# Skiing for the Quiver Challenged



## hammer (Dec 19, 2007)

With all of the talk about purchasing different types of skis, I was wondering who out there is still working with old(er) skis and if they feel that it has held them back or not.

With a family and 2 growing kids to get equipment for and keep updated, I've had to stick with the skis I first purchased several years ago...Atomic C8s. They have a narrow waist (in the mid 60s) and somewhat soft, which is fine for an intermediate crusing on groomers but according to all that I've read they would not be good for much else.

I did have the chance to demo some skis last season and, while I enjoyed the experience of trying something new, in all honesty I can't remember any more how much they really made a difference in my skiing.

I took care of getting properly-fitted boots last season so I'm set there...just don't have the funds at this point to get new skis.

If I have the opportunity to go out on a "low powder" day (which I may do on Friday), will it really make that much of a difference if I'm on my groomer skis?


----------



## campgottagopee (Dec 19, 2007)

hammer said:


> With all of the talk about purchasing different types of skis, I was wondering who out there is still working with old(er) skis and if they feel that it has held them back or not.
> 
> With a family and 2 growing kids to get equipment for and keep updated, I've had to stick with the skis I first purchased several years ago...Atomic C8s. They have a narrow waist (in the mid 60s) and somewhat soft, which is fine for an intermediate crusing on groomers but according to all that I've read they would not be good for much else.
> 
> ...



To answer your question, no it wont REALLY make that much diff because it really boils down to just having fun and you can do that on ANY ski. But, that being said, the newer skis are simply easier to have FUN. What i mean is IMO it doesn't take nearly the effort on the newer skis to turn, carve, ski crud, powder etc. I still take out some of my older skis from time to time just to remind me how much work skiing used to be.


----------



## millerm277 (Dec 19, 2007)

I skied on a set of Atomic C6's last year in both the V-day and St. Patrick's day storms...and I still had a great time. I can't really compare to actual powder skis, as I've never been on them, but it wasn't too difficult, and I didn't feel that it held me back very much.


----------



## billski (Dec 19, 2007)

I don't think the new snow will be deep enough (unless it's over about 10" or so) to really feel the effect of a fatter ski.  

Here's another idea, maybe you can start to demo for the day. = $30-35 to rent a "performance" ski.  If you're lucky you can find a demo day and do it for free (for me, the timing never worked out since most d/ds are on the weekend) It can start helping  you formulate your likes and dislikes about newer skis and cuts. Call ahead because not everyone has "fatter" skis.  I'd suggest asking about a "midfat" ski.  Remember, If you spend most of your time carving, (and the weather in the east lends itself to that), having pow skis may not be a good investment.  However, renting pow skis on a pow day may be just the ticket.   It's cheaper than buying a set.  One shop credited my demo days towards the purchase of the demo skis at end of season.  That worked out well, they didn't get much skiing on them.

where are you going? Most shops near the resort are usually very good places to find good skis.


----------



## JD (Dec 19, 2007)

Until last week I was on Rossi Axiomes circa 198?.  90 pecent piolet, 10 percent gear.


----------



## hammer (Dec 19, 2007)

billski said:


> I don't think the new snow will be deep enough (unless it's over about 10" or so) to really feel the effect of a fatter ski.
> 
> Here's another idea, maybe you can start to demo for the day. = $30-35 to rent a "performance" ski. If you're lucky you can find a demo day and do it for free (for me, the timing never worked out since most d/ds are on the weekend) It can start helping you formulate your likes and dislikes about newer skis and cuts. Call ahead because not everyone has "fatter" skis. I'd suggest asking about a "midfat" ski. Remember, If you spend most of your time carving, (and the weather in the east lends itself to that), having pow skis may not be a good investment. However, renting pow skis on a pow day may be just the ticket. It's cheaper than buying a set. One shop credited my demo days towards the purchase of the demo skis at end of season. That worked out well, they didn't get much skiing on them.
> 
> where are you going? Most shops near the resort are usually very good places to find good skis.


