Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 70
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    retired
    Posts
    12,482

    are these things important to you in a ski?

    1. graphics? do you prefer pucking blood skulls ala hellbent, hand paint ala 4frnt, crazy neon colors ala new ks stuff, techy graphic designs ala lhasa pows, or simple designs ala dps? do you care?

    2. ski finishing - ie awesome structure, ceramic edge, flat/railed? matched camber/rocker & flex? do you know how to actually check for this stuff? if it was off, would you notice or care?

    3. shaping? prefered sidecut/shape? rocker lines? etc.

    4. flex and flex options? stiff, medium or soft? does it matter if there are countless options?

    5. weight? do you like a super heavy ski (damp)? super light ski (reactive), do you tour? do you care?

    6. technology? do you care about pushing the design envelope? do you specifically like to support companies that are doing something cool/new/different?

    7. price? how price motivated are you? will you only buy on mad closeout? will you pay full pop for something truly lust-worthy? how many skis do you buy a year? how long do you expect them to last?

    8. durability? do you care about the hardness of your bases? do you like or not like die-cuts underfoot? sidewall or cap - care?



    it would be interesting to see people rank these items in terms of importance, and then write a sentance or two explaining each line.

    if someone has a NS account or TTips account, it might also be cool to post this over there and post a link so we can see what everyone is thinking...

    awesome. i guess this is your chance to speak your mind on design. i am going to send the results around to a bunch of various contacts....
    go for rob

    www.dpsskis.com

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    PRB
    Posts
    21,125
    1. graphics? do you prefer pucking blood skulls ala hellbent, hand paint ala 4frnt, crazy neon colors ala new ks stuff, techy graphic designs ala lhasa pows, or simple designs ala dps? do you care?

    I prefer understated graphics, more dps than the others, but on the importance scale, very low.

    2. ski finishing - ie awesome structure, ceramic edge, flat/railed? matched camber/rocker & flex? do you know how to actually check for this stuff? if it was off, would you notice or care?

    I care a lot, I think, but admittedly I don't that I would notice or check.

    3. shaping? prefered sidecut/shape? rocker lines? etc.

    The shape of a ski is very important to me, probably the most important thing. When I start searching for a new ski, it is always with a particular shape/dimension/etc in mind.


    4. flex and flex options? stiff, medium or soft? does it matter if there are countless options?

    I haven't often had "options" in a particular model, but next to shape, this is probably the most important thing to me. I know that neither a super stiff ski not a super floppy ski will work for me, so if a particular ski doesn't come with choices, I won't buy it if it isn't in the ballpark as far as flex.

    5. weight? do you like a super heavy ski (damp)? super light ski (reactive), do you tour? do you care?

    I tour a good bit, but don't care that much about weight. I want downhill performance, if that comes in a light package, great, but if not, not a big deal to me. I will always choose the ski that fits my downhill performance characteristics.

    6. technology? do you care about pushing the design envelope? do you specifically like to support companies that are doing something cool/new/different?

    Sure, supporting cool new shit is great, but this one is low on the scale for me. I want a great ski, that's what I am looking for. So I am willing to spend money for it (bought Folsoms this year), but don't care if my ski is made of the super newest coolest tech, I only care if that tech is noticeable on the down.

    7. price? how price motivated are you? will you only buy on mad closeout? will you pay full pop for something truly lust-worthy? how many skis do you buy a year? how long do you expect them to last?

    I am very motivated by price, but will spend for a ski I really want. Wouldn't have spent $1000 on skis, but was willing to spend $700 on Folsom's May pre-sale, and did spend $600 on Mantras in their first year. That said, I also got a pair of used Gots for $300 and skied the shit out of them for 3 years. I have bought a pair of skis every year, just about, but may not buy again for a while. I expect a pair of skis to last 100+ days for me.

    8. durability? do you care about the hardness of your bases? do you like or not like die-cuts underfoot? sidewall or cap - care?

    I don't know any of the details you mention, so I guess I don't care. I do care about durability, one of the reason I sold my Mantras is it seemed they got core shots just by looking at them. But overall, I don't care if the topsheets chip easily, that kind of stuff doesn't matter that much to me.


    For ranking, from most important to least important:
    Shaping
    Flex
    Price
    Durability
    Finishing
    Weight
    Graphics
    Technology
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,798
    Quote Originally Posted by marshalolson View Post
    1. graphics? do you prefer pucking blood skulls ala hellbent, hand paint ala 4frnt, crazy neon colors ala new ks stuff, techy graphic designs ala lhasa pows, or simple designs ala dps? do you care?
    Simple simple simple, but bright. Love the new dps colors. Don't really dig the pmgear stuff. I also enjoy artwork, like some of the Armada and 4frnt stuff. Puking blood skulls are a little much.

    In the end, though, graphics are a pretty secondary consideration.

    2. ski finishing - ie awesome structure, ceramic edge, flat/railed? matched camber/rocker & flex? do you know how to actually check for this stuff? if it was off, would you notice or care?
    Above all else I want shit to match, the rest of these things are important too, though most are fixable or not likely to be noticed.

