Are you happy with your "specialty" ski purchase?

[drjeff]

This will in all likelyhood get me flamed pretty badly, but what the heck. Why not spend the $$ you'd spend on adding the to specialty side of your quiver and put it towards some lessons in your weak areas that you feel you need the specialty ski for??

Personally I'd much rather be darn comfortable in all conditions with 1 pair of skis, than getting the little mental second guessing going on when conditions change from what that specialty ski was designed for to something else. Just my opinion, now let my flaming begin :flame: :uzi:

 

[SkiingInABlueDream]

At the risk of being contrarian I still just dont get the need for a "quiver" of skis. For the last ~10 seasons Ive been skiing with an all mtn / mid-fat / do everything ski in everything from waist-deep fresh, chowder, crud, trees, glades, spring corn/slush, groomers, bumps, icebumps, 4" of fresh over icebumps, dust on crust, whatever. My skis have been a Salomon Xscream, then K2 Axis X, and currently Dynastar Legend 4800 all of which are ~70 mm underfoot. (the 4800's really make me miss the Axes though). But overall Ive never felt like I was unable to do whatever I wanted to due to my skis (with the possible exception of aggressive carving on iced groomers). Maybe Im the proverbial neutered dog.

That said, Im still curious about this "flotation" thing ppl talk about when they talk about fat skis and I made a whim purchase yesterday of a pair of Fischer Watea 94's. (read good reviews, found a decent deal and I guess money burns a hole in my pocket. Oh yeah, and I needed to do something with a pair of leftover bindings).

Maybe when I try them out on the next fresh-snow day next season (or this season??) I'll have an epiphany and revive this thread saying 'ok I get it now'.

[edit: I guess a sub-point would be, does one really need a quiver skis, or do we just like our toys. yeah, I thought so ]

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

This will in all likelyhood get me flamed pretty badly, but what the heck. Why not spend the $$ you'd spend on adding the to specialty side of your quiver and put it towards some lessons in your week areas that you feel you need the specialty ski for??

Personally I'd much rather be darn comfortable in all conditions with 1 pair of skis, than getting the little mental second guessing going on when conditions change from what that specialty ski was designed for to something else. Just my opinion, no let my flaming begin :flame: :uzi:

My race skis are great in powder and crud...but my fat skis are better..My fat skis are good on eastern hardpack..but my race skis are better..:-?

 

[Greg]

At the risk of being contrarian I still just dont get the need for a "quiver" of skis.

For the last ~10 seasons Ive been skiing with an all mtn / mid-fat / do everything ski in everything...

Your second sentence explains the opinion you have in your first.

 

[2knees]

very happy with my bump skis. Head Mad Trix. Great in bumps. I have no quiver. its my only ski so i have to make them work everywhere.

 

[Rushski]

Haven't had full use out of my midfats (last year's Blizzard Titan Eight). But they ski so well they can go out at any time and not just for light pow/crud. The usage I have had with them have made them worth it and will prolong the life of the rest of my (small) quiver.

Though my RX8s still are my best bet for groomers.

 

[snowmonster]

[edit: I guess a sub-point would be, does one really need a quiver skis, or do we just like our toys. yeah, I thought so ]

...it all started when I was a young boy and we didn't have the money to buy me a wagon named Rosebud...

Yeah, these are our toys. We don't need them but it surely makes going to the office bearable.

 

[riverc0il]

This will in all likelyhood get me flamed pretty badly, but what the heck. Why not spend the $$ you'd spend on adding the to specialty side of your quiver and put it towards some lessons in your weak areas that you feel you need the specialty ski for??

Personally I'd much rather be darn comfortable in all conditions with 1 pair of skis, than getting the little mental second guessing going on when conditions change from what that specialty ski was designed for to something else. Just my opinion, now let my flaming begin :flame: :uzi:

No flaming here, that is a good point... most skiers really only need a one ski do it all quiver.

 

[madskier6]

No flaming here, that is a good point... most skiers really only need a one ski do it all quiver.

Agreed. But if an expert skier really likes to ski powder, there's nothing quite like a true fatty for those conditions.

 

[deadheadskier]

No flaming here, that is a good point... most skiers really only need a one ski do it all quiver.

Absolutely true statement. I definitely only 'need' one pair of skis.

That said, I love having the option. While I can ski powder alright on my all mountain B2's, the difference is night and day when I get on the Axioms. The extra float allows me to not only ski though deep powder faster, but it also reduces the amount of energy needed, so I can ski longer and harder without getting fatigued. The latter part of that statement is what makes them worth it to have.

I'm hoping for the same in getting a ripper for groomers. The B2's pretty much suck on ice / skied off conditions.

 

[severine]

I like my specialty skis even though I don't use them for their intended purpose. My Dynastar Marie Martinod Pro TTs rock, even if they're a park and pipe ski (for which I have never used them). Great confidence building, awesome getting through crud and fresh manmade (never got to try them in powder, though). I took a chance in trying them as an "all-mountain" and the gamble paid off. The only thing I've found they don't do as well on is hardpack/ice (which is why I just added the Roxy Joyrider to my now 2-ski quiver). Yeah, I've skied them on hardpack anyway and lived to tell the tale. But it's not as fun as it could be with a better gripping ski.

Nobody "needs" even one pair of skis, if you want to get technical. Variety is the spice of life though, n'est-ce pas?

 

[riverc0il]

Let me clarify my statement as "most skiers really only need a one ski do it all quiver" was painting the brush too broadly and too factual when taken literally (I would much rather offer my opinion than try to speak factually on this matter!!). I think the point drjeff was trying to make (correct me if I am wrong) and that I was echoing is that most skiers really are not going to notice or take advantage of the performance difference and would be better off one a one ski quiver with 10 more lessons during a season than spending the money on a new set of skis. Even some skiers that could tell the difference in performance may not get their monies worth. That said, there most definitely is a point at which specialized skis for certain conditions improve performance and enjoyment in those conditions and at that point, it becomes a financial issue of whether the specialization for a limited number of days is worth while. Someone only skiing powder once or twice a year may not see the financial value in a big powder board over a 80ish mid-fat. The financial point of worth whileness will be different for every skier depending on their desires, performance needs, and finances.

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

Powder skis are awesome in crud and deep sugar granuler chop as well..they're not just effective in deep powder.*

 

[Hawkshot99]

At the risk of being contrarian I still just dont get the need for a "quiver" of skis.
................
[edit: I guess a sub-point would be, does one really need a quiver skis, or do we just like our toys. yeah, I thought so ]

Do I NEED them? No, I could be happy on a rental ski, just getting out there. But I love haveing my quiver. There is more to it than just having lots of skis. They each do something for me that I really enjoy. Whether it be floating down a powder trail on the wide skis, or tearing up a high speed groomer on the race skis, or throwing mad steezy airs on my twin tips.

It is like why do some guys collect cars? They can only drive one, and there is usully always overlap in their "car quiver".

 

[deadheadskier]

I can definitely see how joe average skier might not think it makes financial sense in buying new skis. I guess with me, the quiver is something I've built over time. I got new skis (all mountain) this winter for the first time since 2003. In doing so, my old all mountain are now defacto bump skis, they've softened too much for skiing crud and carving at higher speeds, but still are fantastic in bumps. My powder boards were purchased in 2000 and despite having 150 days on them, still ski great - easily the most durable skis I've ever owned.

Next season, I'll get a set of groomer/race skis as nothing I have right now really nails those conditions like I'd like. That said, the skis I purchase will probably be a new 05-06 or 06-07 model that I find for cheap.

The average joe probably doesn't think its worth the money to have multiple styles of skis. That said, the same person often spends $800+ on their skis. I'd rather search for deals and get two sets for that amount if not for cheaper. An example would be this weekend at Saddleback I saw the exact same ski/binding set up I've got on 'sale' for $740. I paid $325.

As with everything though, different strokes for different folks. To each their own.

 

[Hawkshot99]

An example would be this weekend at Saddleback I saw the exact same ski/binding set up I've got on 'sale' for $740. I paid $325.

Don't you have B2's? I don't care what binding you have, there should be no way that they are that expensive "on sale"

 

[deadheadskier]

Don't you have B2's? I don't care what binding you have, there should be no way that they are that expensive "on sale"

Indeed I do. Granted this was in the shop in the lodge, but yeah they had the same Axial bindings as mine. List price for the skis $720, bindings $220. Package sale for it was either $720 or $740. Last years model just like mine.

Oddly, I still come across some B2's for $300+ flat on ebay, which even at that I think is kind of a rip off

http://cgi.ebay.com/Rossignol-Bandi...ryZ16062QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

[tekweezle]

as you get more "into" skiing, you want to have the "right tool for the job" atleast for that particular day. you could use a hammer to try and fix everything but would you?

i do agree with the statement that improving skills could help you tackle any condition on the mountain. But sometimes, you don;t want to work so hard. having a better tool for the job increases the fun factor on the mountain.

in spring conditions, everyone ought to have a pair of rock skis.

so for me, i got a pair of shortish, narrowish eastern ice skis and a pair of wider at the waist crud busting skis for out west. i could ski my east coast skis out west and west coast skis out east and actually, i have but results would be mixed.

 

[Greg]

as you get more "into" skiing, you want to have the "right tool for the job" atleast for that particular day. you could use a hammer to try and fix everything but would you?

i do agree with the statement that improving skills could help you tackle any condition on the mountain. But sometimes, you don;t want to work so hard. having a better tool for the job increases the fun factor on the mountain.

in spring conditions, everyone ought to have a pair of rock skis.

I agree with all of this except your last sentence. All skis are rock skis. :razz:

 

[severine]

I agree with all of this except your last sentence. All skis are rock skis. :razz:

Or at least, rock skis in training until they officially become rock skis.