Hmmm....interesting, my dear Watson. What ski for LP?
Mike, some quick thoughts, but no clear answers for you:
1) I'm sure you know all of this, but aside from rocker, a ski's performance in soft snow has a lot to do with width and length (natch!), but also flex pattern, stiffness, tip width, and sidecut. Specifically on the latter, I am thinking turn radius and where the sidecut starts back from the tip...further back = better float. You can have a frontside oriented 88mm ski like the Blizzard Mag 87, Rossi Experience 88, etc., which will not float nearly as well as, say, a Blizzard Bushwacker (also 88mm), Dynastar Outland 87 or Nordica Steadfast. Not being familiar with your Hart's, I have no idea how they would behave in soft snow. Depending on your choice of a mid-80's ski, there may be little appreciable improvement....or perhaps to the contrary(?). It all depends on how the Rev 85's size up next to your Hart's, I guess.
2) Could your knee pain be alleviated with a bit of extra stand height on a wider ski? Simple physics dictates that there is far less strain on the knees if the boot is raised off the ski a centimeter or more. I have a great book that has a description of this -- I can scan the page and email to you if you wish. Not sure if your past experience with 88mm+ skis has been only with flat mounted bindings, but this knee pain is clearly an issue for you and is preventing you from going wide. Perhaps a flex plate or lifters would be the answer?
3) Have you tried the combo of wider skis with your new boots? I am thinking not, as the Redsters are so new. Perhaps the better fit, better ski control, less slop, less jarring/vibration, different (upright?) stance, different (taller?) cuff, better alignment of the Redsters will help eliminate some of those issues?
4) I am not familiar with Big Sky, but as Montana is directly south of Banff, Alberta, I may venture a guess that they may have similar snow characteristics(?). In my experience (I have skied in Banff a lot), and seeing what the locals are skiing on and chatting them up about their choice of ski, I can say that the snow in that area is typically rather firm, even when they get some fresh stuff it's like that. The area is on the dry side of the Rockies. They don't tend to get the deep light fluffy powder that, say, the interior of BC or Utah would get. The majority of locals, including those who go into the back country with AT gear, ski on boards that are less than 90mm, and a lot of them are on 78 to 82mm skis, including instructors and patrollers. These guys take these skis all over the mountain, and when prompted, say they feel no need to go wider. Personally, skiing in Banff I have only ever been on my Mach 3's (72mm) which were fine for on-piste and week-old off piste, and my Mythics (88mm) which I can take everywhere. I have never needed a wider ski there than the latter. Just unlucky to have missed all the mega powder dumps, I guess. Worth checking out if Big Sky is similar.....you may be fine with your 78's. And if it really dumps, you can rent something.
It would be interesting to see if you demo anything out there and how they work for you. I'd be curious to know if a mid-90's ski that was lighter and less burly than your Sultans, combined with your new boots, would still give you knee pain. If you do try anything, but don't want to go 90+, try the Outland 87 on for size. It looked like it had a lot of off-piste cred judging by the rocker, wide tip, sidecut profile, etc., but it still held solid on hard snow and icy patches. Very fun ski. Much lighter underfoot and way easier to handle than any of the Legend series I have tried, save the Sultan 85 perhaps. Would probably perform a bit better off-piste than the Rev (not sure on that, though).
Hope this helps.....some food for thought at least.....
Home
Login
Register