    3. shaping? prefered sidecut/shape? rocker lines? etc.
    That's more of a quiver consideration, I think.... That said, this and flex defines what ski I buy.

    4. flex and flex options? stiff, medium or soft? does it matter if there are countless options?
    See # 3 for the first 2. For the 3rd: Don't really care about this - if it doesn't come in a configuration I want I won't buy it. If the only configuration available happens to be what I want then I will. I guess this kind of thing will keep a manufacturer in the game for a greater variety of customers, and I'm grateful if this kind of thing adds to my options, I guess.

    5. weight? do you like a super heavy ski (damp)? super light ski (reactive), do you tour? do you care?
    See # 3.

    6. technology? do you care about pushing the design envelope? do you specifically like to support companies that are doing something cool/new/different?
    I want it to work for me. I'm not an early adopter. I don't have the fundage to be a guinea pig.

    7. price? how price motivated are you? will you only buy on mad closeout? will you pay full pop for something truly lust-worthy? how many skis do you buy a year? how long do you expect them to last?
    I'm broke. Any new acquisition means giving up something else. If I really want it I'll find a way to make it happen, but this usually has to involve some kind of hookup.

    8. durability? do you care about the hardness of your bases? do you like or not like die-cuts underfoot? sidewall or cap - care?
    I'm broke, what I buy may need to last me 3 or 4 years. yes, don't care, sidewall.

    So: 3, 4, 8, 2, 5, 7, 1, 6 - I think.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    SLUT
    Posts
    3,352
    graphics-don't give a shit.
    finishing- doesn't matter so much. i want the skis to look like they should, but on soft snow skis it is not a big deal. i do want the rocker/flex pattern to match though, that is pretty big.
    shaping-taper is magical, ala JJ's. just have fun and make cool shit!
    flex- so many options out there you can find something that fits your needs, don't need multiple flexes in most skis.
    weight- medium, say between 9.5 to 11 pounds for a fairly large ski is key. there is definitely the need for lighter and heavier skis though, but for an everyday ski i want something that is very quick and light but can still absorb what it needs to.
    technology- no. carbon seems cool but a lot of other bull shit is just stupid gimmicks to get idiots to pay mor for something they don't need.
    price- i can't pay full price for a ski, no matter what the cost... cheaper is better, obviously.
    durability- cap and die cuts suck. that said, i own jj's and love them. if it is built right, anything can work. i don't care if the skis get beat up, as my jj's are. i just need the edges to hold on and the skis to not bend or break. you don't notice anything else in most conditions.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    571
    1. Graphics - kick ass glossy graphics catch my attention, but I don't buy a ski based on this.

    2. Finish- I like a ski to come skiable with only a quick wax. I hate trying to get them pushed through a shop for a grind when I'm stoked to ski, So flat, some structure, and beveled edges.

    3. Shape - Turning radius <20m need not apply, and I really prefer something around 27m for an everyday ski.

    4. Flex - Stiff underfoot, med-stiff tip, medium stiff tail.

    5. weight - I like heavy damp skis less and less these days. Maybe because I'm getting older, but I've been enjoying a bit more pop these days. There seem to be a lot of great skis around 8.5 lbs per pair.

    6. Technology - I like second gen technology, once it's watered down a bit, but I definitely pay attention to companies who are pushing new design.

    7. Price - I won't pay early season pricing to get that super anticipated ski, ie Super7, but I rarely wait until all the long skis are gone. I want a good value.

    8. Durability - I can't be bothered by tip-toeing around rocks, so durability is big for me. I don't mind cap construction, but prefer sidewall. Edges that stay attached to the core are big.
    BEWARE OF FEMALE SPIES

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Wasatch Back: 7000'
    Posts
    8,694
    scaled from 1-10:

    Graphics: 1
    Finishing: 8
    Shape: 7
    flex: 8
    weight: 4
    Technology: 4
    Price: 5
    Durability: 6
    I usually purchase my skis based upon materials used, finish, shape, flex.
    Generally speaking, I'm a wood, metal, sidewall kind of guy; however, I really like carbon for pop at a lighter weight. Seems that carbon fiber is a good replacement for metal.

    2,4,3,8,5,6,7,1
    "My policies are based not on some economics theory, but on things I and millions like me were brought up with: an honest day's work for an honest day's pay; live within your means; put by a nest egg for a rainy day; pay your bills on time; support the police." M. Thatcher (RIP)
    "...
    Judges smoke it, even the lawyer too...So you've got to legalize it..." Peter Tosh

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    12,958
    My personal preference priorities:
    T1 Shape
    T1 Flex
    3 Weight -- I tour on all but one pair of my skis, but I don't ski on the lightest ski cuz they get knocked around too much
    4 Durability
    5 Flex options -- would be nice
    T6 Technology -- but not just for the sake of technology, i.e., I don't need the latest greatest thing, but if it corresponds to better performance, then hell yeah
    T6 Ski finishing -- but only if it corresponds to peformance. Cosmetics are meaningless to me
    T8 Graphics -- I don't give a shit
    Last edited by Big Steve; 01-08-2010 at 02:21 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    PRB
    Posts
    21,125
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    LV-426
    Posts
    15,701
    Quote Originally Posted by marshalolson View Post
    1. graphics? do you prefer pucking blood skulls ala hellbent, hand paint ala 4frnt, crazy neon colors ala new ks stuff, techy graphic designs ala lhasa pows, or simple designs ala dps? do you care?
    K2 and similar graphics designs are enough to make me pass on the skis, no matter how awesome they might be. If given the choice of any graphics, the simple stuff (DPS, Igneous' wood grain, Prior) is the most attractive. No all-white skis, however -- incredibly stupid.

