I am done with super fats unless I am cat skiing.

[Monique]

Knowing yourself and your preferences is very important. 100% support you getting the ski you want and that work best for you.

But some people have some weird ideas about fat skis, so I just want to respond - others have, but there are a few particular points I want to make.

Paul - good on you. If you look at the skiers who are technically proficient (PSIA D Team, former US Team Members, coaches, etc) no one is rocking anything over 100 underfoot in powder. That is unless they are receiving a sponsor check.

Tricia - what you are probably seeing is them throwing their COM way over to the side to tip that ski instead of skiing from their feet. They will be the individuals who, in their late 50',s will say, "I used to ski but my knees won't take it anymore." It takes a great deal of athleticism to ski like that due to your body being in a unstable position at initiation. Like you, I give kudos to the athleticism, but fundamentally don't believe in "talent".

As for the no-one with talent is skiing over 100+. I'm sorry. I just don't buy that. I see many people with exceptional ski technique skiing a wide variety of skis. Yes, if you're a PSIA-technique junkie, its one thing. But there are lots of former racers out there with solid fundamentals ripping around on 100+ skis because at the end of the day the find them more fun. And yeah, some of them are sponsored. But if you read into someone like Eric Hoji, it is obvious that he is skiing on a ski of his design that he believes is the best for conditions/style he wants to pursue. He's not in it for the paycheck.

Addressing the above three comments - hah, I just realized the three antis are all the same person -

I know a PSIA Examiner who skis 113 underfoot all season long. I'm pretty sure Examiners count as PSIA technique junkies and as technically proficient. I am also pretty sure that she's skiing from her feet.

* I probably know several more, but I am fully confident of this example

John Seifert at University of Montana has been studying the effect of wide skis for years. His findings are that anything over 80 and you start to torque the shit out of your knees. Based on my experience (and assuming that you have been on wide skis for a while) you probably have exceptional rotary movements, but edging and is pressure control needs to be developed. Once you develop those assets you will likely gravitate towards a narrower ski. Part of that will also likley be yoga - and increasing range of motion in your lower core.

I believe that the torque observations were specifically related to hard snow. Soft snow has different characteristics. Primarily that it's soft.

I use my Patrons for cat skiing only - for the most part. They just don't handle the chop very well.

I find that surprising. My La Ninas are softer versions of the Patron, and they have been great in chop.

 

[Daves not here]

I find that surprising. My La Ninas are softer versions of the Patron, and they have been great in chop.

I should clarify - I can ski my Patrons in crud and chop and they are ok. I just prefer a heavier/damper ski for those conditions. My Bonafides absolutely shine in that area.

 

[crgildart]

Might consider going a little l o n g e r to compensate for a narrower ski off piste. My fattest ski is a 192 cm full camber 99 waist. It cuts through leftovers in excellent fashion and seems fine in untracked powder for my 174 pound butt. Granted, I've never tried anything fatter but I'm another old school GS powder ski relic so 99 seems like a pair of surf boards to me.. Longer also seems to soak up the crud chunks better than shorter for me..

 

[Started at 53]

My narrow skis are 77’s, my wide powder/crud/off piste skis are 77’s

Yep, you guessed it, I am a OSQ guy

 

[jmeb]

My narrow skis are 77’s, my wide powder/crud/off piste skis are 77’s

Yep, you guessed it, I am a OSQ guy

You just started. Give it a year or two before thinking you're a OSQ fellow.

 

[Jilly]

I have a copy of the report on knees vs ski width. And it has to do with firm snow. So eastern machined groomers. I found my 95's (Atomic Vantage) we're OK on my knees at WB. Haven't tried them yet at Tremblant because I know they were hurt my knees on our groomers. Waiting for a snow day.

 

[Lorenzzo]

My narrow skis are 77’s, my wide powder/crud/off piste skis are 77’s

Yep, you guessed it, I am a OSQ guy

Within 5 years I’d set the over/under for you at 6 maybe 7.

 

[fatbob]

And here was I thinking I ski my Shiros as a soft all mtn and have real pow ski in the closet.

I'm kinda surprised that a strong skier wouldn't find the Shiro a good crud buster - it's the most GSy big ski I've tried but being one of Phil's 11/10 skiers ( size not skill) I recognise I'm personally an outlier.

 

[Started at 53]

You just started. Give it a year or two before thinking you're a OSQ fellow.

Don’t rain, I mean don’t snow on my parade

My brand of choice has some wider skis coming out, and some in some amazing graphics too

The red ski is a 84 waist, the one on the left with the cool mountain top sheet is a 94 I believe. I forget the waist on the dark blue on the right. The red is an amazing looking ski, I have seen all three in person.

 

[Doug Briggs]

When you have soft snow, the dynamic changes considerably when referring to stress on knees. On hard snow, you are going to be attempting to balance on the edge of the ski whenever you tip your ski on edge. When you are in soft snow, your balance point on the ski can move in from the edge so you can actually be balancing on the center of the ski.

When choosing a ski for a day of skiing, you have to consider all possible conditions; specifically which conditions you want to ski optimally and which conditions you are willing to accept less than optimum performance. Some skis perform better across a range of conditions, some don't. Choose accordingly.

