Suggestions? Gentle frontside groomer during knee rehab

[Monique]

Hey all,

Assuming PT clears me, I'll be allowed to ski at 6 months post-op. Doc has been very clear that he wants me to ski *gingerly* (his word) and only on gentle groomers until 9 months post-op, when I am technically cleared, but he would rather I continue to take it easy - and in any case, I'm not stoked on getting back into challenging terrain right when spring conditions are taking effect (ie, the same conditions that contributed to my injury).

Now, in addition to saying he wants me to ski gingerly, he has said that the reason I need to avoid uneven terrain or snow is that he does not want me to have to make any sudden lateral moves, twists, etc. Based on this information, I have internally amended the guidance to mean "ski groomers gently" - I can ski any groomer slowly and with great control. Okay, that's not quite right. I have noticed that when I'm intentionally skiing behind someone skiing slowly, I can do it, even on scraped, nasty stuff. When I ski without intentionally following someone, I tend to get going too fast and skid a lot, even when I think I'm trying to ski slowly. When I ski slowly, I can feel myself rounding my turns nicely. Just need to trick my brain into doing it even when I don't "have" to.

Part one of my plan is that I signed up for a series of 10 Saturday level 6 (out of 9) classes. I figure that I will get a lot out of going "back to basics," and if they venture into bumps or terrain, I can meet them at the lift. Actually, I'll have to miss the first few, so figure maybe 6 or 7 lessons.

Part two of my plan is (thanks @LiquidFeet for the suggestion) to work on PSIA level II exam drills. I am not an instructor, but I'd like to be one some day, and I've always thought it would be cool to work toward and potentially get this cert. I figure it will help keep me sane to have a focus other than just lapping groomers.

Part three of my plan is to get one or two private lessons with an examiner I know very well, to help me understand the drills and generally help me with gentle skiing.

I have met people in their 70s and even a guy in his 80s skiing double black bumps smoothly, so that's my goal. Learn to ski smoothly so that I can ski for a lifetime. Silver lining, lemonade out of lemons, all that.

So here's my current quiver, all in my usual lengths:
Scott The Ski, 90mm - rarely used
Nordica Santa Ana, 100mm - was my daily driver until along came ....
Nordica La Nina, 113mm - this was my daily driver most of last season. Probably a bit much during knee rehab
I also have a pair of Fat-ypus I-Rocks, 126mm - to replace my old powder skis. These don't have bindings mounted just yet. I figure they're on ice for the coming season.

Oh, I do have Sick Day 110s, but I'm trying to sell those.And I have my AT setup, but no, not playing around with binding releases.

So, yeah, I'm a fatty lover.

I also have on semi-permanent loan:
Fischer Motive, 84mm
Dynastar Course Speed, 72mm

My thought is that of everything available to me, the Scott The Ski is the gentlest available. It's so easy to ski. I did not find that it held a great edge on boilerplate (yes, I experienced it - east coast buddies confirmed it was the real deal!). It's the narrowest of my own skis.

I've also considered the Santa Ana, which held a better edge (one does wonder if tuning played a role).

I remember getting out on a groomer on one of the loaner carvers and feeling out of sorts, presumably because they wanted to carve, and I tend to smear. It's possible I would have liked them more with a few more runs. But I don't want a taskmaster if I'm worried about my knee - I want a ski that will reward positive carving efforts without demanding them.

What do you guys think? Is "gently carving" (in terms of stress on the knee) an oxymoron? Am I better off with a soft ski or a firmer ski? (I ski in Colorado.) Should I keep my pennies in my pocket and use one (two) of the skis already in my house, or is there a perfect ski - preferably old new stock or even demo stock - at a nice price?

 

[Tricia]

You want a ski that will be smooth and turn nicely without being aggressive.
The Volkl Flair 81 is a good option, as is the K2 Oooh La Luv, or Blizzard Quattro. All of these skis will instill confidence and turn when you want them to without forcing you into a turn that you're not ready for.

As Phil said in the other thread, you may find a Scott Black Majic out there for a deal because they haven't pushed that ski and its a really nice ski in this similar(but not same) category. It will be more groomer specific than your current TheSki.

 

[Monique]

As Phil said in the other thread, you may find a Scott Black Majic out there for a deal because they haven't pushed that ski and its a really nice ski in this similar(but not same) category. It will be more groomer specific than your current TheSki.

So far I see them at > $600 =/ Maybe there's a deal hiding somewhere. They sure are pretty!

 

[Monique]

The Volkl Flair 81 is a good option, as is the K2 Oooh La Luv, or Blizzard Quattro. All of these skis will instill confidence and turn when you want them to without forcing you into a turn that you're not ready for.

Which Quattro? @SkiEssentials has a bunch of variants ...

 

[Tom K.]

Narrower is better during knee rehab.

Seeing how many turns you can fit into a run might help with checking the speed?

I dunno, but welcome back, in advance!

 

[cantunamunch]

What do you guys think? Is "gently carving" (in terms of stress on the knee) an oxymoron? Am I better off with a soft ski or a firmer ski? (I ski in Colorado.) Should I keep my pennies in my pocket and use one (two) of the skis already in my house, or is there a perfect ski - preferably old new stock or even demo stock - at a nice price?

I don't think it's an oxymoron but you might wind up riding the sidecut a lot.