    2. ski finishing - ie awesome structure, ceramic edge, flat/railed? matched camber/rocker & flex? do you know how to actually check for this stuff? if it was off, would you notice or care?
    I expect the skis to be finished to a reasonable standard, i.e., any production ski from any mass-market company is fine (Rossignol, Dynastar, Elan, Salomon, whatever). I don't need it to be $100 race tune perfect, but I don't want fuzzy, unprepped, concave or convex bases.

    3. shaping? prefered sidecut/shape? rocker lines? etc.
    All depends on the intended purpose of the ski. I have no need for a full twin tip ski in any conditions, however.


    4. flex and flex options? stiff, medium or soft? does it matter if there are countless options?
    Same as above -- all depends on the intended purpose of the ski. Personally, I want a stiff ski for hard snow, and a medium flex for soft snow; if it's a pure powder ski, a soft tip is nice.

    5. weight? do you like a super heavy ski (damp)? super light ski (reactive), do you tour? do you care?
    Same as above -- depends on the intended purpose of the ski. For powder & touring, light and snappy is nice.

    6. technology? do you care about pushing the design envelope? do you specifically like to support companies that are doing something cool/new/different?
    There are a lot of copycat designs out there from pretty much every company, with a Rossi S7/ Lotus 120/ PM Gear Lhasa shape. They're all going to work pretty well.

    7. price? how price motivated are you? will you only buy on mad closeout? will you pay full pop for something truly lust-worthy? how many skis do you buy a year? how long do you expect them to last?
    Somewhere in between mad closeout and reasonable discount. I'll never pay full MSRP; I know that the ski -- any ski -- is going to come up somewhere on clearance, or used, and I can wait. I go through a lot of skis.... never really get to the point of destroying them, though I have some Explosivs and Spatulas right now that look pretty harsh.

    8. durability? do you care about the hardness of your bases? do you like or not like die-cuts underfoot? sidewall or cap - care?
    I don't like die-cut bases. Unnecessary weakness in the base for the sake of graphics. I like wood core skis; never skied a foam core ski that I really liked. Sidewall vs. cap -- doesn't really matter, so long as it's well-constructed. (Salomon's cap skis in recent years have been great.)

    I much prefer a quality-prepped base (fast) over a supposedly super-durable hard base. Several pairs of skis I've gone through have had claimed "super hard bases," and I've found that just means they don't take wax well at all, and tend to be really slow. I'm not skiing on rocks on purpose; I don't need skis that can take abusive IFSA comp conditions.
    Last edited by El Chupacabra; 01-08-2010 at 10:37 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by powder11 View Post
    if you have to resort to taking advice from the nitwits on this forum, then you're doomed.

  10. #10
    adam is offline The Shred Pirate Roberts
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    3,560
    Shaping, price, flex, and durability are my main concerns.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    6,062
    1-Shape- I hate big sidecut and expecially big tails
    2 for touring, 3 for resort-Weight- I'm not dainty (or skilled) enough for ultralight skis, but does anyone besides Pmgear and DPS make light skis that aren't mediocre or worse? For a resort ski, weight and flex would flip flop
    3 for touring-2 for resort-Flex- I hate super soft tails and super stiff tips. On a touring ski, as long as things are balanced, and it isn't a noodle or a 2X4, I can deal. I never think to myself "I wish this ski were 5 percent stiffer." But when skiing very fast in crud or bumps, flex is a much more important factor.
    4-Technology- Carbon fiber is good. Also I like the Corriolis cores in my Carradan Mambas
    5-Durability- I would put this above Technology, except for the fact I don't break stuff much. I expect skis to hold together unless I do something bad to them.
    6-Price- I can't pay $1100 for new skis, but I'll pay $575 for used skis.
    7-Finish- I expect flat bases and a semblance of a tune. I'm not convinced a pair a Kastles (which are beautifully made) perform better than other skis that appear more homemade.
    8- Graphics- I don't like hip hop themed skis, or flaming skulls, or trippy alien designs, but whatever.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Central VT
    Posts
    4,015
    1. Shaping is my biggest concern. First thing I look at is turning radius, dimensions, rocker, etc.

    2. Price is 2nd. I'm not going to pay big money for ski that I'm going to eventually trash.

    3. Flex is also important. Depending on what I'm using the ski for, it can't be too stiff or too flexy. I don't get to technical with flex ratings. If a ski is the right flex I'll know when I ski it.

    4. Durability is also up there. I don't plan on a ski lasting ten seasons, but it has to hold together for at least a few years. Like mountain bikes, skis get beat on; they can only perform well so long.

