Rock skis, anyone?

[billski]

After having a nice experience in some deep glades yesteday, I've a new found interest , but not a budget for new gear.

Anyone like to recommend some models of skis that I might keep a lookout for to buy used for marginal condition skiing in the glades?

Thanks,

 

[NYDrew]

My rock skiis usually evolve from my last main pair of skiis. When they become too beat up for everyday use, they become my rock and teaching skiis. This is usually a 2-3 season cycle (assuming I dont break them and get a free replacement)

 

[billski]

I'm looking for something specific, thanks.
I can't afford 2-3 year replacement.
My old skis are all way too long.
From what I can tell, I want something with a good deal of flex.

 

[riverc0il]

welcome to the fun and exciting world of glade skiing. from experience, i suggest avoiding the trees at all costs :lol:

NYDrew is spot on in his recommendation. if you get serious about the trees, you are going to get serious about replacing your gear cause you hit a lot of junk in the woods. my philosophy since starting to ski the woods is that all skis are rock skis (my philosophy used to be that all skis BECOME rock skis, but why wait? heh). i understand you can't afford that now... but if you really get into the woods, you might find yourself figuring out ways to afford doing so.

any ways, shorter skis are definitely better in the woods, but you don't need to go super short. if you could demo some skis, i would recommend finding something that turns well through the bumps if woods are not available. you need something that turns quick and on a dime, something you can give input to and get instant feedback. i love my dynastar 8000s for this type of terrain, but don't take that as a recommendation for what will work for you. best to demo the current range of mid-fats and find what works best for you. once you find a ski that meets your needs, look for used versions of past years' models on ebay.

 

[BeanoNYC]

How long are your tree skis, Steve. I know your well over 6 feet, just curious what is short to you.

 

[riverc0il]

178. don't go too short in the trees or you'll sacrifice float on the powder. that is, if you're into that sort of thing

 

[awf170]

How long are your tree skis, Steve. I know your well over 6 feet, just curious what is short to you.

I think 178? Not sure though...

IMO the weight of the ski for tree skiing is more important then legnth. I bet a 185 pocket rocket is easier in the trees then something like a 170 metron.

 

[NYDrew]

I as always suggest a slalom ski for everything...yeah I'm weird, but how can you go wrong with a short turn radius when you need to avoid trees (they work even better in bumps)

My current non rock skiis are dynastar 63's, I love their performance in the trees so much that I have "graduated" them to tree skiis even though they are brand new. Poor rock skiis, they havn't seen action all season beacuse of this.

 

[Marc]

How long are your tree skis, Steve. I know your well over 6 feet, just curious what is short to you.

I think 178? Not sure though...

IMO the weight of the ski for tree skiing is more important then legnth. I bet a 185 pocket rocket is easier in the trees then something like a 170 metron.

Any ski of any length is quite hard to fit into a pocket. I've attempted this on separate occasions if anyone's wondering.


But I conditionally agree with Austin. Weight is my first concern, but then I barely ever ski a good powder dump.

"Sucks to be that guy."


Yeah I know, I could tell you were all thinkin' it.

 

[riverc0il]

I as always suggest a slalom ski for everything...yeah I'm weird, but how can you go wrong with a short turn radius when you need to avoid trees (they work even better in bumps)

a good pick if that type of ski's performance fits the skier; however, the sub-par performance in powder could hurt in the trees. you want good float and control on powder in the trees and most slalom skis don't have a very wide waist.

 

[NYDrew]

yeah, forgot to mention that. River is a little off when he says sub par, what I think he means to say is REALLY sub par.

You really have to muscle them through and above powder. They say it takes stamina to ski in the trees, well then it takes a miracle to ski slalom skiis in trees after a dump.

I like it, im weird.