Cage Match Comparison 2017 Masters and Beer League GS Skis

Choucas

Getting on the lift
Skier
Joined
Feb 17, 2016
Posts
214
Location
Vermont
Further to my comments about the category, I got in two short days on a new pair of Fischer RC4 SC's that I picked up at the end of last season but never skied until yesterday. I've been a bit lost in the wilderness of wider skis for a few years, but after feeling these hook up and begging me to hit the gas, I'm thinking that these will be my everyday eastern skis as long as I'm skiing on firm snow. Very solid, accurate feel throughout the turn. Go where you point them, and don't need to be coaxed back on course.
I put a 1 degree bevel on the base and 3 degree on the side. I'm going to take a little more metal off the base edge (keeping the same 1 degree bevel). The iron grabs a little while waxing, so this should get them dialed in a bit better.
 

James

Out There
Instructor
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Posts
11,846
Is there consensus on binding position marks ?
I have an older Dynastar Course Ti, (183cm,121-72-105), that basically just woke up after moving the binding on the plate forward. Probably 1.5 cms. But maybe only 1. That ski is probably in the first category or even below. Not a masters race ski.

The ski was really meh to borderline floppy before the change.
Now you can feel the rubber dampening layer working and the whole front of the ski engaging the snow. Made it much friendlier too. Hell, it's practically an intermediate ski now. ogsmile

I rember a race shop that had a chart with info presumably from the factory(?) where they mounted skis + or - of the line. That was some time ago.
 

Choucas

Getting on the lift
Skier
Joined
Feb 17, 2016
Posts
214
Location
Vermont
Further to my comments about the category, I got in two short days on a new pair of Fischer RC4 SC's that I picked up at the end of last season but never skied until yesterday. I've been a bit lost in the wilderness of wider skis for a few years, but after feeling these hook up and begging me to hit the gas, I'm thinking that these will be my everyday eastern skis as long as I'm skiing on firm snow. Very solid, accurate feel throughout the turn. Go where you point them, and don't need to be coaxed back on course.
I put a 1 degree bevel on the base and 3 degree on the side. I'm going to take a little more metal off the base edge (keeping the same 1 degree bevel). The iron grabs a little while waxing, so this should get them dialed in a bit better.
PS -- Typo: These are RC's not SC's. 4 days on the skis. Have the base tune dialed in. They are very easy skiing high performance skis that make me feel a lot more, relaxed, comfortable and confident on my skis. Very happy with the skis and a new pair of Tecnica Mach 1 MV's. A comfy combo.
 

cbk

Ambassador of Stoke
Skier
Joined
Jan 21, 2016
Posts
698
Location
Del Mar
I have a pair of 180cm WCR I.Speed skis on the way... :thumb::D
 

cbk

Ambassador of Stoke
Skier
Joined
Jan 21, 2016
Posts
698
Location
Del Mar
Head's World Cup Rebels i.Speeds have got my attention....
Mine too... Bought a pair....

[snip]
So I'm guessing the i.Speed is more a civilian GS ski & the i.Race is more SL oriented? I am definitely interested in the differences between the two.
I think you are correct. I also heard from somebody at Head that RD is "Race Department" and they also have "RP" which is one notch down from RD but still a notch (or several) up from the "regular" non-RD SL and GS skis...
 

markojp

mtn rep for the gear on my feet
Industry Insider
Instructor
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
4,334
Location
PNW aka SEA
ISpeed Pro uses the RD layup in the iSpeed mold. The iRace is a 16m ski.
 

JTurner

Always tryin' to get better
Skier
Joined
Aug 14, 2017
Posts
66
Location
Minnesota
Philpug or Scotskier, can you describe how the skis like the Rossi master or blizzard/nordica compare to their respective brands' transitional FIS GS skis in the largest sizes like 182/25? I have the 18m hero master that I use for beer league, and have tested the 21m hero master as I'd like a little more ski for masters races. The 21m felt a little slow edge to edge, so I'm curious if a narrower ski would feel quicker even if it had to be bent or angled a little more to get the same radius. I'm 5'10" 160lbs, so not sure if I would be too heavy for those type of skis or not. Unfortunately, women's FIS are just too much in the midwest. Even on masters courses we just don't have enough vertical for GS sets much beyond 23-25 meters or extended steep pitches where we can really get a big ski to bend for more than a handful of direction changes.
 
Thread Starter
TS
ScotsSkier

ScotsSkier

USSA Coach
Industry Insider
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
2,403
Location
North Lake Tahoe, NV
Welcome to Pugski. Always good to see the race crew here growing.

Philpug or Scotskier, can you describe how the skis like the Rossi master or blizzard/nordica compare to their respective brands' transitional FIS GS skis in the largest sizes like 182/25? I have the 18m hero master that I use for beer league, and have tested the 21m hero master as I'd like a little more ski for masters races. The 21m felt a little slow edge to edge, so I'm curious if a narrower ski would feel quicker even if it had to be bent or angled a little more to get the same radius. I'm 5'10" 160lbs, so not sure if I would be too heavy for those type of skis or not. Unfortunately, women's FIS are just too much in the midwest. Even on masters courses we just don't have enough vertical for GS sets much beyond 23-25 meters or extended steep pitches where we can really get a big ski to bend for more than a handful of direction changes.