    5. Weight isn't that important. I don't even notice the weight of different skis. I just don't want it to weigh a ton.

    A ski's construction is also a factor for me. I'd take a sandwhich construction ski, which metal or carbon laminates over a cap ski with just a wood core.

    I really don't care about graphics, technology or finishing.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Hyperspace!
    Posts
    1,037
    My personal preference priorities:
    T1 Shape - right tool for the job
    T1 Flex -- soft, med, stiff - are nice options - i prefer a fairly round flex
    T1 Weight -- I tour on all but one pair of my skis, but I don't ski on the lightest ski cuz they get knocked around too much
    4 Durability - no die-cut bases - should be able to take a few shots without going to the core - nice when the topsheets/sidewalls don't chip away after 1 run.
    5 Price -- full retail is silly - but willing to pay for quality gear & good CS
    T6 Technology -- not just for the sake of technology, i.e., I don't need the latest greatest thing, but if it corresponds to better performance, then hell yeah
    T6 Ski finishing -- matched and flat - I'll adjust everything else.
    T8 Graphics -- I don't give a shit - but simple is good -

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Bozeman
    Posts
    1,516
    In order:

    1. Shape - I hate big sidecuts/short radii as well. I also care about taper in relation to the rocker/camber profile.

    2. Flex - This combined with shape, defines whether I'm interested in the ski. I don't care about options. IMO, flex should be matched to shape and intended use.

    3. Price - This is the next step for me. I usually buy a new pair of skis every year and haven't paid more than $450. No way in hell am I paying $800 or more. There's just too many good options out there.

    4. Durability - It's not that I beat the shit out of my skis, but I want to get my money's worth. To this end, I won't buy foam core skis and try to buy sidewall skis.

    5. Finishing - This is important to me because it seems to indicate whether the manufacturer has their shit together or not, i.e. a well-finished ski indicates attention to detail and quality throughout.

    6. Technology, graphics, and weight. These are all about the same to me, by which I mean that none of them matter if the ski rocks and none of them would make me buy the ski if it didn't rock.
    We heard you in our twilight caves, one hundred fathom deep below, for notes of joy can pierce the waves, that drown each sound of war and woe.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Skinner Box
    Posts
    3,370
    One-to-Ten Scale


    Quote Originally Posted by marshalolson View Post
    1. graphics?
    4
    Of course.Otherwise it would be like choosing your wife just on the basis of of her personality and...uh..wait?
    But yes,gfx many times is the stimulus.Good gfx show the "personality" of the ski and can make the final buy-this-ski-instead-of-some-other-ski stimuli.
    But you can allways ad some jetblack spray (ia. to im.103...)




    2. ski finishing

    6
    Of course. It is important but not a deal braker,obviously good craftmanship usually gives away how well the ski is made=durability=good stimuli.


    3. shaping? prefered sidecut/shape? rocker lines? etc.

    10

    Most important.Dictates how the ski skis. That is why I buy skis. I want a skis that skis like I would wish it skis:fast,playfull,stable,nimble etc.

    4. flex and flex options? stiff, medium or soft? does it matter if there are countless options?
    9
    Very important,but not as much as the shape. You can get by with a bit softer ski that otherwise behaves like a dream.You sacrifice maybe a bit in top speed or in superfunky snow,but..


    5. weight? do you like a super heavy ski (damp)? super light ski (reactive), do you tour? do you care?
    7
    Matters a bit. You choose your tools for the trade. For a charger ski you might want a bit extra mass to push through the crud or if you are doing week long tours it might be a bit dumb to use spatulas,even if they could
    be sweet on the down. But I tend to choose skis more on their other charasteristics (?). I have my go-high-go-far-do-it-all ski=Legend Pro.
    But I put dynafits on them and that way they are reasonably light but I didnt have to sacrifice skiability one iota.



    6. technology? do you care about pushing the design envelope? do you specifically like to support companies that are doing something cool/new/different?

    2
    Couldnt give a flying fuck.If it works,it works.
    But new technologies invariably do not work in the first generations,so I steer away from them.Sometimes.




    7. price? how price motivated are you? will you only buy on mad closeout? will you pay full pop for something truly lust-worthy? how many skis do you buy a year? how long do you expect them to last?
    5
    I usually scrounge all my stuff from friends (importers etc) or from firesales or other deals. But if I cant find them there and I need something,I do not have objectations to pay full price.

    8. durability? do you care about the hardness of your bases? do you like or not like die-cuts underfoot? sidewall or cap - care?

    6

    Meh. I am lightweighter and light footed so that has never been a issue for me.
    Last edited by Meathelmet; 01-08-2010 at 11:02 AM.

    The floggings will continue until morale improves.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mostly in a bad dream
    Posts
    563
    In order of importance:

    1. Shaping - Shape and length are what originally draw me to a particular ski.

    2. Flex - I can like the shape and length but if it isn't a flex (IMO) that matches what I want the ski to do it's a deal breaker. Flex options would be much appreciated!

