis being discussed that are loved by many advanced skiers here...
- Yumi 84 is classified by Volkl as: Advanced, Ambitious, Expert (the 80 underfoot version, leaves "expert" out)
- Blaze 86 is classified by Volkl as: Advanced, Ambitious
- Santa Ana 84 is classified by Nordica on a scale from beginner to expert... the bar is all the way at the end of "Expert", yet the description of the ski states that it was made for "intermediate and advanced" skiers.
I'm going to stop there, because the SA84 is a perfect example why I don't agree with classifying skis by skier ability...it really doesn't matter.
Last edited:
TiffAlt
Ski Diva Extraordinaire
Just wanted to call out how accurate this is - and that it is something I am now just understanding. This is a big part of what disadvantages those new or less informed to this sport in my opinion.
For me, it took a lot of guidance to get to that understanding - that each skier has different needs according to their height, weight, athleticism, terrain usually skied, etc. Even skis themselves - it's not the waist that matters alone - there are construction differences, stiffness - torsional and bending, and then bindings! Delta, mount point etc etc.
This is why such a black and white classification system will never work.
marzNC
Angel Diva
Here's a bit of history to put ski design and materials in context.
History of Skiing
The history of skiing in photos from cave paintings in Norway to Lake Sindor, and the inventions of camber ski, metal edges, wood, plastic, shaped, fat skis.
www.freethepowder.com
Ski width and length are not like fashion changes for skirt length, pant width, or tie width in the last 100 years. The evolution of ski shape and materials in the last 50 years has been based more on changes in materials, market, and technology. Perhaps an analogy is the phone. Those of us who learned to ski on straight skis before 1970 also grew up with a rotary dial phone. Those who started skiing enough to consider buying ski gear after 2005 are much more likely to have heard the terms camber, rocker, and/or sidecut.
marzNC
Angel Diva
Also makes a big difference what region and type of terrain a pair of skis will be used for the most.
What I bought initially for skiing at my home hill in the southeast was unlikely to be the best choice for skiing in the Rockies, which is where I fly to ski a few times a season. I was an adventurous intermediate skiing about 20 days a season. After I started taking one 1-week trip out west per season I got more serious about buying all-mountain skis. After demo'ing a few seasons, I settled on skis that I demo'd in Tahoe over 3 days in snow conditions that ranged from soft snow to deep fresh powder (barely knew how to ski that). Those skis were 128-75-108, turn radius about 12. Those skis were versatile enough for skiing in the southeast and out west since I wasn't skiing ungroomed terrain much back then.
I found reading ski reviews unuseful as an intermediate. Even as an advanced skier, my skiing interest sand size rarely match up with professional reviewers. YMMV
skibum4ever
Angel Diva
I almost didn't purchase the Blaze, even after demoing and enjoying it, because I am neither advanced nor ambitious. Fortunately I had seen other reviews which described it as a versatile ski for all levels. After 6 days I am very pleased with my purchase. I hope to grow into its more advanced capabilities.
TiffAlt
Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I have a related story, I almost didn't demo the Volkl Yumi because I thought 154 length it was available in was too long for me. All the online calculators said so! But the fact that it was the shortest/narrowest demo combo at my home mountain combined with my impatience to start demoing, pushed me to move forward with the demo.
Well I LOVED them and bought them on the spot. I've been out on them 10+ days now and they are still confidence inspiring. I am more than capable of handling them. It also made me more familiar with what ski short and ski long might mean when looking at other skis.
We get very hung up on these things that while not insignificant, never paint a full picture.
Last edited:
