Not many data points from ski racers. @DocGKR isn't a Blossom fan but @razie seems to be one. I didn't catch any other opinions from ski racing world. I gather that @DocGKR is a Masters racer and @razie is a race coach (who puts videos of himself out there on youtube). I've not read anything in this thread on the Blossom FIS from any other posters in tis thread. 1 like and 1 worst ski anyone's ever been on. I've been on worse skis and really like (really like) the Blossom but I'm not a racer. Technique junkie but not a racer.
-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Rank the Race Skis in Order...
- Thread starter Philpug
- Start date
Everyone has different needs and preferences for their skis. What works well for one person, may not for another. Hopefully everyone finds equipment that works for them in the conditions they ski.
I have owned a couple of pairs of Blossoms--they were fine to free ski. Enjoy!
Good for racing? Nope, did not work for me or anyone I know around here. I have directly observed ScotsSkier trying some Blossom race skis; IIRC, he did not find them particularly stellar in the course. None of the other Masters racers I know have had much success on them.
This past season, relative newcomers VanDeer/Augment, as well as Kastle, were both on WC podiums; how many Blossoms made it to a WC podium, how about EC or even NorAm top-10 finishes?
Hmmm, that might be a small evidentiary clue.....
I have owned a couple of pairs of Blossoms--they were fine to free ski. Enjoy!
Good for racing? Nope, did not work for me or anyone I know around here. I have directly observed ScotsSkier trying some Blossom race skis; IIRC, he did not find them particularly stellar in the course. None of the other Masters racers I know have had much success on them.
This past season, relative newcomers VanDeer/Augment, as well as Kastle, were both on WC podiums; how many Blossoms made it to a WC podium, how about EC or even NorAm top-10 finishes?
Hmmm, that might be a small evidentiary clue.....
Thanks, Doc.
To me, it was a big surprise and interesting how well Kastle is doing in World Cup! (finally)
The previous couple of race-like samples/"attempts" from them I and others tried were to us nutty soft for a tech race ski,
so I have to assume Kastle covered a lot of make-up ground in a hurry.
Having a top racer (or two?) on their payroll doesn't hurt either.
(But you've got to hand it to Kastle, because top racers don't respond so well to, or sign up for, below average skis.)
This summer and coming year, I will be looking forward, again, to any signs that Augment/VanDeer is re-entering the U.S. market,
both with race skis and with all mountain skis. Please let us know if you hear of any (signs, that is).
(This may already have happened, and I just don't know about it yet.)
I hope @ScotsSkier gets at some of their latest race offerings, especially - again.
Man, I have to guess that would be great, and great for the rest of us also, I'd be hoping - for starters, as a "heads up".
Go @ScotSkier for summer training and next season, for both you and your racers, if you still do that coaching and masters racing by then!
(To me it's been great to have both of you, and hopefully some others, with firsthand knowledge of next year's race ski crop -
and all mountain crop from these top race brands also. Top of my list, each year.)
(P.S. Note to @mulva28 : For your own enjoyment, if nothing else, please go back in the archives and look at years of past posts
by both these two posters regarding then current race skis and their performance. Still relevant info.
It's two resources that are great and consistent on this website up to now, to me and others - not to be missed,
if you have strong interest in the subject. And strong interest to get on top race skis [both SL and GS] for recreational enjoyment.)
To me, it was a big surprise and interesting how well Kastle is doing in World Cup! (finally)
The previous couple of race-like samples/"attempts" from them I and others tried were to us nutty soft for a tech race ski,
so I have to assume Kastle covered a lot of make-up ground in a hurry.
Having a top racer (or two?) on their payroll doesn't hurt either.
(But you've got to hand it to Kastle, because top racers don't respond so well to, or sign up for, below average skis.)
This summer and coming year, I will be looking forward, again, to any signs that Augment/VanDeer is re-entering the U.S. market,
both with race skis and with all mountain skis. Please let us know if you hear of any (signs, that is).
(This may already have happened, and I just don't know about it yet.)
I hope @ScotsSkier gets at some of their latest race offerings, especially - again.
Man, I have to guess that would be great, and great for the rest of us also, I'd be hoping - for starters, as a "heads up".
Go @ScotSkier for summer training and next season, for both you and your racers, if you still do that coaching and masters racing by then!
(To me it's been great to have both of you, and hopefully some others, with firsthand knowledge of next year's race ski crop -
and all mountain crop from these top race brands also. Top of my list, each year.)
(P.S. Note to @mulva28 : For your own enjoyment, if nothing else, please go back in the archives and look at years of past posts
by both these two posters regarding then current race skis and their performance. Still relevant info.
It's two resources that are great and consistent on this website up to now, to me and others - not to be missed,
if you have strong interest in the subject. And strong interest to get on top race skis [both SL and GS] for recreational enjoyment.)
Last edited:
I'm not sure if this is correct. While their presence in the tech events on the women side might have been more limited (though Nicole Hosp and Katharina Truppe did pretty well on their skis), on the men side, they've had 3 skiers in (or around) top-15 of the slalom standings for many years (Yule, Ryding, and Khoroshilov). So I personally think they've been doing quite well in the tech events.
I guess that's your subjective opinion. They have a few fairly good racers. I too root for them. And love some of their non- FIS skis. Okay.
However, there is an official FIS World Cup Alpine brand competition each year, and in terms of this objective scoring,
Fischer is slipping a bit farther behind in all events, not doing "quite well".
(See FIS website and look under alpine brand competition for the results breakdown going back years.)
Fischer is one of the top brands in terms of volume of skis made. It is one of the "big boys," in this regard, and financially;
but in terms of how it does on the world cup and in FIS, it is not one of the top tier companies performance-wise,
ranking below #4 Stockli (a much smaller company) at the moment, in 5th;
down with Van Deer (a very small start-up company with several top tier racers)
and Salomon (never in the running - subordinate in racing to Atomic in its same company).
The only brands below it have not really been in the running at all.
So in that sense, Fischer is dead last of the "big boys."
(For most, please skip the details below that back up the summary above.)
In recent years, overall, objectively, in terms of points in the brand competition, Fischer has been slipping in its strength, the speed events,
and it is still a distant finisher and near the bottom, in the tech events:
a distant 5th in the overall (half the points of the 4th place finisher, which in turn was way behind the big three);
a distant 4th in slalom (one third the points of #3);
a distant 7th in giant slalom (less than one sixth of #6).
Also, Fischer has slipped badly in the speed events, its traditional strength, as I said:
a distant 6th in SG (one quarter the points of #2);
a distant 6th in downhill (half the points of #4).
So in 2023, Fischer speed events have slipped badly, and their tech events have improved a bit, still near the bottom.
By contrast, in 2022, a high point, Fischer was a distant 4th overall, a distant 4th in slalom, and a respectable and competitive 3rd in downhill.
In 2021, Fischer was a distant 6th overall (behind Salomon and Stockli), a distant 7th in Slalom, a distant 6th in GS, and a respectable 4th in downhill.
In 2020, Fischer was competitive in Slalom and Downhill.
In 2019, Fischer was more competitive: second in both Downhill and SG; but distant in the tech events. A high point year.
In 2018, Fischer was competitive in Downhill and SG, distant overall and in the tech events.
So let's go back to the originating post. Are we talking about ranking the race skis for racing, or are we talking about ranking the race skis for free skiing?
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2016
- Posts
- 2,737
Yes.
There's a definite correlation, to me - perhaps especially as a finesse skier myself. Because of different skier profiles, preferences will vary, and vary from year to year at times. But the pleasant differences between how the race skis perform recreationally in my experience to a great degree correlate to how they handle racing. The same qualities that make them fast, dependable, distinctly different and in their own ways have an edge or are better in a course are a delight in free skiing, that so far, in my experience of the big three plus Volkl, pretty much translate from racing, even from racing results, to fun free skiing in distinct, characteristic brand ways, just enjoying the things that are possible with each FIS ski, in both SL and GS.
