Women's Skis Vs. Men's Skis

[whitewater girl]

I am sooo happy to find I'm not the only one put off by some of the graphics! Saw a few while researching skis that I actually wondered if I would/could ever be caught dead skiing on something that looked like that! (too over the top)...don't mind a tastefully done script (I kind-of like how Volkl has been doing their logo), but some script-treatment out there is way over the top (way too many florishes! We are not in the baroque!)

 

[indyjones]

Some of you have mostly men's skis and are proud of not owning women's skis... is it because of the girly graphics or because you think women's skis aren't up to par at the advanced levels? If you think they're lower quality, what's missing?

 

[MaryLou]

Some of you have mostly men's skis and are proud of not owning women's skis... is it because of the girly graphics or because you think women's skis aren't up to par at the advanced levels? If you think they're lower quality, what's missing?

I don't think I detected any pride in this post of owning "men's" skis. I think of them as unisex, because until recently (in my timeframe at least) there was very little in women's ski, M & F bought the same stuff. I've never skied a women's ski, b/c unisex has suited me fine for nearly 40 years and I've just never demo'd a pair. I'd like to someday, and definately before my next purchase. But I have a unisex that works for me that I love, I don't feel obligated to ditch it b/c it's not a woman ski.

But, there certainly are women's graphics that I would never be caught dead skiing. I can't off the top of my head think of a unisex ski that would turn me off so much just b/c of graphics. I'm sure there are some, but I'm talking about what I mostly see around here (all mt. cruisers, park).

 

[SnowflakeADK]

Do many of you more "petite" (in height) Divas find that it's also harder to come across a good selection of unisex skis in a short enough length? I ski on 150's and maybe I'd even go mid 150s, but what I've looked at to possibly demo in a unisex version has been too long. With my weight being out of proportion to height I'm sure I could go longer, but I don't want to sacrafice the maneuverablity I have. Do you believe that ski companies are offering less of the "shorties" in unisex because they all seem to have a more extensive line up of WS? Have WS skis come far enough along (grafics and names aside) that it really doesn't matter as long as you are in an appropriate ski for you?
Sorry....I didn't mean to change to vibe of the thread, just a question I thought may somewhat fit the flavor.

 

[MaineSkiLady]

^^^ Try a longer ski, just to see how it feels. I would think that the weight distribution on it would actually be better in your case. Its ability to maneuver shouldn't be too compromised -- depends on brand/model. Another case scenario where demo is clearly your best option. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised with the added length. But where WS skis are concerned, yes, I think they have evolved to the point of offering a huge range of options for all sizes and abilities. Thank goodness. This really IS the bottom line: CHOICE. I think all the graphics stuff is a trend. Not unlike the (unfortunate) neon clothing era. All could swing way conservative with regard to graphics once the pendulum goes the other way. Which it will. It always does.

 

[Gloria]

Some of you have mostly men's skis and are proud of not owning women's skis... is it because of the girly graphics or because you think women's skis aren't up to par at the advanced levels? If you think they're lower quality, what's missing?

I see what you are sensing, but I don't think it's something necessarily occuring on this board. I see it alot at the ski shop. Alot of the men were contributing to this effect during one clinic and the rep told a pretty funny story. They were creating a M's and a W's version of the same ski. They wanted the difference to be that the W's ski performed better under a lower weight range and the M's under a higher weight range and that's it. Effectively they used less fiberglass in the W's ski and a slightly different weave pattern. They took the 2 prototypes and put a really good male skier that was a very small person on each without telling him what they were. He ended up not liking the M's version and loving the W's version. Ultimately now skis on the women's version...So typically no, I don't think the majority of W's skis are lesser quality and as the cycle has continued, most are simply designed with a weight range that is more relative to the female figure in effort to achieve similiar or same performance levels. Although it may not have been an overnight process and lots of tweaking has occurred along the way.

 

[MaryLou]

Do many of you more "petite" (in height) Divas find that it's also harder to come across a good selection of unisex skis in a short enough length? I ski on 150's and maybe I'd even go mid 150s, but what I've looked at to possibly demo in a unisex version has been too long. With my weight being out of proportion to height I'm sure I could go longer, but I don't want to sacrafice the maneuverablity I have. Do you believe that ski companies are offering less of the "shorties" in unisex because they all seem to have a more extensive line up of WS? Have WS skis come far enough along (grafics and names aside) that it really doesn't matter as long as you are in an appropriate ski for you?
Sorry....I didn't mean to change to vibe of the thread, just a question I thought may somewhat fit the flavor.

I know my unisex ski comes in a 153 and 163 (I have 163 and I'm 5'4", but chunky). I just checked eBay, etc...and it seems the 2008 version is mainly available in the longer lengths now, so you may have a hard time finding the shorter version on an older model. I was able to demo the 163 in November, and bought them in March (the store was out of the 153 by then though). They either make fewer shorter skis, or they sell out faster, I suppose.

 

[sbskier]

I think some manufacturers are discontinuing the shorter sizes in unisex skis. I ski on 2007 Dynastar 8000s in a 158cm, this size is no longer available as of the 2008 model. Could it be that more women are skiing WS skis therefore the demand for shorter unisex skis is decreasing?

BTW, I also have a WS ski in my small quiver, which is actually the ski that I use most of the time.

 

[MaineSkiLady]

They were creating a M's and a W's version of the same ski. They wanted the difference to be that the W's ski performed better under a lower weight range and the M's under a higher weight range and that's it. Effectively they used less fiberglass in the W's ski and a slightly different weave pattern. They took the 2 prototypes and put a really good male skier that was a very small person on each without telling him what they were. He ended up not liking the M's version and loving the W's version. Ultimately now skis on the women's version.

