Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 204

Thread: Blister

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rossland BC
    Posts
    1,091
    I pick through all the free content (website and podcasts) Blister provides, and find some of it interesting, and occasionally useful. I donít see any value in paying for the upgraded content, but good on them for making it work. Itís been mentioned previously, but videos could help me determine the credibility of the reviewer, otherwise itís safe to assume theyíre a technically flawed skier who just happens to be able to express an opinion somewhat convincingly.

    On the other hand, Powder Magazineís gear testers just spent a week goofing around my local mountain, which has me thinking, does it really matter that most reviewers are upper intermediate hacks, lacking the technique, physical conditioning, and experience to appreciate the subtleties of gearís performance, given that most of the people reading the reviews and buying the gear are even less capable. Perhaps these articulate amateurs are the perfect gear reviewers?

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Magically whisked away to...Delaware
    Posts
    2,306
    Quote Originally Posted by kootenayskier View Post
    On the other hand, Powder Magazine’s gear testers just spent a week goofing around my local mountain, which has me thinking, does it really matter that most reviewers are upper intermediate hacks, lacking the technique, physical conditioning, and experience to appreciate the subtleties of gear’s performance, given that most of the people reading the reviews and buying the gear are even less capable. Perhaps these articulate amateurs are the perfect gear reviewers?
    Given that criteria, I hereby volunteer to be Blister's (or Powder's...or Freeskier's) next reviewer...send me some skis STAT!!!
    It makes perfect sense...until you think about it.

    No thanks. I'll stick with porn. - Benny

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    8,203
    Quote Originally Posted by smartyiak View Post
    Given that criteria, I hereby volunteer to be Blister's (or Powder's...or Freeskier's) next reviewer...send me some sks STAT!!!
    No shit, sounds like I'd be the best reviewer on the planet. In all seriousness, I do feel like good skiers have the capability to override the flaws in some skis, or at least ski them much better than someone with less experience.

    I'll admit to buying all of my skis sight unseen, not demoing them, and justifying a purchase through online reviews after I find a good deal. Although I do ski a few times a week all winter long, I don't feel like I have the time, or the desire to go around demoing stuff, not to mention that most demo's take place earlier in the season, when there's usually just an abundance of groomers available, which I really don't ski most of the year. I think that I'm just the kinda guy who buys a ski and figures it out myself, hopefully stepping up my game to the level of the ski. However that's bitten me in the ass before, with the old BD Zealots that I couldn't turn for shit.

    I'd say at least Blister gives it a shot, and I wish them well. I probably won't be paying for their services, but I also don't pay for cable, and am kind of a cheapskate.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    45
    Without Blister and TGR I'd have fewer skis and alot less information. I'm grateful for the resources.

    Relatedly, what I miss about Betel's presence is the volume. Dude contributed alot of volume and kept the dialogue going. Filter away, extrapolate away to your needs. It's all good.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
    Last edited by bry; 03-05-2019 at 08:45 PM. Reason: Can't spell for shit

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    1,939
    Quote Originally Posted by kootenayskier View Post
    ...videos could help me determine the credibility of the reviewer, otherwise it’s safe to assume they’re a technically flawed skier who just happens to be able to express an opinion somewhat convincingly.
    I observed Blister reviewer Luke Koppa ski for a token 1.5 hours. If you have any specific questions about his skiing, I'm happy to report what I observed.

    Also, for ski reviews, I care more about the reviewer's ski TESTING skills than their skiing skills. The 2 are not the same.

    .
    - TRADE your heavy BILLYGOATS or PROTESTS for my lightweight versions at this thread

    "My biggest goal in life has always been to pursue passion and to make dreams a reality. I love my daughter, but if I had to quit my passions for her, then I would be setting the wrong example for her, and I would not be myself anymore. " -Shane

    "I'm gonna go SO OFF that NO ONE's ever gonna see what I'm gonna do!" -Saucerboy

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Rossland BC
    Posts
    1,091
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitamin I View Post
    I observed Blister reviewer Luke Koppa ski for a token 1.5 hours. If you have any specific questions about his skiing, I'm happy to report what I observed.

    Also, for ski reviews, I care more about the reviewer's ski TESTING skills than their skiing skills. The 2 are not the same.

