# Ski the East...or not?



## kingslug (Jan 27, 2019)

So many people I know just wont ski the East any more. I go on 3 trips out west a season and when i ask the crowd im with..who live here ,where they ski, most say out west only now. They have given up with our variable conditions and long drives. Sad..I cant imagine not skiing here..i think it makes you better. And some wonder why they have a tough time out there when the champagne powder turns to 
Crud...and in order to stay in shape for places like JH..you better ski a lot before and after you go. This last trip wiped out so many people..quickly. 
Hmmm...wonder why...


----------



## Not Sure (Jan 27, 2019)

kingslug said:


> So many people I know just wont ski the East any more. I go on 3 trips out west a season and when i ask the crowd im with..who live here ,where they ski, most say out west only now. They have given up with our variable conditions and long drives. Sad..I cant imagine not skiing here..i think it makes you better. And some wonder why they have a tough time out there when the champagne powder turns to
> Crud...and in order to stay in shape for places like JH..you better ski a lot before and after you go. This last trip wiped out so many people..quickly.
> Hmmm...wonder why...



Your friends are old? I just can't get motivated to ski shit conditions the older I get.


----------



## kingslug (Jan 27, 2019)

All in late 40s to 60s. At best they go to killington a few times..they cant believe i drive 5 hours to Stowe every week when im not out west..
Skiing SB,Stowe,Jay..only makes you better


----------



## andrec10 (Jan 27, 2019)

Wimps....


----------



## kingslug (Jan 27, 2019)

What really cracks me up is a lot of them bring their Eastern skis...and die in the deep snow...some do get it..and rent some fat boys...after dying..in the powder.


----------



## Los (Jan 27, 2019)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> Your friends are old? I just can't get motivated to ski shit conditions the older I get.



+1


----------



## WWF-VT (Jan 27, 2019)

kingslug said:


> So many people I know just wont ski the East any more. I go on 3 trips out west a season and when i ask the crowd im with..who live here ,where they ski, most say out west only now. They have given up with our variable conditions and long drives. Sad..I cant imagine not skiing here..i think it makes you better. And some wonder why they have a tough time out there when the champagne powder turns to
> Crud...and in order to stay in shape for places like JH..you better ski a lot before and after you go. This last trip wiped out so many people..quickly.
> Hmmm...wonder why...



They aren't skiers....they're tourists


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 27, 2019)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> Your friends are old? I just can't get motivated to ski shit conditions the older I get.


I'm the opposite.  The older I get, the more I appreciate all kinds of conditions.  Yes, the preference is powder, but if you have the right gear tuned properly and the skill to use it, even hard pack days can be fun.  The most accomplished precision racers on the planet live for snow surfaces Joe Tourist thinks as garbage. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## tnt1234 (Jan 27, 2019)

I love so much about east coast skiing. 

I love the variety of mountains- from large resorts to small mom and pops...I love - absolutely love - winding, new england trails, narrow and steep, snaking down the mountain....

I love east coast glade skiing.... 

But I'm really getting frustrated with our weather.  When we catch two feet of snow on a sunday, and that is wiped out by rain before the very next weekend...


----------



## abc (Jan 27, 2019)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> Your friends are old? I just can't get motivated to ski shit conditions the older I get.


I just don’t have the time to ski the east. 

This season, I’ll go out west 3 times, 9 weeks total, including the weekends front and back. That doesn’t leave too many weekends I’m in the east!

Then, like last weekend, I just got back from CO the week before, do I feel strongly motivated to fight the holiday crowd and pay premium window price (blackouts in my Ikon base pass) and the risk of windhold? Nah.

Simple math of zero sum game: the more I ski put west, the less time I have to ski the east! 

I’m not choosing not to ski the east, I’m simply choose to ski west as my priority, with the resulting consequence of not skiing the east half as much as I used to.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 27, 2019)

WWF-VT said:


> They aren't skiers....they're tourists



Pretty much.  If you, "only" ski in the west, you're only skiing so many days.


----------



## snoseek (Jan 28, 2019)

As someone that skis all over I enjoy skiing in the east when I get the opportunity. I like the idea of spending a season back there every so often. It keeps things real and sharpens my skills. I also like the low key locals vibe.


----------



## Vaughn (Jan 28, 2019)

What's your shortest drive to a good mountain though? In Boston, I can hit the 4 western White Mt. areas in a little over 2 hours - a very easy day trip. If I lived in NJ or LI and it was over 3 hours to even Mt Snow, I could see where hopping a plane for long weekends out west (money aside) would be pretty appealing as I'd already be looking at skiing as an overnight, not day trip.


----------



## Not Sure (Jan 28, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> I'm the opposite.  The older I get, the more I appreciate all kinds of conditions.  Yes, the preference is powder, but if you have the right gear tuned properly and the skill to use it, even hard pack days can be fun.  The most accomplished precision racers on the planet live for snow surfaces Joe Tourist thinks as garbage.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



My Ski preferences are bumps and skiing groomers fast.  Skiing icy bumps with powder is how I broke a ski 2 yrs ago LOL.  I'm into self preservation as I age , I just don't bounce back from injury as fast . I'll always ski a trail or slope to check out obstructions first before making a fast run. If the hardpack is chopped up or the bumps are bulletproof skiing just isn't fun .

I cherry pick my days anymore, It's not that I don't ski the east .I'll wait a few days for the areas to recover or pick a warm day . If I take a trip somewhere I tuff it out and ski slower . My schedule is fairly flexible so I'm not restricted  to weekends. Skiing weekends with the crowds is also counter to my self preservation theme LOL. I can't see not skiing anymore but my motto is "Live to ski another day"


----------



## Funky_Catskills (Jan 28, 2019)

Wow - you guys are depressing and old..


----------



## Smellytele (Jan 28, 2019)

I ski what the gives me (unless it is raining). Living close to the mountains helps. As others have said if I had to travel 3 hrs or more it maybe a different story.


----------



## NYDB (Jan 28, 2019)

How do your buddies get their legs primed for out west trips if they aren't on the snow before your trips?  

You can do all the squats/lunges/box jumps you want but to get good legs time on the hill is needed.


----------



## tnt1234 (Jan 28, 2019)

Smellytele said:


> I ski what the gives me (unless it is raining). Living close to the mountains helps. As others have said if I had to travel 3 hrs or more it maybe a different story.



Yeah, the drive time sucks.  The day trips...you get up at absurd hours, drive 3, 3-1.2 hours to the catskills, and find icy bumps and slick groomers...really brings the stoke down, you know?  

And then, weekend trips, you have to commit to time off, hotels, etc.... drive 5-6 hours each way, and find lack luster snow....it's a bummer.

But, what the hell....it's not like someone is forcing me to ski.  I love the sport, my family loves the sport.  This is what we're in for until i can figure out a way to move or get a second home in teh mountains.


----------



## tnt1234 (Jan 28, 2019)

Funky_Catskills said:


> Wow - you guys are depressing and old..




That may be, but for me, it's really just the fact that I live in NJ.  and every ski day takes a certain amount of commitment on my part.  And often that commitment is scoffed at by the conditions.  

If I lived close to a mountain, I'd ski all the time.  Good, bad, what's it matter?  There is always tomorrow.  

But when you are a weekend warrior with drive times, that's not always the case.


----------



## jimk (Jan 28, 2019)

It’s all good.  Enjoy what you got and you won’t miss what you don’t.


----------



## mfi (Jan 28, 2019)

NY DirtBag said:


> How do your buddies get their legs primed for out west trips if they aren't on the snow before your trips?
> 
> You can do all the squats/lunges/box jumps you want but to get good legs time on the hill is needed.



A lot of them are just damned good...the others may get a few day on the snowchaser trip to Snowbird in December. Me, by the time I hit the west I have 12 day at least at Stowe and Hunter..just skied 6 days straight at JH and my legs were fine..others were totally burnt out. I work out off season and it helps a lot, deadlifts especially but nothing compares to just skiing. And I limit the alcohol consumption over there..altitude is a killer..as many find out


----------



## Skrn (Jan 28, 2019)

Skiing West is much better than skiing the east. But skiing the east is much better than not skiing. Tougher decision if its 4-5 hours drive though.


----------



## cdskier (Jan 28, 2019)

tnt1234 said:


> That may be, but for me, it's really just the fact that I live in NJ.  and every ski day takes a certain amount of commitment on my part.  And often that commitment is scoffed at by the conditions.



Living in NJ isn't a valid excuse. :razz: Even before I had a place in VT I still skied nearly every weekend. I usually had 2-4 weekend trips to VT or the Adirondacks planned each season (Sugarbush, K, Stowe, Gore, Whiteface, etc). I typically planned them in advance and didn't worry too much about the weather. I always found a way to have fun even if conditions weren't optimal. Any weekend I didn't have a trip planned would be a day trip to the Cats. Here you could make a last minute decision if weather didn't look good.

Honestly if I had worried about weather too much, I would have missed one of the best weekends I ever had a number of years ago. I planned a trip a month or so in advance to Sugarbush for St Patrick's weekend. Early in that week that I was going, the weather showed rain for the St Patrick's weekend. I had everything booked so just hoped for the best. Well by Thursday the forecast completely changed and we ended up with 3 feet of snow that weekend. If I had obsessed with the weather and let it dictate my plans I would have backed out and missed an epic weekend. 

I also think sometimes people worry about what conditions might be like a little too much. Many times you will find that you can be pleasantly surprised if you just get out and go (this weekend would be a case in point of that...I expected everything to be frozen solid yet that was not the case at all). The first year I had a place in VT I put too much thought into when to go. I learned after that to just go and see what happens.


----------



## Hawk (Jan 28, 2019)

I could never limit myself when it comes to skiing.  3 hours, 15 minutes gets me to Sugarbush and far less to the I 93 places and/or North Conway.  I really enjoy the place that I call home and would really not consider relocation away from friends and Family.   I get to ski out west 1 or 2 times a year and that satisfy me enough.  Maybe when I retire things will change.  But it certainly would be hard to commute and get 50 days out west from my house in MA.  To each their own.


----------



## shwilly (Jan 28, 2019)

In order to live in the east and say "I only ski out west," you've got to either:
a) be able to take the winter off and go wherever with no concern for money, or
b) be satisfied with a couple big trips and that's your ski season.

I'm not in either situation, so that's that. 

I feel like there's a disconnect in mindset. I love deep powder, high alpine terrain, and big ticket trips as much as the next person...but we're talking about something you can do most weekends for half of the year. I love taking lots of little weekend road trips. "I bet Aspen is skiing way better today" is just not something that ever crosses my mind.


----------



## slatham (Jan 28, 2019)

I have to think most of the people here are 30+ days a year skiers? We live on the East Coast? We do not have endless funds, or days off? 

Thus we ski the east. Some of us even happily 

And it makes us much better skiers, both because of the # of days out, and because of the conditions and terrain.

If you've got 3 ski trips a year, and the money. Go at it out West. But as mentioned, that's more tourist skiing vs. what we are into. TO each his/her own.....


----------



## Edd (Jan 28, 2019)

Skiing the east 30+ days a year is a lifestyle. The rest is frosting on the cake. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## abc (Jan 28, 2019)

I ski more than 30 days a year for the past 5+ years (already 20+ this year). 

I'm a ski tourist. Not the least bit ashamed of that label.


----------



## Hawk (Jan 28, 2019)

shwilly said:


> In order to live in the east and say "I only ski out west," you've got to either:
> a) be able to take the winter off and go wherever with no concern for money, or
> b) be satisfied with a couple big trips and that's your ski season.
> 
> ...



Not entirely true.  I have a friend that works in town here in Boston.  He buys tons of round trip tickets from BOS to SLC when they come down in the summer.  He does Thursday night flights and comes back on Monday night and skies 30 to 40 days a year at Snowbird.  I am sure is costs substantially more than what you or I will spend but he is doing it.  He is certainly my role model.


----------



## 2Planker (Jan 28, 2019)

kingslug said:


> All in late 40s to 60s. At best they go to killington a few times..they cant believe i drive 5 hours to Stowe every week when im not out west..
> Skiing SB,Stowe,Jay..only makes you better




 Spoiled whimps !!  We ski Wildcat, BW & The River most weekends....
 Plus a Europe trip or maybe some BC Cat skiing (Chatter Creek)


----------



## AdironRider (Jan 28, 2019)

Hawk said:


> Not entirely true.  I have a friend that works in town here in Boston.  He buys tons of round trip tickets from BOS to SLC when they come down in the summer.  He does Thursday night flights and comes back on Monday night and skies 30 to 40 days a year at Snowbird.  I am sure is costs substantially more than what you or I will spend but he is doing it.  He is certainly my role model.



If I was stuck in a city this would be my play. Southwest flys to SLC from Boston. You can't get from Boston to VT for much less once you pay for gas and wear and tear on your car (Boston to Sugarbush round trip and the IRS rate would cover you for like 320 bucks). You fly enough and you get a buddy ticket for free. 

Hotels are a wash. 

Travel time is a wash basically. 

I'd still hit a couple days back East if I was there, notably spring and fall, but otherwise a couple decent trips would be worth it to me over say an extra 5-10 days back East.


----------



## gregnye (Jan 28, 2019)

Hawk said:


> Not entirely true.  I have a friend that works in town here in Boston.  He buys tons of round trip tickets from BOS to SLC when they come down in the summer.  He does Thursday night flights and comes back on Monday night and skies 30 to 40 days a year at Snowbird.  I am sure is costs substantially more than what you or I will spend but he is doing it.  He is certainly my role model.