 

[Lauren]

Is "gently carving" (in terms of stress on the knee) an oxymoron? Am I better off with a soft ski or a firmer ski?

I'd say you're looking for the goldilocks ski. Not too soft, not too stiff....juuuust right. Too soft and you won't be balanced, won't be stable and I could see that creating more work for your knees. Too stiff and you'll need to always on your game, be aggressive and I could see that putting a lot if strain on your knee. I've definitely been on skis that when I get off then I feel like they haven't worked me at all and I could ski them forever.

The Head Total Joy was the first ski that came to my mind when you used the wording "gentle carving". Completely agree with the Blizzard Quatrro idea too. Haven't been on the Flairs, so can't speak for that one.

 

[Living Proof]

My somewhat cranky knees do get beat-up by 90ish and above width skis. For frontside versatility I am a big fan of 78ish skis. I demo'd the Blizzard Latigo 77 last year in mixed snow and was delighted by how well it skied without being as demanding as a typical carver in that width. @Tricia has skied them and gave very positive reviews, hopefully Trish will comment on the Latigo as a possible solution. Note: this is the first, and, possibly last time I will ever offer advise about women's skis,.

 

[SkiEssentials]

Which Quattro? @SkiEssentials has a bunch of variants ...

Yeah there's a huge range of performance within the Quattro line... The RS and RX, for example, are certainly NOT gentle frontside groomer skis, they demand to be skied fast and aggressively.

@Monique I think you'd be best off on a carving ski without metal. From the Quattro line I'd probably point you towards the Quattro W 8.0 Ca. Still a strong performing ski, but will initiate turns at slower speeds than a ski with metal.

 

[Monique]

I don't think it's an oxymoron but you might wind up riding the sidecut a lot.

As opposed to ..?

 

[Lauren]

Oh, I'd also make a point to go for something with a flat tail...should (slightly) deter you from wanting to go off-piste and on ungroomed terrain when you shouldn't be.

 

[Monique]

For a front side ski, would I want to go shorter than my normal quiver (fat with lots of rocker)? Frex my Santa Anas and La Ninas are 169. But I weigh a lot, so I'm not really anxious to go shorter. 5'5 200 right now, working on an extremely gradual plan to lose weight.

For the record, I do wonder about how much I *really* need to narrow down. I get that narrower skis are easier on the knees in hard snow. Our hard snow is not the same as, say, east coast hard snow, 98% of the time. And while most people have a daily driver that's at least sub 100, mine has been 113. So I really wonder if skinnier is always better for knee rehab, or if it's relative to what you're used to.

Also - err ... so, Mr @SkiEssentials has the Quattros with binding for $600. Black majic is out there for > $600, no binding.

Is there any way to dig deep and find something < $400 *with* binding?

For example - powder7 has 2015 Super Joys?

And out of left field, what about the vaunted Kaestle LX72? Is that still too demanding in terms of requiring a carve? (I'm guessing it is based on what I know of Kaestle, just asking ...)

 

[Monique]

Oh, I'd also make a point to go for something with a flat tail...should (slightly) deter you from wanting to go off-piste and on ungroomed terrain when you shouldn't be.

I agree with flat tail; when it comes to deterring me from getting the goods, I'm just going to have to pray for strength!

 

[AmyPJ]

Oh, no, the Kastle will not be too demanding at all. I think the 72 is even "gentler" than the 82, and the 82 is a walk in the park. Smooooootthhh!

 

[Monique]

Oh, no, the Kastle will not be too demanding at all. I think the 72 is even "gentler" than the 82, and the 82 is a walk in the park. Smooooootthhh!

Powder7 has LX72s at a screaming deal, but only at 162, which seems pretty short even though no rocker (I assume). They have LX82s in 164 and 172 ... also at very good deals ...

Plus I've always wanted a Kaestle, but I also always thought they'd make me toe the carving line pretty hard. So I'm still suspicious about the gentleness aspect. @Nancy Hummel ?

 

[Lauren]

For a front side ski, would I want to go shorter than my normal quiver (fat with lots of rocker)? Frex my Santa Anas and La Ninas are 169. But I weigh a lot, so I'm not really anxious to go shorter.

Yes, I would go shorter. For reference, I ski the Santa Ana in the 169 but whenever I ski a front-side carver I'll go for something in the low to mid-160s.

 

[Tom K.]

Is there any way to dig deep and find something < $400 *with* binding?

For example - powder7 has 2015 Super Joys?

If cost is paramount, not sure how you can beat that.

Every review I've seen on that ski can be condensed to "great performance, fun and easy".

Seems like it would check all the boxes on your list.

 

[Lauren]

Every review I've seen on that ski can be condensed to "great performance, fun and easy".

This is exactly how I would review this ski. I went into demoing it thinking it was going to be more demanding, but was surprised about how easy it skied. You could really push it as much or as little as you wanted.

Plus...yea, that price...

 

[mdf]

Oh, I'd also make a point to go for something with a flat tail...should (slightly) deter you from wanting to go off-piste and on ungroomed terrain when you shouldn't be.

I would recommend just the opposite. The last thing you want is to have your tail get caught if you bobble and your weight winds up too far back at turn completion.

 

[SkiEssentials]

In my opinion, this is one of the best deals on the site right now... 2014 Blizzard Viva 8.0

It's essentially the predecessor to the Quattro I mentioned. I always really liked these skis.