You are on the right track, in that the narrower waist width will make them more responsive. I have never been a big fan of the 70ish waist width so many of they "Masters" skis come with, and I see quite a few Master racers now switching over to the FIS W skis instead. Disappointing to see that Atomic has also followed the trend this year and made their Masters ski a few mm wider than the FIS skis.

However. Most of the 182/25 skis available now in a "proper" (65-66ish) waist width are "Tweener" skis. While they are for the most part based on etc mold for the previous generation womens FIS >23m skis, the construction on a lot of them has been dialed back a bit to soften them off for lighter U14/U16 racers. At 160# you are probably getting near the limit for these weight wise. I have seen them being used by heavier skiers who then find them washing out on them as they overpower them. However for tighter midwest GS courses that you are skiing you should be able to make these actually work to your advantage. Personally in your position I would look at something like the 184 Blizzard GS which has enough beef for someone your size. There are also some around 186 (Head?) that i see quite a few Masters on that would work but I suspect you dont want to make such a big jump from the 175 you are on.
 

ski otter 2

Out on the slopes
Skier
Joined
Nov 20, 2015
Posts
1,231
Location
Front Range, Colorado
@ScotsSkier , I wonder if just the W 183/23 old FIS ski might work well for this? I have a pair I use just for recreational skiing (Völkl Racetiger), and it has a great feel to it. It's faster and crisper-turning than the around r 18 skis, but still good for shorter GS turns. And at times these can still be gotten cheaply, all set up and prepped, and in great condition, often - fairly lightly used by some FIS or transition racer, who was simply moving up to longer specs. (I'm 5'10" around 150 lbs., older guy).
 
Thread Starter
TS
ScotsSkier

ScotsSkier

USSA Coach
Industry Insider
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
2,403
Location
North Lake Tahoe, NV
@ScotsSkier , I wonder if just the W 183/23 old FIS ski might work well for this? I have a pair I use just for recreational skiing (Völkl Racetiger), and it has a great feel to it. It's faster and crisper-turning than the around r 18 skis, but still good for shorter GS turns. And at times these can still be gotten cheaply, all set up and prepped, and in great condition, often - fairly lightly used by some FIS or transition racer, who was simply moving up to longer specs. (I'm 5'10" around 150 lbs., older guy).
Abolutely.! In most cases they are built a bit stronger than the "tweener" ski and will hold up better for us ummm.....shall we say more mature, larger girth :eek: racers. But these are becoming harder to find now in decent condition since it is ~ 5+ years since they were last produced and most have seen a fair bit of use by now so starting to lose some pop and lateral torsional rigidity. The Völkl is certainly a good option for those of lighters weight (<165) having a (relatively) softer flex that cdfan be more easily bent into the turn then some others.
 

Muleski

Skiing the powder
Industry Insider
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
4,204
Location
North of Boston
Abolutely.! In most cases they are built a bit stronger than the "tweener" ski and will hold up better for us ummm.....shall we say more mature, larger girth :eek: racers. But these are becoming harder to find now in decent condition since it is ~ 5+ years since they were last produced and most have seen a fair bit of use by now so starting to lose some pop and lateral torsional rigidity. The Völkl is certainly a good option for those of lighters weight (<165) having a (relatively) softer flex that cdfan be more easily bent into the turn then some others.
Just as a data point on that, SS knows that our daughter was a NCAA skier who was fortunate to get great skis from Völkl. Actual WC stock. She is four years out of college, and retired from any serious racing. However, she lives in a mountain town, works in the business, and does some coaching. Skis a part of every day. She was asked to ski in some town charity thing last winter, which is evidently a big deal. So she hauled a pair of her 183/23 Völkl GS skis out of the closet, having not skied them in 4-5 seasons. Scraped off the travel wax, ran a stone over the edges, and good to go. Her comment was that they really felt "dead." Just as SS describes. No pop, and not normal tip engagement or tail release. Just age.

So she asked one of the FIS girls if she could borrow a pair of 188cm 30M Volkls. She felt that they were great, and actually easier to ski, and easier to work than any of the skis that she had in her prior race stable. This was a good pair, as the kid gets good skis. She was racing in a pretty "citizen" like course. Longer and tougher than a beer league course, but no FIS set. She's about 5'5' and 140 lbs, BTW. In a plug boot, at least that day. Loved the skis.
 

JTurner

Always tryin' to get better
Skier
Joined
Aug 14, 2017
Posts
66
Location
Minnesota
Thanks to everyone for your replies and advice.

Muleski, shall I read your daughter's experience as a recommendation that a women's FIS ski may not be too much, or am I over reading you there?
 