While I'm initially jealous, the traveling sounds awful. Honestly who wants to deal with airport security every weekend and the hassle of getting to and from boston logan. Not to mention all the lost time waiting for your checked skis on the ski pickup carousel. And it's significantly worse for the environment than me driving NH or Vermont. No thank you, I'll stick to the east coast with a once a year trip out west (although I intend to live out West soon!)


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 28, 2019)

Time in the air vs in a car is near the same. Actual travel time is anything but.  Traffic in and out of Logan along with security lines can be insane.  

There's a huge pain in the ass factor with flying.  That's the number one reason I haven't bothered to head out west in years.   



Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 28, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> *There's a huge pain in the ass factor with flying.*  That's the number one reason I haven't bothered to head out west in years.



I mitigate this as much as possible by intentionally selecting small airports if possible.  The difference is dramatic.   Cant do that with some locations (SLC for instance), but if you can, it's worth an extra $40 etc.... per ticket.


----------



## abc (Jan 28, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> There's a huge pain in the ass factor with flying.


Contrast that against driving, when all of those hours you have to keep your eyes on the road. While flying, you can actually just sleep while on the plane!

I often fly back on a red eye. Go straight to the office. Fresh as a daisy.


----------



## Zand (Jan 28, 2019)

I've always found Boston to have the shortest security lines of any major airport other than maybe Charlotte. Can usually arrive 90 mins before flight and still have an hour to kill.

SLC was super easy...from the time the plane landed I got my bag from the claim, got my rental car, and drove to Solitude in just over 1 hour. Denver was a lot more time consuming and a pain in the ass not to mention an extra hour from any skiing. While I definitely would never want to fly every single weekend, people make it out to be way worse than it is.


----------



## tnt1234 (Jan 28, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Time in the air vs in a car is near the same. Actual travel time is anything but.  Traffic in and out of Logan along with security lines can be insane.
> 
> There's a huge pain in the ass factor with flying.  That's the number one reason I haven't bothered to head out west in years.
> 
> ...




Yeah, but if you fall asleep flying home, you're not gonna crash your car.  Plus, you can drink booze!


----------



## tnt1234 (Jan 28, 2019)

Honestly, so many people here live closer to the mountains, and have a flexible schedule.  If I could ski frequently mid week and be to a good mountain under two hours....that would be perfect.

Because really, I love so much about the east coast ski scene.  Just wish I could score a few more high quality days.

But having said that, I think I only skied 13 days last year, but all but 3 or 4 of them were pretty darn good.  And I missed the big spring rally too.


----------



## raisingarizona (Jan 28, 2019)

Some of the efforts you guys go to to get in some skiing sounds so stressful to me. I gotta hand it to ya though, some of you sure are dedicated. 

I do remember in the early 90’s driving 8 or 9 hours in blizzard snow conditions to get fresh snow at mad river or sugarbush. I’ve been there but I was young and way more fired up then I am now.


----------



## slatham (Jan 28, 2019)

Hawk said:


> Not entirely true.  I have a friend that works in town here in Boston.  He buys tons of round trip tickets from BOS to SLC when they come down in the summer.  He does Thursday night flights and comes back on Monday night and skies 30 to 40 days a year at Snowbird.  I am sure is costs substantially more than what you or I will spend but he is doing it.  He is certainly my role model.



I have to make the assumption this person is single? Which makes me think, how many of us here are single vs. have families in tow? Changes the equation.....

Also, someone mentioned equal time Boston to SLC vs driving North? Some bad math in those calculations when you look at the all in travel time.


----------



## ghughes20 (Jan 28, 2019)

I ski most every weekend in SoVT.  I have a place there and my son is in a weekend program.  I also try to get out west for 1 - 2 trips a year.  One guys trip and maybe one family trip.  This year I'm heading to Winter Park with my son, and Steamboat with the guys - all on the IKON pass.  

I love skiing out west, but I love VT just as much.  I wouldn't give up either.  When I was a kid, skiing in VT was like the pinnacle for my family and I.   I grew up in NJ (still live there now), and was usually skiing the Poconos or Vernon Valley / Great Gorge (yes, I'm old).  Mt Snow was amazing compared to Big Boulder.  

I still love the cold, icy, fast, occasional powder that you get in the east.  Sure, the occasional rain sucks and it's no fun driving home when it's snowing on a Sunday night, but I will never give up on skiing in the east.  As I get older, I'll just do it more mid-week, and avoid the crowds.


----------



## Jully (Jan 28, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Time in the air vs in a car is near the same. Actual travel time is anything but.  Traffic in and out of Logan along with security lines can be insane.
> 
> There's a huge pain in the ass factor with flying.  That's the number one reason I haven't bothered to head out west in years.
> 
> ...



Give Logan's security another chance. Zand is right, lines are mega short these days. https://www.wcvb.com/article/securi...t-are-fastest-in-the-nation-tsa-says/25564586

Traffic is a different story though...

As a 20 something living in Boston directly (40 minutes on public transit to Logan) I've considered what Hawk's role model does. SLC flights are under a good bit under $250 round trip if you buy in advance and the ski bus is free with an ikon/cottonwoods season pass. If you really aggressively follow the guidelines for vehicle reimbursement at 50 cents per mile, it's $150 round trip to Wildcat/Sunday River. 

Get TSA pre check and the amount of time you are stuck standing in line/traveling to the airport isn't bad at all. I'd rather spend 5 hours working/watching tv on a plane than 3 hours driving too.

Of course I don't actually do this because, while sound in theory, that many red eyes would probably kill me, and I like seeing my SO/friends. The fact that I absolutely love Wildcat and would really struggle to give it up helps with the jealously I get when Snowbird gets 80" of snow in 7 days.


----------



## Jully (Jan 28, 2019)

BenedictGomez said:


> I mitigate this as much as possible by intentionally selecting small airports if possible.  The difference is dramatic.   Cant do that with some locations (SLC for instance), but if you can, it's worth an extra $40 etc.... per ticket.



I love SLC and even places like Hayden compared to DIA for this reason. Midway>O'Hare in Chicago is another big one too. 

I'm torn when you sacrifice direct v. transfers for smaller airports though. Connecting through Newark or JFK just for better parking or security is a tough pill to swallow.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 28, 2019)

abc said:


> Contrast that against driving, when all of those hours you have to keep your eyes on the road. While flying, you can actually just sleep while on the plane!
> 
> I often fly back on a red eye. Go straight to the office. Fresh as a daisy.


Hate the flying experience with a passion.

I'd much rather spend my time driving any day of the week.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 28, 2019)

Jully said:


> Give Logan's security another chance. Zand is right, lines are mega short these days. https://www.wcvb.com/article/securi...t-are-fastest-in-the-nation-tsa-says/25564586
> 
> Traffic is a different story though...
> 
> ...


I'm on the way home to Logan as I type from a business trip to Cancun.  I could literally avoid Logan (all of Boston actually) for the rest of my life and be very pleased with that outcome.

If I must fly it is almost always Manchester, but the timing just didn't work out this trip. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Vaughn (Jan 28, 2019)

AdironRider said:


> If I was stuck in a city this would be my play. Southwest flys to SLC from Boston. You can't get from Boston to VT for much less once you pay for gas and wear and tear on your car (Boston to Sugarbush round trip and the IRS rate would cover you for like 320 bucks). You fly enough and you get a buddy ticket for free.



This is a bizarre comp though - sure it takes 3.5 hours to get to SB from Boston but again you can get to all of the NH areas for a shorter drive as well as the southern VT areas.


----------



## cdskier (Jan 28, 2019)

Vaughn said:


> This is a bizarre comp though - sure it takes 3.5 hours to get to SB from Boston but again you can get to all of the NH areas for a shorter drive as well as the southern VT areas.



Plus the cost factor changes drastically when you start to consider the possibility of multiple people. The car/drive cost is the same whether there is 1 person in the car or 5. Flights on the other hand are per person.

Additionally...the IRS rate is rather ridiculous in my opinion (not that I complain when I have to drive to one of my other offices for work and get reimbursed for mileage). 

Even if the costs were the same, I'd still rather drive 5 hours every weekend rather than take a flight every weekend.


----------



## abc (Jan 28, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Hate the flying experience with a passion.
> 
> I'd much rather spend my time driving any day of the week.


While I don’t “hate” driving, I hate the time I wasted driving. HATE it with a passion! I felt I’m shortening my life by all those hours!


----------



## WWF-VT (Jan 28, 2019)

Average drive time from my house just west of Boston to Sugarbush is 3:15

Family time in the car with my kids as they grew up - priceless.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 28, 2019)

abc said:


> While I don’t “hate” driving, I hate the time I wasted driving. HATE it with a passion! I felt I’m shortening my life by all those hours!


Yeah, no drive to a ski area has ever annoyed me as bad as flying mishaps can.

This business trip case in point.

Friday, up at 4AM to make it to the airport in time for an early flight.  Get to the airport, flight departure delayed. Delayed not because of weather but because FAA rules require a specific rest period for the crew that got in late the night prior.  Delay in Boston caused missed connection in Atlanta. Sit around for an extra 90 minutes for the next flight.  Puts us into Cancun as some weather hit. Have to circle the airport for 90 minutes.  Get on the ground. 2 hour line to get through customs.

Fast forward to today.  Plane leaves Cancun late for no specific reason.  I get to Fort Lauderdale.  Race as fast as I can through customs, then back through security and onto my connection.  Missed connection due to no fault of my own.  Stuck in Fort Lauderdale for the night with nothing but the clothes I'm wearing, my company paying $225 for a hotel room to use for literally 7 hours until I get back in a taxi at 4AM to take a flight home.  (Hopefully)

Never had a drive to a ski area in New England screw me so badly as either my flying experience Friday or today. 

I'll take the comforts of my vehicle with my own schedule, my own tunes, not sharing space with rude strangers, being able to stop whenever I want for something to eat or use a bathroom larger than a phone booth every single time over air travel.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## abc (Jan 28, 2019)

> no drive to a ski area has ever annoyed me as bad as flying mishaps can.


I’ve had my share of flight delays. Fly enough, that’s bound to happen. Just statistic. But it doesn’t bother me. 

For one thing, I can work anywhere. 

So, stuck at airport? Pull out my laptop, or even just the iPad. I’m in business! Not quite as efficient as in the office with 3 monitors, but I can work on stuff that don’t need a nig screen. 

Have to get a hotel room? No biggie. Sure, it may bring additional expense which I don’t like. But the time was either for sleeping or swimming or gym, whatever I would have been doing that time of day anyway. No time wasted. 

The only thing I can help is when the plane circled for hours, whocj happened in a recent flight. Yeah, I was borderline stir crazy. But it never happened for that long, not that I could remember. 

Contrast that with getting stuck on roads on a friday rush hour trying to get to a ski resort in a snow storm turning a 5 hr drive into a 10 hr drive? No thanks. I’ll gladly take a leak in a phone booth on a plane!


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 28, 2019)

I don't live where there really is much of a rush hour and I also don't live 5 hours from where I prefer to ski. I live 2 hours away.  In the worst conditions it's never taken longer than 3.5 hours.  

I work remotely too, so yes I can and do work when delayed with air travel.  

I also have a 3 year old just starting to ski and a two month old.  That ups the ante tenfold on air travel headaches.  Nevermind the cost.

End of the day, I don't really care what others prefer nor should they care what I prefer.  





Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## abc (Jan 28, 2019)

It’s amazing how different our preference are! Even in such narrowly defined sphere as downhill skiing!

Isn’t this world a fascinating place?


----------



## Piste_inyoFace (Jan 28, 2019)

My 2 cents— 3 days at vail is 460$. Killington midweek pass 489$ plus tax. &#55358;&#56596;

When I priced out a trip earlier this season it would of cost me almost 2k for 5 day trip to ski 3 days. I can’t do that. Maybe one day I’d love to but for now I’ll take my killington season pass & day trips in the Catskills over that.


----------



## crazy (Jan 28, 2019)

Piste_inyoFace said:


> My 2 cents— 3 days at vail is 460$. Killington midweek pass 489$ plus tax. ��
> 
> When I priced out a trip earlier this season it would of cost me almost 2k for 5 day trip to ski 3 days. I can’t do that. Maybe one day I’d love to but for now I’ll take my killington season pass & day trips in the Catskills over that.



It obviously depends on location, but you could do unlimited skiing at Stowe (with blackouts), Okemo (no blackouts), up to 10 days at Vail, for under $700 by buying a pass.


----------



## Jully (Jan 28, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> I'm on the way home to Logan as I type from a business trip to Cancun.  I could literally avoid Logan (all of Boston actually) for the rest of my life and be very pleased with that outcome.
> 
> If I must fly it is almost always Manchester, but the timing just didn't work out this trip.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



If it was more or equivalently convenient for me to fly out of Manchester or Portland I'd do it every time as well. 



deadheadskier said:


> I don't live where there really is much of a rush hour and I also don't live 5 hours from where I prefer to ski. I live 2 hours away.  In the worst conditions it's never taken longer than 3.5 hours.
> 
> I work remotely too, so yes I can and do work when delayed with air travel.
> 
> ...



Can't argue with anything you've said here. Family and to a lesser extent simply non-skiing friends really make super frequent trips out west less appealing to me. There's something nice about being able to audible a free Sunday or not skiing at all for a weekend to make time for something urgent. While possible with flying too, it usually costs you a bunch.

Flight delays and traffic delays both infuriate me, but I completely agree that the average traffic delay is much less severe than the average flight delay. This is from the perspective of something driving from Boston to Maine and NH primarily.