    .
    Being a technically proficient skier doesnít necessarily correlate with an ability to effectively assess and communicate the qualities of skiing equipment, but Iíve always assumed itís a requirement. If for example you canít make technically proficient short radius turns down the fall line (without faking it with some floppy, skidded, interpretive dance variation I see all day everyday) what am I to make of your subjective opinion and florid prose. I actually preferred it when ski tests consisted of a large roster of instructors and coaches (with cheesy mugshots and bios), some attempt at objective criteria, and spat out numbered rankings.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    1,939
    Quote Originally Posted by kootenayskier View Post
    Being a technically proficient skier doesnít necessarily correlate with an ability to effectively assess and communicate the qualities of skiing equipment, but Iíve always assumed itís a requirement. If for example you canít make technically proficient short radius turns down the fall line (without faking it with some floppy, skidded, interpretive dance variation I see all day everyday) what am I to make of your subjective opinion and florid prose. I actually preferred it when ski tests consisted of a large roster of instructors and coaches (with cheesy mugshots and bios), some attempt at objective criteria, and spat out numbered rankings.
    I hear ya. That's valid. But the way I see it, different people want the results of different tests. And one ski tester doesn't need to be a "complete skier" who is proficient at ALL tests---a tester only needs to be proficient for the subset of tests he/she reports test results for.

    For example, there might be some people who don't care at all about the results of a "technically proficient short radius turns down the fall line" test, and maybe some people only want to know which comp-type ski will help them most to recover as elegantly as possible from a backslap landing. ...And I don't know if a roster of instructors and coaches would be proficient at performing a bunch of backslap tests.

    Yes, I'd like ski testers to be proficient at the tests they choose to perform---and then just report the results they observed.
    Yes, I definitely agree that comparisons are valuable (either numbered rankings, or just sorting, or whatever other methods they come up with).

    .
    - TRADE your heavy BILLYGOATS or PROTESTS for my lightweight versions at this thread

    "My biggest goal in life has always been to pursue passion and to make dreams a reality. I love my daughter, but if I had to quit my passions for her, then I would be setting the wrong example for her, and I would not be myself anymore. " -Shane

    "I'm gonna go SO OFF that NO ONE's ever gonna see what I'm gonna do!" -Saucerboy

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    my own little world
    Posts
    2,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitamin I View Post
    I hear ya. That's valid. But the way I see it, different people want the results of different tests. And one ski tester doesn't need to be a "complete skier" who is proficient at ALL tests---a tester only needs to be proficient for the subset of tests he/she reports test results for.

    For example, there might be some people who don't care at all about the results of a "technically proficient short radius turns down the fall line" test, and maybe some people only want to know which comp-type ski will help them most to recover as elegantly as possible from a backslap landing. ...And I don't know if a roster of instructors and coaches would be proficient at performing a bunch of backslap tests.

    Yes, I'd like ski testers to be proficient at the tests they choose to perform---and then just report the results they observed.
    Yes, I definitely agree that comparisons are valuable (either numbered rankings, or just sorting, or whatever other methods they come up with).

    .
    Right. Which is why Iíd rather have 6 overtly subjective data points than 2 or 3 that try too hard to be objective.
    focus.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,298
    Quote Originally Posted by kootenayskier View Post

    On the other hand, Powder Magazineís gear testers just spent a week goofing around my local mountain, which has me thinking, does it really matter that most reviewers are upper intermediate hacks, lacking the technique, physical conditioning, and experience to appreciate the subtleties of gearís performance, given that most of the people reading the reviews and buying the gear are even less capable.
    iím wondering where to sign up for this job!
    .....I hope you know that this will go down on your permanent record

    http://procatinator.com/?cat=80

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    1

    Blister

    I see it, different people want the results of different tests. And one ski tester doesn't need to be a "complete skier" who is proficient at ALL tests---a tester only needs to be proficient for the subset of tests he/she reports test results for

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Sun Valley, ID
    Posts
    1,592
    All Iíll say is Iíve seen videos of a few people here ski and immediately disregard anything they say about skis. For a professional reviewer it sure would be nice to see them ski to see if itís worth paying any attention.

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    44
    There are tons of pictures of these guys skiing, and I know I've seen videos of both Sam and Luke skiing before. It's pretty easy to see the skiing style of all of them from the pictures, and that they are pretty decent skiers. They are pretty open about not being perfect, pro-level skiers (except Jonathan), but from the pics and videos i feel like they are probably in the top 95% percent of skiers on the mountain. There are a lot of top 5% skiers on TGR (from the way you talk at least), but its pretty shitty to totally disregard someones opinions on skis just because they're not quite as good as you.