Muleski

Skiing the powder
Industry Insider
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
4,204
Location
North of Boston
Thanks to everyone for your replies and advice.

Muleski, shall I read your daughter's experience as a recommendation that a women's FIS ski may not be too much, or am I over reading you there?
No, you have the right read, based on her experience. I can't think of anybody I know who has not preferred the most recent womens 188cm FIS GS skis to the skis built to fit the older{shorter, smaller radius} skis.

I think that as a guy, @ScotsSkier is probably your best source of info and confirmation as he has a lot of miles on a variety of the skis.

My son is a coach. Granted, he coaches pretty high level kids. Almost all of his second year U16 girls are skiing a 188cm.

People tend to get hung up on radius, length worrry about FIS. And ignore that the skis are really easy for a skilled pilot to ski. If a skied can't engage the tip of the ski, bring it up in edge, bend it, release it, etc. not so much.

Make sense? @ScotsSkier can weigh in. Probably Is as I type!
 
Thread Starter
TS
ScotsSkier

ScotsSkier

USSA Coach
Industry Insider
SkiTalk Tester
Joined
Nov 12, 2015
Posts
2,403
Location
North Lake Tahoe, NV
Thanks to everyone for your replies and advice.

Muleski, shall I read your daughter's experience as a recommendation that a women's FIS ski may not be too much, or am I over reading you there?
No, you have the right read, based on her experience. I can't think of anybody I know who has not preferred the most recent womens 188cm FIS GS skis to the skis built to fit the older{shorter, smaller radius} skis.

I think that as a guy, @ScotsSkier is probably your best source of info and confirmation as he has a lot of miles on a variety of the skis.

My son is a coach. Granted, he coaches pretty high level kids. Almost all of his second year U16 girls are skiing a 188cm.

People tend to get hung up on radius, length worrry about FIS. And ignore that the skis are really easy for a skilled pilot to ski. If a skied can't engage the tip of the ski, bring it up in edge, bend it, release it, etc. not so much.

Make sense? @ScotsSkier can weigh in. Probably Is as I type!
JT! The woman's FIS ski is an excellent ski and,as Muleski indicates, I have probably been one of the leading advocates of them for Masters as I have been racing on them for 3 seasons now and the majority of the Masters athletes I coach have also been using them. HOwever, in Far West we probably have better GS courses and we are normally setting at 27 ish m. The 188/30 does demand a bit more precise technique in gates,youreally need to be able to roll it up and arc it on a high early edge and use a high line to get the maximum out of it. Running straight at the gate as many do on a smaller ski is not fast! If you are running 23-25m courses it is certainly useable BUT this assumes a certain level of race Skills and good modern technique. where I would be wary of recommending it to you as a race ski is that you are currently running a 175/18 m ski. Going straight to the woman's ski might be a huge learning curve for you, depending on your race skills.

What I would suggest is that you get hold of a pair, preferably at the softer end of the spectrum, - Völkl, rosssi or head and try them free- skiing initially. But not just letting them run, really work at cranking them into a tighter are. All the 30m skis have a really nice flexin the tip and as a result, much easier for us masters to actually get the ski to work. Get some miles under you belt on them, really working them , before you take them into gates, then remember the advice above, high and early! Think about you turn shape as more like a "J" lying on its side rather than a C if that makes sense
 

DocGKR

Stuck at work...
Skier
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Posts
364
Location
Palo Alto, California
This was a great thread and I wanted to revisit it. I’ve noticed a lot of family and friends talking about their “GS” skis; likewise I’ve witnessed ski sales folks pitching various “GS” skis to customers. Despite often saying “GS” and “Race” on their labeling and generally mimicking the appearance of WC racing skis, many such skis more realistically behave as longer radius sport carvers and are not actually serious GS race skis.

If a ski has a turn radius less than 20m and/or a waist width 70mm or wider, it is probably not a true GS race ski. Nonetheless, these longer radius “GS” sport carving skis are a blast cruising down resort groomers. Some of the skis at the top end of this category can also be used successfully for Beer League and Nastar type racing events that have tighter set gates.
 GS-Not GS skis.jpeg

However, for racing GS at Masters and higher levels, skis with a turn radius in the 23-30m range and waist widths around 65-67mm are more appropriate—although such skis are generally both more demanding and less fun for public free skiing than their sport carver cousins.
 

Tony S

thread drift a specialty
Skier
Joined
Nov 14, 2015
Posts
4,536
Location
Maine
rails on ice, favorite ski for on top of glacier or when Im alone.

10 points to anyone for calling the year
I think the Dynastars are significantly newer. Maybe 2011. The Rossi graphic goes back to the mid 2000s, right? 2006?
 

James

Out There
Instructor
Joined
Dec 2, 2015
Posts
11,846
I think the Dynastars are significantly newer. Maybe 2011. The Rossi graphic goes back to the mid 2000s, right? 2006?
Yeah I was going to say 2007. Around the time period they had that ski with the different length arms you attach to the shovel.
 
Top