Prioritize conditions, purchase skis that match those priorities, ski. It is that simple.

 

[jmeb]

Within 5 years I’d set the over/under for you at 6 maybe 7.

Just started my 5th year of skiing a lot since I was a kiddo (i.e. owning skis, 50+ days a year).

Currently at 4 inbounds + 3 touring skis. I'd say you're spot on.

 

[Dwight]

Don’t rain, I mean don’t snow on my parade

My brand of choice has some wider skis coming out, and some in some amazing graphics too View attachment 34108
The red ski is a 84 waist, the one on the left with the cool mountain top sheet is a 94 I believe. I forget the waist on the dark blue on the right. The red is an amazing looking ski, I have seen all three in person.

hmm, I'll be in FL in 2 weekends, I'll have to try your Bombers on the beach.

 

[James]

Don’t rain, I mean don’t snow on my parade

My brand of choice has some wider skis coming out, and some in some amazing graphics too View attachment 34108
The red ski is a 84 waist, the one on the left with the cool mountain top sheet is a 94 I believe. I forget the waist on the dark blue on the right. The red is an amazing looking ski, I have seen all three in person.

Well, if you switch brands you could double your stock with the same investment. And likely have better skis for you.

 

[Started at 53]

Within 5 years I’d set the over/under for you at 6 maybe 7.

I think you should keep that thought to yourself when we get together in a couple of weeks. Betsy might not like hearing things like that

Notice I did not tag her in that response

 

[Started at 53]

Well, if you switch brands you could double your stock with the same investment. And likely have better skis for you.

I’ll be ok

Hmmm, my “mentor” picked them out specifically for my beginner skills, short and a soft flex, and the tune is very forgiving.

I’ll get longer (172’s) next year, but I’m gonna cheat death on the 162’s this year

 

[Lorenzzo]

I think you should keep that thought to yourself when we get together in a couple of weeks. Betsy might not like hearing things like that

Notice I did not tag her in that response

Those who know me well know I spill nothing...because I don’t want it coming back.

Believe me...if not for Betsy I’d have set the over/under much higher. My quiver went from 0 to Embarrassed to Say after my split. Absent an Other...this could be your math:

1. The only skis I’ll ever need...aren’t they pretty?
2. Well these are pretty too.
3. That first pair sucked.
4. So did the second.
5. I need something wide for...you know...deep days.
6-10. Those lessons helped.
11. New Technology?
12. Bode said what?
13. @FairToMiddlin said what?
14. I’m heading towards a relationship, better buy now.

So my estimate took Betsy into account.

 

[Started at 53]

Those who know me well know I spill nothing...because I don’t want it coming back.

Believe me...if not for Betsy I’d have set the over/under much higher. My quiver went from 0 to Embarrassed to Say after my split. Absent an Other...this is the math:

1. The only skis I’ll ever need...aren’t they pretty?
2. Well these are pretty too.
3. That first pair sucked.
4. So did the second.
5. I need something wide for...you know...deep days.
6-10. Those lessons helped.
11. New Technology?
12. Bode said what?
13. @Fair to Middlin said what?
14. I’m heading towards a relationship, better buy now.

So my estimate took Betsy into account.

 

[Monique]

Those who know me well know I spill nothing...because I don’t want it coming back.

Believe me...if not for Betsy I’d have set the over/under much higher. My quiver went from 0 to Embarrassed to Say after my split. Absent an Other...this could be your math:

1. The only skis I’ll ever need...aren’t they pretty?
2. Well these are pretty too.
3. That first pair sucked.
4. So did the second.
5. I need something wide for...you know...deep days.
6-10. Those lessons helped.
11. New Technology?
12. Bode said what?
13. @FairToMiddlin said what?
14. I’m heading towards a relationship, better buy now.

So my estimate took Betsy into account.

QFT. Fortunately can't speak to #14.

Regarding relationship survival, this seems to be working for us: I have a monthly withdrawal into my own personal savings account (otherwise our finances are entirely combined). That savings account applies to skis and bikes. So it's already budgeted for - we don't need to have a conversation about whether I "need" another bike or pair of skis. It's either there, or it's not.

Profit from sale of clutter sometimes goes into that account, too, because it's usually about getting stuff out of the house more than it is about the money.

 

[martyg]

I have a copy of the report on knees vs ski width. And it has to do with firm snow. So eastern machined groomers. I found my 95's (Atomic Vantage) we're OK on my knees at WB. Haven't tried them yet at Tremblant because I know they were hurt my knees on our groomers. Waiting for a snow day.

Exactly. But who is skiing soft snow all day? In years when we see 800+" I am skiing bonafide powder maybe 20ish days out of 100+. Where I teach now, where we may see 300" a year, I can count powder days on two hands. And then you are skiing groomers to get to pow.

 

[Doug Briggs]

Exactly. But who is skiing soft snow all day? In years when we see 800+" I am skiing bonafide powder maybe 20ish days out of 100+. Where I teach now, where we may see 300" a year, I can count powder days on two hands. And then you are skiing groomers to get to pow.

Define soft.

I consider anything I can sink an edge into a couple inches as soft. Days after a storm the snow off piste can easily still be soft. It can even be soft on piste depending on the groom.

I'm in search of soft all the time.