    I have the luxury of skiing a LOT of different skis, and I know that mostly agree with Luke, and Paul often enough, but he's 20 lbs heavier than me so that skews his take for me. They're also getting better at including multiple reviewers in each review, which displays the subjectivity of each reviewers take. I subscribe to the deep dives because it allows me to talk to about a ski I'm trying to sell compared to a ski that I've never seen before pretty confidently.

    If you can demo a ski, you should do that. I feel like any of the blister guys would say that too...

    Also, on the note of measurements, I find it incredibly interesting to see which manufacturers actually hit their stated dimensions and weights, and which are way off. For those ones that are way off - are they intentionally lying? or are their manufacturing tolerances just that loose? Some consistently nail it, which gives me confidence in those brands.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sonoma & Truckee
    Posts
    11,073
    Quote Originally Posted by white_wolf View Post
    Also, on the note of measurements, I find it incredibly interesting to see which manufacturers actually hit their stated dimensions and weights, and which are way off. For those ones that are way off - are they intentionally lying? or are their manufacturing tolerances just that loose? Some consistently nail it, which gives me confidence in those brands.
    Sometimes there are definitely what I would call, marketing adjustments. Or a placebo effect to some degree. Nordica used to be pretty bad this way several years back. Like a 184 ski would measure out at 187 on a straight-pull, which is insane. It's also why ON3P cut the tail off their 186 / 191 Billy Goats to make essentially the same skis a 184 / 189 so they wouldn't over-intimidate people.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,340
    I do think a few clips of the reviewer skiing would actually be useful.

    I don't think we need a full length run for every reviewer or ski but a few clips here or there wouldn't be bad. Hell, even a GoPro POV clip would suffice. That can't be too difficult given how many POV Instagram stories I see daily.

    My issue with relying on pictures is that we skiers can be vain when it comes to picture choice. I don't think anyone here would volunteer a potential review photo in which we aren't ripping. As a result, we have a single still snapshot which doesn't really cover a whole lot in the scheme of things.

    And to those saying demoing a ski is better than reading reviews, unfortunately not all of us can demo a ski in the conditions we're buying them for.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Den/Baltimore
    Posts
    5,129
    Quote Originally Posted by white_wolf View Post
    Also, on the note of measurements, I find it incredibly interesting to see which manufacturers actually hit their stated dimensions and weights, and which are way off. For those ones that are way off - are they intentionally lying? or are their manufacturing tolerances just that loose? Some consistently nail it, which gives me confidence in those brands.
    Ski mfgs often measure the base material which means the straight tape pull is short after the ski is pressed with rocker and camber. It's not lying or poor tolerances, it's just a different measurement.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  16. #166
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sonoma & Truckee
    Posts
    11,073
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    Ski mfgs often measure the base material which means the straight tape pull is short after the ski is pressed with rocker and camber. It's not lying or poor tolerances, it's just a different measurement.
    Of course, we all know this.... but there's definitely been some fudging here or there for marketing purpose. Which, to be honest, I'm fine with. Because people can be dumb and say they don't want a ski that's 107mm but 105 would be perfect. It's 2 millimeters, STFU.

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Den/Baltimore
    Posts
    5,129
    Quote Originally Posted by TahoeJ View Post
    Of course, we all know this.... but there's definitely been some fudging here or there for marketing purpose. Which, to be honest, I'm fine with. Because people can be dumb and say they don't want a ski that's 107mm but 105 would be perfect. It's 2 millimeters, STFU.
    And if any tech talk regular would have said, I wouldn't have commented the way I did but I wasn't sure if the JONG I responded to was also aware. Should have worded my post to give the benefit of the doubt, tho.

    Yes agree, the numbers aside from length sometimes seem fishy -- especially the weight. Like you, I'm not too concerned about a few mm or a few grams. But sometimes, it's good to know how the actual weights stack up.

    e.g., the Scarpa Alien RS is spec'd at 890g but weighs 970g. There's a fair number 1 kg boots out there, but there's not too many 900 g boots out there so the difference is substantial. So to me, that lets me compare the Alien to other 1kg boots, instead of the no-man's land between 1kg boots and skimo race boots.
    Last edited by auvgeek; 03-08-2019 at 06:05 AM.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    1,939
    Quote Originally Posted by Mustonen View Post
    Right. Which is why Iíd rather have 6 overtly subjective data points than 2 or 3 that try too hard to be objective.
    OK. To each his own taste. Is your preferred ski review method (i.e. "6 overtly subjective data points") being delivered by anyone nowadays? Like, do you feel that TGR Forums community delivers that if >6 people chime in on a review? Or does a different website deliver that? Or nobody provides that?