    3. Durability - I hit lots of rocks. I haven't bought a non-sandwich constructed ski in years and years.

    4. Technology - I have a quiver so I enjoy seeing the R&D behind new ski design and if a new design fits a particular hole in the quiver that's great.

    5. Price - If all of the above fit perfectly I don't really care about price.

    6. Ski finishing - Depends on the price. If the price is high (above $900) I want the workmanship to be top notch. If the price is low (below $600) I can accept some faults but nothing that can't be fixed. IE. bad tune, railed base would be fine.

    7. Graphics - I can learn to like ugly gawdy graphics if conditions 1 - 3 are met. Sometimes graphics can turn me off right away though.

    8. Weight - Only really matters when looking at AT setups or if a particular ski is slightly longer than I am looking for or slightly stiffer.
    Last edited by DudeLebowSKI; 01-08-2010 at 11:38 AM.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    399
    1. shaping?

    Things that determine how a ski skis are the most important. No use buying a ski without the right specs and camber/rocker profile. Flex is a very close second. for example, the Zealot looks perfect in terms of specs and profile for my next resort ski, but the flex is not quite there for me. If you took the flex of the german made gotamas and cast that in the specs/profile mold of the zealot - I would be pretty happy (maybe G3 will have something like that next year with their joyride 2 offerings to come)

    2. flex and flex options?

    Another must-have like described above. although, I have been surprised by a few skis that are very stiff, but still ski very easily, the 192cm goliath is a great example of that.

    3. ski finishing?

    If they affect how it skis it matters for sure. Some of the finishing things you mentioned are less important because they are easily fixed - structure I think can be addressed and for off piste skis I am not sure it matters. mis matched camber though is cause to return a ski.

    4. durability?

    I sell skis much sooner than I should because designs have been getting better and I learn more about what I like as I go. i do care about durability - especially with touring gear, but I have to admit most skis I sell are in very good shape. That said, when I find a ski I really like (reverends, old gots) I keep them and am happy when they hold up, like both of those have

    5. weight?

    How this is prioritized really depends on the purpose of the ski. but, for all skis, even resort pow skis, I know I like a med to med-light ski. the thug, for example, was a nice light weigh, so was the sanouk. I liked that about those skis for performance reasons - not because i toured on them. Too light and its a problem, but some lightish skis dont suffer from the problems others do, for example, older gots, reverends, king salmons and coombas (although less so) ski like stout skis without the weight.

    6. graphics?

    I care. i have to admit i am less interested in the sidestash even though it checks a lot of boxes in terms of the in-area ski I am looking for. In general I like simple graphics. Blue sanouks were nice. Build me a 2010 zealot with old got construction and a pure green topsheet like the new dps pure topsheets and I am a happy buyer.

    7. price?

    If the right ski comes along I will buy from the local store at close to full retail, but most things I buy used. how many i buy a year depends on whats happening with the quiver. next year, probably one pair and sell two.

    8. technology?

    I am glad tip rocker came along, and a lot of less helpful things probably had to come along to get the rare advancement, but pushing design is not something I prioritize.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Nhampshire
    Posts
    5,547
    1. graphics?
    Could care less. Cool stuff like the woody sanouks is neat, but it isn't a dealbreaker
    2. ski finishing
    I care, but only to the extent that I notice it skiing/tuning

    3. shaping?
    Either it works or it doesn't.

    4. flex and flex options?
    Options are good, especially if you like the shape, but really I just need a nice medium flex. I think the more important piece is that there's a flex for every major segment of your market.

    5. weight?
    I like damp skis mostly, but like having at least one poppy one in my quiver. Lighter weight=better, provided nothing else is sacrificed.

    6. technology?
    It has to work, and it has to be built right.
    7. price?
    I hate paying more than $250 for skis, as I'm a cheap bastard, but would probably do it if I found a ski that was perfect for me.
    8. durability?
    This is huge for me. In 30 days or less a year, I burn up at least 1 pair a season. I'm good at breaking stuff. VERY GOOD. To give an example, I have yet to meet a cap ski I can put more than 20 hard days on without the edge separating.

    In order: 3, 8, 4, 2, 7, 6, 5, 1

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Access to Granlibakken
    Posts
    7,063
    1. graphics? do you prefer pucking blood skulls ala hellbent, hand paint ala 4frnt, crazy neon colors ala new ks stuff, techy graphic designs ala lhasa pows, or simple designs ala dps? do you care?

    somewhat important, but not a deal breaker. prefer simple/classic graphics like dps but also like the graphics on my moment and praxis skis

    2. ski finishing - ie awesome structure, ceramic edge, flat/railed? matched camber/rocker & flex? do you know how to actually check for this stuff? if it was off, would you notice or care? important, especially if spending $$$. yes, i know how to check this stuff. at the very least, flat base, no gaps or shitty finish tolerances, matched camber & flex.

    3. shaping? prefered sidecut/shape? rocker lines? etc. my quiver is around 10-12 pairs, with a wide range of designs & shapes, so it's hard to answer your question. but my main category of skis these days are in the all mtn / pow category (e.g. katana, lotus 120) so shallow sidecut, pintail, mild tip/forebody rocker, flat or very mild camber underfoot.