Very interesting. We had thread not long ago discussing SkierGrl27's neighbor, retired pop star John Oates, just written up in Ski or Skiing, forgot which (good article) and his propensity for tele skiing on K2 Phat Luvs - also a small guy.

There ya go.

DH is also a small guy, in fact, we have the same boot sole length and can switch skis easily - he just needs to crank my DINS (or he'll pop out, outweighs me by 30#). He's been on some of my WS and does notice the more forward mounting point, has to adjust his stance. Overall, he prefers his own. However, I think we will be sharing the pow skis, WS, this winter (who gets the wider waist, ha!- toss coin?)---not that it's often a situation here, but...ya never know! (He doesn't yet know he's getting new mid-fats for xmas, shhhh)()

 

[jaydog]

I use WS skis, for the lighter weight and forward mounting- I'm not petite, but I am on the small/light side. Interestingly, 2 of the 3 pairs I've owned had nothing feminine about their topsheets. The Dynastar ELs were orange with some geometric shapes, and my V76s are white and grey with a pattern of light grey circles. [I believe Atlantiqueen, on the same ski, had a guy tell her she was smart not to use women's skis]

My first skis were pre-Luv K2 T9s, and the floral pattern on them was subtle and understated. Feminine without being garish. And the name? "X" Simply, X. Ah, the good old days!

 

[altagirl]

You have to take the male ego into consideration here.

For the typical man - bigger, stiffer, longer skis are always better. No matter what - even if you're 5'1" and 101lbs.

You just have to remember to take things with a grain of salt when guys give you ski advice. Because it often goes to one of the extremes. As in - they either think you should be on some short pink noodles because you're a girl and couldn't possibly ski anything beyond a terminal intermediate ski. OR you should be on something that has the flex of a 2x4 that is a foot over your head, because that would be bad-ass.

Which is pretty much why you need to do your own research and demo a variety of skis until you learn what actually works for you. (Because sometimes what's holding women back IS being on beginner/intermediate soft/short skis for too long) I've owned women's skis and they were great, but I also found that I HATE forward mounting and mounted them without the forward mount point that's usually recommended for women. Most of my skis are unisex - but then again, I'm not short/light-weight, so that probably makes sense. Figure out what works for you and don't worry about the labels.

 

[whitewater girl]

:ROTF: sounds alot like much of the advice I've gotten on boats over the years! (& I went through ALOT of boats before finding something that worked for ME)...hopefully won't go though that with skis :duck:

...someone did a study a while back, determined that women came in alot more different shapes & sizes than men (alot more different personality types it turns out as well)...so even more so than guys, we need to figure out what really works for each of us (so much for one-size-fits-all!)

 

[whitewater girl]

...the article did go on to say that the folks who did the study figured this was maybe why men don't "get" women...we're just more different from one another than they expect us to be

 

[oragejuice]

:ROTF: sounds alot like much of the advice I've gotten on boats over the years! (& I went through ALOT of boats before finding something that worked for ME)

Same here!!! I've owned way too many kayaks.

 

[Gumbelina]

I am about to buy myself a pair of Vokl Luna's, I demo'd those and the Tierra's and I was pretty bummed that the skis that I liked best were...BROWN! Not even a pretty brown where I might want to get a new pair of pants to match. I do like the actual graphics though.

 

[Bumblebee]

I just don't trust that women's skis will be "tough" enough for me - and by that I mean I'm very strong and very heavy and when I look at the girly skis I just think "meh". There might be some really, really great stuff out there - but I just keep coming across (in mainland Europe) carving skis with a max of a 72 waist...

Oh, and as others have mentioned I really don't need flowers, naked chicks (as per another thread), "hot mamas" or anything else which makes me sound like I'd rather be in the lodge putting on my lipstick.

 

[pinto]

...someone did a study a while back, determined that women came in alot more different shapes & sizes than men (alot more different personality types it turns out as well)...so even more so than guys, we need to figure out what really works for each of us (so much for one-size-fits-all!)

That's really interesting. It makes sense, but I never thought about it before.

 

[Daria]

Last year I was boot shopping and almost did not buy the pair I ended up with because they were too "cute". I am so glad I got over it because they are fabulous!

So back a few years ago with the Rossi Bandit series, did any of you see the hidden figures in the graphics on the shovels? This was on both the unisex and the women's versions and all models, single X to tripple. Once that was pointed out to me I could not stop seeing the curves. Sometimes it pissed me off and sometimes it gave me a good laugh. I had a pair of the women's doubles and loved them!

 

[liquidfeet]

I see what you are sensing, but I don't think it's something necessarily occuring on this board. I see it alot at the ski shop. Alot of the men were contributing to this effect during one clinic and the rep told a pretty funny story. They were creating a M's and a W's version of the same ski. They wanted the difference to be that the W's ski performed better under a lower weight range and the M's under a higher weight range and that's it. Effectively they used less fiberglass in the W's ski and a slightly different weave pattern. They took the 2 prototypes and put a really good male skier that was a very small person on each without telling him what they were. He ended up not liking the M's version and loving the W's version. Ultimately now skis on the women's version...So typically no, I don't think the majority of W's skis are lesser quality and as the cycle has continued, most are simply designed with a weight range that is more relative to the female figure in effort to achieve similiar or same performance levels. Although it may not have been an overnight process and lots of tweaking has occurred along the way.

What manufacturer was this?