    Quote Originally Posted by white_wolf View Post
    ...They are pretty open about not being perfect, pro-level skiers (except Jonathan), but from the pics and videos i feel like they are probably in the top 95% percent of skiers on the mountain. There are a lot of top 5% skiers on TGR (from the way you talk at least), but its pretty shitty to totally disregard someones opinions on skis just because they're not quite as good as you.
    Those sentences confuse me. I think you wrote numbers you didn't mean. "Top 95%" merely means Blister testers are not the worst 5% on the mountain---and I doubt you meant that. I have personally observed 3 days worth of Crested Butte skiers, including Luke Koppa, and Luke is near the top end of that huge 95% chunk of top people you mentioned.

    .
    - TRADE your heavy BILLYGOATS or PROTESTS for my lightweight versions at this thread

    "My biggest goal in life has always been to pursue passion and to make dreams a reality. I love my daughter, but if I had to quit my passions for her, then I would be setting the wrong example for her, and I would not be myself anymore. " -Shane

    "I'm gonna go SO OFF that NO ONE's ever gonna see what I'm gonna do!" -Saucerboy

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitamin I View Post

    Those sentences confuse me. I think you wrote numbers you didn't mean. "Top 95%" merely means Blister testers are not the worst 5% on the mountain---and I doubt you meant that. I have personally observed 3 days worth of Crested Butte skiers, including Luke Koppa, and Luke is near the top end of that huge 95% chunk of top people you mentioned.
    Yeah sorry, ski brain. You got what I meant. Blister reviewers are probably better than 95% of skiers.

    Quote Originally Posted by TahoeJ
    Of course, we all know this.... but there's definitely been some fudging here or there for marketing purpose. Which, to be honest, I'm fine with. Because people can be dumb and say they don't want a ski that's 107mm but 105 would be perfect. It's 2 millimeters, STFU.
    I agree entirely, but what I really question when looking at measured vs. stated dimensions is whether each ski coming out of a factory in a certain model/size is actually identical to every other ski in that model/size (and I'm talking about widths here, not lengths). When looking at a bunch of pairs of the same ski, you can often find subtle differences in construction in supposedly identical skis. It can be variability in the width between carbon stringers under a clear topsheet, or in materials under a clear base, but there seems to be less precision in ski manufacturing than we would all like to think there is. Also, you can see in the measured specs on blister's reviews that the one skis in a pair can weigh up to 50g more or less than the other. I'm not saying there are drastic performance differences between different pairs of the same ski, but I do think that large discrepancies between stated and measured dimensions could indicate loose manufacturing tolerances. For someone who doesn't get to inspect a dozen pairs of the same ski, that could be valuable information.

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,513
    Quote Originally Posted by white_wolf View Post
    I agree entirely, but what I really question when looking at measured vs. stated dimensions is whether each ski coming out of a factory in a certain model/size is actually identical to every other ski in that model/size (and I'm talking about widths here, not lengths). When looking at a bunch of pairs of the same ski, you can often find subtle differences in construction in supposedly identical skis. It can be variability in the width between carbon stringers under a clear topsheet, or in materials under a clear base, but there seems to be less precision in ski manufacturing than we would all like to think there is. Also, you can see in the measured specs on blister's reviews that the one skis in a pair can weigh up to 50g more or less than the other. I'm not saying there are drastic performance differences between different pairs of the same ski, but I do think that large discrepancies between stated and measured dimensions could indicate loose manufacturing tolerances. For someone who doesn't get to inspect a dozen pairs of the same ski, that could be valuable information.
    Anyone have input/data points where those micro variances have any relevance to real world on snow ski feel? I ski 99 percent backcountry heliskiing and ski touring and IMO/ime, it doesn't really matter much in that context. Skied for a few seasons with a cracked core ski which resulted in almost flat camber/more shovel splay/softer flex/altered flex profile...another season with one ski with a bent tip, some delammed skis both repaired and left delammed...really couldn't tell the difference between one or the other aside from just a C hair better float in bottomless conditions on the one cracked rossi xxx bandit compared to the 'normal' one.

