• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.

markojp

mtn rep for the gear on my feet
Industry Insider
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,601
Location
PNW aka SEA
Well, that is another area where we separated ourselves. Our reviews are interactive and not static. Most every other review site posts the review and there it is and you have to decipher the information yourself and its a pretty good sized crapshoot. Our reviews, be it from any of our testers, you can ask questions of the reviewer which IMHO is huge. Here, you can talk to the people who actually skied the skis and ask them questions directly. You don't even have that ability in most shops, is the shops you might have one person, the buyer, who gets to the demos, maybe one or two key salespeople. At that point you either get second hand information from the buyer, regurgitated rhetoric from the magazines or stuff that is just made up on the spot. Again, this is most shops, there are many good shops that you will get accurate and helpful information.

We have many seasoned skiers here who get on dozens of skis every year and can discern the differences and understand who that ski is for, who will get the most out of it and maybe who it is not for. Are we always right? Hell no. But I think we do a pretty good job. So keep asking the questions about skis and what we think of them.

The one we both liked, Phil, that the world at large didint seem to get was the Nrgy 100. Still scratching my head. It's a great ski for the right skier, but not the one for standing on the middle and pivoting turns.
 

markojp

mtn rep for the gear on my feet
Industry Insider
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,601
Location
PNW aka SEA
Interesting, why would anyone evaluate a ski by cost? For instance, I think the Sali Q105 is a great ski. I wouldn't have a higher or lower opinion based on the cost. I would say its a tremendous value based on the price.

Because in 75% of the ski buying public's eye, price is a factor. Even in a relatively affluent market like Seattle, you don't see a ton of Kastle or Stoecki's on the hill. I did have one person turn down an Nrgy 80 because at $499, he was convinced it couldn't possible be as good as a $650.00 ski in the same category.
 

Ron

Seeking the next best ski
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 8, 2015
Posts
9,282
Location
Steamboat Springs, Co
Because in 75% of the ski buying public's eye, price is a factor. Even in a relatively affluent market like Seattle, you don't see a ton of Kastle or Stoecki's on the hill. I did have one person turn down an Nrgy 80 because at $499, he was convinced it couldn't possible be as good as a $650.00 ski in the same category.

I still would not evaluate it any differently due to the price.
 

Erik Timmerman

So much better than a pro
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,302
The one we both liked, Phil, that the world at large didint seem to get was the Nrgy 100. Still scratching my head. It's a great ski for the right skier, but not the one for standing on the middle and pivoting turns.

I didn't like that ski. I guess that the Capo responds better to standing in the middle and pivoting because I do like it.
 

kickerfrank

Let's Talk Business
Manufacturer
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Posts
87
I still would not evaluate it any differently due to the price.

It would be helpful for customers to know how an expensive or inexpensive ski stacks up to other skis in the same pricing tier. There should be a reason you're spending $1000 for a ski compared to a$600 ski. Whether it's durability, finish quality, materials or technology.

A review on performance is one thing but a complete review may want to consider value for/to the customer.
 

oldschoolskier

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Posts
4,225
Location
Ontario Canada
Price of a ski while important is some what a misleading item. It can be for the cost of Manufacturing (methodology), Materials (Quality), Rarity (hand made one of) or Marketing (very big expense).

The comment regarding the overall value is important. As an example I ski Race skis because I can't reach the top end performance limitations with my ability. On slightly lesser skis I do, and on average skis most certainly. So for me spending half my day on the slopes being hampered by the ski dramatically cuts down my fun factor, so the extra dollars spent are worth it. If I can live the performance hit then the extra dollars are better spent else where.

Don't mistaken cost for value. I'd rather ski in an old jacket than poor performing skis.

The good reviews provide a performance rating for a given set of criteria which the skier must use to determine the fit. Those that have not yet mastered that are at the mercy of the shop staff to help guide them through the process of best value for monies spent. There are good shop person and bad, sometimes though it is the skier themselves that provides bad information about themselves that causes the wrong selection.

I'm sure Philpug (and some of the other shop staff) have some stories on this problem.
 

markojp

mtn rep for the gear on my feet
Industry Insider
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,601
Location
PNW aka SEA
I didn't like that ski. I guess that the Capo responds better to standing in the middle and pivoting because I do like it.

I like both so I guess I suck, too. My thoughts certainly don't make you a 'lesser' skier, or me 'correct'. I could just never figure out the extreme disconnect of people's experience with the N-100.
 

Ron

Seeking the next best ski
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 8, 2015
Posts
9,282
Location
Steamboat Springs, Co
It would be helpful for customers to know how an expensive or inexpensive ski stacks up to other skis in the same pricing tier. There should be a reason you're spending $1000 for a ski compared to a$600 ski. Whether it's durability, finish quality, materials or technology.

A review on performance is one thing but a complete review may want to consider value for/to the customer.

Agreed and those things are important and if I test a ski and there is noticeable quality; good or bad, i would include that.
 

Ecimmortal

Getting off the lift
Skier
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Posts
393
Location
PDX
I have a somewhat challenge of being impartial to reviewing ON3P. I have known Scott since their first year here in Portland. Have had early looks and access to new models. And I truly believe in the product being put out. I will fully admit (as will they) that they don't make a ski for everybody. And that some models may have not resonated well with me. If I don't like it I'm more inclined to tell Scott what didn't appeal to me than review it.
I'm also so partial to the Line Prophet/Influence/Supernatural in the 98 to 1oh that I could grab any of them off the wall and be happy. So much so that I don't really get the appeal of the Bonafide, even after spending a day on it.
That being said I was lucky to have a friend working for a rep insist that a try the Motive 95.
 