----------



## Jully (Jan 28, 2019)

cdskier said:


> Plus the cost factor changes drastically when you start to consider the possibility of multiple people. The car/drive cost is the same whether there is 1 person in the car or 5. Flights on the other hand are per person.
> 
> Additionally...the IRS rate is rather ridiculous in my opinion (not that I complain when I have to drive to one of my other offices for work and get reimbursed for mileage).
> 
> Even if the costs were the same, I'd still rather drive 5 hours every weekend rather than take a flight every weekend.



Your point about costs/person is a good one. I'm always thinking in terms of one person in the car personally, but definitely not the case or even the norm for most of us.

The IRS rate I agree is bananas (hence why I used the term "aggressively" when I brought it up haha).

When the drive extends beyond 3.5 hours, I get squeamish. No matter how awake I am to start the drive, I get real sleeping by hour 4. Absolutely to each their own though. The VT mountains would be in a lot worse shape financially if everyone was like me.


----------



## ironhippy (Jan 29, 2019)

I'm more of a cyclist than skier so take this for what it's worth.

When the skiing is bad, the fat biking is normally really good. I'm lucky enough to live near (30 min max drive) 7 different fat bike areas, 5 of them are groomed with machines, the other 2 with snow shoes. That's not counting the thousands of miles of ski doo trails that I can reach from my back yard.


----------



## mfi (Jan 29, 2019)

My greatest anxiety with flying is loss of luggage and skis..that can really mess up a trip. That being said it has only happened once on a trip to Tahoe...but I still hate the wait at the luggage pickup..praying that at least my skis made it. Flying to resorts in this country is not too bad, especially Utah where you can ski the same day. BC is another story. 18 hours from the time I left my house to the resort. Air Canada is a bit of a mess..but the trip was worth it. 5 hour drives aren't too bad if you stop at least once, and you have another driver. Stowe is a t least a straight shot up with very little VT crawling at 30mph. Having a truck with snow tires gives me no worries, except for the cars with no season tires crashing in front of me in a storm.


----------



## VTKilarney (Jan 29, 2019)

Count me in the camp of people who believe that flying is a bigger burden than driving.  You have to get to the airport ahead of time, wait for your plane, fly, wait for your skis, wait for your shuttle... etc...

You also can't be nimble when flying - at least if you book the tickets ahead of time.  If SLC is having a bad year, too bad.  You are locked in.

I have a lot of respect for people that make numerous trips out west each year, but it's not something that I would be interested in, especially since I live three hours (with no traffic) from an airport with a direct flight to SLC.


----------



## abc (Jan 29, 2019)

VTKilarney said:


> Count me in the camp of people who believe that flying is a bigger burden than driving.
> ...
> I live three hours (with no traffic) from an airport with a direct flight to SLC.


Well, I think the cause of your burden is quite clear. There's a direct correlation between the above two line. 

I live less than an hour from 3 airport that have many flights. So any given time, I can almost always find direct flights to just about anywhere. (Doesn't mean it's cheap, that takes advance purchase). The equation for me is VERY different than for many others.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 29, 2019)

While I know there are additional costs associated with wear and tear on a vehicle,  I just got back to Logan. Parking from Friday morning until today was $158.  I can fill my Alltrack up five times for that amount and complete two round trips to Wildcat per fill up.   So, ten trips.  Mind you I also have a 120 mile round trip commute plus tolls on top of the Logan parking expense.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Smellytele (Jan 29, 2019)

So it comes down to everyone's situation is different. Some people live in Gotham and can get on a plane easier and cheaper to get out west. Others live closer to the great outdoors and can drive cheaper and easier to the eastern mtns. Every one has to sacrifice something in life to get something else.


----------



## abc (Jan 29, 2019)

Back to the initial post of this thread. OP is on Loooong Island! His friends "live nearby", which is again LI. That's a looooong way to the mountains! Along their path drive to the mountains, they would have to pass (no, make that "fight their way through crazy traffic") by one or even two major airport with tons of direct flights to the west. 

I can see why many of them no longer ski the east. 

I, on the other hand, choose to move away from Long Island for that very reason. Too far from the mountains. Not just for skiing but also for mountain biking. 

From my house in Westchester, I can still (kind of, sort of) get to the mountains at a reasonable effort (cost+time). So I get to ski the east for about 30% of my days. Though reality being, the more I ski the west, the less I ski the east. 

(those days used to be 50/50 east-west. But I've increased my days quite a bit lately. And all the increase are out west! Basically, my eastern days are holding steady but as my western days goes up, the percentage is tilting strongly west  )


----------



## AdironRider (Jan 29, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> While I know there are additional costs associated with wear and tear on a vehicle,  I just got back to Logan. Parking from Friday morning until today was $158.  I can fill my Alltrack up five times for that amount and complete two round trips to Wildcat per fill up.   So, ten trips.  Mind you I also have a 120 mile round trip commute plus tolls on top of the Logan parking expense.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



The IRS isn't in the habit of giving more writeoffs than they have to. The 55 cents a mile give or take is pretty accurate (I've done the accounting for a fleet of 100+ vehicles). And that was in an area where rust wasn't an issue. 

I'd be on the downeaster if I was you. You are 10 minutes away from the Exeter station. Easy transfers to Logan from North Station, I usually get to the airport quicker than a cab via T on the blue line.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 29, 2019)

AdironRider said:


> The IRS isn't in the habit of giving more writeoffs than they have to. The 55 cents a mile give or take is pretty accurate (I've done the accounting for a fleet of 100+ vehicles). And that was in an area where rust wasn't an issue.
> 
> I'd be on the downeaster if I was you. You are 10 minutes away from the Exeter station. Easy transfers to Logan from North Station, I usually get to the airport quicker than a cab via T on the blue line.


I've considered it, but it really depends on the flight.  The earliest DE train arrives in North Station at 7:50AM.  So, factoring in 45 minutes to be safe to get to Logan plus security lines etc, about the earliest flight you can catch using the DE is 10AM.  The return options are also tough to work with.   

Ultimately I try and use Manchester or Portsmouth 90% of the time, but this particular trip forced me into Logan.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Not Sure (Jan 29, 2019)

With flying there's other things to go wrong. I took a group trip to Banff years ago the flights were uneventful but one of the others in the group got his ski bag and noticed some dirt on the outside , unzipped to find both pairs of skiis with the tips completely broken off!!

We take a bus to from Calagary , me trying to be helpful unload my ski bag and was about to place it in the outside storage area . Bus driver spots me and goes berserk ....Starts yelling at me and grabs my bag and says wrong hotel . I protested many times but to no avail guy throws my skis back in the bus storage .....WTF . Unload luggage and bus drivers gone !@###$. I went in to the Hotel manager and explained what had just happened . They said "Would look into it " two days later I get my skis back without may bag. Hotel paid for rentals ......Damn :angry:


----------



## Edd (Jan 29, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> I've considered it, but it really depends on the flight.  The earliest DE train arrives in North Station at 7:50AM.  So, factoring in 45 minutes to be safe to get to Logan plus security lines etc, about the earliest flight you can catch using the DE is 10AM.  The return options are also tough to work with.
> 
> Ultimately I try and use Manchester or Portsmouth 90% of the time, but this particular trip forced me into Logan.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



For ski flights from our area the fastest way is to just drive straight to Logan unfortunately. Manchester has no direct flights that I’m aware of to anyplace that matters. Taking the bus from Portsmouth saves $ on parking, but the equation changes fast as you add people.


----------



## Skrn (Jan 29, 2019)

Flying is definitely more complicated logistically and expensive. But there are things you can do to make flying cheaper and less stressful.

1. While airfare adds additional cost, I found ski resort hotels in the west are a lot cheaper than the east. For example, it costs me $90 a night to book a suite (for family of 4) at the mouth of cottonwood canyon during Christmas. This would be easily $250+ in east resorts. There are more options to have cheap and high quality meals too.  

2. For some destinations like SLC and DEN, airfare can be low when most airlines first publish the fares 11 months out, it can also drop 1-2 months out if they don't sell and you can flexibility. JetBlue publish airfares 6 months out. That is also a good point to buy as the price can be low. If you watch early, pretty easy to score fares that are under $250 to SLC and under $300 to DEN. Destinations like Aspen, Steamboat, Jackson tends to higher. 

3. Cost wise, if we are talking about skiing an week during high season (Christmas/new year, MLK, Feb vacation week), I will be able to save more money from hotel and meals in SLC or DEN that more than offsetting the cost of airfare. And you have less crowds and better snow.

4. There are certain credit cards covering baggage delay/loss/damage. If you use those cards to pay for airfare, you don't need to worry about checked skis too much. Because if they don't arrive on time you can demo skis with costs reimbursed by credit card company.

5. Normally the same credit cards cover trip delay/cancellation, I just came back from a steamboat trip when return flight was cancelled and rebooked to next day. I ended skiing one more day with hotel/meal/taxi costs reimbursed.

6. Specifically, flying to SLC has minimum risk in weather delay, because it rarely snow in the valley. Delta and JetBlue are relatively efficient airlines with less delay/baggage issues. Uber Ski is super convenient. 

7. The more you travel, the less you bring and less stress on your way. Also the more you travel, the less lead time you built in and spend less time in airport.

Personally I skis a lot in the East and took multiple trips to west. Not arguing if you should or shouldn't ski the east. But if you do fly to ski the west, hope these tips can save you some $$ and hassle.


----------



## Ski the Moguls (Jan 29, 2019)

All this talk of heading west has me thinking of a trip to Snowbird for myself. Anyone have experience between Iron Blossom, The Lodge, and The Cliff hotel rooms? Just book the cheapest, or is one preferable?


----------



## Hawk (Jan 29, 2019)

slatham said:


> I have to make the assumption this person is single? Which makes me think, how many of us here are single vs. have families in tow? Changes the equation.....
> 
> Also, someone mentioned equal time Boston to SLC vs driving North? Some bad math in those calculations when you look at the all in travel time.


Nope, married with one kid.  The kid goes with him about 50% of the time.  He has it totally dialed in.


----------



## Zand (Jan 29, 2019)

Skrn said:


> Flying is definitely more complicated logistically and expensive. But there are things you can do to make flying cheaper and less stressful.
> 
> 1. While airfare adds additional cost, I found ski resort hotels in the west are a lot cheaper than the east. For example, it costs me $90 a night to book a suite (for family of 4) at the mouth of cottonwood canyon during Christmas. This would be easily $250+ in east resorts. There are more options to have cheap and high quality meals too.
> 
> ...



I agree that lodging in Utah is very cheap compared to anywhere in the east. Twice as much for me to get a room in that big beautiful destination city St Johnsbury as it was in Midvale (which has EVERYTHING you need right there and only 20 minutes from Snowbird). The other hotels I was looking at in Utah even up on the edge of the Canyons was still incredibly low...you'd be paying $200+ in the east on a weekday to get that close. I wouldn't put Colorado in the cheap category though (although still less on average than the east).

If you do have a little flexibility, JetBlue bestfarefinder.com is your friend. Haven't looked in a while but even flights to STEAMBOAT were recently under $300 round trip from Boston in late March. It was possible to do Denver and SLC for under $200 round trip.

For me by far the biggest money sucker in SLC was renting an SUV. Quickly realized it wasn't necessary. It's possible to get by without a car at all while you're there because the bus routes are everywhere and go to every mountain. If you're like me and want a car just for the convenience of being able to drive around to find good food and stuff like that, then all you need there is a car. If it's snowing and the 4X4 laws are in effect in the canyons, find a parking lot and hop on the bus. On the other hand, Colorado is nearly impossible to do without an SUV so can't cut that cost there.

EDIT...I'll be damned. Right now you can do Wed-Wed in March to Steamboat for $198 roundtrip from Boston.


----------



## jimk (Jan 29, 2019)

East-West Ski Career in a Nutshell:
- started skiing in the mid-Atlantic in 1967, primarily day-skiing at an assortment of areas within 2-3 hrs of Wash DC. Me and my older brothers at Camelback 1968





- 1971 made first out-of-region ski trip to Whiteface and Stowe with family during Christmas week.  I made my first return to Stowe in 2010 and took this photo:




- 1972-87 folks owned ski cabin one mile from Blue Knob, PA, they and my 3 sibs had season pass those years and skied 25-50 days per season.  My folks at Killington 1977:




- for first 40 of my ski years I did 90% of my skiing in the mid-Atlantic, but many winters I would take time for a week trip to New England or out West, made first Western trip in 1976 to CO.  Sweet home Blue Knob, PA:




- in the early 2000s my four kids reached HS and college years and I started skiing more out West, East-West split of ski days close to 50-50.  My family at Eldora, CO:




- Between approx 2008-2014 my son and I visited more than 50 different ski areas together.  He had grown to be as avid or more about skiing as me and we saw a lot of the best areas in N. America. Son and I at Cannon Mtn:




- Son got "real" job in SLC in 2015 and also became part time instructor at Snowbird.  I still have my home in Wash DC area, but now my ratio of ski days becomes about 75% west and 25% east.  I got in the mode of flying to SLC about 3 times a winter and quickly learned to accept the hassle of flying for some good skiing.  My son at his adopted home Snowbird:





- Will probably continue the western focus in future as long as son has a place for me to crash in SLC.

The difference between me and a lot of you is that you guys live 2-4 hrs from good New England skiing at nice places with 2000' of vertical or more.  I live 2-4 hrs from places where 1000' is big and skiing that is limited to man-made snow runs almost exclusively. This motivated me to search a little farther and wider for good skiing.


----------



## abc (Jan 29, 2019)

Prime season:

Utah lodging makes Colorado feel REALLY expensive!

And Colorado makes Vermont feel REALLY expensive!