Looking to hit Pats Peak on Friday (close by and I'm a passholder), but I wouldn't consider that to be a "powder day"...I have 5 vacation days to use between January and March so at least one powder day is in the plans for this season.

I did the $25 demo thing at Pats last year...hit it late in the season so there wasn't much available at the time. May try that again, but I'll take your advice about looking for a midfat ski to demo.


----------



## riverc0il (Dec 19, 2007)

The ski industry has made a lot of money selling the "need" to upgrade to your typical all mountain mid-fat. Depending on your level of skiing, it may or may not help. Better gear let's skiers do things easier and have a little more fun at what they are proficient at. Gear does not and will not improve your technique. Bad gear can hold you back but if your gear is at your level then new gear will not help at all. Lots of variables. I maintain that there is absolutely no need for any one below an advanced level to demo skis and experts will get the most out of the activity.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Dec 20, 2007)

Up until I worked in a shop I was always skiing on "Beginner-intermediate" Level of equipment.  There was nothing that I had problems doing with this gear.  Never did I feel i needed high end stuff.
When I started working in a shop I got spoiled and now am on real nice high end gear.  I can feel the difference of the gear now, and have a few times used my old skis just to try them out.  Now that I now the difference it would be hard to go back.


----------



## ckofer (Dec 20, 2007)

hammer said:


> <snip>
> 
> I took care of getting properly-fitted boots last season so I'm set there...just don't have the funds at this point to get new skis.
> <snip>



Plenty of folks are in your exact position. I say leave the demo days alone! Just focus on having fun and getting on the mountain. When you feel that you have about $700 to spend on a new pair of skis and bindings, you can start looking at some pretty nice stuff. I got my Metrons a couple years ago and love them-I had demoed a lot of stuff before buying. I don't want to know if this year's gear is that much better. Specifically, I can't afford to know it. ;-)


----------



## billski (Dec 20, 2007)

riverc0il said:


> I maintain that there is absolutely no need for any one below an advanced level to demo skis and experts will get the most out of the activity.



Steve, why not?  At what point does one become "advanced"?  I like to test drive a car before I buy it.  Why not so with skis?  Would not an intermediate learn from the demo experience also? [I guess I'm in the debating mood today!]

I think we are commingling too issues here - the skills improvement aspect and the buying experience.  

Certainly with regard to demo'ing, many shops only have "high performance" in stock, and often, at the high end of the ticket experience.  

With regard to buying, how is Joe Bloe Average Skier going to know s/he has/was sold bad equipment?  I maintain that the 3-5 day a year skier may never know, and in fact, be better off with rentals.  However, if you're going to make a $$ investment in equipment, wouldn't it be good to know you're buying something you will be happy with?  I may be wrong, but I don't think most people buy their skis from knowledgeable pros at shops in the mountains.  They probably buy them from kids working at a big box store in the burbs who are given a couple of key parameters, and told which skis to push.  

When I was young, I bought strictly based on price.  The cheaper the better.  And the stores wanted to sell me something, anything, were happy to oblige.  It was probably one of the most expensive "deals" I ever got.  I spent more time monkeying around and worrying about equipment than I did focusing on skills.

Back to skills improvement.  I would argue that short of demo'ing, the way to know if you are being held back with your equipment is to ask someone knowledgeable (instructor, rep, etc.) to watch  you ski.

Should be an interesting day of dialog.:-D


----------



## riverc0il (Dec 20, 2007)

billski said:


> Steve, why not?  At what point does one become "advanced"?  I like to test drive a car before I buy it.  Why not so with skis?  Would not an intermediate learn from the demo experience also? [I guess I'm in the debating mood today!]
> 
> I think we are commingling too issues here - the skills improvement aspect and the buying experience.
> 
> ...


The car test drive analogy is erroneous. How much "skill level" difference is there between most drivers? If you want to use the car test drive analogy, then why you would not take a 16 year old kid still in driver's education and just getting his license out to test drive a muscle car? These two things are completely different beasts. And I would submit more people would be able to tell differences between cars (at least personal preferences) than skis at the average level.