This is not complicated. It's a lot simpler and more straight forward than the prevailing point of view on many websites (about how in another world "real" race skis are, beyond mere mortals, etc.)
P.S. One of the things that makes this pattern possible is that there is a real affinity between the woman's spec GS ski and men recreational skiers - the dang things work so well for men who are simply good skiers, whereas the men's spec GS skis tend to be too much for most average sized guys (and many active male racers too, in the long run; too stiff for optimal, enjoyable, safe rebound, and too much power in the rebound if flexed enough).
Sorry. I just think there are a lot of good skiers who could be accessing and enjoying great FIS tech skis more (both men's and women's in SL; and Women's, Masters and Juniors in GS.)
Last edited:
Yup. Don't need to be convinced of that. I own a pair - albeit older ones - and they are unquestionably great skis. Don't actually get out on them that often, but I get the point.
I guess what I'm wondering aloud is whether active racers like Doc and Scot picking a race ski for free skiing would pick the same race skis non racers might pick.
I'd be curious in which way was it underwhelming?
Ok to free ski, but in a race course they had poor grip, low energy, slow times.
Last I checked, ScotsSkier also did not have a great time on the ones he tried....
Last I checked, ScotsSkier also did not have a great time on the ones he tried....
fair enough - didn't take them in gates. I find they need a serious race tune, sidewall strip la la la to make them sing, but the grip would be less definitive and immediate than say a Fischer or Atomic etc - that's what makes them more forgiving
Which is why there are no true unicorn skis.
In this category, there are indeed obvious limitations to the ski: it ain't so much for off piste, for example.
But still, one mostly gets used to the FIS spec skis, to the point where they become a new normal for free skiing on piste,
and with afternoon deterioration on piste.
Yes, a masters race ski or a near race ski is more forgiving recreationally, especially initially;
and that's probably a similar benefit to the Blossoms, from what I'm reading.
But the top FIS skis in many ways become a bit more forgiving too, though maybe not as much, as one gets used to them
(I guess if one has at least some skills - but not necessarily elite or expert level skills).
And the specific brand top FIS qualities still shine through, enjoyable, an option to turn to.
I'm a lighter weight, old guy, finesse skier, with very modest race background a fairly long time ago,
so if that's true for me,
it would probably be even more so for heavier, stronger skiers , and more expert or elite skiers.
But still, one mostly gets used to the FIS spec skis, to the point where they become a new normal for free skiing on piste,
and with afternoon deterioration on piste.
Yes, a masters race ski or a near race ski is more forgiving recreationally, especially initially;
and that's probably a similar benefit to the Blossoms, from what I'm reading.
But the top FIS skis in many ways become a bit more forgiving too, though maybe not as much, as one gets used to them
(I guess if one has at least some skills - but not necessarily elite or expert level skills).
And the specific brand top FIS qualities still shine through, enjoyable, an option to turn to.
I'm a lighter weight, old guy, finesse skier, with very modest race background a fairly long time ago,
so if that's true for me,
it would probably be even more so for heavier, stronger skiers , and more expert or elite skiers.
Probably why your reviews resonate with me. I'm an old light guy with no racing background, just a speed and acceleration junky.
Pay attention to this post especially the last paragraph in italics. Spot on.There's a definite correlation, to me - perhaps especially as a finesse skier myself. Because of different skier profiles, preferences will vary, and vary from year to year at times. But the pleasant differences between how the race skis perform recreationally in my experience to a great degree correlate to how they handle racing. The same qualities that make them fast, dependable, distinctly different and in their own ways have an edge or are better in a course are a delight in free skiing, that so far, in my experience of the big three plus Volkl, pretty much translate from racing, even from racing results, to fun free skiing in distinct, characteristic brand ways, just enjoying the things that are possible with each FIS ski, in both SL and GS.
This is not complicated. It's a lot simpler and more straight forward than the prevailing point of view on many websites (about how in another world "real" race skis are, beyond mere mortals, etc.)