So for those of us who don’t have a ski housein VT? It’s a question of “how often do I feel like paying an arm and a leg to ski in VT?”. And if it’s expect to rain, or frigid temperatures plus wind chill, the long lines and crowded slopes... our answers are pretty unanimous!

Fast forward to spring time (late March/April), lodging cost falls like a rock. The difference between VT and UT got a lot smaller. And the mountain emptier too. That’s when I feel like skiing the east.


----------



## KustyTheKlown (Jan 29, 2019)

you nj and nyc area people complaining about the distance are just soft as shit.

i live in brooklyn new york. 

i ski 50 days a year. maybe 45 this year because i'm throwing my girlfriend some bones and skipping this weekend to see the disco biscuits. 

i ski 30 days in the east. i ski 20 days in the west. the overwhelming majority of my eastern days are in vermont. mostly central or northern vermont. maybe like 2 days in the catskills. 

i work a m-f 9-5. i use 75% of my vacation days to ski out west. the other 25% saved for summer trips that the girlfriend gets to plan entirely. i do not use PTO to ski the east. skiing the east is a purely weekend pursuit, or maybe the occasional last minute sick day for a big storm. my boss gets it. 

i drive thru the night on friday nights. i sleep in my car. i stay in shit motels. i drive back exhausted, get home at 9 pm, go to sleep, and go to work.

i am almost 34 years old. i foresee myself maintaining this schedule until 40, at least. god willing, by then, i can buy something and relocate at least part time to the mountains. i'd probably choose a second home in vt, not out west. the skiing is better out west. the soul of it is better in the east.


----------



## KustyTheKlown (Jan 29, 2019)

abc said:


> Prime season:
> 
> Utah lodging makes Colorado feel REALLY expensive!
> 
> ...



what? 

salt lake city motels are like $50 and within 45 minutes of the cottonwoods. 

frisco/silverthorne/dillon motels are ~$150 (ie., the most expensive of the three places you mention)

killington/rutland area motels are <$100. 

manchester stratton/magic area motels are ~$100. 

waterbury/stowe hotels are ~$125.

no matter what state/region, just stay in the towns/cities and not on mountain and don't be prissy about the quality of your lodging and it doesnt need to cost very much.


----------



## kingslug (Jan 29, 2019)

abc said:


> Back to the initial post of this thread. OP is on Loooong Island! His friends "live nearby", which is again LI. That's a looooong way to the mountains! Along their path drive to the mountains, they would have to pass (no, make that "fight their way through crazy traffic") by one or even two major airport with tons of direct flights to the west.
> 
> I can see why many of them no longer ski the east.
> 
> ...


I cant change my location on my profile but im in stamford ct now and the club is based in NYC..thats wshy i can go to Stowe all the time..only a 5 hour drive


----------



## kingslug (Jan 29, 2019)

And yes..my dream is to move to utah..which may..just never happen..


----------



## abc (Jan 29, 2019)

KustyTheKlown said:


> what?
> 
> salt lake city motels are like $50 and within 45 minutes of the cottonwoods.
> 
> ...


OK, I was wrong in the price range of Colorado. The cost of lodging had increased substantially since the last time I had to pay to stay there. (since I now have a free place to stay, I haven't paid for lodging for some years. My information was outdated)

My bad.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 29, 2019)

KustyTheKlown said:


> *i'd probably choose a second home in vt, not out west.* the skiing is better out west. the soul of it is better in the east.



That may change once you see the difference between 2nd-home property taxes out west versus Vermont.  Ouchie.


----------



## kingslug (Jan 30, 2019)

VT...not a cheap place...


----------



## KustyTheKlown (Jan 30, 2019)

NH or ADKs works too. One day.


----------



## mfi (Jan 30, 2019)

But VT has the best damn beer!!! and cheese...


----------



## jimk (Jan 30, 2019)

Ski the Moguls said:


> All this talk of heading west has me thinking of a trip to Snowbird for myself. Anyone have experience between Iron Blossom, The Lodge, and The Cliff hotel rooms? Just book the cheapest, or is one preferable?


Just go with cheapest.  All pretty similar with good access to slopes.  Budget seekers stay 20 minutes away in suburban SLC at chain motels for $100 or less per night.  Renting a 4wd is good if you're sharing costs, but I've often got by with economy car if trying to save.  Then there is public bus option when it snows, but that can be crowded on pow days.  It's good to stay up LCC if you're on a rare vacation to avoid hassles.

I’ve done a lot of ski travel over the decades, but much of it was by automobile, including numerous cross-country drives.  I’m not as experienced at flying and never held a job where I flew much.
Since 2016 I’ve gotten more flying experience, specifically because I’ve flown from Wash DC to SLC about 8 times.  Although it might have been worthwhile, I don’t do frequent flyer miles because, as mentioned, I rarely flew for any other reasons during that time (or before). 
I used Kayak-type sites or airline sites to find my fares and I would sometimes buy tickets months in advance.  Other times I’d buy a fare just 2 or 3 weeks in advance (and pay more for that tardiness/spontaneity).  My rdtrp fares from Wash DC to SLC usually ranged from $200-300.  Highest might have been about 350.  Lowest was $138 rdtrp in May 2018 when I went out to help son paint his house exterior.  I flew a variety of airlines such as Delta, SWA, Frontier; generally whatever was lowest for specific dates.  Delta usually cost a bit more, but I found them more user-friendly with better chance for non-stops, and they had some convenient flight times on my route that allowed for last-day skiing.  My wife and I once in 2017 took voluntarily bumps on an afternoon flight out of SLC when Delta paid us $800 each (in future flight credits) to switch from a 5pm to a 9pm (redeye) flight.   Another time I took a voluntary bump in similar scenario by myself when Delta paid me $700 in Am Ex gift card (good as cash).  A third time I got involuntarily bumped when ice storm in Atlanta caused nationwide delays for Delta.  They gave me a $150 future flight credit and some meal money for that delay, but I had to stay an extra day at son’s Utah house before flying home.   I only work about 20-25 hrs per week the last four years, so I probably tolerate these travel/flight disruptions better than a lot of you, plus I have a free place to stay in Utah.
PS:  Best Utah storm cycle I ever caught was a week in Jan 2017 (81") on an airline ticket I bought three months in advance:   http://www.dcski.com/forum/91448


----------



## benski (Jan 30, 2019)

Delta has a picture of Sugarbush on there Facebook page now. Which brings the question, how many people are flying to ski Vermont? I know someone who did this. But only for a free place to stay in spite of not being able to stay awake his entire drive.


----------



## jimk (Jan 30, 2019)

For Wash DC and points south taking a flight to VT is a serious consideration.  I never did it in dozens of trips up there.  I’m too cheap, and I always wanted my car to commute from my motel to the slopes once up there.  I was usually on a family budget and not staying slopeside.  Also, I tolerate long drives pretty well when sufficiently motivated.  Sometimes air fares from DC to Manchester can be pretty good and driving from down here does entail an increasingly expensive gauntlet of highway tolls, so the flight/drive cost differential may be getting closer.  However, my advice to most local friends about this is if getting into an airplane I recommend going west than north because of more consistent good ski conditions for minor additional cost.
FYI from DC to Mt. Snow is approx. 8-9 hrs, to Stowe maybe 11 hrs in good driving conditions.


----------



## abc (Jan 30, 2019)

The cost comparison between drive vs fly need to include cost of rental cars at the destination. 

That's why we in this country almost ALWAYS drive to destination that's less than 5 hours away, and often even for drives that are 8 hrs or even 10 hrs away. The need for a rental car adds substantially to the equation when flying. e.g. you may get a $150 round trip flight from DC to Burlington. But add the rental car @$50/day, you're suddenly up to $300 for a weekend getaway! 

(Driving, you have your own car at the destination. Then, there's also the luggage cost. though that's not quite as high as the rental car.)

I hate long drives. But once factor in the cost of rental car, I always ended up driving anywhere that's less than a day's drive away. 

It's only for destination that are far away, then flying makes a lot more sense.


----------



## Zand (Jan 30, 2019)

If I lived where I had to fly just go get to VT (south of DC is probably where that limit begins) I would never fly to VT and exclusively fly west. If you have to deal with the hassle and expense either way why would you NOT go west unless you have family or friends in VT.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 30, 2019)

Zand said:


> If I lived where I had to fly just go get to VT (south of DC is probably where that limit begins)* I would never fly to VT and exclusively fly west. **If you have to deal with the hassle and expense either way why would you NOT go west* unless you have family or friends in VT.



Pretty much everyone in America agrees.   

If you had the ability to compare auto/plane travel for east/west ski resorts they would likely be dramatically different.


----------



## VTKilarney (Jan 30, 2019)

KustyTheKlown said:


> NH or ADKs works too. One day.



Is this where we tell him about the property taxes in New Hampshire?


----------



## crank (Jan 30, 2019)

Ski the Moguls said:


> All this talk of heading west has me thinking of a trip to Snowbird for myself. Anyone have experience between Iron Blossom, The Lodge, and The Cliff hotel rooms? Just book the cheapest, or is one preferable?




Iron Blossam is fine.  Nice hot tub.  Decent restaurant.  It's been 4 seasons but I found a studio thereon Craigslist for $600 for a full week.  We  stayed 6 nights and skied 5 days but it was still a bargain.  Only thing about being trapped up there with no car is you are at the mercy of the expensive crappy little grocery store in Snowbird's lodge and a few over priced restaurants.  Maybe Uber to tge resort rather than airport shuttle and stop at a grocery and liquor store along the way?


Regarding subject of this thread...  I go both ways - last year I skied 2 days in VT and 18 out west on 3 trips.  The year before I didn't ski the east at all and skied 20 something days out west.  This year I have been to Stowe a few days and have plans to drive up to Eastern Townships and Jay for a week in Feb. and then meet some guys at Stowe and Sugarbush at the end of March.  I am going to Val d'Isere for a week and will not head west at all this season... was invited and was considering going with my buddies in the next paragraph but wanted to stay home for some stupid reason.

I have friends in their 50's who still do the Killington ski house thing. They are a subset of my friends who are total powder hound storm chasers and these guys head north only if there is a big storm.  They also head west only when the weather pattern is promising.  Bastards just caught the last series of storms at Jackson Hole and a few of them are still out there and are driving down to SLC for a few more days.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 30, 2019)

crank said:


> Iron Blossam is fine.  Nice hot tub.  Decent restaurant.  It's been 4 seasons but I found a studio thereon Craigslist for $600 for a full week.  We  stayed 6 nights and skied 5 days but it was still a bargain. * Only thing about being trapped up there with no car is you are at the mercy of the expensive crappy little grocery store in Snowbird's lodge and a few over priced restaurants. *



Stayed a night at the Cliff Lodge this summer, and I dont think I'd want to stay at Snowbird in the winter for this reason.  The place is nice enough, but you're completely captive, and honestly the service was terrible, and that's coming from someone who doesnt care much about service.  Restaurants basically shut when they feel like rather than by posted hours, and this was during an extremely busy, near sold out or sold out weekend.  We had to wander to several restaurants to find one "willing" to serve us, and this was only at about 9pm, and even then, it was limited menu.   Employees were disgruntled too and bitching about call-outs and lack-of-accountability from management regarding "bad" employees; I really got a very bad vibe from the place.


----------



## mfi (Jan 30, 2019)

When its storming ide rather be there than stuck on the access road...cheese crackers and some wine and im good


----------



## Dickc (Jan 30, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> While I know there are additional costs associated with wear and tear on a vehicle,  I just got back to Logan. Parking from Friday morning until today was $158.  I can fill my Alltrack up five times for that amount and complete two round trips to Wildcat per fill up.   So, ten trips.  Mind you I also have a 120 mile round trip commute plus tolls on top of the Logan parking expense.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



There is a Logan Express in Peabody.  Park there, ride the Logan bus.  You need to get off on Route One in Danvers as the 95 exit come out about 50 yards too far to go right there.


----------



## Ski the Moguls (Jan 30, 2019)

kingslug said:


> What really cracks me up is a lot of them bring their Eastern skis...and die in the deep snow...some do get it..and rent some fat boys...after dying..in the powder.



What do people think about this? Sounds like my 85mm waist Kendos may not be worth bringing out west, but how do the fat boys handle the trees and bumps?


----------



## Domeskier (Jan 30, 2019)

Ski the Moguls said:


> What do people think about this? Sounds like my 85mm waist Kendos may not be worth bringing out west, but how do the fat boys handle the trees and bumps?



Fat skis are for people who think they like powder but really want groomers.


----------



## Not Sure (Jan 30, 2019)

Ski the Moguls said:


> What do people think about this? Sounds like my 85mm waist Kendos may not be worth bringing out west, but how do the fat boys handle the trees and bumps?



It's been a while but western bumps are filled with packing peanuts . Eastern bumps are made with recycled concrete. 
You'll be fine with the fat boys.


----------



## jimk (Jan 30, 2019)

Ski the Moguls said:


> What do people think about this? Sounds like my 85mm waist Kendos may not be worth bringing out west, but how do the fat boys handle the trees and bumps?



I'd bring your 85mm skis.  There is about a 65% chance they will be just fine.  If you catch approx 10" or more new snow, then you might want to rent a fatter ski for a day or two.  Even when no new snow your 85mm will be among the most narrow skis in Little Cottonwood Canyon


----------



## tnt1234 (Jan 30, 2019)

Ski the Moguls said:


> What do people think about this? Sounds like my 85mm waist Kendos may not be worth bringing out west, but how do the fat boys handle the trees and bumps?



I skied my 88m Bushwackers at Breckenridge this year and they were fine.  Didn't snow while we were there though.  Had it, Iw ould have rented - not that I can't, and don't ski powder with them, but just because it would be fun to try something fatter.


----------



## prsboogie (Jan 30, 2019)

slatham said:


> I have to make the assumption this person is single? Which makes me think, how many of us here are single vs. have families in tow? Changes the equation.....
> 
> Also, someone mentioned equal time Boston to SLC vs driving North? Some bad math in those calculations when you look at the all in travel time.


This ^^ if you are a single person the costs are not that unreasonable, PVD to SLC is about $350 RT, x 4 ~ $1400 then lodging and lift tickets, meals transfers etc. 

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## benski (Jan 30, 2019)

BenedictGomez said:


> Stayed a night at the Cliff Lodge this summer, and I dont think I'd want to stay at Snowbird in the winter for this reason.  The place is nice enough, but you're completely captive, and honestly the service was terrible, and that's coming from someone who doesnt care much about service.  Restaurants basically shut when they feel like rather than by posted hours, and this was during an extremely busy, near sold out or sold out weekend.  We had to wander to several restaurants to find one "willing" to serve us, and this was only at about 9pm, and even then, it was limited menu.   Employees were disgruntled too and bitching about call-outs and lack-of-accountability from management regarding "bad" employees; I really got a very bad vibe from the place.



When I went to snowbird I felt like all the restaurant sucked too. I remember an incident with uncooked meat, but mostly just lame overpriced restaurants. On Yelp it looks like Alta has better rated restaurants. I know some of the on mountain lodging is independent at Alta.


----------



## Ski the Moguls (Jan 30, 2019)

Domeskier said:


> Fat skis are for people who think they like powder but really want groomers.



Ha! I have sometimes thought this myself -- are fat skis just cheats for people that do not know how to evenly weight their feet in the fluff? Putting most of your weight on the outside ski helps you hold an edge on hard pack, but it is not the way to ski powder!


----------



## snoseek (Jan 31, 2019)

benski said:


> When I went to snowbird I felt like all the restaurant sucked too. I remember an incident with uncooked meat, but mostly just lame overpriced restaurants. On Yelp it looks like Alta has better rated restaurants. I know some of the on mountain lodging is independent at Alta.



The lodges at alta are indeed independent and operate a modified American plan meaning you get breakfast and dinner included in the room fee. The lodges will gladly take outside reservations and it is prix fix menu that changes nightly.


----------



## mfi (Jan 31, 2019)

Ski the Moguls said:


> Ha! I have sometimes thought this myself -- are fat skis just cheats for people that do not know how to evenly weight their feet in the fluff? Putting most of your weight on the outside ski helps you hold an edge on hard pack, but it is not the way to ski powder!



I like my fat skis..skiing powder for 20 years now..but yes experts can rip it on skinny ones..I'm not in that category. Its like Banana George who can water ski on his bare feet..most people prefer water skis. I had a much better time on my 117's at Jackson in 3 feet of snow than others on their skinny skis. Technology is..technology..it keeps improving..some things..


----------



## andrec10 (Jan 31, 2019)

Siliconebobsquarepants said:


> It's been a while but western bumps are filled with packing peanuts . Eastern bumps are made with recycled concrete.
> You'll be fine with the fat boys.



This!


----------



## tumbler (Jan 31, 2019)

We stayed at the Cliff a couple years ago in early March, family of 5 and found everything to be great.  The restaurant at the top was very good and the service was great.  Took the shuttle and ate at other restaurants and had no issues.  Yes, you are a bit captive but after a day of skiing, apres, hot tub and dinner, bed was the call.  I liked being able to ski down to the Peruvian lift with almost no line while the tram line was out of the building.  Take the tunnel into Mineral or ski off the Peruvian.  The new bridge from the Cliff to Tram building should make a huge difference.  I've also stayed at the Rustler and felt more captive there.


----------



## skiNEwhere (Jan 31, 2019)

This time of year I wouldn't take anything sub 100 to Alta/Snowbird unless you have no other choice. Even on the days in between the storms where the snow gets firm, it's still very edgable. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## mfi (Jan 31, 2019)

Alta Bird got 7 feet in 7 days..THATS BIG BAZOOKA ski territory. Read my write up of the Head Kore 117's. They worked fine in every condition I can think of except ice which I did not encounter at JH. Nor would I want to.


----------



## Ski the Moguls (Jan 31, 2019)

mfi said:


> I like my fat skis..skiing powder for 20 years now..but yes experts can rip it on skinny ones..I'm not in that category. Its like Banana George who can water ski on his bare feet..most people prefer water skis. I had a much better time on my 117's at Jackson in 3 feet of snow than others on their skinny skis. Technology is..technology..it keeps improving..some things..


Good point. The reason I have for being cautious about fatter skis is the potential drawback in bumps or tight trees.

I was mistaken, my old Volkl Kendos are 89mm, not 85mm, so that helps a little. However, Demos/Performance rentals are only $50 a day, while the airlines will charge $40 each way to fly my old skis out there. (4 ski days X $50)  - (2 flights x $40) = $120 for demos. Seems like a small price to pay.

btw ... the Snowbird Cliff rental shop offers Volkl 108's, Mantras (96mm), and Kendos (currently 90mm). So my old skis would not be entirely out of place!


----------



## mfi (Jan 31, 2019)

Jackson got hammered into moguls after every dump..the 117's just floated through them, turn if I want or just bomb over them. In the glades they just ripped through huge moguls, and the Hobacks which has huge moguls at the top. 
An Eastern mogul ski they are not...
My regular Eastern skis are 105, shit condition skis are 85.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 31, 2019)

Threads like this remind me that we live in an age where many people have no idea what it's like skiing on something 63 or 65 underneath.


----------



## KustyTheKlown (Jan 31, 2019)

i still have a pair of atomic beta carv 9.18s in the garage. they are 68 maybe? i took them to aspen about 12 years ago. narrow skis are stupid and ive never looked back. got 85s about 10 years ago, and since then never anything less than 100.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 31, 2019)

KustyTheKlown said:


> i still have a pair of atomic beta carv 9.18s in the garage. they are 68 maybe? i took them to aspen about 12 years ago. narrow skis are stupid and ive never looked back. got 85s about 10 years ago, and since then never anything less than 100.


Couldn't disagree more. And I skied wide skis before they were cool.  I was on Rossignol Axiom (110) from 99-2005 as a primary ski. 

Anything over 100 is pretty much a waste unless there's 8+" of fresh down.  You forfeit considerable carving, mogul and tight tree performance going that wide.

My active quiver is

Head iRally (76)
Nordica Steadfast (90)
Nordica Vagabond (107)

In all but the best of EC winters, the Vagabonds are used maybe 10% of my days out. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 31, 2019)

KustyTheKlown said:


> narrow skis are stupid



Like this.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 31, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Anything over 100 is pretty much a waste unless there's 8+" of fresh down.  *You forfeit considerable carving, mogul and tight tree performance going that wide.*



Precisely this.  All of this.

I have an ancient pair of Salomon XScream skis which I believe are 67 underneath, which I keep in-tune and they only come out in the absolute most horrid of (usually early season) conditions.   I can use them to comfortably & safely go down a steep ice skating rink.   

This is the point where numerous people will reply that they too can go flying comfortably & safely down steep ice skating rinks on their beloved 110 underfoot, but no, no you cant.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Jan 31, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> *My active quiver is
> 
> Head iRally (76)
> Nordica Steadfast (90)
> Nordica Vagabond (107)*



My quiver is surprisingly similar:

Salomon XScream (67)
Line Prophets       (90)
Rossignol Soul 7's  (106)


I also have a pair of Rossignol S7's (116), but they only come out in major dumps.


----------



## GregoryIsaacs (Jan 31, 2019)

BenedictGomez said:


> Precisely this.  All of this.
> 
> I have an ancient pair of Salomon XScream skis which I believe are 67 underneath, which I keep in-tune and they only come out in the absolute most horrid of (usually early season) conditions.   I can use them to comfortably & safely go down a steep ice skating rink.
> 
> This is the point where numerous people will reply that they too can go flying comfortably & safely down steep ice skating rinks on their beloved 110 underfoot, but no, no you cant.



Agreed. I will never go wider than 98.. I feel like out east anything wider than that turns into the equivalent of cinderblocks attached to a 2X4 real quick... Wide open pow charges on a steep incline is a whole different ballgame though and thats why I still have a pair of Atomic Powder Magics hanging around just in case


----------



## jaytrem (Jan 31, 2019)

GregoryIsaacs said:


> I feel like out east anything wider than that turns into the equivalent of cinderblocks attached to a 2X4 real quick..



Out east? Where you from, Minnesota? 

As for skis I'm mostly on old K2 Cabrawlers, somewhat old mogul skis.  For me theyre fine in deep powder.  For tele skis I do have a fatter pair if needed.


----------



## Jully (Jan 31, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Couldn't disagree more. And I skied wide skis before they were cool.  I was on Rossignol Axiom (110) from 99-2005 as a primary ski.
> 
> Anything over 100 is pretty much a waste unless there's 8+" of fresh down.  You forfeit considerable carving, mogul and tight tree performance going that wide.
> 
> ...



Agreed completely. Carving performance is really important to me especially. Nothing matches the performance of a race inspired ski <73 mm underfoot. Its even more noticable on days approaching the feel of an injected FIS course. You CAN carve something wider, but I can enjoy a frozen day on a ski like that, much less fun flapping around on a 95 or even 85mm ski.

Same thing goes for real mogul skis, though I've only spent individual days on them and can't zipper moguls well enough to really feel confident touting their superiority in detail beyond "wow."

All mountain skis these days can do just about anything okay, but just as 117s really rock, a 67mm also shines in the right scenario and conditions.


----------



## deadheadskier (Jan 31, 2019)

It's all physics.  Not too different than automobiles

IRally = AWD sports sedan with studded snows

Steadfasts = SUV

Vagabonds = F150 with big ass tires





Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## cdskier (Jan 31, 2019)

Jully said:


> Agreed completely. Carving performance is really important to me especially. Nothing matches the performance of a race inspired ski <73 mm underfoot. Its even more noticable on days approaching the feel of an injected FIS course. You CAN carve something wider, but I can enjoy a frozen day on a ski like that, much less fun flapping around on a 95 or even 85mm ski.
> 
> Same thing goes for real mogul skis, though I've only spent individual days on them and can't zipper moguls well enough to really feel confident touting their superiority in detail beyond "wow."
> 
> All mountain skis these days can do just about anything okay, but just as 117s really rock, a 67mm also shines in the right scenario and conditions.



Several years ago I tried using my Fischer RX8 skis (mid 60s at the waist) and absolutely couldn't stand them any more. Back in the day I loved my Atomic Beta Race Carve 9.something skis (although back then I loved just ripping down groomed runs with big GS turns and skied VT only maybe once a year)

My current quiver only has 2 skis:
Volkl AC50 (85)
Nordica Hell and Back (98 )

The AC50's are my hard pack/early season/late season skis. I enjoy the playfulness more on the Nordica's though as long as we have at least packed powder conditions. Can't really speak to wider skis as I haven't had much experience with them in the right conditions. I've toyed with the idea of getting something wider for true powder days but just couldn't convince myself to spend the money. Generally speaking my current skis do quite well in east coast conditions, although I fear the AC50s are approaching the end of their useful life and may need to be replaced in the next couple years.


----------



## skiur (Feb 1, 2019)

I always have to laugh as now its so common on the east coast on a super icy day to see half the people out there on skis wider than 115.  I like the way they look and its what people out west use so they must be good seems to be the thought process.


----------



## ironhippy (Feb 1, 2019)

skiur said:


> I always have to laugh as now its so common on the east coast on a super icy day to see half the people out there on skis wider than 115.  I like the way they look and its what people out west use so they must be good seems to be the thought process.



I also laugh at this.
Or at the "powder days" when it's 3-4 inches of dust on crust.

If I only have one set of skis, I'd prefer them to be optimal for the conditions I normally ski.


----------



## dlague (Feb 1, 2019)

Well,  this is an interesting thread.  I am on my 3rd season in Colorado and I honestly do not miss New England skiing at all.  Conditions here are super consistent, rarely rains in the mountains,  rarely are there days that are sub zero, and the snow is never frozen.  Bumps are always nice and the woods always skiable.  Powder days are never deep though generally 10-20 inches with several 3-10 inch tune ups.  While I will get in a day now and then in VT or NH, the one time I have been so far was not great at Cannon - super icy.  Did not miss it.  So I get why people might focus on western skiing.

Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Smellytele (Feb 1, 2019)

I laugh when people are using race skis on 10" days. I have a pair of 78 under foot for most days but a pair of 110 for powder days. If it a day after powder with no ice to be seen I will ski the 110's, They work great on non ice groomers (packed powder) better than the 78's. Any site of "hard pack" aka ice and it's the 78. The 110's also bust through/over crud like a hot knife through buttah.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 1, 2019)

cdskier said:


> * I've toyed with the idea of getting something wider for true powder days but just couldn't convince myself to spend the money.*



Wait until near the end of the season, and buy demo powder boards.   If you take a late trip out west you can find them at the mountains, if not, look on EBAY and you wont pay for than $350 for lightly used skis.



ironhippy said:


> *If I only have one set of skis, I'd prefer them to be optimal for the conditions I normally ski.*



If I were forced to only own 1 pair of skis, they'd be 90mm and not twin-tips.  That's fat enough to handle powder "okay", and narrow enough to be serviceable on ice and groomers.



dlague said:


> I am on my 3rd season in Colorado and *I honestly do not miss New England skiing **at all. *



If I moved out west, I would 100% miss New England skiing.  Specifically, the tight, windy, classic, early American ski trails that you rarely find out west.  I love those.


----------



## ironhippy (Feb 1, 2019)

dlague said:


> Well,  this is an interesting thread.  I am on my 3rd season in Colorado and I honestly do not miss New England skiing at all.  Conditions here are super consistent, rarely rains in the mountains,  rarely are there days that are sub zero, and the snow is never frozen.  Bumps are always nice and the woods always skiable.  Powder days are never deep though generally 10-20 inches with several 3-10 inch tune ups.  While I will get in a day now and then in VT or NH, the one time I have been so far was not great at Cannon - super icy.  Did not miss it.  So I get why people might focus on western skiing.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app



Not be a jerk, but how's the I70? 
When I read stories about the weekend traffic on that road, I am glad I live where no one wants to come ski.


----------



## Ski the Moguls (Feb 1, 2019)

dlague said:


> Well,  this is an interesting thread.  I am on my 3rd season in Colorado and I honestly do not miss New England skiing at all.  Conditions here are super consistent, rarely rains in the mountains,  rarely are there days that are sub zero, and the snow is never frozen.  Bumps are always nice and the woods always skiable.  Powder days are never deep though generally 10-20 inches with several 3-10 inch tune ups.  While I will get in a day now and then in VT or NH, the one time I have been so far was not great at Cannon - super icy.  Did not miss it.  So I get why people might focus on western skiing.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app


Lucky #%*&! 

So what do you think is the best width ski for those western conditions?


----------



## mfi (Feb 1, 2019)

A lot of people I know out west have around a 108 to 110. Some go for the big ones at 117 120. Like I said before I had zero trouble on 117's in all the condition JH had..but never encountered ice. The Kore 117's are very stiff so they handle hardpack well. A lot of older powder skis were noodles and would fold on conditions like that. Things have changed a bit. Material science for one. 
I think my 105's are almost perfect on any condition as long as they are sharp. Ice at the top of runs at Stowe can be pretty hairy but I don't have a problem with it. My Sultan 85's do handle it better but they are tanks and heavy.


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 1, 2019)

ironhippy said:


> Not be a jerk, but how's the I70?
> When I read stories about the weekend traffic on that road, I am glad I live where no one wants to come ski.



It is worse than what you read also. 

Last trip there they called 9" at A basin. I left Denver at 645am and didn't make it A basin until 1145. It took three hours to get back to Denver that night. This is a 1 hour drive tops each way in good conditions that took an average of 4 hours each way. 

The time before that was summer and it took almost 7 hours to get to Steamboat from just outside Golden. 

The time before that someone jackknifed a boat and trailer (it was snowing?!) and I had to turn around and not ski that day. 

That sums up my last three trips to Colorado to visit my sister in law. I sat in traffic. From now on she visits us. With all that said though this does seem to be relegated to the I70 corridor. Most other places you aren't dealing with traffic.


----------



## mfi (Feb 1, 2019)

On the way back from Vail I70 was backed up for over 20 miles...oy


----------



## Jully (Feb 1, 2019)

Just gotta wait for that hyperloop in CO!


----------



## KustyTheKlown (Feb 1, 2019)

the i-70 corridor is just awful. it took me the same time to get from golden to copper on a saturday morning that it would take me to get from brooklyn to magic. denver is bursting at the seems. and the resorts (except for a-basin) are not that good relative to the rest of the west.

hard pass on summit and eagle county for me for the forseeable future.


----------



## dlague (Feb 1, 2019)

ironhippy said:


> Not be a jerk, but how's the I70?
> When I read stories about the weekend traffic on that road, I am glad I live where no one wants to come ski.


I live in Colorado Springs and Saturdays we take the back way 24 and 9 to Breck so no I-70.  We also check out Waze and see what the traffic gives us.  We have had 2 bad I-70 days out of 25 days so far.  Snow has been constant and it has been busier.  We also ski Fridays where traffic is lighter.  Typically Sunday traffic is not too bad as long as you leave by 2:30 ish.  Once Marxh hits it is easy peasy into June minus powder days.

Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## GregoryIsaacs (Feb 1, 2019)

Great all this talk about I-70 is really getting me excited for my trip for 2/27-3/3.... 

Staying in Wildernest and planning on hitting Loveland wed pm (flight gets into denver @8:30am) Vail thursday and Abasin for the fri-sat. 

Any recommendations on what time the Abasin parking lot gets filled on a typical Saturday? Should we bag even trying to ski loveland that wed afternoon? We will be using Gem Cards


----------



## mfi (Feb 1, 2019)

I remember not being able to get back ip the parking lot exit at A basin. Friggin SUV rental with 2WD  took 6 of us to push the damn thing..beware of rentals.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 1, 2019)

I wouldnt bag Loveland, I actually prefer Loveland to Arapahoe Basin.


----------



## dlague (Feb 1, 2019)

GregoryIsaacs said:


> Great all this talk about I-70 is really getting me excited for my trip for 2/27-3/3....
> 
> Staying in Wildernest and planning on hitting Loveland wed pm (flight gets into denver @8:30am) Vail thursday and Abasin for the fri-sat.
> 
> Any recommendations on what time the Abasin parking lot gets filled on a typical Saturday? Should we bag even trying to ski loveland that wed afternoon? We will be using Gem Cards


The Gems card is awesome! Using it today at Loveland.  A Basin Parking lot fills up fast on Saturday but the upper lot is  full by 10.  The key to skiing there is to take the Pali lift which has great bump runs and can get you to Lenawee Lift and from there East Wall amd Montezuma Bowl are available.  Do hit Loveland!!!!

Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## AdironRider (Feb 1, 2019)

dlague said:


> I live in Colorado Springs and Saturdays we take the back way 24 and 9 to Breck so no I-70.  We also check out Waze and see what the traffic gives us.  We have had 2 bad I-70 days out of 25 days so far.  Snow has been constant and it has been busier.  We also ski Fridays where traffic is lighter.  Typically Sunday traffic is not too bad as long as you leave by 2:30 ish.  Once Marxh hits it is easy peasy into June minus powder days.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app



This is bad advice. You leave at 230 on a Sunday and you are going to be in I70 traffic for hours.  

There was also a front page article in the Summit newspaper about how waze is sending folks like you through residential neighborhoods and backing traffic up in town for hours also. I suspect the local cops are going to start putting up local traffic only signs and ticketing folks for that move so enjoy it while it lasts. 

https://www.summitdaily.com/news/wh...nty-events-snowfall-and-google-maps-to-blame/

There is also a 248 page thread on TGR about how bad it is. There is no relief summer or winter. 

https://www.tetongravity.com/forums/showthread.php/275353-OFFICIAL-I70-BITCH-THREAD

The traffic is so bad there are people driving 8 HOURS to ski Jackson on their Ikon passes rather than deal with I70. It is pretty incredible the amount of Colorado plates this year in Jackson (and most have had access to JHole with the Mountain Collective for years now). They all say it takes them just as long in the car to ski Vail that it does to get to Jackson. Jackson is 550 miles from Denver mind you.


----------



## Smellytele (Feb 1, 2019)

GregoryIsaacs said:


> Great all this talk about I-70 is really getting me excited for my trip for 2/27-3/3....
> 
> Staying in Wildernest and planning on hitting Loveland wed pm (flight gets into denver @8:30am) Vail thursday and Abasin for the fri-sat.
> 
> Any recommendations on what time the Abasin parking lot gets filled on a typical Saturday? Should we bag even trying to ski loveland that wed afternoon? We will be using Gem Cards


While I don't want to say don't ski Loveland - Skiing on the first day you are there and not acclimated can be an issue. I usually try to acclimate on the first day. Walk around Breck then ski the second day.


----------



## snoseek (Feb 1, 2019)

70 was a shitshow 10 years ago when I did that drive from golden to loveland or winter park almost daily. I can only imagine it being worse now. It got to the point where I started skiing areas down south/west off 285 as it was less stressful. Im done with the front range...I had my fill. West slope is more my speed.

Road up little cottonwood is starting to piss me off as well but at least its a quicker drive, 13 miles of dumpster fire and done. Also the payoff is better.

Don't skip loveland imo.


----------



## GregoryIsaacs (Feb 1, 2019)

Smellytele said:


> While I don't want to say don't ski Loveland - Skiing on the first day you are there and not acclimated can be an issue. I usually try to acclimate on the first day. Walk around Breck then ski the second day.



I know this and did the same thing at Jackson two years ago and felt the burn for sure but think it would be better to pull it off than try to ski on the Sunday travel day... my flight is at 530pm out of DIA

As for Loveland its amazing how I had to scratch and claw to get one day there with my buddies. It wasn't until I sent them an old AZ thread did they finally shut up! Had to concede a day at vail though and spent like $189 on the day pass HA


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 1, 2019)

GregoryIsaacs said:


> As for Loveland its amazing how I had to scratch and claw to get one day there with my buddies. It wasn't until I sent them an old AZ thread did they finally shut up! Had to concede a day at vail though and spent like $189 on the day pass HA



They're all about Vail and dont want to ski Loveland?

You need better (ski) friends.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 1, 2019)

mfi said:


> A lot of people I know out west have around a 108 to 110. Some go for the big ones at 117 120. Like I said before I had zero trouble on 117's in all the condition JH had..but never encountered ice. The Kore 117's are very stiff so they handle hardpack well. A lot of older powder skis were noodles and would fold on conditions like that. Things have changed a bit. Material science for one.
> I think my 105's are almost perfect on any condition as long as they are sharp. Ice at the top of runs at Stowe can be pretty hairy but I don't have a problem with it. My Sultan 85's do handle it better but they are tanks and heavy.



117 do not handle hard pack well.  Sorry. Tune em' razor sharp, they just don't. The physics of the ski do not work.  There's a reason race skis have remained very narrow all these years later after the wide ski revolution.  They perform vastly better on hard pack.  Same goes for bump skis. 

I've made this analogy many times before. Just because you can turn a philips screw with a flat head driver, doesn't make it the right tool for the job.  



Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## kingslug (Feb 2, 2019)

Saying 117s do not handle hard pack well is like saying cars that are a certain dimension do not do something well..you cant group all skis of a certain dimension into 1 category..material science..is science..the Head Kores are made different than other skis..which are made different than other skis...try them..then see.


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 2, 2019)

kingslug said:


> Saying 117s do not handle hard pack well is like saying cars that are a certain dimension do not do something well..you cant group all skis of a certain dimension into 1 category..material science..is science..the Head Kores are made different than other skis..which are made different than other skis...try them..then see.


Hmmmmm, if that's true, I suppose we will see Shiffrin skiing in a World cup race on Kore 117 and Dale Earnhardt Jr racing Talladega in an 18 wheeler.  

I have no doubt the OP can probably ski hard pack fairly well on the Kore 117 and so could I, but a ski of those dimensions is a very poor choice for those conditions.  There are probably 100 models of skis if not more that would be a better choice for hardpack including every other model in the Kore series.  In the East, about 90% of the days in a season, the Kore 93 would be a better tool for the conditions than the 117.  

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## dlague (Feb 2, 2019)

I ski Salomon Rocker 2 at 122 under foot 185s all the time and they ski really well.  I ski them in bumps, in the trees, open ungroomed and on groomed runs.  I love them.  I have Chams that I ski in early and late season but did not do that this season.

As far as traffic leaving at 2:30 on Sunday has worked for us I do not care what people are reading.  Last Sunday we opted for the back way which was the first time we decided to do that because it was snowing.  Locals know how to avoid the traffic.  There are side roads off the 70 and once we get to the Express lane we take it.

Yesterday the 70 was easy peasy.  Friday nights heading west not good, 7-9 am Saturday heading west can be tough.  Sunday evening heading east can be tough as well if you do not know some of the side roads and do not want to use the Express lane.

So when I vacationed in Colorado, we did not take a day to acclimate.  Skied the first day.  We ate bananas before skiing.  Took Ginko Baloba and Ginseng for two weeks before coming out and we were fine.  Altitude Adjust was good too.  Everyone is different though.  We skied Cooper the first day to start off easy.  Then skied A Basin, Keystone and Loveland.  Vail is lower so that may be good.  I would hit Loveland and A Basin if you have the Gems Card.

BTW we skied 60 days last season doing day trips - just saying.  We know first hand.

Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## kingslug (Feb 2, 2019)

My Kores will probsbly not see many east coast days unless it dumps..i bought them for the west..were hardpack exists as well...
Want to replace my sultans with the kore 93


----------



## prsboogie (Feb 2, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Hmmmmm, if that's true, I suppose we will see Shiffrin skiing in a World cup race on Kore 117 and Dale Earnhardt Jr racing Talladega in an 18 wheeler.
> 
> I have no doubt the OP can probably ski hard pack fairly well on the Kore 117 and so could I, but a ski of those dimensions is a very poor choice for those conditions.  There are probably 100 models of skis if not more that would be a better choice for hardpack including every other model in the Kore series.  In the East, about 90% of the days in a season, the Kore 93 would be a better tool for the conditions than the 117.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


Stop feeding the troll!! Lol

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 2, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> In the East, about *90% of the days in a season*, the Kore 93 would be a better tool for the conditions than the 117.



Sadly, I'll take the OVER.


