• For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
https://www.skiessentials.com/

SkiEssentials

Slashing Turns and Prices
SkiTalk Sponsor
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
986

Hey PugSkiers!

It's been a little while since our last full length 2018 ski review, but we're kicking things back off with the 2018 Rossignol Experience 88 HD. No structural changes to this ski from 2017 to 2018, but we didn't do a full review of it last season and wanted to take some time to chat about where it fits in to an all mountain ski market that's filled with an abundance of different shapes, construction techniques, etc.

Click the image above for the full article!
 
Thread Starter
TS
SkiEssentials

SkiEssentials

Slashing Turns and Prices
SkiTalk Sponsor
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
986
Your reviews have really taken things up a notch. Good stuff!

Thanks so much!

How would you say the 2018 version compares to the 2014 / 2015 E88?

Carbon Alloy Matrix really changed the ski quite a bit. It's noticeably more powerful, responsive, and energetic than the 14/15 E88. Better edge grip thanks to increased torsional stiffness. All in all it kind of just took it to the next level in terms of the type of performance demanded by advanced and expert level skiers.
 

Core2

Making fresh tracks
Skier
Joined
Nov 29, 2015
Posts
1,844
Location
AZ
I had the 2014/15 model and I found them to be a great ski but too "turny" for me if that makes sense. It initiated so easy sometimes I felt like I was going to do a 360 on the hill. Would love to demo the new model just to compare. Great review.
 

tch

What do I know; I'm just some guy on the internet.
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
1,531
Location
New England
Hey SkiE, I hate to go off topic to a pedantic note, but please... it's not "a tremendous amount of options" but "a tremendous number of options".

And by the way... nice, informative -- and accurate -- review.
 

tch

What do I know; I'm just some guy on the internet.
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
1,531
Location
New England
Hmmm... why is that?

Countable vs. uncountable. "Amount" is reserved for modifying things that cannot be counted individually: amount of sand, amount of coffee, amount of energy. "Number" is used for items that can be counted individually: number of skis, number of friends, number of times I've tried to explain this to students and friends. So in your review, it would be "there are a tremendous number of options at this width."
ogsmile
 
Thread Starter
TS
SkiEssentials

SkiEssentials

Slashing Turns and Prices
SkiTalk Sponsor
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
986
Countable vs. uncountable. "Amount" is reserved for modifying things that cannot be counted individually: amount of sand, amount of coffee, amount of energy. "Number" is used for items that can be counted individually: number of skis, number of friends, number of times I've tried to explain this to students and friends. So in your review, it would be "there are a tremendous number of options at this width."
ogsmile

That's really interesting. I've never actually heard that I don't think. The dictionary defines amount as "a quantity of something, typically the total of a thing or things in number, size, value, or extent." Having "number" in the definition suggests it could be counted, no?

Perhaps I've been misusing amount my entire life?
 

tch

What do I know; I'm just some guy on the internet.
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
1,531
Location
New England
Re. time: Time itself isn't individually countable. Delineations of time are. Hence, a tremendous amount of time is OK. But you would say "a number of hours ago" rather than "an amount of hours ago". The issue is whether you are adding up individual items, or speaking about an uncountable quantity.
 
Thread Starter
TS
SkiEssentials

SkiEssentials

Slashing Turns and Prices
SkiTalk Sponsor
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
986
Re. time: Time itself isn't individually countable. Delineations of time are. Hence, a tremendous amount of time is OK. But you would say "a number of hours ago" rather than "an amount of hours ago". The issue is whether you are adding up individual items, or speaking about an uncountable quantity.

Cool! This is super interesting. I found this too:

"Although objected to, the use of amount instead of number with countable nouns occurs in both speech and writing, especially when the noun can be considered as a unit or group ( the amount of people present; the amount of weapons) or when it refers to money ( the amount of dollars paid; the amount of pennies in the till)."

I am, however, going to try to use "number" in place of "amount" in my writing more often.
 

tch

What do I know; I'm just some guy on the internet.
Skier
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 13, 2015
Posts
1,531
Location
New England
"Although objected to, the use of amount instead of number with countable nouns occurs in both speech and writing, especially when the noun can be considered as a unit or group ( the amount of people present; the amount of weapons) or when it refers to money ( the amount of dollars paid; the amount of pennies in the till)."
.

Yeah, I'm one of those guys who objects (bolded above) to that kind of use. I'm not a grammar/language prescriptionist generally, but some usage just irritates the h*ll out of me. And I don't think all usage correction qualifies as simple curmudgeonly behavior.

Sorry for the thread drift -- back to the original programming.
 

AmyPJ

Skiing the powder
SkiTalk Tester
SkiTalk Supporter
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
7,835
Location
Ogden, UT
This is amusing to me! Goes along with the "less, not fewer" and vice versa. (Fewer people were at the game, not less people...that kind of thing.)
And back on track: My BF is an L3 and has been for several years, and his ski of choice is the E88. E100 on powder days. He's a big, strong guy, and loves the power these skis have. Just picked up some E84s for more "relaxed" days.
 

Viking9

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Sep 9, 2016
Posts
787
Location
SO CAL
I've been daydreaming of the 88 a lot lately but skiing it in a 180, the 188 would be the the size for me based on size , long and lean and ability , advanced, but I think having that ski shorter would be a lot of fun .
I'm pretty sure Phil said it doesn't automatically ski longer like previous models.
I can't think of a better style of ski for the lower 2/3'rds from the the top of mammoth where it's usually flat and heavy( you do remember your old stomping grounds
 

markojp

mtn rep for the gear on my feet
Industry Insider
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
6,584
Location
PNW aka SEA
" Hey mom, where are my clean socks at?"
"Behind the 'at'."

Yes... this was my life with a teacher mom. ogsmile

And not off topic, the new 88 is a huuuge improvement over the original. Don't overlook the 84 either.
 

Sponsor

Top