Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Phool. I ski the SP's. I'm 63kg and ski the 179's. You might want to go the 189's. Personally, I think they rock, but I agree with someone above - what you should ski may not match what you want to ski. Match the ski for the style of skiing you do.

 

The SP's are designed for long, fast turns in open areas. Thus, they come into their own on big lines. Sure, you can throw them around in the trees, but it's much more work. They love deep powder, but they're not very flash on piste. If I'm skiing lots of tight things (moguls/trees) or if I don't have much depth under foot, I much prefer my mid-fat skis.

 

If you want to go real fast, and open them up into long turns, and you've got opens slopes to do that, then the SP's great. If you want something more versatile that can do trees better and cope with piste better, and if that really is the kind of skiing you're doing, then I'd go a mid-fat.

 

Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Quote:
Originally posted by Fattwins:
Why did WB rename sudans anyways
Urban legend 1) that some french guy wanted to sue for royalties on the name? 2) the "troubles" and political correctness.

I was still spooked by the time I got to the top of the saddam. I dont want to seem like too much of a pu$$y but I sat there for 20 minutes trying to overcome my fear of falling 400 yards. The entry I know I could do and that was the hardest bit....the first 10 yrds!!!... Really just a 3 foot wide steep (1 ski wide) slide and to the top of a bump and then it was open and actually not as steep as red...the minds a funny thing isnt it...I just couldnt do it.....( i was very very lucky i didnt get choppered out of red it was a long rag doll scenario without an injury! except of the brain)....
Link to post
Share on other sites
 Quote:
Originally posted by powda tele:
Thus, they come into their own on big lines. Sure, you can throw them around in the trees, but it's much more work. They love deep powder, but they're not very flash on piste. If I'm skiing lots of tight things (moguls/trees) or if I don't have much depth under foot, I much prefer my mid-fat skis.

If you want to go real fast, and open them up into long turns, and you've got opens slopes to do that, then the SP's great. If you want something more versatile that can do trees better and cope with piste better, and if that really is the kind of skiing you're doing, then I'd go a mid-fat.

Good luck.
Its so hard knowing what fast and big are isnt it! I run into this problem on other forums. Its just hard to put into words what everyone considers "hard" and "fast". Thats why Ive been going to some lengths to try and paint a picture of what I do now. Now this picture is constantly evolving. For me I am definitely getting better each year. I think I can grow into the Seth Pistols and my skiing will evolve to be faster and "bigger".

The impression I get is that PRs are soft and SPs are like "big PRs", stiffer, but still soft compared to many of the other "bigline" less sidecut fats out there.


Real Fast isnt me yet. I am if nothing else committed to improving. Some at home would even say unhealthily obsessed with improvement. I always get private lessons, I get lots and lots. In the last 5 seasons Ive gone from high intermediate into expert (in 99 I would not have been doing dbl blk diamonds). I am just beginning to feel the mountains are opening up for real. Dont get me wrong about not being able to ski fast. My wife who is not as good as me and Keba were clocking 100kph on a green run at red mountain (those GPS things are nifty arnt they \:\) ... following the instructor sometimes is hazardous). Im sure I could have kept up or exceeded that. I do carve okay. I had a crack at a local Nastar thing with Keba. He beat me one week (bronze). Next week he had gone, I had practiced (silver). @ Whistler last feb he passed me on the other course just hammering it. Like I was stationary! Pity he _totally_ spread himself over 2 gates (the price of going over the edge hehehee).

Ripping it in powder on a treed run and bowls with air is ultimately what I want to be but Im not there yet.

Overall Im thinking SPs, LBFs if I can find them at a discount, then the other less well know twins..
Link to post
Share on other sites
 Quote:
Originally posted by Shimba:
go to this site, the 03/04 seth pistols are only 34,800 - i bought my big stix from this shop in kutchan near niseko... but they are 169 (good length for me \:D )

http://www.spotaki.co.jp/ski2003freeski.html

keep your eyes on this shop, they have really good sales!
Thanks for the heads up. Ive spoken to them but unfotunately they only have 169 03/04s and the 04/5 come in at 100000 with 912 ti sally bindings and fat brakes.

\:\(

03/04 in 179 would be an instant buy
Link to post
Share on other sites
 Quote:
Originally posted by keba:
It would be fair to say you are a deliberate skier, when it comes to technique... I will continue to focus on getting my first beer in while waiting for you at the bottom...
We shall definitely see...
Link to post
Share on other sites

I love my sp's. They are great for any soft snow occasion - even soft cords.

Although, you said that you want to ride park adn pipe in the first post. Unless you are going to be going absoloutely huge or just doing straight airs I would have to recomend a smaller ski for the park.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Quote:
Originally posted by Captain Stag:
I love my sp's. They are great for any soft snow occasion - even soft cords.
Although, you said that you want to ride park adn pipe in the first post. Unless you are going to be going absoloutely huge or just doing straight airs I would have to recomend a smaller ski for the park.
80% off piste, we'll see with the park \:\) I wont be hanging there with the crew if you get my drift.

Im thinking skiing Seths a little short may make them a little more suited to me (ease the turns). FT is always talking 180+ and Im always thinking 180-

failing finding a pair at a reasonable price i will hunt for one of the other skis. Jimbocho here I come!

Thnks C.

Just in time cause we fly to noz TOMORROW

Y A Y !
Link to post
Share on other sites

its your wieght mate at 90kg youll sink more with a 169 into powder. too be honest 169 seth wont be a bad pow park ski like about 60 40 pow to park. you wont be able to go as fast as the 179s but you get a bit of park mixed in

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Quote:
Originally posted by keba:
It would be fair to say you are a deliberate skier, when it comes to technique... I will continue to focus on getting my first beer in while waiting for you at the bottom...
lol.gif lol.gif

Thats what always happens when i ski with toque and fattwins...right :rolleyes:
Link to post
Share on other sites

I will confess that the powder will slow me down (a lot), especially as I've deliberately avoided getting powder-specific skis, but will try to keep up on my Elan 666 Mantis 168cm... I may have to invest in new skis if this theory fails. ;\)

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Quote:
Originally posted by phool:
FT is always talking 180+ and Im always thinking 180-
I have to say it as well. You are a big guy and you are only going to get better. Why lock yourself in on a short ski. The fat ski is going to bring you up to a new level pretty damm quick.

My 2 cents. 180-190 in a mid-fat to fat ski

Good luck on finding cheap skis.

Getting into Sudan's is scary. I remember skiing that when I was 12 and being freaked out of my mind
Now the traverse along Chainsaw ridge (skiers left of Sudans) gets the adrenaline flowing.
Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...