    4. flex and flex options? stiff, medium or soft? does it matter if there are countless options? important. in general, i prefer skis at the stiffer end of the spectrum, but i realize that not everyone does, so i really like the option of choosing a stiff version. this can be accomplished by flex options in a given length (like DPS), or having two models e.g. a softish 192 for some customers, and a stiff 196 for customers like me.

    5. weight? do you like a super heavy ski (damp)? super light ski (reactive), do you tour? do you care? again, depends on what part of the quiver you're talking about. for my resort skis, i strongly prefer my damp, heavy, metal lam skis (im103s, katanas, etc). for BC i'm willing to trade some performance for light weight. DPS flex 3 are the first low weight BC ski that i've found satisfactory, but frankly i almost never ski my lotus 120s or w105s at the resorts since my other skis (comi kazis, katanas, im103s, big daddies, etc) outperform them.

    6. technology? do you care about pushing the design envelope? do you specifically like to support companies that are doing something cool/new/different? Yep, have always been a guinea pig for new designs and constructions, and will always try to support companies that are trying new approaches. Important attribute and one that I will pay more for, within reason.

    7. price? how price motivated are you? will you only buy on mad closeout? will you pay full pop for something truly lust-worthy? how many skis do you buy a year? how long do you expect them to last? Somewhat important but depends. For a basic mainstream twintip, i'm not gonna pay more than $300. For a quality hardwood metal lam ski, I'll gladly pay $300-$500 on sale or thru my industry friends. For a truly unique product like a DPS, i'll pay $700 or more but don't do that often since i see skis as a consumable item that gets broken or worn out.

    8. durability? do you care about the hardness of your bases? do you like or not like die-cuts underfoot? sidewall or cap - care? Very important. Prefer strong sidewall construction that resists compression damage, thick edges, thick and hard base, no die cuts. Very impressed w/ the Praxis skis in this regard -- a ski built for places like kirkwood and squaw. Brands that gain this type of durability reputation can, and do, charge more.

    btw i'm a tele skier but have one pair of boards mounted AT. used to be that my tele friends all had budget, somewhat crappy skis, but these days it seems that my tele brethren are all over 30 with real jobs and drop serious cash on what TGR would consider the better skis on the market.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    InDaPow, CO
    Posts
    484
    1-Shape - Most important, has to be specific to a certain snow/terrain type, or quiver of 1 shape. Companies should give this more thought - not just produce a shape to be different.

    2-Flex - This is about as important as Shape...IMO. Flex should be appropriate to overall ski type and length.

    3-Weight - More weight = more energy, so generally if strength can be achieved with lower weight, all the better.

    4-Technology - Core material, CF and Glass being used in new ways to reach goals of 1-3 above.

    5-Durability - I'm paying good money, skis should last 70+ days (or at least 10 days at Arockahoebasin)

    6-Finish - Should be a finished, clean, splinter-less, true product, but not of the most importance. If above are addressed, finish will most likely be handled.

    7-Price- I'll pay for quality, but expect a good warranty to accompany the higher price.

    8-Graphics- DPS, High Society FR, Folsom are definitely how skis should look. Time and $ should be spent elsewhere.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Hokkaido
    Posts
    1,240
    3. shaping? prefered sidecut/shape? rocker lines? etc.
    As many have said above, I care most about the factors that determine what the ski does best.

    4. flex and flex options? stiff, medium or soft? does it matter if there are countless options?
    Again, to repeat what others have said, I like a flex pattern that is aligned with what I want the ski to do.

    7. price? how price motivated are you? will you only buy on mad closeout? will you pay full pop for something truly lust-worthy? how many skis do you buy a year? how long do you expect them to last?
    I am a known chepaskate -- actually my wife is the really cheap one. If my wife would let me, I would spend lots of money on gear but I have a very limited budget. As a result, I tend to buy a lot of gear used. I know it doesn't help the industry but that's where I'm at right now.

    5. weight? do you like a super heavy ski (damp)? super light ski (reactive), do you tour? do you care?
    I kind of care about weight but am conflicted because I like the way a damp ski feels skiing down but for touring I appreciate a little less weight after a lot of steps.

    8. durability? do you care about the hardness of your bases? do you like or not like die-cuts underfoot? sidewall or cap - care?
    I used to be a lot rougher on my equipment than I am these days. And I do all my own shop work, so this is not as important to me as it was when I was younger.

    2. ski finishing - ie awesome structure, ceramic edge, flat/railed? matched camber/rocker & flex? do you know how to actually check for this stuff? if it was off, would you notice or care?
    New skis should be matched and be reasonably flat, but I have traditionally seen so little quality in finishing of skis over the years that I am used to putting the tune on them that I want and don't care what they look like when I am using them.

    6. technology? do you care about pushing the design envelope? do you specifically like to support companies that are doing something cool/new/different?
    Nice, but not very high on my list.

    1. graphics? do you prefer pucking blood skulls ala hellbent, hand paint ala 4frnt, crazy neon colors ala new ks stuff, techy graphic designs ala lhasa pows, or simple designs ala dps? do you care?
    Well, while I don't like crazy designs when I see them in the shop, on snow I really don't care much at all, as long as they don't have swastikas or some other evil shit. I do like wood veneers or simply glass over core. Lowest priority for me.