    Also, unsolicited data point; Can't stand 'new' skis; always find them too reboundy, twitchy, precise...I like em broken in, edges fully detuned and rounded off for tip/tail rocker, work matured...like a seasoned baseball glove. More friendly, forgiving, predictable, schmeary, eezee. Just one man's take. Still lovin' my beat to shit o.g. customized K2 Darksides...they might just be my lifelong partner. Just learned about 'refreshing' old geezer skis by grinding off the topsheet and adding a layer of fiberglass to bring em back to life if they're completely trashed. Not there yet but at least there's a backstop just in case. Dunno details of what the process is...mentor buddy will coach when required.

    Just giv'er.
    Last edited by swissiphic; 03-08-2019 at 08:37 AM.
    Master of mediocrity.

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Posts
    10,892
    Dear JFE24, if you’re still watching this I’d like to put in my request with the others. To match the ski tester to my needs you should know that I’m 155 lbs, I’m an upright finesse skier that likes to ski anything, anywhere, except big air, and I’m transitioning from tele to fixed heel but I’m not sure which way to go with any particular ski so please test them with both types bindings. My bsl is 305-307 so you’ll need to match that. Also, please provide video and detailed evaluation of the skis performing in all conditions with alpine, AT, and tele bindings.

    Thanks in advance.

    Oh, and make it free, or possibly Pay Per View.
    And I guess that I just don't know

  22. #172
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Driggs
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by auvgeek View Post
    Yes agree, the numbers aside from length sometimes seem fishy -- especially the weight. Like you, I'm not too concerned about a few mm or a few grams. But sometimes, it's good to know how the actual weights stack up.
    Yeah, on that note, I remember going to put bindings on a ski that was advertised as 105 mm underfoot, and my 105 mm brakes didn't fit. Pulled out the calipers, and it was 111 mm at its narrowest point.

    That experience really reinforced for me why it's worth it to record those numbers on Blister. Otherwise, you have the potential to get your new skis the day before a trip and end up really bummed because your bindings don't fit them.

  23. #173
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    mammoth
    Posts
    105
    They all seem like totally proficient skiers to me.




    And idk how I found this but here's a steezy vid of reviewer sam shaheen from a decade ago:



    edit:
    Here's their skier bios:
    https://blisterreview.com/category/c.../ski-reviewers
    Last edited by macon; 03-08-2019 at 11:41 AM.

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    775
    Quote Originally Posted by Meadow Skipper View Post
    Dear JFE24, if youíre still watching this Iíd like to put in my request with the others. To match the ski tester to my needs you should know that Iím 155 lbs, Iím an upright finesse skier that likes to ski anything, anywhere, except big air, and Iím transitioning from tele to fixed heel but Iím not sure which way to go with any particular ski so please test them with both types bindings. My bsl is 305-307 so youíll need to match that. Also, please provide video and detailed evaluation of the skis performing in all conditions with alpine, AT, and tele bindings.

    Thanks in advance.

    Oh, and make it free, or possibly Pay Per View.
    Lol. Donít forget to ask JFE to buy all the skis so that he can check the quality that you as a buyer will get and get rid of the Blister badges because they annoy you.

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    1,939
    Quote Originally Posted by swissiphic View Post
    ...Just learned about 'refreshing' old geezer skis by grinding off the topsheet and adding a layer of fiberglass to bring em back to life if they're completely trashed...Dunno details of what the process is...mentor buddy will coach when required.
    Long, long ago, an aerial ski jumper guy had a website with instructions how to add multiple layers of fiberglass, each layer of different length and position, with intent to stiffen/strengthen a ski so it could handle big landings from those big aerials. I remember it was like sloppy hand-drawn illustrations. If you have mad Google skillz, maybe those web pages are still being served...and then just take bits and pieces of his methods for aerial skis and adapt them for your freeride skis.

    .
    - TRADE your heavy BILLYGOATS or PROTESTS for my lightweight versions at this thread

    "My biggest goal in life has always been to pursue passion and to make dreams a reality. I love my daughter, but if I had to quit my passions for her, then I would be setting the wrong example for her, and I would not be myself anymore. " -Shane

    "I'm gonna go SO OFF that NO ONE's ever gonna see what I'm gonna do!" -Saucerboy

Posting Permissions

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