P.S. One of the things that makes this pattern possible is that there is a real affinity between the woman's spec GS ski and men recreational skiers - the dang things work so well for men who are simply good skiers, whereas the men's spec GS skis tend to be too much for most average sized guys (and many active male racers too, in the long run; too stiff for optimal, enjoyable, safe rebound, and too much power in the rebound if flexed enough).
Sorry. I just think there are a lot of good skiers who could be accessing and enjoying great FIS tech skis more (both men's and women's in SL; and Women's, Masters and Juniors in GS.)
Yup! Very true, to a large extent... there are skis which are harder to ski on hard or grippy snow, that's where the issue lies, specifically SL. For most on-piste skiing no big issue with FIS skis, soft snow allows any ski to be feathered or pushed into whatever... but on hard/grippy snow, for instance something like the Fischer WC SL, when it will engage, it will turn no matter if you're ready or not, grips really well and bends and throws you if you're not on top of it. That's expected, that's it's job in a sense... unless you're driving the thing from behind the backseat and not letting it engage the tips.
The Blossom, what I was trying to say, it's not less powerful, but it will be more forgiving with the grippiness and the bending and the throwing. It will throw you, but more predictable and allows some feathering. It may feel more "damp" too. If you're not that young or in shape and not taking kindly to a 4m radius turn at speed, you'll appreciate that quality more insert-guilty-smile.
Masters and lighter skis, they will be more forgiving due to their softer nature, they can grip only where you want them to grip and feather the rest, you can manhandle them and generally control them better.
For instance, a beefier masters SL at 173cm at say 69 will make a very nice all-mountain slayer in most conditions... it will engage and turn no problem, but the flex pattern along and across is much nicer to handle and control than a thoroughbred.
In simpler words, a thoroughbred on hard snow is built for athletes... of which I am hardly one...
With race skis there's also the situation of a very well spent race ski on grippy snow. They can grip and overbend to the point to which your knees may have issues because they haven't lost lateral rigidity enough. That's when you usually start detuning them to take some of the bite out to save your knees... or rather replace with a new one.
The Blossom, what I was trying to say, it's not less powerful, but it will be more forgiving with the grippiness and the bending and the throwing. It will throw you, but more predictable and allows some feathering. It may feel more "damp" too. If you're not that young or in shape and not taking kindly to a 4m radius turn at speed, you'll appreciate that quality more insert-guilty-smile.
Masters and lighter skis, they will be more forgiving due to their softer nature, they can grip only where you want them to grip and feather the rest, you can manhandle them and generally control them better.
For instance, a beefier masters SL at 173cm at say 69 will make a very nice all-mountain slayer in most conditions... it will engage and turn no problem, but the flex pattern along and across is much nicer to handle and control than a thoroughbred.
In simpler words, a thoroughbred on hard snow is built for athletes... of which I am hardly one...
With race skis there's also the situation of a very well spent race ski on grippy snow. They can grip and overbend to the point to which your knees may have issues because they haven't lost lateral rigidity enough. That's when you usually start detuning them to take some of the bite out to save your knees... or rather replace with a new one.
Last edited:
Do you mean "grippy," as in having the wrong warm weather wax for slush snow?
If not, not sure. Maybe sometimes this is so for a good W FIS GS ski, for certain skiers and skis (men's GS?).
Not is my case, with the 188/30 women's skis (and others).
But a good, top FIS SL, men's or woman's - when tuned right - I do not experience as you describe.
WHEN TUNED RIGHT, it is not hard on knees, not overly grippy.
I know really old guys who can barely walk who do not have such problems with these FIS SL skis.
(Yes, FIS SL skis get more stable when steadily doing shorter turns, but tuned right,
there is lots of leeway - fast or slow, quick or in slow motion almost.)
If it's a bit hooky, or demanding a turn, that's the base bevel, mostly - in most cases.
(Some may like this extra "grab"/quick reaction at the tips,
but that's not what the ski is designed to feel like - Atomic, Rossi, Head, from what I understand.)