    Thanks for asking!

    I boiled my thermometer, and sure enough, this spot, which purported to be two thousand feet higher than the locality of the hotel, turned out to be nine thousand feet LOWER. Thus the fact was clearly demonstrated that, ABOVE A CERTAIN POINT, THE HIGHER A POINT SEEMS TO BE, THE LOWER IT ACTUALLY IS. Our ascent itself was a great achievement, but this contribution to science was an inconceivably greater matter.

    --MT--

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    New States
    Posts
    841
    1. graphics? do you prefer pucking blood skulls ala hellbent, hand paint ala 4frnt, crazy neon colors ala new ks stuff, techy graphic designs ala lhasa pows, or simple designs ala dps? do you care?

    Don't care that much, but can be put off by truely ugly graphics (e.g. latest K2 sidestash/darkside etc.).

    2. ski finishing - ie awesome structure, ceramic edge, flat/railed? matched camber/rocker & flex? do you know how to actually check for this stuff? if it was off, would you notice or care?

    I care, I notice and I check. I've sent skis back that I ordered if they were off enough.

    3. shaping? prefered sidecut/shape? rocker lines? etc.

    Like others have stated, 'it depends'. Looking at my current quiver, there is a clear preference for skis with some tip rocker, no tail rocker and not much side cut. This combination tends to perform the best of the shape/sidecut combos in variable snow (a high priority for me) while still reasonably decent on steep firm snow (a second high priority). Don't like pintails, since they tend to washout on steep firm snow.

    For some resort skiing (little new snow) I like a ski with a lot of side cut, not too wide in the waiste, for billy-goating, trees and bump skiing.

    4. flex and flex options? stiff, medium or soft? does it matter if there are countless options?

    Flex mostly needs to harmonize well with the sidecut/shape. Nice to have options, but not super important. Tend to like stiff tails though.

    5. weight? do you like a super heavy ski (damp)? super light ski (reactive), do you tour? do you care?

    Own, like and tour on some of the lightest (DPS 120's) and some of the heaviest things out there (XXL's, soli Rockers). Big mountain skiing (AK, LL) prefer heavy. Resort skiing and mellow touring, light.

    6. technology? do you care about pushing the design envelope? do you specifically like to support companies that are doing something cool/new/different?

    I do care and am willing to be on the bleeding edge.

    7. price? how price motivated are you? will you only buy on mad closeout? will you pay full pop for something truly lust-worthy? how many skis do you buy a year? how long do you expect them to last?

    Not very price sensitive and am willing to pay up. I've bought as many as four pair in a year, but I've also gone for years without a purchase.

    8. durability? do you care about the hardness of your bases? do you like or not like die-cuts underfoot? sidewall or cap - care?

    Durability is mostly important in that I don't want gear to leave me stranded. Don't care about core shots/top sheets or anything that can be easily fixed or ignored. If edges rip out easily though hitting rocks, I won't go there. (I hit a lot of rocks).

    Priority from top to bottom.

    Shape/sidecut, flex (can't really seperate these)
    Weight
    Durability
    Finish
    Price
    Technology
    Graphics
    "I just want to thank everyone who made this day necessary." -Yogi Berra

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,872
    QUOTE=marshalolson;2690404]it would be interesting to see people rank these items in terms of importance, and then write a sentance or two explaining each line.

    if someone has a NS account or TTips account, it might also be cool to post this over there and post a link so we can see what everyone is thinking...

    awesome. i guess this is your chance to speak your mind on design. i am going to send the results around to a bunch of various contacts[/QUOTE]

    Here's my ranking, and rationale...

    8. graphics? - A: Don't really care, although flowery pink and girly colors might make me really have to suck it up in the lift line. But if the ski kicks ass, well then...pink it is!

    5. ski finishing - ie awesome structure, ceramic edge, flat/railed? matched camber/rocker & flex? do you know how to actually check for this stuff? if it was off, would you notice or care? - A: This is a tough one. I am somewhat anal about this but put it lower on the list because I don't think at the end of the day the ski finish affects performance as much as shape and flex, but it's really close for me.

    1. shaping? prefered sidecut/shape? rocker lines? etc. - A: I find this to be number one because if you are talking in terms of dims, this sets the choice for what you want in a ski, i.e. pow, groomers, park, or all mtn.

    2. flex and flex options? stiff, medium or soft? does it matter if there are countless options? - A: Again a soft flexing ski or a stiff ski will dictate a lot in terms of how you ski, anad what you are looking for in a ski. I have different pairs of skis with different flex for different snow conditions, so this is obviously high in my mind when considering a ski,

    7. weight? do you like a super heavy ski (damp)? super light ski (reactive), do you tour? do you care? - A: Just side country touring and weight is not a major issue for me. I tend to prefer something mid-weight with some pop, or liveliness. Although, now and again a good stiff ski can be a blast but wouldn't want to ride a stiff damp ski all season long.