----------



## crazy (Feb 2, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Hmmmmm, if that's true, I suppose we will see Shiffrin skiing in a World cup race on Kore 117 and Dale Earnhardt Jr racing Talladega in an 18 wheeler.
> 
> I have no doubt the OP can probably ski hard pack fairly well on the Kore 117 and so could I, but a ski of those dimensions is a very poor choice for those conditions.  There are probably 100 models of skis if not more that would be a better choice for hardpack including every other model in the Kore series.  In the East, about 90% of the days in a season, the Kore 93 would be a better tool for the conditions than the 117.
> 
> Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app



Everything that you say about narrower skis working better on harder snow surfaces is true. Obviously ski racers are going to keep using narrow skis! And I agree that the Kore 93 would work better almost all of the time on the East Coast than the 117, unless you're really lucky and live next to Jay Peak and only go skiing when there's a dump of new snow :razz:! The other exception is if you're Andrew Drummond and are mostly heading out into the backcountry. Exceptions aside, your point stands. 

That said, what's changed in the last few years is that ski manufacturers have started producing wider skis that actually perform pretty decently on harder snow surfaces. Oftentimes that means rocker-camber-rocker instead of full rocker, larger sidecuts, and different materials or construction. This doesn't mean that wider skis work better than narrower skis on hardpack, they generally don't, but the performance differences have gotten a bit smaller.

I kept skiing my narrow race skis even after my high school ski racing days for many years. It wasn't until recently that I tried skiing on wider skis, and boy was it so much more fun to do things other than carve on hard surfaces. My daily driver is now in the 85-90 range, and my powder/west coast ski is in the 105-110 range. I've used the 105-110 ski a few times this season, but of course the 85-90 gets most of my use. I've skied race skis out west plenty of times ... but I will not go back to that. The wider skis are so much more fun. But I have nothing but respect for people who love skiing narrow skis. It's all personal preference. *Different skis perform better or worse in certain conditions, but ultimately it's about what's enjoyable to you*. Unless you're Mikaela Shiffrin :beer:!


----------



## kingslug (Feb 2, 2019)

Well said


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 2, 2019)

crazy said:


> Everything that you say about narrower skis working better on harder snow surfaces is true. Obviously ski racers are going to keep using narrow skis! And I agree that the Kore 93 would work better almost all of the time on the East Coast than the 117, unless you're really lucky and live next to Jay Peak and only go skiing when there's a dump of new snow :razz:! The other exception is if you're Andrew Drummond and are mostly heading out into the backcountry. Exceptions aside, your point stands.
> 
> That said, what's changed in the last few years is that ski manufacturers have started producing wider skis that actually perform pretty decently on harder snow surfaces. Oftentimes that means rocker-camber-rocker instead of full rocker, larger sidecuts, and different materials or construction. This doesn't mean that wider skis work better than narrower skis on hardpack, they generally don't, but the performance differences have gotten a bit smaller.
> 
> I kept skiing my narrow race skis even after my high school ski racing days for many years. It wasn't until recently that I tried skiing on wider skis, and boy was it so much more fun to do things other than carve on hard surfaces. My daily driver is now in the 85-90 range, and my powder/west coast ski is in the 105-110 range. I've used the 105-110 ski a few times this season, but of course the 85-90 gets most of my use. I've skied race skis out west plenty of times ... but I will not go back to that. The wider skis are so much more fun. But I have nothing but respect for people who love skiing narrow skis. It's all personal preference. *Different skis perform better or worse in certain conditions, but ultimately it's about what's enjoyable to you*. Unless you're Mikaela Shiffrin [emoji481]!


My daily driver is a 90.  It will likely be replaced with either Head Kore 93 or Nordica Enforcer 93.  

My general point is more directed towards folks who ski something 100+ as a daily ski in the East at a place like Loon or 120+ out West and make comments about performing well in bumps or hard pack.  Yes the rocker / camber profile helps a lot.  The gap has gotten smaller. However if you value precision, the performance difference is still night and day. This is why all ski designers still produce a race ski, bump ski, powder ski etc with a certain profile. 

Typically folks making such comments can't buy a carved turn or link a half dozen steep bumps before bailing across the fall line.  They don't have the skill set to tell the difference, so I just kinda laugh at the comments. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## dlague (Feb 2, 2019)

If I ski Breck on Peak 8 bowls 90% of the time a wide ski performs best.  Skiing Montezuma Bowl or East Wall then again a wider ski performs well.  At Loveland off Chair 9 or other higher terrain then the wider ski performs best.  It handles chop, powder and crud with ease.  Groomers are not my concern since they ski well there too.  The snow here is almost always carveable using any ski.  Back easy, I agree that a mid fat does better unless you are a snow chaser.

BTW my wife skies the Volkl 100eights and they carve very well for her.  Volkl did a really nice job with those.

Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 2, 2019)

Sorry Dave

No offense, but you really don't have the skill set to know the difference.  Skiing a 122 underfoot ski as a daily driver virtually anywhere except a place like Valdez heli-skiing is silly.  The best freeride skiers in the world, guys like Candide Thovex, are likely on something 108 or less in typical resort conditions in Colorado. 

And don't take this as me saying you are a bad skier.  You are an average advanced recreational skier.  You skid turns more than carve and don't have quick feet in bumps.  Glad you have fun on those 122 Solomon's, but someone with a higher skill set is going to demand much more precision with their gear. 

I probably come across as an asshole here, but nothing I'm saying is untrue about aki design. That's why manufacturers produce the varying ski products they do.

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## skiur (Feb 3, 2019)

I often laugh when I see people skiing with 110+ width skis on a 10 degrees day when it rained the day before.


----------



## crazy (Feb 3, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> My general point is more directed towards folks who ski something 100+ as a daily ski in the East





skiur said:


> I often laugh when I see people skiing with 110+ width skis on a 10 degrees day when it rained the day before.



These are fair criticisms. I have noticed more and more people skiing fat skis out east on days that really don't warrant them. I mean, whatever floats your boat, but when Sunapee is icy from not having a new snow in over a week, those 110 width skis really aren't very ideal :razz:!

When I go out west, almost all of my runs are off of the trail in bowls, glades, moguls, and more. I've found that this newer generation of wide skis does very well on western hardpack, to the point where I the only ski I bring with me is my wide 105-110 pair of skis. Western groomers are softer and have lower skier density than out east, at least where I ski. Believe it or not I'm still able to carve some nice turns on my 105-110 skis out west. Obviously the wide skis are less ideal for carving, but when I'm out west, carving isn't my top priority like it can be here in the east.


----------



## dlague (Feb 3, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Sorry Dave
> 
> No offense, but you really don't have the skill set to know the difference.  Skiing a 122 underfoot ski as a daily driver virtually anywhere except a place like Valdez heli-skiing is silly.  The best freeride skiers in the world, guys like Candide Thovex, are likely on something 108 or less in typical resort conditions in Colorado.
> 
> ...


Wow! Thank you Judge DHS, expert extraordinaire.  

First the skis I am on have a great balance of rocker and camber with 20 mm of side cut.  They handle all the non groomer stuff that a narrower ski would sink in.  Because of the balance of the ski, taking them on groomers is not an issue at all.  I love the way they ski since they float over everything.  Skis have come a long way and I have raced on narrow skis, switched to mid flats and still have then but i will continue to ski a ski that gives me most of what I want.

Anyone reading the DHS bullshit - ski what you want, ski what you like, ski where you want.  This is not a competition of skier wits or skill.  It is a fucken forum.

DHS I have skied with you and you have nice skid turns too.  Sorry about going there but you did - expected.more from you!

I hope to be as good as you when I grow up.  Nah, I am happy with my abilities.

Have fun!

BTW I-70 sucked today!  Not!



Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## dlague (Feb 3, 2019)

crazy said:


> These are fair criticisms. I have noticed more and more people skiing fat skis out east on days that really don't warrant them. I mean, whatever floats your boat, but when Sunapee is icy from not having a new snow in over a week, those 110 width skis really aren't very ideal :razz:!
> 
> When I go out west, almost all of my runs are off of the trail in bowls, glades, moguls, and more. I've found that this newer generation of wide skis does very well on western hardpack, to the point where I the only ski I bring with me is my wide 105-110 pair of skis. Western groomers are softer and have lower skier density than out east, at least where I ski. Believe it or not I'm still able to carve some nice turns on my 105-110 skis out west. Obviously the wide skis are less ideal for carving, but when I'm out west, carving isn't my top priority like it can be here in the east.


Someone who gets it!

Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 3, 2019)

Did Highway Star hack DHS’s account?


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 3, 2019)

VTKilarney said:


> Did Highway Star hack DHS’s account?


Lol 

I'm just saying that the true technicians of the sport, people have mastered all conditions and terrain types, right size their gear.  I'm talking people like Puck It, waloaf, Savemeasammy, Xwhaler.  You'd never see any of them on something wider than about 100 as a daily driver in the East and they sure as hell wouldn't be skiing a 122 as a daily driver in the West.  Maybe after an 18" dump a skier of their caliber would bring out something that big.  Maybe

What I'm saying isn't all that controversial. Pretty much all manufacturers and retailers say the same thing. A lot of skiers, tend to choose skis that are too wide for the conditions they ski 80-90% of the time.   They buy these super fat skis where they will only realize their benefits 10% of the time.

If you don't understand these realities of ski design, it's probably because you lacj the skills to appreciate the difference.  You get people like Dlague making horrible gear recommendations. I remember him suggesting his Chams in a thread asking for advise about good carving skis.  Um what??? I bit my tongue then. Maybe I should've last night and today as he's clearly offended.  



Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## machski (Feb 3, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Lol
> 
> I'm just saying that the true technicians of the sport, people have mastered all conditions and terrain types, right size their gear.  I'm talking people like Puck It, waloaf, Savemeasammy, Xwhaler.  You'd never see any of them on something wider than about 100 as a daily driver in the East and they sure as hell wouldn't be skiing a 122 as a daily driver in the West.  Maybe after an 18" dump a skier of their caliber would bring out something that big.  Maybe
> 
> ...


I have to agree with DHS here.  My midseason everyday ski is the Pinnacle 95 currently and they carve pretty darn good when the groomers are soft like they have been most of this week/weekend.  I am lighter than most, so they float enough for Eastern Powder and even Western for me.  I rarely go wider as I like the precision I get when needed.  But if we go boiler east hard pack (or its spring and I'm skiing mostly soft bumps all day long), then the Chargers come out and those are 74 under foot.  Sorry, but there is a huge difference when trying to carve on ice/hard pack between underfoot widths.  I can swing tthe Pinnacles and look pretty good on the hard pack, but the reality is I'm skidding most turns or a least smearing it.  On the Chargers, I am still carving the turn and if it gets even more slick and the edge starts to slip, so much easier and quicker to feel/correct on the narrow than the wide boards.

To each their own though.

Sent from my SM-T830 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 3, 2019)

I also agree with DHS.  My daily ski is 78mm underfoot.  

It was the delivery that could have been more refined.


----------



## benski (Feb 3, 2019)

I can rip anything on my 105mm Rossignol soul 7’s. They are better for carving than my 90mm line Profit flights I had before. They have the same turn radius as some Slalom skies.


----------



## WWF-VT (Feb 3, 2019)

benski said:


> I can rip anything on my 105mm Rossignol soul 7’s. They are better for carving than my 90mm line Profit flights I had before. They have the same turn radius as some Slalom skies.



LOL...90 under foot Line Prophet Flight not exactly known as a carving ski and neither is the Soul 7


----------



## Edd (Feb 3, 2019)

Soul 7 is a short turner for what it is, but yeah, it’s no carver. 

I ski on my 78 Head Supreme Instincts a lot these days. Even in a good snow year, it’s often a better tool than my wider skis. 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## speden (Feb 3, 2019)

I'm not sure there's really a good one ski quiver for the east. You encounter so many different snow conditions here, I'm often thinking a different ski than what I'm on would make the day more fun. If you're on the wrong ski for the conditions, then it usually means you're working harder than necessary, or sometimes means you can't go to all the terrain you want to ski (e.g. you're on a narrow ski and there's deep powder in the woods).

I'm probably heading towards a four ski quiver: a wide powder ski (106), a narrow hardpack ski (77), a mid-fat (TBD, but I'm eyeing the Kore 93 as others have mentioned), and possibly a bump ski (if I can ever learn to ski the zip line).


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 3, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> *A lot of skiers, tend to choose skis that are too wide for the conditions they ski 80-90% of the time.  * They buy these super fat skis where they will only realize their benefits 10% of the time.



I've said this many times before, but cant resist a perfect opportunity once more:

_Skiing skis that are too wide is the new, skiing skis that are too long._


----------



## snoseek (Feb 3, 2019)

If there's no new snow in the last 48 hours or so then Im skiing 95's. New snow Im skiing 110. More than two feet I probably am reaching for the 115's....but more often than not 110 is more than enough.


----------



## skiur (Feb 3, 2019)

deadheadskier said:


> Lol
> 
> I'm just saying that the true technicians of the sport, people have mastered all conditions and terrain types, right size their gear.  I'm talking people like Puck It, waloaf, Savemeasammy, Xwhaler.  You'd never see any of them on something wider than about 100 as a daily driver in the East and they sure as hell wouldn't be skiing a 122 as a daily driver in the West.  Maybe after an 18" dump a skier of their caliber would bring out something that big.  Maybe
> 
> ...



If someone gets offended by what someone wrote on the internet then they have bigger issues than wearing powder skis on hardpack and thinking they are the right ski for the job.


----------



## SkiingInABlueDream (Feb 3, 2019)

BenedictGomez said:


> I've said this many times before, but cant resist a perfect opportunity once more:
> 
> _Skiing skis that are too wide is the new, skiing skis that are too long._



This. THIS. 

I was going to say the same.