I believe you are right that most skiers get their gear from the big box metro retailers from young high school kids pushing products they have not tried. But that type of equipment (certainly not higher end) has many fewer variables and significant differences than higher end products in which people want something very specific and _can identify their needs._ How many beginner and intermediates can identify their needs? The mid-fat becomes a good option once an advanced level is reached and then demoing becomes a factor because various mid-fats do different percentages of hard vs. soft snow and weight/body build/style can begin to play a major role. By the time someone achieves an expert technique in which they have mastered most aspects of the activity, they are usually very dialed into something very specific and will get the most of out very specific skis. Same can not be said for intermediate and definitely not a beginner.

A knowledgable instructor (obviously unbiased unlike shop or demo folks who want you to demo and buy the latest and greatest) will definitely be the best person to tell you whether you would be helped along by purchasing better gear. But if you are still struggling to parallel on a groomed black, an upper level carver ski is not going to help much until you own that parallel turn on all groomed terrain, so why bother demoing one?


----------



## deadheadskier (Dec 20, 2007)

JD said:


> Until last week I was on Rossi Axiomes circa 198?.  90 pecent piolet, 10 percent gear.



The official ski for the town of Stowe in 2000-2001 brought to us by Chris Strong's roomate for $100 a pair?

I know and love those boards well.  I don't think they're circa the 80's, but probably 95 or so, one of the first Powder skis on the market.  To be honest, if there's more than six inches of fresh out there, I'm using my Axioms over my 2007 B2's.  Those are great powder boards, heck I even enjoy them on packed powder and spring slush quite well to, but probably will stick to the B2's in the latter conditions now.


While I agree with rivercoil, that an expert is going to be more particular about their equipment and notice differences between boards based upon particular needs in different conditions (the same could be said for experts in any sport for that matter), I do think it can be beneficial for anyone to take the time and work with a gear expert to find the equipment that is right for them.

I say this, yet I don't think I've demoed a set of boards in ten years.  I typical just read, read and read all the different perspectives in different publications, talk to my piers and go for a pair skis that fit the mold of what I want them to do.  I also have a great deal of loyalty towards Rossignol over the years....never owned a pair I didn't like.  My other 'new' skis this season are a pair of barely used circa 2001 188cm Volkl P40's that I picked up off my father as I think they'll do better on ice than the B2's

So....maybe it is 90% pilot, 10 % gear or maybe I'm just not good enough of a skier to know the difference :lol:


----------



## koreshot (Dec 20, 2007)

Im with Steve on this one.  I suck at bumps, I could get skis that are skinnier and more suited for bumps and I will suck a tiny bit less at them, but I will still suck. 

This is a sport where skill is far more important than gear.  Throwing money at the problem can help you have more fun on the slopes, but it will only take you so far.

A few years ago, I was barely able to stay in front of a pro skier down a wide steep groomer.  I was on a pair of carving skis, he was on a pair of Volant Spatulas with reverse sidecut and reverse camber.  I felt like complete crap... cause I own 4 pairs of skis


----------



## thinnmann (Dec 20, 2007)

Equipment definitely makes a difference and can hold you back.  But there is an interaction - you have to constantly improve technique, and you have to constantly dial-in on your equipment needs.  And it works both ways, the equipment drives a need to dial-in your technique.  This assumes you ski enough because repetition and experience on different conditions is a key component also.



hammer said:


> With a family and 2 growing kids to get equipment for and keep updated, I've had to stick with the skis I first purchased several years ago...Atomic C8s. They have a narrow waist (in the mid 60s) and somewhat soft, which is fine for an intermediate crusing on groomers but according to all that I've read they would not be good for much else.



Hammer - I am in the same boat, with two growing kids.  You just have to learn to use eBay!  I keep my kids wife and especially myself in almost new equipment that I have never paid more than $179 for - including shipping!  Let others use the new stuff for a year, then buy the demos and cast-offs online!

It takes patience, and time, and it pays to be able to sharpen, wax & service stuff yourself.

eBay has allowed me to use many different types of skis, and to re-sell them when I grew past them, sometimes for more than I paid.

