That's where I got mine (181) from. They were only $99 over the summer though, so the price may go down again. I think it was up a little higher than $149 during the peak of the winter.
-
Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!
You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!
Skinny bump skis....worth it????
- Thread starter Greg
- Start date
That's where I got mine (181) from. They were only $99 over the summer though, so the price may go down again. I think it was up a little higher than $149 during the peak of the winter.
jack97
New member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2006
- Messages
- 2,513
- Points
- 0
Yup, peaked at $169, it might go down again in mid summer. Sounds tempting at 99 but I spent my cash on boots and helmet....stuff long overdue and now is the time to get them. Anyhow, kind of interested in feeling out my other skis with the new boots.
Alot of rotary. And you're right about the learning process. And about it not being the ski but the skier.
Which kind of contradicts what you said about carving skis. Which is kind of correct nonetheless.
Anyway, I think sometimes people talk about their equipment too much when it's just a matter of getting out there and turning whatever you have on your feet. Skis today are SO much more technically superior to what we had 15 years ago that I have to laugh when hairs get split.
ed-drum
New member
It's not the ski, it's the skier. I have a friend who is a world champ who had a pair of K2s with large sections of the edges missing. He went through icy bumps like he was on train tracks. Yes, skis do help but a lot of people whine too much about their gear. You have to practice on the groomers first doing tight turns with knees and feet together. Experts lose points in mogul contests if their feet come apart. Besides, the National Ski Patrol website has an article on how to avoid knee injury, and one of the tips is to keep your feet together. I just don't understand this "new" concept of keeping feet a foot or so apart with shape skis. Then again, I have a lot of instructor friends who are great athletes and they call instructors that tell their student "nice wide stance now".......... destructors. SORRY! Ed.
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2001
- Messages
- 31,154
- Points
- 0
I do agree to an extent. You're not going to realize the benefit of a bump ski until you reach a certain level. I also agree on the narrower stance thing. That was one of the biggest limiting things in the bumps for me last season and I worked on it a lot. When I started with the Cabrawlers this year, I was able to lock that stance much easier and hold it through the run. I've been able to take that technique back over to the mid-fats too. So, while I do agree it is more the operator than the equipment, I do believe the right equipment can facilitate learning certain techniques quicker and easier.
You can't effectively carve a turn with your feet and knees locked together. I'm sure your Russian Ski Team buddy can tell you that. At tight stance is great for bumps, powder and trees; basically anything that requires a short radius turn. If you want to go out and rail groomers or run GS gates you need a wider stance. A well rounded skier can do it all and one size/stance does not fit all.
ed-drum
New member
I thought we we talking about bumps and the skis that go with them. Of course you open up your stance when carving a turn. I don't keep my feet together all of the time. If I'm skiing powder and do a narrow stance, I would sink like an anchor. The trick to skiing bumps is to keep your back straight and bend the knees and ankles like a spring. I also ski on the tails of my skis SOMETIMES. There are no set rules. The only skiing rule is, DON' T FALL DOWN! Ed.
Sorry, you started talking about carving skis, so I thought you were making a general reference to skiing. Not just bumps.
MR. evil
New member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2007
- Messages
- 3,547
- Points
- 0
I am by no means an expert in this subject as I just started to ski bumps this season. I still have a long way to go before I would even consider myself an average bump skier.
Up until this season I was skiing on a pair of first generation shaped skis. They had a side cut, but were not nearly as wide as today’s typical all mountain skis. With my old skis I generally skied most conditions with a really tight stance, (feet touching) and my tips were about ½” apart. At the beginning of the season I purchased a new pair of DynaStar’s. Off hand I cannot remember what the dimensions of the ski are, but they were about the same width on average as most of the other all mountain skis in the shop. But due to the width I have had to adjust my stance. I can no longer ski with my feet touching or my tips over lap by more than an inch. It was actually a big adjustment for me to change my stance.