----------



## Ol Dirty Noodle (Feb 3, 2019)

My Daily’s are currently Rossi HP Pursuits Ti, 81 underfoot at 177, great for groomers, good in the bumps, crud and trees but I would like something with a 95-100 waist for the powder up north VT and eventually out west


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 3, 2019)

speden said:


> I'm not sure there's really a good one ski quiver for the east. You encounter so many different snow conditions here, I'm often thinking a different ski than what I'm on would make the day more fun. If you're on the wrong ski for the conditions, then it usually means you're working harder than necessary, or sometimes means you can't go to all the terrain you want to ski (e.g. you're on a narrow ski and there's deep powder in the woods).
> 
> I'm probably heading towards a four ski quiver: a wide powder ski (106), a narrow hardpack ski (77), a mid-fat (TBD, but I'm eyeing the Kore 93 as others have mentioned), and possibly a bump ski (if I can ever learn to ski the zip line).


Same.... just need to convince my non skiing wife the virtues of having a dedicated bump ski!

I have the other three in basically the exact same sizes as you list.  The iRallys were bought this year to replace a set of Fischer Motive 84.  Those were a carving biased mid-fat, but they just didn't offer the precision and hard snow grip I was looking for.  The Rally's rip on the shiny stuff.

My powder skis will probably last me 15 years I use them so infrequently.  They come out anytime there's more than 8" of fresh, but it's fairly common that I size down to the 90 midday as things get tracked out and bump up.  The 90s are just so much quicker laterally in the bumps. I've yet to ski any conditions on the 107 where I wished for more float. 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## speden (Feb 4, 2019)

I've actually been using my powder skis a lot this season. We've just had so many good storms up north and I've been hitting almost every one of them. I'm finding that the latest technology in the wide skis has really expanded their versatility. The light weight and asymmetric design of the Ripsticks I picked up this year is surprisingly effective. The inside edge has more camber to give better carving performance on harder surfaces and the outside edges are more rockered for smooth turns in 3d snow. So I've been having fun on them in even 4" of fresh (and usually it will be deeper than that in the trees at places like BW since the glades there don't get tracked out for a few days).


----------



## dezzyq (Feb 4, 2019)

BenedictGomez said:


> I've said this many times before, but cant resist a perfect opportunity once more:
> 
> _Skiing skis that are too wide is the new, skiing skis that are too long._




Yeah, but what if you just prefer wider/longer skis?


----------



## dezzyq (Feb 4, 2019)

kingslug said:


> So many people I know just wont ski the East any more. I go on 3 trips out west a season and when i ask the crowd im with..who live here ,where they ski, most say out west only now. They have given up with our variable conditions and long drives. Sad..I cant imagine not skiing here..i think it makes you better. And some wonder why they have a tough time out there when the champagne powder turns to
> Crud...and in order to stay in shape for places like JH..you better ski a lot before and after you go. This last trip wiped out so many people..quickly.
> Hmmm...wonder why...



Simply put: Quality of quantity... plus it's more affordable for many in the East to ski out West. 

I live in NYC. Jumping on a plane is easy. I take an early morning flight and I'm in Salt Lake City by 9/10am, on the slopes by 10/11. add an hour or two for Reno. 

In SLC and Reno, hotels and rental cars are half the price of what you pay in the East. That easily covers the cost of the flight. The food is significantly lower priced as well. So long as you stay more than a few days, it's cheaper. 

I buy my tickets on Southwest, so if for some reason conditions aren/t optimal, I can reschedule or book to a different location without paying any penalty fees. 

Most importantly, out West, the conditions are much more reliable and optimal. I've gotten burned way too many times out East. For example, last time I was at Stratton, they conveniently didn't update their website conditions report til 2pm. So all morning their website claimed 100% trails and lifts open, when in fact there was only one mid-mountain lift and 2 or 3 trails open.  Unforgivable. 

They do it intentionally to get people to the mountain knowing that after a long drive many will just give up and accept whatever paltry skiing they can get, or spend money at the restaurants in the resort... It's unacceptable, especially insulting considering how much money we put towards patronizing their resorts. There is no excuse for it either. 

So yeah, I ski out West because by any objective standard and measurable metric, it's significantly better, and there is only so much time one has to ski.


----------



## Hawk (Feb 5, 2019)

dezzyq said:


> Yeah, but what if you just prefer wider/longer skis?



First, Benedict's quote is so accurate.  I will add, I think it has more to do with your ability to use the ski that your choose.  I have seen people that ski both too long and too fat and you can tell they struggle.  Now if you are a top athlete or a gifted skier, then you might have the strength and ability to power those skis correctly and be in control.  If that is the case then you are probably in the top 5% of skiers.  Most people that ski are not and will struggle to some extent.  It is my opinion that is you ski the east, ski bumps, eastern woods, tight chutes and the varied snow conditions that we get.  Then anything more than about 100 - 105 under foot is way to much.  UNLESS it snows a bunch.  I mean why would you ski bumps, hard snow or tight woods with skies fatter than that.  You are just wasting energy.


----------



## dlague (Feb 8, 2019)

Look I had no intention of using my current skis as a daily driver.  I have skis that are 95 underfoot that I had used back east and out here as well.  I bought wider skis for powder days but since conditions vary so much in bowls, trees and then soft groomers, the Salomon skis just ski better IMO. Are there other skis I would like, absolutely.  I like the Icelantics Nomad 105 for example.  I just can not afford lots of gear.  I research gear all the time and every couple of years I try to pick something up.  I actually am looking at a narrower ski as my next target for those groomer only days. For now, I like how my skis work and enjoy them.  I have skied with most of the people you mention mostly at Cannon or Killington and I was not skiing a wide ski.  I guess I should be honored that I got to ski with such skiing technicians.  I never thought anything about it other than skiing with friends.

Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## kingslug (Feb 8, 2019)

This weekend in the east..78 razor sharp would be the weapon of choice...out west 120..plus!
yes its a bit depressing


----------



## machski (Feb 22, 2019)

Well, we're headed out to SLC Saturday and just like the first time we went to Utah back in 2003, looks like we might get visited by the R word out there again next week.  I really should just go to Big Sky every time out west, been there 3 times and it's the only place I have been and not gotten Wet out west.  Meanwhile, Sunday is a bit iffy for now back here but the remainder of the week has good chances right now.  Typical.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## kingslug (Feb 22, 2019)

Where in SLC will it rain?


----------



## drjeff (Feb 22, 2019)

kingslug said:


> Where in SLC will it rain?



Probably about 2000 feet below ANY base area


----------



## Ski the Moguls (Feb 22, 2019)

drjeff said:


> Probably about 2000 feet below ANY base area


Yep, I am watching Snowbird closely and just seeing snow.


----------



## kingslug (Feb 22, 2019)

In 23 years of going there..multiple times per year I can only remember 1 rain event. It was a bad one ..I found it the hard and easy way. ..Found it digging snow pit at AVI school..then crashed on it a few days later, backside Alta..but thats it.
Park City could sometimes get rain but Alta/Bird...nah


----------



## machski (Feb 22, 2019)

kingslug said:


> Where in SLC will it rain?


Park City and both resorts there, Snowbasin too.  The Cottonwoods are avoiding it for now, but forecastshave them in the mid 30's weds/thurs of the precip event.  Even looked up into Jacson Hole, they are forecasting the same there.  It's about right given El Nino has kicked up, Vegas just had back to back snowstorms and the most snow the city has seen in over a decade plus Flagstaff's record dump.  Now the jet will swing wildly North in the rockies.

Been there when it rained at the base of the then Canyons, changed to snow from the Tombstone Express and above but it was a super wet, pasty snow.  Only had a fleece jacket that day and was soaked in an hour.  Also been to Steamboat and been rained on there as well.  Mid season too, not on the fringes.  Year we did Tahoe didn't rain (didn't do anything), but was warm midseason.  

My wife and my schedule stinks that we are locked in to travel west on the NH vaca weeks only (She teaches).  Even out West, you have to time it or miss out.

Sent from my SM-T830 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## kingslug (Feb 22, 2019)

I'll be there next week..too bad I missed all the epic dumps but who knows..the weather there changes all the time.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 22, 2019)

I dont really see it on the models.  It's marginal at best and my WAG is elevation would save it anyway.


----------



## abc (Feb 22, 2019)

Wag?


----------



## drjeff (Feb 22, 2019)

Going to need a *little* fresh or some warmer temps to get the ungroomed stuff and trees decent again in SoVT!! Some of the farm fields along Route 100 about 6 or 7 South of Mount Snow near the elementary school as I was just driving in!! 

No filter on that sheen!!! 

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 22, 2019)

abc said:


> Wag?



https://www.acronymfinder.com/Wild-Ass-Guess-(WAG).html


----------



## prsboogie (Feb 22, 2019)

drjeff said:


> Going to need a *little* fresh or some warmer temps to get the ungroomed stuff and trees decent again in SoVT!! Some of the farm fields along Route 100 about 6 or 7 South of Mount Snow near the elementary school as I was just driving in!!
> 
> No filter on that sheen!!! View attachment 24661View attachment 24662
> 
> Sent from my Moto Z (2) using AlpineZone mobile app


Ooph


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Smellytele (Feb 22, 2019)

Snowed until noon today at cannon which was skiing great today.


----------



## dlague (Feb 22, 2019)

machski said:


> Park City and both resorts there, Snowbasin too.  The Cottonwoods are avoiding it for now, but forecastshave them in the mid 30's weds/thurs of the precip event.  Even looked up into Jacson Hole, they are forecasting the same there.  It's about right given El Nino has kicked up, Vegas just had back to back snowstorms and the most snow the city has seen in over a decade plus Flagstaff's record dump.  Now the jet will swing wildly North in the rockies.
> 
> Been there when it rained at the base of the then Canyons, changed to snow from the Tombstone Express and above but it was a super wet, pasty snow.  Only had a fleece jacket that day and was soaked in an hour.  Also been to Steamboat and been rained on there as well.  Mid season too, not on the fringes.  Year we did Tahoe didn't rain (didn't do anything), but was warm midseason.
> 
> ...


The forecasts that I am seeing have the highs in the mid forties for Park City but has snow forecasted for Monday then dry for a stretch.  

It if funny how different Colorado is.  This coming week is dry but snowing today and tomorrow.  Next storms are forecasted for next weekend.

Open snow is predicting the following for Utah and it is kind of similar to Colorado and they are generally pretty good.

https://opensnow.com/dailysnow/utah 

Sent from my SM-G930V using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## machski (Feb 23, 2019)

dlague said:


> The forecasts that I am seeing have the highs in the mid forties for Park City but has snow forecasted for Monday then dry for a stretch.
> 
> It if funny how different Colorado is.  This coming week is dry but snowing today and tomorrow.  Next storms are forecasted for next weekend.
> 
> ...


Thanks.  We'll see, still looks like it will get a but warm this week.  Cottonwoods will stay white, just not sure about the PC side being lower elevation.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## gores95 (Feb 24, 2019)

Thinking of coming up to either Gore or Stowe mid-March. Does anything look good on the horizon in terms of snowstorms?


----------



## kingslug (Feb 24, 2019)

No way on earth to predict...march has delivered though..


----------



## Smellytele (Feb 24, 2019)

kingslug said:


> No way on earth to predict...march has delivered though..


It has also failed us in the past as well.


----------



## machski (Feb 27, 2019)

So far no rain in Wasatch, looks like that forecast changed.  Bit warm and super windy today at Snowbird, don't try and tell me there are no wind holds out west.  Tram is on hold and all of Mineral Basin closed today for wind.  Small powder day (surprise) Monday with half a foot at Brighton, maybe more tomorrow at Deer Valley.  

Note: rented a vehicle through National in SLC, standard SUV.  They were doing an amazing job getting all skiers set up with 4x4's.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 27, 2019)

machski said:


> So far no rain in Wasatch, looks like that forecast changed.



As I mentioned when you first posted this, I never saw rain in the Wasatch forecast to begin with


----------



## kingslug (Feb 27, 2019)

All set for Utah..rented an SUV but don't know if its 4wd..calling and asking is useless. When I go to Alta/Bird I'll just take the bus up if its not as they are citing people now. 
Looks like snow everyday up there. JH got 4 feet..holy shit


----------



## Ski the Moguls (Feb 27, 2019)

machski said:


> So far no rain in Wasatch, looks like that forecast changed.  Bit warm and super windy today at Snowbird, don't try and tell me there are no wind holds out west.  Tram is on hold and all of Mineral Basin closed today for wind.  Small powder day (surprise) Monday with half a foot at Brighton, maybe more tomorrow at Deer Valley.
> 
> Note: rented a vehicle through National in SLC, standard SUV.  They were doing an amazing job getting all skiers set up with 4x4's.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


How are the lift lines at the ‘Bird? Empty midweek, or are they still busy?


----------



## kingslug (Feb 27, 2019)

Unless theres a dump I'm sure it won't be insanity...


----------



## machski (Feb 27, 2019)

Ski the Moguls said:


> How are the lift lines at the ‘Bird? Empty midweek, or are they still busy?


Only skied it today and basically ski on, even with tram delayed on wind and no mineral Basin all day.  Alta was the same yesterday.  Brighton Monday had a bit of a line at times at the Snake Creek Express, but everything else was ski on.  Solitude on Sunday wasn't bad, but their line setups are horrible, basically Europe like free for all.  Summit had about a 5 minute line at tops.  That said, we were going to ski Brighton Sunday but just after Solitude village, the road became a parking lot.  So we 180'd it back to Solitude.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## machski (Feb 28, 2019)

Well, no rain today at DV, but very wet graupel most of the day.  Certainly not "the greatest snow on Earth".  Was definitely drier at the summit, guessing the Cottonwoods got better quality considering they are 1000' higher up.  I think I'm done with the Park City side.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------