    6. technology? do you care about pushing the design envelope? do you specifically like to support companies that are doing something cool/new/different? - A: Would support a company that is doing something new and cool but the problem is I really like to demo a ski before I buy. I can think of one ski in 10 years I bought based on input from ski community w/o demoing. And often time finding a demo of a boutique cutting edge ski co. is hard to come by.

    4. price? how price motivated are you? will you only buy on mad closeout? will you pay full pop for something truly lust-worthy? how many skis do you buy a year? how long do you expect them to last?
    A: I have never paid full MSRP for a ski/boot/pole/gloves/goggles/etc... I buy about one ski pair every other year.
    I have a pair of Dynastar Legend 8000's that I've had for 5 years now. Skied them maybe 60-70 times in that time period. Just had them tuned/stone ground/base structure, etc. I think I can get a few more yrs out of them with some TLC, so I don't think it is unreasonable to get at least 100 days out of a ski. Mine still feel like the first day I got on 'em.

    3. durability? do you care about the hardness of your bases? do you like or not like die-cuts underfoot? sidewall or cap - care? - A: Don't care if cap or sandwich or base material, just as long as it isn't soft. I think if you are going to drop some serious dough for a ski set up, you want it to last. Same goes for my boots. A guy on a pair of the early foam core salomons was dismayed out how fast they turned to noodles. Who doesn't want a durable ski?
    "We don't beat the reaper by living longer, we beat the reaper by living well and living fully." - Randy Pausch

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    AK
    Posts
    329
    3. shaping - It really depends on why I'm buying the ski. I'll always have a standard camber ski ready to go, but want some rocker for my pow ski. I don't have an endless quiver so I look for versatile shapes.

    4. flex - I like medium flexing skis and want versatility. Having different options available only matters if the standard options isn't to my liking.

    2. ski finishing - I check and would notice. I won't buy a ski that has obvious flaws or irregularities.

    8. durability - I want my skis to last years. I had a string of 3-4 years where I was breaking skis left and right, and got very concerned about durability.

    5. weight - I mostly tour so I want light-weight skis.

    7. price - Price is important, but I'm willing to pay up if it's a ski I'm really lusting after. Most of my skis were close outs, end of season sales, or purchased used.

    6. technology - I like new technology and innovation, but want a ski that is versatile and will last a long time so I generally don't offer myself up as a guinea pig.

    1. graphics - Simple graphics ala DPS are the best. Lighter colors prefered. This isn't a deal breaker for me, but gets factored in when I can't otherwise choose between two skis.


    Edited to clarify that the numbers are from the original post, but I rearranged everything so the top is most important and the bottom is least important

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    SF, CA
    Posts
    814
    1. Graphics? I prefer understated graphics. The early Nordicas and now the DPs are my favorite skis, and actually stand out from the crowd for their simplicity. I'd like to say graphics don't matter, but they were the reason I bought two pairs of Nordicas way back when.

    2. Ski finishing? Skis don't need to be a perfect match, but shouldn't be so out of spec you have mad camber on a powder ski, or flat camber on an all-mountain ski. No need for race prep, but should arrive flat and sharp, ready for wax.

    3. Shaping? This and flex are the most important aspects. This narrows down the playing field. I like versatile shapes, as I'm trying to downsize my quiver. Just bought a Lhasa Pow 186, but honestly would have taken the same shape a touch narrower for it to be my true everyday ski. Was also looking at the BD Justice and Praxis Backcountry.

    4. Flex? I like a medium stiffness, roughly a 4-5 on your scale. Prefer consistent flex, maybe a touch of progressive stiffness underfoot. I've had a lot of stiff skis (XXL, im103, explosive, axoim) and I have more fun on slightly softer skis like the BD Verdict. Options only matter if you're not making a ski in that medium flex.

    5. Weight? do you like a super heavy ski (damp)? I tend to make shorter turns these days, and prefer a high energy, lightweight ski. Dampness at speed is an appreciated bonus. Especially for touring, lightweight is critical (3rd most important factor after shape and flex).

    6. Technology? I care, in as much as it produces the shape, flex, and versatility I want from a ski. I like trying new things, but I won't plunk down money until a few other folks have tried it and stamped their approval.

    7. Price? Wasting money on cheap skis that are wrong for me has made me less price motivated, but $500 is still the absolute upper end of what I'll spend on a ski. $400 is the most I've spent to date. Given two options of similar shape and flex from reputable MFGs, cost is the next factor and a differential of more than $50 would make the deal.

    8. Durability? Thick edges are more important than lightweight, and hard bases are much more important than fast bases. Put cheap, hard PTEX on that bitch, not soft,absorbent race-bases. I don't care about die cutting or graphics on the base. If anything they just make my repairs uglier because I can't match PTEX color.

    Critical factors - flex, shape, price (for touring, also weight), basic level of finish/QA
    Secondary factors - durability, superb finish/QA, (both previous considered against price) weight, feel (damp vs. energetic... I like the middle ground)
    Tertiary - Graphics, technology (in as much as it's separate from shape, flex and weight), MFG size and location (prefer to support the little and local guy)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •