People skiing on old straight skis

[Luithien]

As for bindings, I'd say the same thing goes for them as for boots:

If you leave them in your garage or attic and they go through a million cycles of freezing in the winter, and being 90F in the summer, they probably aren't going to last too long. If your idea of "adjusting bindings", is messing with a screwdriver until your foot fits in them, and you think DIN settings are supposed to be up as far as they can go....the bindings probably aren't going to work well or last long.

If you keep your stuff at room temperature, inspect it, and take care of it, it'll last a long time. As for boot liners wearing out...they tend to get "colder" after that period of time, but don't exactly develop holes instantly or whatever.

Personally, I ski on Nordica NR981 boots from 1990 or 1991, they're the best fitting boots I've ever felt, and cost $5 on ebay to get a spare pair for new rubber heels. Still working great.

Wish that would work for me.../cry. I skied my N981's since new in in 1991. The right one finally gave up the ghost just last Sunday as I was pulling it off after the last run of the season here. Cracked from the back grip plate up towards the cuff about 7 inches. 19 years and too many days to count. Heat molded insoles at the purchase and they never needed anything else. You can guess what brand I am looking at for thier replacements...

R.I.P 981's
Luithien

 

[eastcoastpowderhound]

wow, there's a lot of nutty stuff being tossed out in this thread!
ski equipment more over hyped than pharmaceuticals...WHAT? big pharma probably spends more on lobbyists in DC than the entire ski equipment industry generates in annual revenue.

Boots haven't changed since the 70's? Really...since everything was a single injected monoblock shell with 5 tiny non micro adjustable steel buckles...no power straps, no canting...

no real changes in skis, just tweaking...? its called evolution, if you think skis haven't changed much you either aren't paying attention, haven't skied on much new gear, or just can't tell. there have been 3 pretty big changes in the last decade and a half...shape skis, waist widths, and more recently, reverse camber/early rise.

boot liners have also come a long way in the last two decades...for starters, most liners weren't even asymetrical back in the early 80s...they were typically made out of one density of inner liner, a fabric cover, and a plastic or leather upper cuff. the tongue was the same shape from left to right. Liners fit much better right off the shelf now, most are made with multiple layers of thermomoldable eva foam around the ankles and midfoot, they're much more anatomically correct, and weigh half as much as the liners of old.

How do I make a living? I've been an equipment pimp for the last 22 years...been skiing on it, working on it, and designing it...experiencing all of the changes in materials, shapes, constructions, etc every year. Sure, there are some things that haven't changed a ton...there are similar materials being used...wood cores, metal edges, the same ski presses are being used...but the final product and its performance and versatility on the hill has changed dramatically. Sure, a great skier can ski on anything...but all the great skiers I know who have access to new equipment only go back to old straight skis for a laugh. Standing by your old equipment because you don't think the new stuff is any better would be like sticking with your trs80 because you think it computes just as well as the laptop your looking at now...or like watching the superbowl on a 19" black and white. You might as well drive a model T to work...its an internal combustion engine, its got wheels, what else has changed? Slap some REO Speedwagon in your 8 track and lets bring this shipment to the shores...who needs a CD player...and mp3's...who's that, r2d2's sister? (pretty sweet model t with an 8 track huh!)

My wife just gave me shit for the length of this post...so, sorry, but I had to read all 7 pages of posts before this...and I haven't posted much all winter as I've spent the last 6 months pimping next years gear...so I've got a lot to say. You can hear a little bit of what I've said or you can play ostrich and stick your head in the sand. your call. :grin:

 

[powpig2002]

lets get real. anyone that says old gear is as good as modern is, to put it politely, out in the ozone. you like working harder, good for you. i held out until 1999, thought shaped was a fad. i've been doing this since 1959. raced, patroled. i'd never go back. but to each his own. thank you.

 

[Rambo]

I can remember when the K2 VO-Slalom, was State-of the Art. Would not want to ski on them nowdays.

 

[Geoff]

Boots haven't changed since the 70's? Really...since everything was a single injected monoblock shell with 5 tiny non micro adjustable steel buckles...no power straps, no canting...

Jeez. The original black plastic Langes from the 1960's had micro adjustable buckles. My late-1970's Lange Banshee shells are quite similar to the Head World Cup shells I use now. My Heads have a canting adjustment I don't use since I'm neutral. Back then, you canted with a shim under the binding and achieved the same effect. Most skiers wouldn't be able to tell the difference in performance with their power strap undone.

The plug boots the racers use are a different story. Recreational boots aren't all that different.

 

[Rambo]

I take it that, Rear Entry Ski Boots, won't ever be back?

 

[eastcoastpowderhound]

Jeez. The original black plastic Langes from the 1960's had micro adjustable buckles. My late-1970's Lange Banshee shells are quite similar to the Head World Cup shells I use now. My Heads have a canting adjustment I don't use since I'm neutral. Back then, you canted with a shim under the binding and achieved the same effect. Most skiers wouldn't be able to tell the difference in performance with their power strap undone.

The plug boots the racers use are a different story. Recreational boots aren't all that different.

Actually the race boots are closer to the boots of past than recreational boots...nearly all are still a single injection with very few bells and whistles beyond the buckles. But they've still changed the lasts quite a bit and the overall shape of the shells have been refined so there is less plastic in the areas it isn't needed and more where it is needed to transmit energy to the ski...thinner shell walls around the midfoot, but thicker spines and soles. The blend of plastics is constantly being adjusted too. Recreational boots are very different from years past; most use 2 if not 3 different durometers of plastic, stiff in the spine and sole, softest over the instep, as a result they're much easier to get into, transmit energy more efficiently and are quite a bit lighter. liner construction has constantly improved, buckles are not only micro, but the upper buckles are usually macro adjustable, etc. womens boots are actually different from mens boots now instead of just being white vs red, black, or grey.

a cant shim under the binding has a very different effect than the canting/upper cuff adjustment on the shell...the cuff adjustment helps to align the upper cuff with the lower leg shaft, has no impact on the foot itself and doesn't really impact knee alignment. The cant shim under the binding changes the angle of the foot relative to the ski, has nothing to do with the fit of the upper cuff to the lower leg, and has a direct impact on knee alignment. Completely different results.

As for the power strap...anyone I ever fit a boot for could tell the difference...if not in performance, certainly in fit and comfort.

or, maybe my 1998 outback with 140K miles is just as good as a 2010 outback...they've both got 4 wheels, both have all wheel drive...both have internal combustion engines...both roll down the roads under their own power, they just look a little different on the outside right?

 

[deadheadskier]

east coast, you should join our conversation on manual transmissions. Many of still prefer the old 3 peddle. Some folks consider it outdated technology.

I definitely feel that new equipment makes a world of difference over old. I could ski on straight skis, but would be quite the gaper for the first several runs.

 

[bvibert]

east coast, you should join our conversation on manual transmissions. Many of still prefer the old 3 peddle. Some folks consider it outdated technology.

My clutch pedal is reversed camber.

 

[deadheadskier]

I believe my slush box is cap design with a foam core.

 

[SIKSKIER]

You mean I should give up using my Marker Rotomats?

 

[billski]

You mean I should give up using my Marker Rotomats?

I was pretty bummed when they were taken off the insurance company's equipment list. They were the bindings I'd always wanted and I thought they were great. They looked the part of a pretty mean piece of gear too. Sad to let them go.

 

[4aprice]

I found it pretty interesting this past season that just after the big storm (2/24ish?) I saw so many pairs of old straight skis in the lift lines at Camelback. It was as if people saw the snow and ran to the closet and pulled them out. I'll bet some of those people hadn't been on skis in 10 years.


Alex

Lake Hopatcong, NJ

 

[riverc0il]

+1
I've long suspected the industry builds in obsolescence for that reason. I mean really, how many legitimate equipment breakthroughs have occurred over the past few decades? Shaped skis? The invention of snow boards? Everything else has been tinkering IMHO.

This does not gel with a competitive environment as that would be collusion and illegal. Besides, it would just take one rouge company to increase their rate of innovation to jump ahead of other companies, so this type of collusion is extremely unlikely as it would provide other companies a huge advantage for not withholding innovation.

Comparing skis now to just ten years ago to the first shaped skis that hit the market, I would not call the development just tinkering. These types of discussions always bring about at least one comment of "its not the skier, its the skis" and I say bullshit. You couldn't pay me to go backward on equipment. I would have to relearn a different technique to ski straight skis and it wouldn't be nearly as fun as ripping a 20m radius board mid-90s underfoot and 130 at the tip.

As for boots, you can replace the liners and those do pack out by their very nature. Unless you can switch out toe and heel blocks, those are the parts of the boot I would be most concerned about as those are your connection to the ski and a safety issue. I changed my boots when I thought the toe and heel were getting a bit too rounded for my liking. Everyone's boots will wear differently depending how much wear you put on those parts of the boots.

The most straight skis I have seen in a day was this season at Stowe, of all places. Folks can pay for the most expensive resort in the east but can't pay to upgrade their equipment. It was a startling sight to behold. But for someone that only take one or two big ski vacations a year, I can see why they might want to maximize the return on their investment. Though for any one beyond doing a wedge turn, the performance increase has to be worth the price of upgrading to at least a used ski at a ski swap on the cheap.

 

[marcski]

These types of discussions always bring about at least one comment of "its not the skier, its the skis" and I say bullshit.

You got it backward, Steve, "it's the skier not the skis."

 

[riverc0il]

You got it backward, Steve, "it's the skier not the skis."

Was thinking about my thought instead of about your broaching the usual quote.

 

[jack97]

+1
I've long suspected the industry builds in obsolescence for that reason. I mean really, how many legitimate equipment breakthroughs have occurred over the past few decades? Shaped skis? The invention of snow boards? Everything else has been tinkering IMHO.

This does not gel with a competitive environment as that would be collusion and illegal. Besides, it would just take one rouge company to increase their rate of innovation to jump ahead of other companies, so this type of collusion is extremely unlikely as it would provide other companies a huge advantage for not withholding innovation.

IMO, there's a big difference between collusion and marketing equipment for obsolescence. Over the last 5-6 years, K2 had the axis series and then went to the apache series. Volkl did the same from the G3 to the AC series. And yes, the skis in the new series did change in dimension and prolly flex. It seemed every company had a skicross type series. Would not surprise me if this was done to spark interest to skiing something new while still staying with the same manufacture, basically get people to buy out of the curiosity factor or the want of tryng something new.

This type of marketing is no different than what the car industry has been doing.

 

[campgottagopee]

These types of discussions always bring about at least one comment of "its not the skier, its the skis" and I say bullshit. You couldn't pay me to go backward on equipment. I would have to relearn a different technique to ski straight skis and it wouldn't be nearly as fun as ripping a 20m radius board mid-90s underfoot and 130 at the tip.

I agree with you sbout going backward on equipment, but how is it not the ski???? I say the ski is a major part of the "quality" of turns we see today while skiing. We wouldn't be seeing that itermediate skier throwing down carved turns if it wasn's for the "modern day" ski. So how is it not the ski????

 

[dbking]

This past season I took out an old pair of 223cm downhills. It was a beautiful sunny day with great groomed conditions. Really, I was just trying to look cool and show off my old skis. But as I started skiing them, I started to have fun. They were tougher to ski than my new school stuff but not impossible. They made me ski correctly. I had to concentrate on getting my weight entirely on the downhill ski. With my new stuff I can get away with my weight on any ski and fake a ton of bad turns. I think going " Old School" would be good for someone who wanted to " Tune Up " their sking. They would be tough to learn on.
Yeah, the old straight skis will keep you honest.

 

[campgottagopee]

This past season I took out an old pair of 223cm downhills. It was a beautiful sunny day with great groomed conditions. Really, I was just trying to look cool and show off my old skis. But as I started skiing them, I started to have fun. They were tougher to ski than my new school stuff but not impossible. They made me ski correctly. I had to concentrate on getting my weight entirely on the downhill ski. With my new stuff I can get away with my weight on any ski and fake a ton of bad turns. I think going " Old School" would be good for someone who wanted to " Tune Up " their sking. They would be tough to learn on.
Yeah, the old straight skis will keep you honest.

That's what I'm talking about---no cheating, NONE!!! The art of weighting the the front, middle, and back of the ski thru a turn is gone. It's all about rolling them on edge and riding now, which, imo, is waaaaaaay easier.