Josh Matta

Skiing the powder
Pass Pulled
Joined
Dec 21, 2015
Posts
4,123
The one we both liked, Phil, that the world at large didint seem to get was the Nrgy 100. Still scratching my head. It's a great ski for the right skier, but not the one for standing on the middle and pivoting turns.

I liked my 185cm NRGY100 I just never loved it.It always lacked when the going got really tough and was kinda of straight for Eastern groomers I have set of 177cm mounted for touring and for corn and light powder they are wonderful.

I like both so I guess I suck, too. My thoughts certainly don't make you a 'lesser' skier, or me 'correct'. I could just never figure out the extreme disconnect of people's experience with the N-100.

The Capo charges though crud way better than any of the NRGYs and it is not demanding. The straight sidecut works better a ton better for crud at this waist width.
 

Tricia

The Velvet Hammer
Admin
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Posts
27,297
Location
Reno
Price of a ski while important is some what a misleading item. It can be for the cost of Manufacturing (methodology), Materials (Quality), Rarity (hand made one of) or Marketing (very big expense).

The comment regarding the overall value is important. As an example I ski Race skis because I can't reach the top end performance limitations with my ability. On slightly lesser skis I do, and on average skis most certainly. So for me spending half my day on the slopes being hampered by the ski dramatically cuts down my fun factor, so the extra dollars spent are worth it. If I can live the performance hit then the extra dollars are better spent else where.

Don't mistaken cost for value. I'd rather ski in an old jacket than poor performing skis.

The good reviews provide a performance rating for a given set of criteria which the skier must use to determine the fit. Those that have not yet mastered that are at the mercy of the shop staff to help guide them through the process of best value for monies spent. There are good shop person and bad, sometimes though it is the skier themselves that provides bad information about themselves that causes the wrong selection.

I'm sure Philpug (and some of the other shop staff) have some stories on this problem.
From both sides of this
  • I've seen shop employees ramble about their ideas based on what they've read, without actually getting out on the skis.
  • I've also been standing at the ski wall with someone who (frustratingly so) gives no feedback on what he/she wants to get out of their new ski, or what kind of terrain we're talking about.
  • Lets not even get into shop employees who ski 5 days a year and rarely get out on new equipment.
 

Tom K.

Skier Ordinaire
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Posts
8,399
The one we both liked, Phil, that the world at large didint seem to get was the Nrgy 100. Still scratching my head. It's a great ski for the right skier, but not the one for standing on the middle and pivoting turns.

I have a pro Nordica bias, but the problem with the NRGY 100 is that it is the same general design as a Hell & Back or old Enforcer, but then watered down. A fine, serviceable ski, but no "wow" factor.

That being said I was lucky to have a friend working for a rep insist that a try the Motive 95.

Mine are finally mounted, and ready to head out to Jackson Hole on Sunday! Thank you (and many others) on Pug and Epic for the detailed, insightful reviews.

Well, unless I don't like them. Then dang you to heck! ;)
 

Erik Timmerman

So much better than a pro
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,302
I have a pro Nordica bias, but the problem with the NRGY 100 is that it is the same general design as a Hell & Back or old Enforcer, but then watered down. A fine, serviceable ski, but no "wow" factor.

Pretty much the same except for the shape, rocker profile and construction. OK, wait, how are they the same general design again?
 

Josh Matta

Skiing the powder
Pass Pulled
Joined
Dec 21, 2015
Posts
4,123
yeah the NRGY is nothing like an Hell and Back or old enforcer.
 

Lorenzzo

Be The Snow
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
2,984
Location
UT
I find the ski review process to be by its nature a bias exercise. That's what makes it so interesting, maddening but ultimately satisfying and rewarding. It's not hard to find evidence of the extent of the bias, just look at the reviews out there. There's as much or more variance as consensus. Biases come from many sources from differences in technique, past experience with brands, conditions at the time of testing, length of testing, preferred sensations, terrain, wax, tuning and on and on and on.

Part of the fun of skiing is the search for equipment. If it was all tied up in a bow I wonder if the whole thing wouldn't be less fun (although a little less expensive).
 

Tom K.

Skier Ordinaire
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Posts
8,399
Pretty much the same except for the shape, rocker profile and construction. OK, wait, how are they the same general design again?

yeah the NRGY is nothing like an Hell and Back or old enforcer.

I guess I meant more that it took the place of those two skis in Nordica's lineup. When Nordica phased out the H&B, the NRGY became the closest ski to it in their lineup.

Plus, some early tip rise, no real tail rocker. Let's just say a classic-ish construction, as opposed to a fully rockered smear stick! How are these skis not at least somewhat similar?

But they reduced sidecut, reduced stiffness, and reduced (wait for it) the energy of the NRGY compared to the H&B. Took the pizazz right out of it IMO.
 

markojp

mtn rep for the gear on my feet
Industry Insider
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,601
Location
PNW aka SEA
I guess I meant more that it took the place of those two skis in Nordica's lineup. When Nordica phased out the H&B, the NRGY became the closest ski to it in their lineup.

Plus, some early tip rise, no real tail rocker. Let's just say a classic-ish construction, as opposed to a fully rockered smear stick! How are these skis not at least somewhat similar?

But they reduced sidecut, reduced stiffness, and reduced (wait for it) the energy of the NRGY compared to the H&B. Took the pizazz right out of it IMO.


I wouldn't call it 'classic' by any means compared to the old Enforcer or Hell n Back skis.
 

Sponsor

Staff online

  • Andy Mink
    Everyone loves spring skiing but not in January
Top