Current ski closet: condition when bought, price after shipping (including bindings):
*Daughter:* 130 cm Atomic Race 8, used about once = $144
120 cm Dynastar Team Omecarve 10, fair condition*, = $120
*Son:* 155 cm Volant Zip Karve, good condition with huge risers = $127 (my wife skied these skis for a season before my son took them over last year because he thinks the silver topsheet is cool)
155 cm Blizzard Sigma SL, used about twice = $123 (I skied these skis for a season, but he is now 14 and as tall as me)
*Wife:* 150 cm Volant Vertex V66, great condition = $137
*Me:* 155 Atomic Metron m:EX, fair condition* = $133
168 Race stock Volkl P40 (ti, rails, awesome race riser & bindings), fair condition* = $83
163 Volant Power, demo bindings, fair condition* = $45
158 Rossi VS Oversize Ti, integrated demo bindings, used about twice = $179
170 Atomic Beta Ride 9.22s, fair condition* = $86

*when I say the condition is "fair" - it means the appearance topsheet and bindings.  But all working parts - the bottoms and bindings - are working just as well as when new!  Sometimes that takes more work when you first get them.  I prefer to do it myself, but ski shops can do it, of course, if you are not so inclined.

paste from my blog on this -->>

My family and I have gone through a lot of skis in the last few years, and I have gotten it done at a fraction of the cost of a couple pairs of new skis.

My justification for going through many skis is twofold: For myself, I have this theory that since I ski a lot at the same place, having a quiver of skis gives me more variety on the limites slopes of Belleayre. My kids are growing, need I say, fast - and the skill level of my family has moved quickly as well.

The technique that keeps costs way down includes these principles:

    * Coming to terms with never skiing the current season's equipment.
    * Not buying skis at retail stores.
    * Using eBay, and being patient there.
    * Buying skis that have bindings already mounted.
    * Keeping ski purchases under $100; unless the skis are in nearly new condition, then go to $200.
    * Reselling skis on eBay or at ski swaps for more than half of what they cost me.
    * Repairing & tuning our skis myself.​


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 20, 2007)

Nice info Thinman, you don't have to drop 7 bills on nice stiff skis with Ebay...Those Atomics you ski will hold you back..buy some stiff skis for the east..


----------



## thinnmann (Dec 20, 2007)

GrilledSteezeSandwich said:


> Nice info Thinman, you don't have to drop 7 bills on nice stiff skis with Ebay...Those Atomics you ski will hold you back..buy some stiff skis for the east..



The Atomic Metron m:EX is stiff, with titanium "pulsars" and all that.  (Demoed: Most of the Atomic Metron line is amazing on everything from powder to ice!)  So I guess you mean the 9.22s's.  Well, the s is for soft, and I got them because in 2005 I did ski the 9.22 (no s) for a couple months, east and west  - the orange ones, with the Atomic Centro bindings (eBay $81 & re-sold @ $72), and I just felt they were too stiff for me (I weigh 140).     I definitely prefer SL race skis when everything is groomer and near-ice.  More details on those Atomic 9.22s's here.  They have a history, previously belonging to a woman, Chris Seashore, who died in an avalanche.


----------



## GrilledSteezeSandwich (Dec 20, 2007)

thinnmann said:


> The Atomic Metron m:EX is stiff, with titanium "pulsars" and all that.  (Demoed: Most of the Atomic Metron line is amazing on everything from powder to ice!)  So I guess you mean the 9.22s's.  Well, the s is for soft, and I got them because in 2005 I did ski the 9.22 (no s) for a couple months, east and west  - the orange ones, with the Atomic Centro bindings (eBay $81 & re-sold @ $72), and I just felt they were too stiff for me (I weigh 140).     I definitely prefer SL race skis when everything is groomer and near-ice.  More details on those Atomic 9.22s's here.  They have a history, previously belonging to a woman, Chris Seashore, who died in an avalanche.



The Metrons are about my least favorite ski but I love the LT11s..which can be had real cheap from the 05-06 season with the neox binders which are heavy but good bindings..


----------