If I get a pair that is a bit unpredictable this way, with extra grab or grip, or hook,
it just means the base bevel is not either even/level or with a proper progressive base bevel
(slightly steeper towards the tip and tail, slightly shallower in the center - VERY slightly).
(Ted Ligety often used, for GS, a zero base bevel underfoot and a 0.5 base bevel achieved progressively by the contact points at tip and tail, for instance - still a good setup for many recreational skiers/racers, once used to it. For recreational SL this works well also.
0.5 underfoot and 0.7 at tip and tail is good as well - easy neutral and no grip/hook either - I often use this, and multiple other options.)
Base bevel level is good too.
And the amount of this progressive base beveling can be controlled very exactly, easily, quickly, with mild experience at it - free hand.
(If one wants a more forgiving, predictable and neutral FIS SL ski in terms of turns/grip at the tips and/or tails, more so than one would want for gates maybe, just add manually a very little extra progression towards steeper base bevel - only a by hand progressive stroke or two towards the ends of the skis, often.) I've described this elsewhere, but it's a shame more skiers don't do this, or learn to.
This variable base bevel is also called a "Radial Tune". I think this type of variable base bevel made sense in the earlier days of shaped skis, but has been made obsolete by modern designs with tip rocker. I tried a radial tune and hated it. Maybe it still makes sense on typical soft snow conditions of the Rockies, but it just resulted in lot less grip on firm Midwest conditions.(Ted Ligety often used, for GS, a zero base bevel underfoot and a 0.5 base bevel achieved progressively by the contact points at tip and tail, for instance - still a good setup for many recreational skiers/racers, once used to it. For recreational SL this works well also.
0.5 underfoot and 0.7 at tip and tail is good as well - easy neutral and no grip/hook either - I often use this, and multiple other options.)
Base bevel level is good too.
And the amount of this progressive base beveling can be controlled very exactly, easily, quickly, with mild experience at it - free hand.
(If one wants a more forgiving, predictable and neutral FIS SL ski in terms of turns/grip at the tips and/or tails, more so than one would want for gates maybe, just add manually a very little extra progression towards steeper base bevel - only a by hand progressive stroke or two towards the ends of the skis, often.) I've described this elsewhere, but it's a shame more skiers don't do this, or learn to.
Grippy as in hooky and holdy, not grabby.
0 underfoot is crazy. I'll try that next time I get to the WC, heh. It's actually dangerous in GS for mortals. 0.5 would be aggressive, would need detuned tips to avoid trouble.
We can tune a ski to ski against its characteristics as much as we can tune a Honda to drive like a Ferrari. Or vice-versa. It can drive better or worse but it will still be a Honda or a Ferrari...
In terms of feel, skis are different in the same categoey. We just contrasted the Blossom to wveryrhing. Atomic is very different from Head. Head is classic beefy damp while Atomics are responsive and tactile, quite the opposite - especially in softer flexes. Rossi falls in the middle, borrows from both, imho.
Can we tune a Head to ski like an Atomic? Nah. But in terms of what one likes vs what one is faster on, skis surprise more often than not... it's why proper ski testing is done with a timer and a course.
0 underfoot is crazy. I'll try that next time I get to the WC, heh. It's actually dangerous in GS for mortals. 0.5 would be aggressive, would need detuned tips to avoid trouble.
We can tune a ski to ski against its characteristics as much as we can tune a Honda to drive like a Ferrari. Or vice-versa. It can drive better or worse but it will still be a Honda or a Ferrari...
In terms of feel, skis are different in the same categoey. We just contrasted the Blossom to wveryrhing. Atomic is very different from Head. Head is classic beefy damp while Atomics are responsive and tactile, quite the opposite - especially in softer flexes. Rossi falls in the middle, borrows from both, imho.
Can we tune a Head to ski like an Atomic? Nah. But in terms of what one likes vs what one is faster on, skis surprise more often than not... it's why proper ski testing is done with a timer and a course.