A couple of weeks ago I picked up a pair of bump skis. Being much narrower than my all mountain skis I can once again ski with a tight stance, feet touching. I have only used them a couple of times so far, but for me they are much easier to use in the bumps simply because of the tighter stance. The funny thing is that my skinny bump skis are almost the same width as my old shaped skis. If my old shaped skis were not so heavy I would have considered using them as my bump skis.
This begs me to ask, do they make bumps skis simply because all mountain skis have gotten to fat? Did they even make bumps skis 10 years ago?
Up until this season I was skiing on a pair of first generation shaped skis. They had a side cut, but were not nearly as wide as today’s typical all mountain skis. With my old skis I generally skied most conditions with a really tight stance, (feet touching) and my tips were about ½” apart. At the beginning of the season I purchased a new pair of DynaStar’s. Off hand I cannot remember what the dimensions of the ski are, but they were about the same width on average as most of the other all mountain skis in the shop. But due to the width I have had to adjust my stance. I can no longer ski with my feet touching or my tips over lap by more than an inch. It was actually a big adjustment for me to change my stance.
A couple of weeks ago I picked up a pair of bump skis. Being much narrower than my all mountain skis I can once again ski with a tight stance, feet touching. I have only used them a couple of times so far, but for me they are much easier to use in the bumps simply because of the tighter stance. The funny thing is that my skinny bump skis are almost the same width as my old shaped skis. If my old shaped skis were not so heavy I would have considered using them as my bump skis.
This begs me to ask, do they make bumps skis simply because all mountain skis have gotten to fat? Did they even make bumps skis 10 years ago?
ed-drum
New member
As far back as I can remember, they started making bumpers in the 1970's. They were softer than race or recreational skis. I don't like skis TOO wide in the shovel, they are (to me) carvers. The point I'm trying to make is that when I was younger, we had skis that were soft medium and hard. Now there is everything under the sun. When I was getting my boots fitted this month, I asked the ski tech when are the skis going to stop getting getting fatter in the shovel and he said that ski companies wouldn't have anything to sell if they didn't stop changing them every year. Remember "soft" boots? What happened to them? People should just "do it" rather than think about their equipment, style, clothes, etc.. It's like driving a car. If you stop analyzing everything so much, it becomes fluid. Our music teachers used to tell us, "get your heads out of those charts!" Ed.
jack97
New member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2006
- Messages
- 2,513
- Points
- 0
The trends does seem to go fatter, I have some k2 and volk all mnt skis, circa 2003-4. The tips are around 109. That would prob be considered a skinny tip by today's standard.
Also, they are making the skis taller to help prevent boot out. That was one of my motivation in getting a mogul ski. I was getting by with my old all mtn skis but I wanted to get skinny and flat just to try it out. So far, lovin it.
mondeo
New member
I thought the rule was, if you aren't falling every once in a while, you aren't pushing yourself hard enough.
But anyways, I agree that its mostly the skier, and partly the skis; someone who skis bumps on a regular basis would do them better with Atomic race skis than someone who's never been in them on bump skis; I was just trying to point out the reasons behind using bump skis, and due to not having read the entire thread, probably was making a redundant point.
Now, to the question of are they worth it or not... It depends. If you spend a couple hours skiing bumps here and there, probably not. But if you're someone like me (and I think a few others here) and only ski for bumps (either in them, traveling to them, or practicing on groomers for them,) then yes, they are worth it. In between, the answer is somewhere in between.
You learn quickly young grasshopper.
Yes, they've always manufactured straight skis. 15 years ago that's all you could get.
No falls no balls.
I'm switching back to my much straighter AT skis this weekend. Because they are easier to ski in big bumps.
But I actually like my RX8's in the bumps most of the season.
ed-drum
New member
Actually, I don't count how many days a year I ski. I count my falls. If I ski (which I have) 100 days a season, I average about 10 falls or so. ED. :roll:
Similar threads
